June 17, 20222 yr The end of an era. "You don't just walk into a bar and mix it up by calling a girl fat" - buildingcincinnati speaking about new forumers
June 22, 20222 yr And the saga continues. Looks like we’re back to some height for High and Lane? The proposal to be heard by the UIRDB tomorrow is 15 stories. https://m.box.com/shared_item/https%3A%2F%2Fcolumbusohdev.box.com%2Fs%2F3bqwssazubzpbkwm1f4buc3nuueulevr
June 22, 20222 yr 22 minutes ago, amped91 said: And the saga continues. Looks like we’re back to some height for High and Lane? The proposal to be heard by the UIRDB tomorrow is 15 stories. https://m.box.com/shared_item/https%3A%2F%2Fcolumbusohdev.box.com%2Fs%2F3bqwssazubzpbkwm1f4buc3nuueulevr This looks great, but appears they will get rid of the apartments the board wants them to save, if I’m seeing it right?
June 22, 20222 yr I can't tell if they are getting rid of them or building on top of them. It looks like it has the opportunity to be one of the mor unique buildings in the area... which the commission will hate. However, if the materials are consistent with the neighborhood hood, might help.
June 23, 20222 yr I think this looks great, it adds a lot of density, which means the commission will absolutely hate it.
June 23, 20222 yr The last slide they show does a great job compared the height to the Taylor tower dorms, and how it doesn’t look much different from that. I just really hope the commission is somewhat open to this. It looks great and does a good job of breaking up the facades, so it’s not one giant building along the block.
June 23, 20222 yr A friend of mine who is in the know about church stuff on the University Area told me a couple of interesting things. First, that University Baptist is looking to develop their plot into a mixed use building part of which the church will occupy. He said it was gonna be the whole stretch from Lane to Norwich but I don’t know if they own all that land. Second, this might be public already though I couldn’t find mention of it, that Summit on 16th Methodist Church will be leaving their building on 16th and Waldeck and merging with another Methodist congregation. That leaves a nice plot close to the 15th and High development that I’m sure the vultures are circling over.
June 23, 20222 yr 13 hours ago, DTCL11 said: I can't tell if they are getting rid of them or building on top of them. It looks like it has the opportunity to be one of the mor unique buildings in the area... which the commission will hate. However, if the materials are consistent with the neighborhood hood, might help. The row houses are being wiped out in this proposal. If you look on drawing A-100 on the link above, you'll see a lower level parking garage occupying the entire site with the exception of the building at Norwich & High that they don't own. I think it looks OK, I like how it steps down towards the north.
June 23, 20222 yr 8 hours ago, DrFrankenmac said: A friend of mine who is in the know about church stuff on the University Area told me a couple of interesting things. First, that University Baptist is looking to develop their plot into a mixed use building part of which the church will occupy. He said it was gonna be the whole stretch from Lane to Norwich but I don’t know if they own all that land. Second, this might be public already though I couldn’t find mention of it, that Summit on 16th Methodist Church will be leaving their building on 16th and Waldeck and merging with another Methodist congregation. That leaves a nice plot close to the 15th and High development that I’m sure the vultures are circling over. From a friend who attends Maynard Ave UMC - They are combining congregations with Summit UMC and moving to Linden somewhere. That means the church at Indianola and Maynard is probably for sale too. Looks like the Baptist church owns the entire parcel.
June 23, 20222 yr Totally off topic - I've been thinking it would be awesome to redevelop W Norwich and W Northwood from High to Neil with U-shaped Chicago style apartment buildings. It would add a lot of density and character to a neighborhood that's a mish-mash of dilapidated student rentals. Parking would be an issue if this had to adhere to Columbus' zoning code. The lots are about the same depth as these pictured below, a few blocks from my daughter's apartment in Uptown (Uptown has a population density of 25,000/square mile!). Probably not economically feasible nowadays...just a thought.
June 26, 20222 yr On 6/22/2022 at 6:13 PM, VintageLife said: This looks great, but appears they will get rid of the apartments the board wants them to save, if I’m seeing it right? As much as it's a disappointment to lose the existing apartment buildings, the underground parking is a huge investment from the developers (and needs to be the new urban standard for Columbus) and the plaza space that terminates that stretch of Norwich is a great move that makes that previous green space that was only usable by those existing apartments a public amenity which is a great trade-off in my opinion. And agreed that the context of the 60-y.o. Taylor Tower is essential for this passing (and since we're losing the existing Harrison Apartments tower).
July 4, 20222 yr Found a small hole in the fence to get a different angle of the Ohio State Lacrosse Stadium being built between the OSU tennis complex and the OSU wrestling/volleyball arena:
July 9, 20222 yr On 6/16/2022 at 5:41 PM, Pablo said: Harrison House is about to get Loewendicked. Equipment on site and a giant earth ramp is installed on the north side. I guess they need the ramp so their equipment can reach the top?
July 20, 20222 yr 8th and High development (7-17-22) 8th & High and King & High cranes Timashev Family Music Building Department of Theater, Film, and Media Arts Building College Road Resurfacing 15th and High Building B1 West Campus West Campus Natural Gas Power Plant West Campus Outpatient Care Building Carmack Road Redo West Campus Interdisciplinary Research Facility Andelyn Biosciences Building Hamilton Hall/Health Sciences Complex Newton Hall Addition Mack/Canfield Halls Renovation
July 22, 20222 yr On 6/22/2022 at 6:49 PM, amped91 said: And the saga continues. Looks like we’re back to some height for High and Lane? The proposal to be heard by the UIRDB tomorrow is 15 stories. https://m.box.com/shared_item/https%3A%2F%2Fcolumbusohdev.box.com%2Fs%2F3bqwssazubzpbkwm1f4buc3nuueulevr So, the developer is back with this same proposal for this month. Read through the meeting minutes and it seems that the board is sort of split on this project. Some like the look of different buildings and others think it should be more cohesive, which those members are wrong and incorrect. The piece of different designs, is what will make this project great and look better than the target building south of this. Here are the remarks made by the board, sorry it is really long, but gives good insight. Fleming: •Proposal has improved, scale and siting is moving in a better direction to better transition down into the neighborhood. Have made decent case regarding height, appreciate pulling building in toward the site for breathing room at grade. •Articulation of building seems to be visual sleight of hand to reduce building height via exterior cladding. •Ok with proposed parking ratio and would support a reduced parking ratio to encourage folks to use alternative modes of transportation. •Two story brick apartment building on E. Norwich could be preserved and incorporated into the site to add an element of preservation. •Having the plaza built over the parking garage will not allow for big shade trees as shown in the rendering. If the below grade parking was cut off at the northern retail wall and the existing building was left alone on the NE corner, may be able to get plaza that supports large trees and retain some existing fabric/ preservation element. • Board and UAC vote to support or not support variances, but neither has the authority to approve them. • In general, the proposal is going in the right direction. Having the bulk of the mass to the south on the site and the stepping down to the north makes sense. •Doesn’t really see a public plaza per say and agrees with Kerry in that retail in the back corner may struggle. •Opening up a green space to the north that provides relief on the block is good.•Plenty of ways to deal with the pieces and get them to make sense. Won’t get greatness on the site on the developer’s proforma. Right now it’s hard to get greatness anywhere unless there are deep pockets. At bare minimum wants to see something on the site that does not leave neighborhood worse off. •Much better than the undifferentiated mass that was previously proposed.•If trying to finesse parking ratio- suggest helping the residents coming home at the end of the work day when traffic is highest so that they are not overloading the area. Gunzelman: •This site serves as a gateway into the university and is a special moment.•The building (moving west to east) needs to address the residential neighborhood to the east and the alley façade needs to be treated accordingly. •Appreciates the stepping down to the north. •Looks like several different architects designed the buildings. Wonders if there is opportunity to understand how there are variations of a whole that can create the same effect without creating 3 different types of buildings. •Stumped by plaza to the north without idea of preservation of at least one of the structures that would help with common ground with the community.•Does not feel like northeast corner is being addressed by proposalas it abuts low density residential uses. This is an interesting corner that needs to be thought about. •Feels as though she could be supportive of the project. •A little concerned about the parking ratio, maybe could increase resource for alternative transportation to help alleviate parking concerns and offset lower car parking counts. •Agrees that it can be hard to create wow factor within proforma, but believes it can be done in a way that is articulated well and has good design for the main corner. Jones: •Looking for application to articulate architectural concept. Currently,the proposal fails in the same way Gateway fails in that proposal has so many different little parts as if many architects had hands in it. See potential for work on the site to be a cohesive strong idea.•Should be less piecemeal, and make a bigger statement. •Is less sympathetic than other board members regarding moving in the right direction. Significant problems exist currently. Does not see shading for High St. shown in renderings- this will be in shade. •Why wouldn’tpublic space be on Lane Avenue and be given to that dynamic public space? Other areas that tried similar public areas at the rear did not work. There is opportunity to make a civic/ social gesture. •Appreciates the stepping down, but not yet achieving what could be the most successful urban gesture. Piecing it in small insignificant way, when there is still a potential to do something much more meaningful on the site. •Could be ok with variances, but variances are not independent of design. Would not be useful for Board to say ok at this point with applicant. •This is not an unusual circumstance in contemporary medium sized urban contexts. Perhaps could come in next time with three very different proposals that are architecturally unique. •The history of the neighborhood is real and important. •Wants to seek proposal that honors site’s legacy and that is not a pastiche. •Would prefer to see some things done really well vs. generic fold-in that could be almost anywhere. Encourage applicant to continue to take risks and be forward-thinking, noting someone will always be opposed to something. See other potential solutions that what is currently proposed. A 14-story tower will always be obtrusive so applicant could try to own this with a design, or come up with a lower height that melds in a different way, etc. Szymanski: •Need to study the parking of the project a little more to understand need to go below the plan recommendation of .375 spaces per bed and not accounting for detail, seems that density is a little too much. Would like to see this improved. •Appreciates the stepping down of the building and the inclusion of public space. Reeds: •Is ok with look of four different buildings, although note the buildings should be able to speak with one another, but ok with each of them being unique. •Feels torn on the courtyard, it clearly is not going to function like the Alhambra. •Concerned about tenant in the back corner, by burying retail in the back, it can really struggle like the Gateway. Agrees with KB on that. •Would be nice to see a diagram that shows how the plan addresses open space, history, and scale. •Does not disagree with KB in the sense that the entirety of every project needs to be spectacular, but some of it just needs to function well and fit in. Given the position geographically, this has the opportunity to do something/ have an element that is really spectacular. Uhas-Sauer: •Appreciates that applicant has listened very carefully.•The number of variances that the project would probably need is not something that this board would deal with. The area Commission also recommends variances and notes they may not be as amenable due to community reaction with the corner of the site being so important. •Still no sense of a preservation design element. The nod to Alhambra court with public space does not match use, as Alhambra was never a public space, it was an amenity.•Do not get sense that the application is the gateway to the community that has its origins in 1840. This site is located up against historic districts. Looking to see a timeless quality. No doubt that quality materials will be used.•Alhambra greenspace was not accessible to everyone but was visible and served as an important transition into the university neighborhood. • Want to emphasize preservation not as impediments to the vision the applicant has, but as a way to make the project unique and enhance it.•Wonder if variations of the whole could accomplish the goal and be better unified. • Ironic that company named landmark is going to remove something that the local community considers to be a landmark. Edited July 22, 20222 yr by VintageLife
July 22, 20222 yr Got a quick one of the Energy Advancement & Innovation Center at Lane and Kenny a little earlier when i was stopped at the light
August 2, 20222 yr I still can’t believe what a behemoth this thing is. Taken from the Lennox parking lot.
August 2, 20222 yr 58 minutes ago, amped91 said: I still can’t believe what a behemoth this thing is. Taken from the Lennox parking lot. It's funny you said that. I haven't been out that way in probably 2 years, but I was at the Petco at Lennox last night. I walked out to my car, glanced up, and that monster completely took me by surprise - legitimately startled me. It was unexpected but oh so nice to see.
August 8, 20222 yr On 6/23/2022 at 12:40 AM, DrFrankenmac said: A friend of mine who is in the know about church stuff on the University Area told me a couple of interesting things. First, that University Baptist is looking to develop their plot into a mixed use building part of which the church will occupy. He said it was gonna be the whole stretch from Lane to Norwich but I don’t know if they own all that land. Second, this might be public already though I couldn’t find mention of it, that Summit on 16th Methodist Church will be leaving their building on 16th and Waldeck and merging with another Methodist congregation. That leaves a nice plot close to the 15th and High development that I’m sure the vultures are circling over. If by "parcels" they mean landowners this would be a larger project than the tower hopefully coming across the street by Landmark. Epic Realty owns a few properties around campus. Their mailing address is that of Pella Property Management. FIMOK must be the name of the entity that owns Litlle Bar. Looks like the feasibility is being done by yet another out-of-town developer. Another from Austin, American Campus Communities. *Edit. Oops, I labeled UMC instead of UBC. Edited August 8, 20222 yr by aderwent
August 8, 20222 yr 18 minutes ago, aderwent said: If by "parcels" they mean landowners this would be a larger project than the tower hopefully coming across the street by Landmark. Epic Realty owns a few properties around campus. Their mailing address is that of Pella Property Management. FIMOK must be the name of the entity that owns Litlle Bar. Looks like the feasibility is being done by yet another out-of-town developer. Another from Austin, American Campus Communities. *Edit. Oops, I labeled UMC instead of UBC. None of their projects are big towers, but they seem to have some decent looks. Here are some from a few universities. The first one would look great with Wilson place catty corner.
August 8, 20222 yr I really hope that Epic land does not get redeveloped. That’s a decent stretch of businesses right there and would essentially kill the rest of campus as it was with little being the only remaining holdout on High. I made the comment when I returned from visiting my cousin at UT-Austin back in 2011 that I loved that our campus had character and wasn’t all high rise apartments. Well fast forward to me being 11 years removed from school and looking for the nostalgia that my older cousins talked about when Gateway replaced their haunts. Edited August 8, 20222 yr by wpcc88
August 8, 20222 yr 49 minutes ago, wpcc88 said: I really hope that Epic land does not get redeveloped. That’s a decent stretch of businesses right there and would essentially kill the rest of campus as it was with little being the only remaining holdout on High. I made the comment when I returned from visiting my cousin at UT-Austin back in 2011 that I loved that our campus had character and wasn’t all high rise apartments. Well fast forward to me being 11 years removed from school and looking for the nostalgia that my older cousins talked about when Gateway replaced their haunts. I think it would only be sad to lose the area between Buffalo Wild Wings and dominos. Those two on the end are trash and the buildings aren’t great. The middle stuff, that would suck to lose.
August 8, 20222 yr As a permanent, non student, university district resident, the businesses could stay or go but development should be encouraged to further increase density, period. There is an argument for a level of architectural preservation that should be maintained there but I'm really not going to lament the loss of college haunts for things that objectively make the area a better place to live at the sacrifice of dive bars etc. In a perfect world, 10-15+ stories replace the BW3s and CVS stepped down to new build above old architecture going north to meet the largely original are North of Lane
August 9, 20222 yr 2 hours ago, DTCL11 said: As a permanent, non student, university district resident, the businesses could stay or go but development should be encouraged to further increase density, period. There is an argument for a level of architectural preservation that should be maintained there but I'm really not going to lament the loss of college haunts for things that objectively make the area a better place to live at the sacrifice of dive bars etc. In a perfect world, 10-15+ stories replace the BW3s and CVS stepped down to new build above old architecture going north to meet the largely original are North of Lane I’m not going to argue against progress I just think there’s a half mile between High & Neil that could be redeveloped just as easy. Progress is part of life though but for all major college campus’ to look sterile kind of sucks. Makes me wish I ended up in Athens, Oxford or Morgantown but I digress.
August 9, 20222 yr There is plenty of space behind that stretch north of BW's to build something, especially if the project wrapped around them on the north and south ends and had some height.
August 10, 20222 yr Nothing official yet, but the Innovation District is likely getting another new building soon. Ohio State lands up to $52M in new research funding to boost advanced manufacturing “Ohio State University will create a new research center for advanced manufacturing with a multimillion-dollar investment from the National Science Foundation. The funding could amount to $52 million over 10 years, which OSU says would be one of the largest research investments in the last decade for the university. The university said Wednesday it has received $26 million for five years to create the center and has the ability to renew for another $26 million. Officially dubbed the Hybrid Autonomous Manufacturing, Moving from Evolution to Revolution Engineering Research Center, the center will be known as the Hammer Engineering Research Center for short. The center will likely be housed in a building in the west campus Innovation District, according to OSU spokesman Ben Johnson, although there is no dedicated construction project to build a new physical space for the center.“ https://www.bizjournals.com/columbus/news/2022/08/10/osu-advanced-manufacturing-center.html
August 15, 20222 yr 2 minutes ago, CbusOrBust said: Few from King and High This is starting to go up faster now. It seems the garage work takes a long time and once that’s done, things move along quickly.
August 18, 20222 yr Ohio State energy vendor terminates contract for major campus construction project “Construction of a nearly $300 million new combined heat and power plant that is supposed to eventually power Ohio State University’s west campus has stopped following a dispute with the contractor building the project. OSU Energy Partners, a private company that manages OSU’s energy infrastructure, is in negotiations with a new contractor, according to OSU's Mark Conselyea, vice president for facilities operations and development. Until then, “the construction activities have been suspended,” Conselyea told trustees on Thursday. The university hopes that construction work will resume by the end of September.” https://www.bizjournals.com/columbus/news/2022/08/18/osu-engie-combined-heat-chiller.html
August 19, 20222 yr 14 hours ago, amped91 said: Ohio State energy vendor terminates contract for major campus construction project “Construction of a nearly $300 million new combined heat and power plant that is supposed to eventually power Ohio State University’s west campus has stopped following a dispute with the contractor building the project. OSU Energy Partners, a private company that manages OSU’s energy infrastructure, is in negotiations with a new contractor, according to OSU's Mark Conselyea, vice president for facilities operations and development. Until then, “the construction activities have been suspended,” Conselyea told trustees on Thursday. The university hopes that construction work will resume by the end of September.” https://www.bizjournals.com/columbus/news/2022/08/18/osu-engie-combined-heat-chiller.html Can't see the full article, but man, if that contractor isn't already loaded up with business this was probably a bad idea. Why would you want to piss off the endless money farm that is OSU? They're only going to grow more and more and now this contractor won't ever be considered again.
August 24, 20222 yr Read the meeting minutes for July, for the High and Lane building. Height didn’t seem to be a problem anymore and most is the commission was more focused on material and making sure it will look good. They are still wanting some type or preservation for the older builds, so hopefully they come back next month with some more fleshed out designs. Seems like a little bit more positive this time around, so hopefully that is a good thing.
August 24, 20222 yr I’m sitting out in public currently, and this quote from the developer has me laughing out loud, especially after this morning’s discussion in the Clintonville thread. The site straddles the border between the University District and Clintonville. The proposed building will sit entirely within the University District portion of the site, while a 70-space parking lot will sit behind the building and to its north, in the Clintonville portion. That placement is no accident – Singh said that the neighborhood’s reputation for opposing dense new development shaped the proposal. “Unfortunately the general outlook in Clintonville is…three stories max – maybe four – but three stories is kind of where they want everything, and that’s not conducive to where development is today and where Columbus is headed with Intel and all the other new investment,” he said. “We were very strategic; on the Clintonville side, which is 20 percent of the site, all we put there was parking, so I’m happy to hear what color blacktop Clintonville wants us to use on that side.” The proposal will be reviewed conceptually, meaning it will need to return to a future meeting of the board for a vote of approval. 🤣🤣 https://columbusunderground.com/six-story-building-proposed-for-vacant-high-street-site-bw1/
August 30, 20222 yr I didn't get any pics, but while i was checking out the new OSU lacrosse stadium, i noticed fencing is now up around all the old Buckeye Village apartment buildings and there were crews on site prepping them for demolition. It appears they could be coming down pretty soon!
August 31, 20222 yr Two out-of-state developers seek to reshape the corner of Lane and High, taking out CVS, Little B There are no renderings yet Redeveloping the site would mean tearing down the University Baptist Church on Lane and the Little Bar at 2195 N. High St. The owners of the Little Bar couldn't be reached for comment. Both buildings would be nine stories. One building at 50 W. Lane Ave. would have 159 units and be about 400,000 square feet. The second, smaller building would be located at 2195 N. High St. and have 30 units and span about 70,000 square feet. According to submitted plans, the University Baptist Church would have space in the ground floor of one of the buildings and continue to serve the neighborhood.
August 31, 20222 yr 32 minutes ago, VintageLife said: Redeveloping the site would mean tearing down the University Baptist Church on Lane and the Little Bar at 2195 N. I'm fine with tearing down the church. It's not really an architectural masterpiece so it wouldn't be much of a loss, and it's good that the church will continue to exist in the new space. I'm not sure how I feel about tearing down Little Bar though. It's not a stylistically urban building, but it's quirky and provides some extra character to the area. With that being said, if we ever want to see the surface lot north of Little Bar developed, Little Bar's character (which is largely reliant on the north face of the building being visible) would lose it's effect on the area. With that being the case, maybe tearing it down to redevelop the entire lot isn't such a bad idea. It's definitely a tough call. 38 minutes ago, VintageLife said: Both buildings would be nine stories. I definitely like the height. It's nice to see developers continue to push higher than the conservative 6 stories, even though they continue to get push back.
August 31, 20222 yr 21 minutes ago, cbussoccer said: I'm not sure how I feel about tearing down Little Bar though. It's not a stylistically urban building, but it's quirky and provides some extra character to the area. According to something else I read, it's just an old IHOP building. I don't think the building itself is worth saving, but hopefully the business can find a new home in the area. EDIT: Upon some Google Earthing, it's 100% an old IHOP building. Looks exactly like the two IHOPs near where I grew up. Peep the street view of The Little Bar and this IHOP in Massachusetts and you'll see they are almost identical. https://www.google.com/maps/place/IHOP/@41.6700934,-70.2973401,15z/data=!4m5!3m4!1s0x0:0x793522fb570b48ad!8m2!3d41.6700882!4d-70.2973244 Edited August 31, 20222 yr by TIm
Create an account or sign in to comment