6 minutes ago, VintageLife said:

Can you post some of the commissions response? 

“Commissioners said the tower's design is "not appropriate" and lacks public art and community engagement.

 

"I really encourage the applicant to really dissect the architecture, the aesthetics and try to find something within the neighborhood that feels right," one commissioner said.

 

Area resident Bob Singleton attended the meeting. He said the tower is, "too big," pointing out the shadow the structure will create in the afternoon.

 

"You can't call it a gateway, it's a barrier between campus and the neighborhood," he said.“

4 minutes ago, amped91 said:

“Commissioners said the tower's design is "not appropriate" and lacks public art and community engagement.

 

"I really encourage the applicant to really dissect the architecture, the aesthetics and try to find something within the neighborhood that feels right," one commissioner said.

 

Area resident Bob Singleton attended the meeting. He said the tower is, "too big," pointing out the shadow the structure will create in the afternoon.

 

"You can't call it a gateway, it's a barrier between campus and the neighborhood," he said.“

 

Absolutely wild. This is ridiculous.

7 minutes ago, amped91 said:

Area resident Bob Singleton attended the meeting. He said the tower is, "too big," pointing out the shadow the structure will create in the afternoon.

Probably lives a mile away and would never even be in the area. The shadow that will be cast on Buffalo Wild Wings or the other tower? Oh no so scary 
 

I kind of agree that the design is terrible so the other commissioners aren’t wrong. It doesn’t seem like they were upset with the height. 

8 minutes ago, VintageLife said:

Probably lives a mile away and would never even be in the area. The shadow that will be cast on Buffalo Wild Wings or the other tower? Oh no so scary 
 

I kind of agree that the design is terrible so the other commissioners aren’t wrong. It doesn’t seem like they were upset with the height. 

 

I just looked up his name on the auditor website. He lives a 10 minute walk away from this site. This tower has absolutely no affect on his property. He'd probably have to climb on top of his roof to even catch a glimpse of the top of this tower. 

 

Does this University Impact District Review Board have any legitimate pull on this AKA can the developer just use Zone In and just build the thing without their approval?

Proposed 16-story tower at Lane & High gets pushback from University Impact District Review Board

 

Plans to put up a 16-story residential tower at the northeast corner Lane Avenue and High Street were met with pushback from the University Impact District Review Board.

 

The board gave the project a conceptual review at its Thursday meeting.

 

One commissioner said the development was "out of place" in regards to renderings presented for the 378,300-square-foot mixed-use space at 2160 N. High St.

...

Commissioners said the tower's design is "not appropriate" and lacks public art and community engagement.

 

"I really encourage the applicant to really dissect the architecture, the aesthetics and try to find something within the neighborhood that feels right," one commissioner said.

 

Area resident Bob Singleton attended the meeting. He said the tower is, "too big," pointing out the shadow the structure will create in the afternoon.

 

"You can't call it a gateway, it's a barrier between campus and the neighborhood," he said.

...

Zac Roman-Jordan with BBCO said that the current CVS "is not a contributing building ... nor appropriate in design or density for that particular site."

 

More below:

https://www.bizjournals.com/columbus/news/2025/04/25/lane-high-landmark-university-district-ohio-state.html

 

33 minutes ago, ColDayMan said:

Does this University Impact District Review Board have any legitimate pull on this AKA can the developer just use Zone In and just build the thing without their approval?

 

Couldn't the developer appeal to city council? 

That's my basic question LOL!  And if this board prevents them from doing what Zone In allows, I'd sue the hell out of them.

53 minutes ago, ColDayMan said:

Does this University Impact District Review Board have any legitimate pull on this AKA can the developer just use Zone In and just build the thing without their approval?

 

UIDRB is a design review board similar to the downtown commission. They issue "certificates of appropriateness" and are supposed to ensure the architecture of a project aligns with adopted design guidelines. They can't reject this solely for the height (especially now with the updated zoning)

 

If the developers come back for approval having made a good faith effort to conform to the guidelines and still get rejected, then they can go to the Board of Commission Appeals, and if rejected there can go to environmental court

 

Edited April 25Apr 25 by NW24HX

13 minutes ago, NW24HX said:

 

UIDRB is a design review board similar to the downtown commission. They issue "certificates of appropriateness" and are supposed to ensure the architecture of a project aligns with adopted design guidelines. They can't reject this solely for the height (especially now with the updated zoning)

 

If the developers come back for approval having made a good faith effort to conform to the guidelines and still get rejected, then they can go to Board of Commission Appeals, and if rejected there can go to environmental court

 

 

That's all well and good, but my fear is what one of the city's housing directors mentioned towards the end of the article:

 

"When we have these sort of back and forths (between the city and developers), it is genuinely frustrating and adds cost and time to projects that gets passed down to the renter ultimately," she said. "So as we think about housing affordability, it's not good from that perspective either."

 

At what point does the developer just walk away, and we're stuck with nothing?

Edited April 25Apr 25 by CMHOhio

If he's saying it's too big there's plenty of split levels located miles away from businesses to move to where you never have to worry about shadows.

 

I honestly hope ZoneIn scares these people off. We don't need them. We do need people who genuinely care about materials and asteics and don’t use them as a proxy to kill density and exacerbate the housing shortage. 

Edited April 25Apr 25 by GCrites

6 minutes ago, CMHOhio said:

At what point does the developer just walk away, and we're stuck with nothing?

 

That's certainly a concern, but really this was only a conceptual review to begin with. They were never going to get approved at this meeting and the project isn't far enough along in development to even seek full approval yet. City staff identified several deficiencies with the proposal (posted on the previous page) that the developers should address

 

For comparison, the mass timber tower at 9th and High was reviewed and approved over a March to August timeline last year. Maybe I'm naively optimistic but I don't think this proposal is all that far off from being able to get over the finish line. Add some art murals, refine the massing a bit, enliven the ground floor with the CVS entrance moved to the corner, and we likely have a winner here IMO

 

1 hour ago, NW24HX said:

 

That's certainly a concern, but really this was only a conceptual review to begin with. They were never going to get approved at this meeting and the project isn't far enough along in development to even seek full approval yet. City staff identified several deficiencies with the proposal (posted on the previous page) that the developers should address

 

For comparison, the mass timber tower at 9th and High was reviewed and approved over a March to August timeline last year. Maybe I'm naively optimistic but I don't think this proposal is all that far off from being able to get over the finish line. Add some art murals, refine the massing a bit, enliven the ground floor with the CVS entrance moved to the corner, and we likely have a winner here IMO

 

I kind of agree, from the commissioner notes posted it doesn’t seem like they have a huge problem with the height, it’s pretty similar to the mass timber. Their problem is with the design, which I honestly agree with. It’s an ugly building and has a lot of room for improvement. 

2 hours ago, cbussoccer said:

 

I just looked up his name on the auditor website. He lives a 10 minute walk away from this site. This tower has absolutely no affect on his property. He'd probably have to climb on top of his roof to even catch a glimpse of the top of this tower. 

 

I swear this is the same guy that came to the meeting for the mass timber and said it would ruin the neighborhood because of the height. I am almost 100% positive his name was Bob and he lived just north of Lane. 

Over the years I've been to a lot of college campuses, including just about every Big Ten university campus. Nearly all of the Big10 (and most large state flagship university campuses) have a growing number of dense / tall developments around them. All but a few have multiple private developments over 7 stories just off campus. It really is impressive what some of these smaller university towns can get built. 

 

What was the last >7 story (non 5over2) apartment building built off campus at Ohio State? Riverwatch in the 1980s? By my rough recollection, every Big10 city has seen a new apartment building over 7 stories off campus since Columbus has last built one except for Bloomington and College Park. 

 

If East Lansing, Iowa City, Lincoln and State College can have multiple new build apartments around ~12 stories, than one of the most dense neighborhoods in the nations 14th largest city should be able to pull it off.  Here is a rough look at a few Big10 stadium adjacent developments:

 

Iowa City

 

Ann Arbor

 

East Lansing

 

State College

 

Lincoln

 

Evanston

 

Madison

 

New Brunswick

 

Champaign/Urbana

 

Minneapolis 

 

And the University District. Main campus's built environment is more dense than the surrounding neighborhood, the inverse of a lot of college campuses. 

 

NOTE - There are a lot of flaws in comparing cities. I have lived in the UD for years and greatly enjoyed my time there/in Columbus, I'm not trying to disparage the city/neighborhood. The area just needs more housing, and its time to catch up to other university towns and go up. 

^This has been a takeaway for me too in my travels. I often refer to Lafayette, which is far smaller than most of those above and they also have the Hub just off campus. If a semi rural city can accept it, so can one of the densest neighbhoods in the state. 

 

Edit: I'm also not terribly worried. I dont really see the city letting the neighborhood commission completely undermine the Zone In. It may be a learning lesson in hiccups, but the City is itching for these and looking to get rid of the commission controls so they'll see it through. Even if it takes a few more steps... I hope. 

Edited April 25Apr 25 by DTCL11

1 minute ago, DTCL11 said:

^This has been a takeaway for me too in my travels. I often refer to Lafayette, which is far smaller than most of those above and they also have the Hub just off campus. If a semi rural city can accept it, so can one of the densest neighbhoods in the state. 

A bunch of old people shouldn’t be able to discourage an increase in population that they won’t be around for. Neighborhoods change, if you’re not able to accept that, move away to somewhere that doesn’t grow. If you love the neighborhood, you have to realize it will be different and that’s a good thing. 

2 hours ago, NW24HX said:

 

That's certainly a concern, but really this was only a conceptual review to begin with. They were never going to get approved at this meeting and the project isn't far enough along in development to even seek full approval yet. City staff identified several deficiencies with the proposal (posted on the previous page) that the developers should address

 

For comparison, the mass timber tower at 9th and High was reviewed and approved over a March to August timeline last year. Maybe I'm naively optimistic but I don't think this proposal is all that far off from being able to get over the finish line. Add some art murals, refine the massing a bit, enliven the ground floor with the CVS entrance moved to the corner, and we likely have a winner here IMO

 

The entire cladding needs scrapped and redone but other than the first floor the rest is fine

Quick one passing Woodruff and Waldeck

From Waldeck

Blume on 16th rises between 16th & Waldeck

Updated renders for Little bar and Baptist church site plan. I believe the high st side has grown from 5 stories to 9.

The cvs redevelopment is also back, with some updated renderings. I'm happy to see they didn't really listen about the height.

1 hour ago, VintageLife said:

The cvs redevelopment is also back, with some updated renderings. I'm happy to see they didn't really listen about the height.

This gives NYC vibes. I kinda like it - but the light gray parts are horrible!

6 minutes ago, columbus17 said:

This gives NYC vibes. I kinda like it - but the light gray parts are horrible!

I like the corner so much more but yeah they didn’t change much of the other stuff and it doesn’t look that great. Better than what is currently there and if this is the end product, I would 100% be fine with it.

Just build them both and get it over with!!!

They really should have incorporated a Burger King on a Plinth into the design to honor the history of the site.

7 hours ago, ColDayMan said:

Just build them both and get it over with!!!

I’m hoping with no submission of design for the lane Ave side of the Baptist church site, they will come back and make that one taller. I’m sure it’s just wanting to get the new building up so the church can continue more or less uninterrupted, but I can always hope.

11 hours ago, VintageLife said:

I like the stained glass entryway here. Nice little touch.

11 hours ago, VintageLife said:

I really like the corner entrance and the 2nd/3rd floor glass atrium. Floors 5 and up are pretty standard for university area residential towers these days, but overall a solid design in my opinion. This thing better get approved.

3 hours ago, cbussoccer said:

I really like the corner entrance and the 2nd/3rd floor glass atrium. Floors 5 and up are pretty standard for university area residential towers these days, but overall a solid design in my opinion. This thing better get approved.

Completely agree, the atrium and corner entrance is awesome.

16- and 9-Story Towers Top Review Board’s Agenda

A pair of development proposals – one right at the corner of Lane and High, the other just off of it – will be heard by the University Impact District Review Board (UIDRB) next week. Both projects have already been before the board multiple times, but significant changes have been made to each since new zoning rules for many of the city’s major corridors went into effect last year. Read on for the latest on both proposals.

2160 N. High St. (Lane and High)

Landmark Properties brought several different proposals for the northeast corner of Lane and High to the UIDRB in 2021 and 2022, but in April came back with a new design that called for a 16-story tower on a smaller footprint. The building would replace what is currently a CVS Pharmacy and its parking lot.

A staff report prepared for this month’s meeting states that the board was “generally supportive of the density and height at this location,” but requested more attention be paid to the building’s massing and how it would interact the surrounding neighborhood.

More below:

https://columbusunderground.com/16-and-9-story-towers-top-review-boards-agenda-bw1/

Ohio State-area project that would demolish Little Bar back for review

More than two years after initial development plans began, a taller student housing tower is now proposed at the site of the Little Bar near Ohio State's campus.

Austin-based developer American Campus Communities will present plans at a Thursday meeting of the University Impact District Review Board to demolish the dive bar at 2195 N. High St. to make way for a nine-story mixed-use building with student housing and a church on the ground floor.

The overall project includes two buildings connected by a pedestrian walkway, one at the North High Street parcel and one building at an adjacent parcel at 50 W. Lane Ave., the current home of University Baptist Church, which will relocate to the High Street lot.

More below:

https://www.bizjournals.com/columbus/news/2025/05/22/little-bar-lane-avenue-student-housing.html

3 hours ago, ColDayMan said:

Ohio State-area project that would demolish Little Bar back for review

More than two years after initial development plans began, a taller student housing tower is now proposed at the site of the Little Bar near Ohio State's campus.

Austin-based developer American Campus Communities will present plans at a Thursday meeting of the University Impact District Review Board to demolish the dive bar at 2195 N. High St. to make way for a nine-story mixed-use building with student housing and a church on the ground floor.

The overall project includes two buildings connected by a pedestrian walkway, one at the North High Street parcel and one building at an adjacent parcel at 50 W. Lane Ave., the current home of University Baptist Church, which will relocate to the High Street lot.

More below:

https://www.bizjournals.com/columbus/news/2025/05/22/little-bar-lane-avenue-student-housing.html

It's a cool building and sad to see it go, but this area is changing rapidly and the bar clearly isn't getting much business outside of OSU game days and graduation. Developers are wanting to build taller buildings along High St in the densest part of Columbus and we should welcome and encourage these developments.

On 5/22/2025 at 4:59 PM, KyleofColumbus said:

It's a cool building and sad to see it go, but this area is changing rapidly and the bar clearly isn't getting much business outside of OSU game days and graduation. Developers are wanting to build taller buildings along High St in the densest part of Columbus and we should welcome and encourage these developments.

It's kinda a neat building but it's also just a slightly revamped old IHOP building, so nothing too special. It's a pretty popular bar with students, so it is sad to see it go, but that corner has horrible landuse with that giant parking lot - These proposals not interfering with any actual historic buildings is a win in my opinion.

Board offers mixed feedback for pair of proposals that could transform corner of Lane and High

Two residential development projects that would add a nine-story and a 16-story tower on the same block of North High Street near Lane Avenue were reviewed last week by the University Impact Design Review Board.

16-story tower could replace CVS at Lane and High

The review process continues for a proposed 16-story tower at the corner of Lane Avenue and High Street, with commissioners somewhat favorable on the design progress but non-committal on final approval for the project.

...

The structure was deemed "out of place" by the review board and commissioners advised a softening of the design to add more gathering areas to activate the corner.

Revised renderings presented last week show the CVS entrance relocated to the corner of Lane Avenue and High Street, with added public space peppered with planters. The plans also show a two-story, glass enclosed amenity space atop the retail store.

“I like this much better than what was presented last month,” one commissioner said.

Another was not "categorically opposed to the project," and advised that the tower’s notable location means quality materials and design are a top priority.

Others continued to express concern, noting what they deemed to be low-quality building materials and small window size.

“It’s a big building on a prominent corner that needs to do something more,” another commissioner said.

More below:

https://www.bizjournals.com/columbus/news/2025/05/28/lane-avenue-high-street-university-review-board.html

I think the height is great, but the architecture is just a mess. Reminds me of a taller version of this shopping mall in Tartu, Estonia.

53 minutes ago, Pablo said:

I think the height is great, but the architecture is just a mess. Reminds me of a taller version of this shopping mall in Tartu, Estonia.

From what I listened to, of the meeting, the commissioners mostly said it just needed to look better. They didn’t care much about the height. One pointed out how all the windows on the north or east side all looked exactly the same and had a ton. They said it just looked uninviting but made mention that the height was fine.

I agree the design is horrid

I like the height but the design is trash. Do better architects.

I'm happy about the height mostly not being an issue, fix the materials and open up the windows and hopefully we will have a winner.