Jump to content
buildingcincinnati

Columbus: Harrison West / Dennison Place Developments and News

Recommended Posts

Yet Another Plan for Prominent Corner to be Presented

 

King-and-High-Jan-3-620x328.png

 

The University Impact District Review Board (UIDRB) will soon weigh in on another proposal for the southwest corner of King Avenue and North High Street, continuing a saga that began last spring when St. Louis-based Collegiate Development Group first floated a redevelopment concept for the site.

 

According to documents submitted to the city in advance of the meeting – which takes place at 4 p.m. on Thursday, January 23 – the new plan calls for the preservation of the existing building on the corner, as well as portions of the Ohio Exterminating building on High and the row of townhomes on King. The submitted presentation also states that the developer would pay for the relocation of the former gas station building at 1331 N. High St.

 

More below:

https://www.columbusunderground.com/yet-another-plan-for-prominent-corner-to-be-presented-bw1

https://www.bizjournals.com/columbus/news/2020/01/22/another-plan-emerges-for-proposed-development-at.html

 

King-and-High-Jan-1-1150x550.png


"You don't just walk into a bar and mix it up by calling a girl fat" - buildingcincinnati speaking about new forumers

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

This is probably as good as we're going to get here in terms of height and historic preservation, and so much better than the previous spite proposal.  I don't hold much hope it will be approved as is, though.  I expect a healthy group of NIMBYers to object.

Edited by jonoh81

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
9 minutes ago, jonoh81 said:

This is probably as good as we're going to get here in terms of height and historic preservation, and so much better than the previous spite proposal.  I don't hold much hope it will be approved as is, though.  I expect a healthy group of NIMBYers to object.

 

If it makes you feel any better, I don't believe the 'Protect old North' has jumped on this proposal. They may be relaxing their position. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
11 minutes ago, jonoh81 said:

This is probably as good as we're going to get here in terms of height and historic preservation, and so much better than the previous spite proposal.  I don't hold much hope it will be approved as is, though.  I expect a healthy group of NIMBYers to object.

 

I don't completely understand the NIMBY opposition here though since it's such a high renter area and neighborhood composition, where are the NIMBYs even coming from?

 

Either way, I hope the commission looks at the "spite" proposal and this proposal and sees the reality in front of them that High St is growing up... it's time they stop bickering over height, density, and traffic and start focusing on materials and architectural quality.

Edited by DevolsDance

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, DTCL11 said:

 

If it makes you feel any better, I don't believe the 'Protect old North' has jumped on this proposal. They may be relaxing their position. 

 

There was at least one comment on FB suggesting that residents should do to this project what was done to the Kauffman project on 2nd in the Short North- meaning protest it into oblivion.  

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Yeah, I don't fully understand what residents are complaining? I don't agree with them, but I at least can understand that for those who paid $400k+ for a house in German Village why there'd be a vocal minority. But who living in this area cares enough to complain. Isn't most everyone just renting? 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Among the concerns I just heard on the news was that they don’t need a giant monstrosity of steel and glass. And another person said the 11 stories was too much. 
 

If they don’t want to be around tall buildings move to the suburbs. You bought a house in a city, deal with it or move. 

Edited by VintageLife
  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
6 hours ago, VintageLife said:

Among the concerns I just heard on the news was that they don’t need a giant monstrosity of steel and glass.


NOT ANOTHER STEEL AND GLASS MONSTER!! IT MIGHT CAST A SHADOW!! 😱

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I will never understand NIMBYs.

 

lol cast a shadow

 

And right?! Not steel and glass! If only it were made of cardboard and saran wrap, maybe then they'd approve!

Edited by Zyrokai
  • Like 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

We got our so you can't have yours. Screw them all. I'm hopeful but I would probably still bet money on a rejection and watch the developer pull put. I honestly dont think the uncommon pt II was a serious proposal but a scare tactic. If they do follow through with the Uncommon pt II version the community will get exactly what it deserves to the detriment of the neighborhood. 

 

What's particularly funny about the shadow casting argument is the biggest area affected by the new shadow will be the rest of the same building, a couple properties behind and the freaking Kroger. Will somebody please consider the effect on Kroger after 3.30 pm in the summer?! What will they do with less sun?! Nooooooo

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
3 hours ago, DTCL11 said:

What's particularly funny about the shadow casting argument is the biggest area affected by the new shadow will be the rest of the same building, a couple properties behind and the freaking Kroger. Will somebody please consider the effect on Kroger after 3.30 pm in the summer?! What will they do with less sun?! Nooooooo

 

Sounds amazing. I hate roasting atop asphalt parking lots in the middle of summer.

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
3 hours ago, DTCL11 said:

We got our so you can't have yours. Screw them all. I'm hopeful but I would probably still bet money on a rejection and watch the developer pull put. I honestly dont think the uncommon pt II was a serious proposal but a scare tactic. If they do follow through with the Uncommon pt II version the community will get exactly what it deserves to the detriment of the neighborhood. 

 

What's particularly funny about the shadow casting argument is the biggest area affected by the new shadow will be the rest of the same building, a couple properties behind and the freaking Kroger. Will somebody please consider the effect on Kroger after 3.30 pm in the summer?! What will they do with less sun?! Nooooooo

 

 

Have their electric bill go down by thousands of dollars a month from April to October and massively reduce their carbon footprint, that's what.

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

A little late to this but to me there shouldn't be too many NIMBYs in this area like the Kaufman project.  This is also actually on High Street versus that project which was not.  This is a high renter area outside of condos on Clark, but those don't have a yard as is, so I'm not sure why they would complain.  In general 3 of 4 sides are either commercial or rentals, so I doubt the NIMBYs win this fight, especially with the changes to the on-street design.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Hmmm, very interesting. From the Harrison West Society facebook page:

 

Quote

Neil Ave Giant Eagle Plaza Development: A much anticipated preview of the potential redevelopment of the Giant Eagle plaza on Neil Avenue is finally here! CASTO Realty Group will be attending the next Harrison West Society meeting on Wednesday, 2/19, at 7 pm in the Harrison Park Clubhouse to provide details on the project and gather input from the neighbors. We encourage all neighbors to attend, learn more about this potentially major development in Harrison West, and provide feedback.

 

image.png.aa3c2db5df56b40f857f6d25c482a4fc.png

  • Like 2
  • Love 1
  • Thanks 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Yes. Please. So much potential. 

 

And frankly, with the retirement homes, I'm not sure we shouldn't see a tower component toward the southwest part of this property. One certainly cannot argue a tower would be inappropriate with 3 12(ish) story buildings within a stone's throw. 

  • Like 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
11 minutes ago, Pablo said:

^I don't think the NIMBY's would allow a tower. What about the sun?!?

 

Don't make me pull out the sun diagrams! 😉

  • Like 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Yeah, there's no way a tower goes in there, even if one is proposed.  I would expect something more along the lines of a 3-5 story, largely-residential project with maybe corner spot for retail.  

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Don't get me wrong, I'm not *expecting* a tower. And allow me to clarify with it being a mid-rise tower not to exceed the Westminster-Thurber towers.  I'm sure CASTO will come up with something very formulaic and copy paste. It's Just that there should be one included. The area of the CVS seems the most reasonable location given the proximity to the others and the lack of adjacent single family homes.

Screenshot_20200211-102002_Maps.jpg

Edited by DTCL11

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I've been waiting for years for this. I lived across the street from this plaza for about 4 years and wanted it redeveloped. I hope they don't disappoint.

 

This is such a great opportunity for more density. I really hope they have something a little higher than 3 to 5 stories planned. It's right on a frequent bus route, too. C'mooon!

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Good news, and a long time coming! I wish there were some way to repair the street grid behind this, which is cut off all the way to 1st. At least Buttles should go through.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

The apartment building closest to 315 at Founders Park is up to four floors on the elevator shafts. I was southbound on 315, but it appeared like this building is going to be right on top of the freeway, and a couple floors above.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
3 hours ago, DTCL11 said:

Don't get me wrong, I'm not *expecting* a tower. And allow me to clarify with it being a mid-rise tower not to exceed the Westminster-Thurber towers.  I'm sure CASTO will come up with something very formulaic and copy paste. It's Just that there should be one included. The area of the CVS seems the most reasonable location given the proximity to the others and the lack of adjacent single family homes.

Screenshot_20200211-102002_Maps.jpg

 

For sure, there is definitely room for one there.  It's a large site that could allow a tower to sit back from Neil and the single-family homes.  I just don't think it'll happen.  If anything, I'm surprised that WT didn't try to buy this site for potential expansion.  

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
29 minutes ago, aderwent said:

The apartment building closest to 315 at Founders Park is up to four floors on the elevator shafts. I was southbound on 315, but it appeared like this building is going to be right on top of the freeway, and a couple floors above.

 

Yeah, I really don't like the development, but I thought it being that close to 315 was kind of cool.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Quick project update for King & High

I was able to make it to the commission meeting last month, was hoping some articles would come out about it but since not... I wanted to fill you all in. 

 

Short answer, it's still a no from UARB. 

 

Long answer, here's a bullet point rundown...

 

- Portion will be "co-living" to reduce rent. Shared common spaces with private rooms, similar to pieces of Gravity II. 

- When asked, CDG said project will not cast shadows on any existing properties that the current buildings don't already.

- UARB said height variance is "major ask" and they cant support it, CDG said the tallest portion now only covers less than a quarter of total project and rest falls under 72' zoned height.

- UARB asked CDG to consider reducing project scope, says height overwhelms existing historic properties.

- UARB asked why there is a High St curb cut, CDG said city traffic and planning requested this, UARB asked CDG do full traffic study because they don't want to see curb cuts on High. 

- UARB asked what will become of old service station, CDG says it will be partially restored for garage entrance but not wholly retained. 

- UARB asked CDG to contact/work with Kroger and see if service station can be relocated across street to Kroger property as a way to honor history of neighborhood.

- UARB asked CDG to host neighborhood meetings to find solutions with surrounding property owners and residents.

- Residents and UARB state they fear High and Wall St traffic will be overwhelmed by project. 

- UARB was upset current structures have deteriorated under CDG ownership, mentioned they will be against any necessary demolitions. 

- UARB was hesitant to allow 5% reduction parking variance, asked CDG to creatively find a way to meet zoning req.

- CDG did present some "meh" materials but said they were willing to work with historic and higher quality materials if it would help push the project forward. I

 

Overall, the commission just seemed dead set against this, they mentioned how High should be a dense and urban corridor but then forgot that the second renderings popped on the screen. I am not sure much positive progress came of the meeting, we may get the 7-story white and gray box after all. Just so ridiculous. 

 

Edited by DevolsDance
Formatting
  • Like 1
  • Sad 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, aderwent said:

The apartment building closest to 315 at Founders Park is up to four floors on the elevator shafts. I was southbound on 315, but it appeared like this building is going to be right on top of the freeway, and a couple floors above.

That's the hotel, not apartments.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
3 hours ago, DevolsDance said:

Quick project update for King & High

I was able to make it to the commission meeting last month, was hoping some articles would come out about it but since not... I wanted to fill you all in. 

 

Short answer, it's still a no from UARB. 

 

Long answer, here's a bullet point rundown...

 

- Portion will be "co-living" to reduce rent. Shared common spaces with private rooms, similar to pieces of Gravity II. 

- When asked, CDG said project will not cast shadows on any existing properties that the current buildings don't already.

- UARB said height variance is "major ask" and they cant support it, CDG said the tallest portion now only covers less than a quarter of total project and rest falls under 72' zoned height.

- UARB asked CDG to consider reducing project scope, says height overwhelms existing historic properties.

- UARB asked why there is a High St curb cut, CDG said city traffic and planning requested this, UARB asked CDG do full traffic study because they don't want to see curb cuts on High. 

- UARB asked what will become of old service station, CDG says it will be partially restored for garage entrance but not wholly retained. 

- UARB asked CDG to contact/work with Kroger and see if service station can be relocated across street to Kroger property as a way to honor history of neighborhood.

- UARB asked CDG to host neighborhood meetings to find solutions with surrounding property owners and residents.

- Residents and UARB state they fear High and Wall St traffic will be overwhelmed by project. 

- UARB was upset current structures have deteriorated under CDG ownership, mentioned they will be against any necessary demolitions. 

- UARB was hesitant to allow 5% reduction parking variance, asked CDG to creatively find a way to meet zoning req.

- CDG did present some "meh" materials but said they were willing to work with historic and higher quality materials if it would help push the project forward. I

 

Overall, the commission just seemed dead set against this, they mentioned how High should be a dense and urban corridor but then forgot that the second renderings popped on the screen. I am not sure much positive progress came of the meeting, we may get the 7-story white and gray box after all. Just so ridiculous. 

 

 

They should take it to the city.  It's amazing how many neighborhood commissions are full of people who hate development- and that's really what this is about.  They're simply making excuses to deny it.

Edited by jonoh81
  • Like 3

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Restore formatting

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.


  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    No registered users viewing this page.

×
×
  • Create New...