Hopefully this gets approved pretty quickly and they can finally start. Reading the CU article I clicked back on the previous proposal for the 12 story hotel. I have to say I’m glad that didn’t come to fruition. The new design looks better. 
 

Picture of previous design. 

Edited July 21, 20213 yr by VintageLife

According to Columbus Underground, it's actually going to be a 15-story building. The renderings they have are different (i.e. taller) than what The Dispatch had.

 

https://www.columbusunderground.com/15-story-building-proposed-for-downtown-bw1/

 

 

 

I'm so tired of hearing about plans for this block, hopefully something happens with this iteration. At this point, I'd be fine if they leveled everything and built a suburban Bob Evans with 200' pole sign.

Maybe they could use some form of tinted glass for the High Street facing parking levels?(It might not look so bad given the darker overall colors of the building.

 

I like it! 15 floors...build it now!

 

I wonder if any of the residents of The Atrium Lofts north of this will complain about light being blocked from the light well there?

3 hours ago, TH3BUDDHA said:

Yea, that stretch of High Street is depressing right now.  Driving south on High Street, you pass through the bustling Short North, and then, afterwards, you come to this area filled with decaying buildings, seedy characters lingering around Long Street, and empty store fronts in the ugly Nicholas building.  We really need to inject some life here.

Well with a mental health center located right at the intersection there, you can count on some "seedy" (looking at least) characters around.  Just the way it is.

30 minutes ago, cbussoccer said:

According to Columbus Underground, it's actually going to be a 15-story building. The renderings they have are different (i.e. taller) than what The Dispatch had.

 

https://www.columbusunderground.com/15-story-building-proposed-for-downtown-bw1/

It's like deja-vu all over again

The Dispatch has updated their story to include a higher floor count...but it is 14 floors not 15 now per that site lol.  So is it 14 or 15 floors? Either one is good for me.

Depends on if you count the 13th floor

I can't believe it's been 6 years since that last proposal... I think I prefer the previous plan to keep a pedestrian alley between the two projects -- instead this is proposing a weird out-of-scale connector building that looks bad

22 minutes ago, jebleprls22 said:

I can't believe it's been 6 years since that last proposal... I think I prefer the previous plan to keep a pedestrian alley between the two projects -- instead this is proposing a weird out-of-scale connector building that looks bad

If you look at the rendering from pearl that section is open. When looking at more of the layout, it seems part of that building will also be some of the restaurant. 

Edited July 21, 20213 yr by VintageLife
Added pictures

3 hours ago, Toddguy said:

The Dispatch has updated their story to include a higher floor count...but it is 14 floors not 15 now per that site lol.  So is it 14 or 15 floors? Either one is good for me.

It’s 15 floors counting the top amenity section, which has a workout room and some other stuff. 

1 hour ago, VintageLife said:

If you look at the rendering from pearl that section is open. When looking at more of the layout, it seems part of that building will also be some of the restaurant. 

It still does not look like it will be a public space(just sayin')...also it looks like the northern half of all of this will have a ground floor parking garage facing High. smh. Are those really parking spaces showing?  Please tell me that is the plan for the floors above and that front 40 feet or so on the ground floor will be something else?

 

Otherwise I like this 15 story surprise and am very happy with it, and can deal with the loss of the public alley. It still looks like there will be a public walkthrough/door?

 

But what is in the 4 floors above the restaurant? 

 

Lots of questions. I am just glad there is such a large proposal for which to have questions.

 

With the exception of showcasing the parking garage facing High, I like the proposal. 

Edited July 21, 20213 yr by Toddguy

1 hour ago, jebleprls22 said:

I can't believe it's been 6 years since that last proposal... I think I prefer the previous plan to keep a pedestrian alley between the two projects -- instead this is proposing a weird out-of-scale connector building that looks bad

One thing I don't agree with is the connector building looking out of scale-at least from the front. It is the same height as one of the existing buildings-the old Madisons Department Store building itself. 

 

I really like the elevator/staircase part fronting High-it seems to divide the building into two slimmer buildings. 

 

Now. build. it.  And Harmony too! This will be a huge change for the East side of High from Long all the way down to Gay! Do it!(to the city, developers, etc).

Edited July 21, 20213 yr by Toddguy

1 hour ago, Toddguy said:

It still does not look like it will be a public space(just sayin')...also it looks like the northern half of all of this will have a ground floor parking garage facing High. smh. Are those really parking spaces showing?  Please tell me that is the plan for the floors above and that front 40 feet or so on the ground floor will be something else?

 

Otherwise I like this 15 story surprise and am very happy with it, and can deal with the loss of the public alley. It still looks like there will be a public walkthrough/door?

 

But what is in the 4 floors above the restaurant? 

 

Lots of questions. I am just glad there is such a large proposal for which to have questions.

 

With the exception of showcasing the parking garage facing High, I like the proposal. 

Oh I get it, that little section along high that will be parking is stupid. Part of the bottom will be restaurant space that looks like it goes into the filler building. 
 

seems like the second or third floor of that building will be private dining and the open floor, then on top of that office space. 
 

these photos are low quality screen shots, but it shows what the space will be. 

16 hours ago, VintageLife said:

Oh I get it, that little section along high that will be parking is stupid. Part of the bottom will be restaurant space that looks like it goes into the filler building. 
 

seems like the second or third floor of that building will be private dining and the open floor, then on top of that office space. 
 

these photos are low quality screen shots, but it shows what the space will be. 

The city really needs to push back on this and say NO! You are going to have to give up those 7 or so front parking spaces at the street level closest to High. There is NO excuse for that. Anything can go in there to activate that space(retail, amenity, etc.) but parking? Nah.  Tint the windows or whatever to hide the cars above that, but NO parking facing High on the ground level. 

 

The rest of it? I like it! Build it now!

Edited July 22, 20213 yr by Toddguy

Is it me, or does this look really similar to the 13-story building Edwards is building on East Broad St.?

 

I really like the overall massing of the proposed building and its height on the block. I actually don't mind the parking decks so much as they are meant to serve the entire Madisons/White-Haines project. Hoping for a speedy approval and construction process (and for Harmony Tower a few blocks up to make similar progress towards becoming a reality!).

This is a little piece from the business first article. 
 

“Some neighbors have expressed concerns about the project. Several residents in the Atrium Lofts next door sent emails about the new 186-foot-tall development casting a large shadow over the skylight in their building. 

In an effort to remedy some of those concerns, plans from Meyers + Associates include a courtyard on top of the parking garage next to the skylight at the Atrium Lofts, so that the shadow cast from the building doesn't block natural light in the Atrium Lofts. Meyers + Associates also conducted a sun study on the potential building, which showed that the shadow cast from the building at various times of day would not cover the entire skylight at Atrium Lofts.”

 

pretty annoying, but it doesn’t seem like the developers have any interest in making it shorter. People that live downtown and get upset with development are the most annoying and useless people around. 

5 minutes ago, VintageLife said:

This is a little piece from the business first article. 
 

“Some neighbors have expressed concerns about the project. Several residents in the Atrium Lofts next door sent emails about the new 186-foot-tall development casting a large shadow over the skylight in their building. 

In an effort to remedy some of those concerns, plans from Meyers + Associates include a courtyard on top of the parking garage next to the skylight at the Atrium Lofts, so that the shadow cast from the building doesn't block natural light in the Atrium Lofts. Meyers + Associates also conducted a sun study on the potential building, which showed that the shadow cast from the building at various times of day would not cover the entire skylight at Atrium Lofts.”

 

pretty annoying, but it doesn’t seem like the developers have any interest in making it shorter. People that live downtown and get upset with development are the most annoying and useless people around. 

 

Is this a joke? This has to be a joke...

20 minutes ago, cbussoccer said:

 

Is this a joke? This has to be a joke...

Can’t wait until they build even taller stuff all around atrium. These people are delusional.

Edwards Cos. plans 15-story downtown tower with rooftop pool, bar

 

Developer Edwards Cos. wants to continue filling holes along Columbus' main thoroughfares.

 

Meyers + Associates Architects presented the conceptual plan for a 15-story mixed-use infill building that would sit at 100 N. High St. to the Downtown Commission Tuesday morning. Edwards is the developer and Eclipse Real Estate Group owns the site.

 

The development would have 152 apartment units ranging from studio to two-bedroom units with restaurant or other commercial uses on the ground floor. There will also be a parking garage with nearly 400 spaces built beneath the building. There is not yet a price tag available for the project.

 

More below:

https://www.bizjournals.com/columbus/news/2021/07/27/edwards-downtown-development.html

 

4 hours ago, VintageLife said:

This is a little piece from the business first article. 
 

“Some neighbors have expressed concerns about the project. Several residents in the Atrium Lofts next door sent emails about the new 186-foot-tall development casting a large shadow over the skylight in their building. 

In an effort to remedy some of those concerns, plans from Meyers + Associates include a courtyard on top of the parking garage next to the skylight at the Atrium Lofts, so that the shadow cast from the building doesn't block natural light in the Atrium Lofts. Meyers + Associates also conducted a sun study on the potential building, which showed that the shadow cast from the building at various times of day would not cover the entire skylight at Atrium Lofts.”

 

pretty annoying, but it doesn’t seem like the developers have any interest in making it shorter. People that live downtown and get upset with development are the most annoying and useless people around. 

I called it 6 days ago!

 

Quote

 

I wonder if any of the residents of The Atrium Lofts north of this will complain about light being blocked from the light well there?

 

On 7/27/2021 at 4:45 PM, ColDayMan said:

Edwards Cos. plans 15-story downtown tower with rooftop pool, bar

 

Developer Edwards Cos. wants to continue filling holes along Columbus' main thoroughfares.

 

Meyers + Associates Architects presented the conceptual plan for a 15-story mixed-use infill building that would sit at 100 N. High St. to the Downtown Commission Tuesday morning. Edwards is the developer and Eclipse Real Estate Group owns the site.

 

The development would have 152 apartment units ranging from studio to two-bedroom units with restaurant or other commercial uses on the ground floor. There will also be a parking garage with nearly 400 spaces built beneath the building. There is not yet a price tag available for the project.

 

More below:

https://www.bizjournals.com/columbus/news/2021/07/27/edwards-downtown-development.html

 

I was reading through the commission meeting notes on this and came across this. Sadly I have a feeling they are going to shorten it.
 

 “Bartley asked if the 20% affordability being asked by the city would affect their height.
 Meyers replied that it was a good point. It could possibly affect their height.

 Slanec asked if it was possible they could put more of the parking underground.
 Meyers replied that there was always a way. It is very expensive, and they are trying to be very
sensitive to the structural conditions of the adjacent buildings. The more they dig out between them,
the tougher it is to shore up those buildings.
 Teba indicated that was one of the concerns raised by the Atrium Lofts homeowners association.
 Meyers said they would work closely with the homeowners association to ensure they are fully
understanding the conditions they have. They will do everything possible to mitigate any disturbance”

Edited October 8, 20213 yr by VintageLife

8 minutes ago, VintageLife said:

I was reading through the commission meeting notes on this and came across this. Sadly I have a feeling they are going to shorten it.
 

 “Bartley asked if the 20% affordability being asked by the city would affect their height.
 Meyers replied that it was a good point. It could possibly affect their height.

 Slanec asked if it was possible they could put more of the parking underground.
 Meyers replied that there was always a way. It is very expensive, and they are trying to be very
sensitive to the structural conditions of the adjacent buildings. The more they dig out between them,
the tougher it is to shore up those buildings.
 Teba indicated that was one of the concerns raised by the Atrium Lofts homeowners association.
 Meyers said they would work closely with the homeowners association to ensure they are fully
understanding the conditions they have. They will do everything possible to mitigate any disturbance”

 

It'll be 5 stories all said and done by the time they finish accommodating every dumb request.  They shouldn't even be worrying about parking at all- they'll still be able to rent out the units either way. And the idea of changing an entire building's design simply to avoid blocking a bit of direct sun on a neighboring building in a downtown area is so absolutely asinine.  Where do these people think they live?  I don't know if I'm more annoyed and exhausted with the inanity of the objections, or all the developers bending over backwards to listen to them.  

I have to wonder if any other mid to large-sized cities have this problem with local commissions and if it's to the same extent. Is it because Columbus had bulldozed so much of its built environment that now because buildings of some height are being built or proposed close to each other we've forgotten what that's like? Do people on these commissions know what living in a downtown environment is like? This is totally baffling. They want a dense, urban environment but don't want anything above 5 floors? 🤨

33 minutes ago, jonoh81 said:

 

It'll be 5 stories all said and done by the time they finish accommodating every dumb request.  They shouldn't even be worrying about parking at all- they'll still be able to rent out the units either way. And the idea of changing an entire building's design simply to avoid blocking a bit of direct sun on a neighboring building in a downtown area is so absolutely asinine.  Where do these people think they live?  I don't know if I'm more annoyed and exhausted with the inanity of the objections, or all the developers bending over backwards to listen to them.  

Here is a little more of it. It sounds like they support height and density, but at the same time don’t want height because of f*cking shade.

 

 “Maniace asked what their shade studies are showing in terms of how excessive the impact would be.
 Meyers said they know they cast a shadow, but they can perhaps adjust some of the top floor
mechanical areas to help cast less of a shadow. They would have to investigate it.
 Bartley asked what the applicant meant by the city’s desire to see height.
 Meyers replied that the guidelines are important, and they stress height and density.
 Teba added that the Planning Division is sympathetic to the neighbor’s concerns, but they support
height and additional density.”

59 minutes ago, VintageLife said:

“Bartley asked if the 20% affordability being asked by the city would affect their height.
 Meyers replied that it was a good point. It could possibly affect their height.

So this is the part that has me confused. I’ll admit I’m not all that knowledgeable about these matters, but I don’t quite understand why this would affect the height. I get that building higher requires more materials, which consequently makes the project more expensive, but if the city wants 20% of units affordable, wouldn’t Edwards then want to further increase the units to be able to include more market rate and generate more profit? I’m also curious about what sort of comparison their is, in general, to money saved off of tax incentives to include income based vs income generated from keeping them market rate. 

19 minutes ago, VintageLife said:

Here is a little more of it. It sounds like they support height and density, but at the same time don’t want height because of f*cking shade.

 

 “Maniace asked what their shade studies are showing in terms of how excessive the impact would be.
 Meyers said they know they cast a shadow, but they can perhaps adjust some of the top floor
mechanical areas to help cast less of a shadow. They would have to investigate it.
 Bartley asked what the applicant meant by the city’s desire to see height.
 Meyers replied that the guidelines are important, and they stress height and density.
 Teba added that the Planning Division is sympathetic to the neighbor’s concerns, but they support
height and additional density.”

All the people complaining about shadows should just buy or rent units that are really high up. Problem solved!

13 minutes ago, TIm said:

All the people complaining about shadows should just buy or rent units that are really high up. Problem solved!

I did send an email to the downtown commission, just asking to not approve a height change. I’m sure none of them really care, but if more people do it, maybe they will be more inclined to fight for height. 

1 hour ago, CMHOhio said:

I have to wonder if any other mid to large-sized cities have this problem with local commissions and if it's to the same extent. Is it because Columbus had bulldozed so much of its built environment that now because buildings of some height are being built or proposed close to each other we've forgotten what that's like? Do people on these commissions know what living in a downtown environment is like? This is totally baffling. They want a dense, urban environment but don't want anything above 5 floors? 🤨

 

I think there's a lot of people that think tower, grass, tower, grass, tower, grass is acceptable but real urbanism isn't. 

To be fair...the penthouse units in the Atrium Lofts building currently have this view. You always take a risk when you buy a unit next to an empty lot, especially in a building where they could not punch windows through the lower floors because a building could be built next door, but still, I can understand where the owners of those units are coming from. Photo from one of the penthouse units currently for sale.

 

1 hour ago, amped91 said:

So this is the part that has me confused. I’ll admit I’m not all that knowledgeable about these matters, but I don’t quite understand why this would affect the height. I get that building higher requires more materials, which consequently makes the project more expensive, but if the city wants 20% of units affordable, wouldn’t Edwards then want to further increase the units to be able to include more market rate and generate more profit? I’m also curious about what sort of comparison their is, in general, to money saved off of tax incentives to include income based vs income generated from keeping them market rate. 

 

The profit margin for an "affordable" unit is lower than the profit margin for a market-rate unit. Each additional "affordable" unit results in a further erosion of the overall profit margin. To do their best to offset this reduction in profit margin, they would likely look at how construction costs could be reduced to allow them to still hit their initial profit goals.

 

The insistence on the inclusion of affordable units is good in theory, but it will inevitably hold some projects from their full potential in terms height, quality of construction, design, etc. That's not to say diversification of price points shouldn't be encouraged, it's just acknowledgement of the effects it has. 

26 minutes ago, .justin said:

To be fair...the penthouse units in the Atrium Lofts building currently have this view. You always take a risk when you buy a unit next to an empty lot, especially in a building where they could not punch windows through the lower floors because a building could be built next door, but still, I can understand where the owners of those units are coming from. Photo from one of the penthouse units currently for sale.

 

I get it, they have a right to be upset, but there is no way they thought there wouldn’t be a building there at some point. They live in the fastest growing mid west city on the main stretch, downtown. If they are upset, they can sell and someone will buy it. They are welcome to find a taller unit or one with more light somewhere else. 

Yeah, I get it but its also unrealistic to stall/alter developments for a few units next door. 

 

The funny thing is this building literally has a light well (hence the atrium) to provide natural light to these penthouse units and the lower units. While the penthouse balcony will lose its views, it'll still have natural light and fresh air as designed. While it sounds crass, if you want a guaranteed view then you have to own the properties that maintain that view. I won't be losing any sleep over some rich people losing their prime view because they don't grasp the intricacies of urban real estate.

1 hour ago, .justin said:

To be fair...the penthouse units in the Atrium Lofts building currently have this view. You always take a risk when you buy a unit next to an empty lot, especially in a building where they could not punch windows through the lower floors because a building could be built next door, but still, I can understand where the owners of those units are coming from. Photo from one of the penthouse units currently for sale.

 

 

I'm not.  The Downtown area isn't their personal playground in which they get to dictate development because it might impact their view.  In a neighborhood like this, as you said, the risk is always there that the view changes when more buildings go up.  They were never guaranteed a permanent private vista.

40 minutes ago, DevolsDance said:

Yeah, I get it but its also unrealistic to stall/alter developments for a few units next door. 

 

The funny thing is this building literally has a light well (hence the atrium) to provide natural light to these penthouse units and the lower units. While the penthouse balcony will lose its views, it'll still have natural light and fresh air as designed. While it sounds crass, if you want a guaranteed view then you have to own the properties that maintain that view. I won't be losing any sleep over some rich people losing their prime view because they don't grasp the intricacies of urban real estate.

Absolutely! There is no guarantee of a "view" for downtown buildings. A 'view' is not a right, something to be expected and accommodated by others. Certainly not in a growing city that is actively trying to densify and grow it's downtown. This is all just absurd and catering to some rich and spoiled individuals. If they don't like it, as has been mentioned, they can move-someone else would probably love that penthouse.*

 

*Now I have the Green Acre's song part "I just adore a penthouse view" sung by Eva Gabor stuck in my head/earworm! lol.

1 minute ago, jonoh81 said:

 

I'm not.  The Downtown area isn't their personal playground in which they get to dictate development because it might impact their view.  In a neighborhood like this, as you said, the risk is always there that the view changes when more buildings go up.  They were never guaranteed a permanent private vista.

 

 

I agree, I was just pointing it out.

 

As it happens, it looks like three of the penthouse units are for sale currently.

 

38 minutes ago, .justin said:

 

 

I agree, I was just pointing it out.

 

As it happens, it looks like three of the penthouse units are for sale currently.

 

Looked two weeks ago and 3 units had already sold. 

sorry for adding more, but the penthouse unit that they complained about is one of them that is for sale. I feel like this shouldn’t even be a problem, now that it’s for sale. The people complaining seem to be leaving. 
 

isn’t this basically how affordable housing becomes a thing? People move out of a building because of some issue, to them at least, and then the housing may become cheaper? In this case, I doubt it will, but maybe eventually. 

Edited October 8, 20213 yr by VintageLife

Just saw on urbanistcolumbus Instagram page they are starting working on this. Wonder if this means the 15 story next door was approved? 

7 minutes ago, VintageLife said:

Just saw on urbanistcolumbus Instagram page they are starting working on this. Wonder if this means the 15 story next door was approved? 

This is theoretically just the continued work on the renovations to the existing buildings -- separate from proposal for the new build on what's currently a parking lot.

Good news for the 15 story building. Looks to be back for the commission meeting this month. It didn’t change in height and got some minor upgrades, adding a bit more to the design. 

1 hour ago, VintageLife said:

Good news for the 15 story building. Looks to be back for the commission meeting this month. It didn’t change in height and got some minor upgrades, adding a bit more to the design. 

The tall grey-blue panel that goes the full height in the middle of the facade is a non-starter. It's one thing to pretend these are separate building masses, it's another to give up on the transition between them...

14 minutes ago, jebleprls22 said:

The tall grey-blue panel that goes the full height in the middle of the facade is a non-starter. It's one thing to pretend these are separate building masses, it's another to give up on the transition between them...

I was going to say that the south portion looks better now, but they made that panel look worse on this rendering. It doesn’t make sense to just leave it like that. 

16 minutes ago, jebleprls22 said:

The tall grey-blue panel that goes the full height in the middle of the facade is a non-starter. It's one thing to pretend these are separate building masses, it's another to give up on the transition between them...

 

Yeah, that's pretty hideous.  I like the southern part better than the northern.

10 minutes ago, VintageLife said:

I was going to say that the south portion looks better now, but they made that panel look worse on this rendering. It doesn’t make sense to just leave it like that. 

It looks so strange. Almost like it’s a place holder for some signage or something else. Idk why, but I also liked the larger “100” at the base that was in the earlier renderings. 

This needs to get done, the tax credits and everything line up to get this across the finish line finally. No more excuses.

I'll forgive the vertical panel all day if they get rid of the parking garage on the ground floor of High street. For God's sake. That should be 101 type stuff. 

I really like the northern building, even though it's a garage I think window cutouts do a nice job echoing the adjoining historic buildings. 

 

The southern building is fine it seems just like a taller version of every other new build. The transition between them is odd. I think it's awkwardly wide and doesn't seem integrated into either building. Definitely needs something, maybe some oversized signage, light bars, mural, something. 

On 10/22/2021 at 12:05 PM, DTCL11 said:

I'll forgive the vertical panel all day if they get rid of the parking garage on the ground floor of High street. For God's sake. That should be 101 type stuff. 

Seems like that vertical panel is probably the elevator/stairwell shaft? Looking the blueprints, that does seem to line up. If so, Edwards did the same thing on their Broad St project - at least this time they did a better job masking the elevator/stairwell shaft!

High Street, Astor Park Projects Approved by Commission

Brent Warren - Columbus Underground - Oct. 26, 2021

 

 

"At 100 N. High St., a 15-story building from the Edwards Companies will hold 152 apartments, ground floor restaurant space, and an eight-level garage that will provide parking for the new building as well as the adjoining Madison’s and White-Haines buildings to the south, which are currently being renovated. ... The commission was largely complimentary of changes made to the proposal since it was first presented to the group last summer. Representatives of Meyers + Associates Architecture explained that the main difference was the treatment of the first several floors and the entrances off of High Street – new materials were added to the facade, as was a space for a public art installation. ... The approval was made with the condition that the applicant return for further review of signage, lighting and the proposed art piece on High Street."

 

 

“Although some commissioners expressed sympathy for the concerns of the Atrium Lofts residents and encouraged Edwards Companies to work with its new neighbors, none voted against the proposal.”

Granted, I’m sure it does suck losing the view, I’m glad the commission showed they are not going to let these complaints derail the city’s growth and upward expansion. 
 

Also, seeing the space marked out for the public art, I take back my earlier statement about the illuminated street number being down-sized. 😂 I can’t wait to see what goes in there.