[{"_1":2,"_111":-5,"_112":-5},"loaderData",{"_3":4,"_26":27},"root",{"_5":6,"_17":10,"_18":19,"_20":21,"_22":10,"_23":-5,"_24":-5,"_25":10},"user",{"_7":8,"_9":10,"_11":10,"_12":-5,"_13":-5,"_14":15,"_16":-5},"roles",[],"isAuthenticated",false,"isPremium","planName","subscriptionStatus","featureFlags",{},"insightsBudget","isDevelopmentHost","userPreferences",{},"recaptchaSiteKey","6LcvOJcUAAAAAHsB-gPGfGktcRlKpH7OTIU_dMTD","isImpersonating","impersonation","affiliateStatus","isFreedomPortal","routes/v2/article/layout",{"_28":29,"_30":31},"notFound",true,"relatedArticles",[32,76,87,99],{"_33":34,"_35":36,"_37":38,"_39":40,"_41":42,"_43":44,"_45":46,"_47":48,"_49":50,"_51":52,"_53":54,"_55":56,"_57":58,"_59":60,"_61":62,"_63":64,"_65":66,"_67":68,"_69":70,"_71":72,"_73":74,"_75":74},"mediaId",6666738,"mediaKeyId","2312703-314715cdc0876a28ad1e5be998277c11","parentId",2312703,"title","Development Commission votes at a glance: most rezoning items approved, one tabled","audioSeconds",8540,"startMs",830000,"endMs",9370000,"viewUrl","/Search/View?dp=1&key=2312703-314715cdc0876a28ad1e5be998277c11&start=830&end=9370","thumbnailUrl","https://assets.pipeline.soar.com/2312703-314715cdc0876a28ad1e5be998277c11/thumbnail_830000.jpg","articleUrl","/articles/6666738/Ohio/Development-Commission-votes-at-a-glance-most-rezoning-items-approved-one-tabled","mediaUrl","https://secure.pipeline.soar.com/6666738-bbfe0d933dad7d7a6a4d84a41a4e704b/orig.mp4?Expires=1776008369&Signature=WmL2X64iKtxeff4eOIRLVFVEHdH9UifnohP4Q2diQHNGMxoxS6zFuSQ1vLoY2doxTSyRU6apnVet-kcQGDXE1ADfzFJDQ9pmCIHx2mF11hjcHQh6ey36IdKD8R7dSk26Y7Yma4sW8G4jsL3zeBOeTQdsqMM9ONzbG17FDo6D7B2Xyzxf-3oGNVnU3jJZLt~NzN6L9lhIAdT16RZDovAyvaOtfb-41~~9dQZ~op4hfHT6avuwwkL53lV5xubVaOsWJOUCG0Ws7tAoc9UYnEBO8RH3Yn5pwvUvQBlesw4DTtsx8cg~lNirpk7s62Ut9J8ZVy4vIhI90LjUGQw2c1ZJlg__&Key-Pair-Id=KUT5TJCACFTXG","author","Columbus","date","2025-02-14T00:09:22.197Z","article","The Columbus Development Commission handled multiple zoning and council‑variance items at its Feb. 13 meeting. Most items were approved by roll call and forwarded to City Council as recommendations; one case was tabled.

Quick outcomes

- Cases Z24‑074, Z24‑077 and Z24‑079 (three separate Seymour Avenue rezoning requests to R‑4 allowing three‑ to four‑unit dwellings) were considered together and received staff and area‑commission recommendation for approval. Commissioners took roll calls and the items were approved.

- Case Z24‑060 (1501 Gerard Avenue): The commission reviewed an AR‑3 apartment residential district request with a concurrent council variance for a proposed 265‑unit apartment building. The developer stated outstanding comments could be worked through with city staff; after discussion, the commission voted to forward the item to City Council with conditional approval pending resolution of technical comments.

- Case Z24‑060 (207 Lockbourne Road): The commission reviewed a rezoning application that staff recommended conditionally, with remaining right‑of‑way dedication and access point issues to be resolved before council. The applicant’s attorney confirmed the plan is for townhouse for‑sale units rather than rental apartments; the commission moved the item toward council.

- Case Z24‑0402 (Hamilton Square Boulevard): The commission considered a request to permit a limited apartment residential district on an irregularly shaped site in an area otherwise recommended for employment uses. Commissioners debated land‑use fit and economic viability; the commission approved forwarding the request to City Council.

- Case Z24‑059 (Harlem Road): (See separate article) Commission approved updated limitation text and forwarded the rezoning recommendation to council with an information packet documenting outstanding DPS comments and neighborhood concerns.

- Case Z24‑028 (Treview/Roberts mixed‑use): (See separate article) Forwarded to council with conditions; commission vote was 4–2.

- Case Z24‑020 (Lindor Drive): (See separate article) Forwarded to council after public opposition; commission roll call was majority yes with at least one recorded no vote.

- Case Z24‑0289 (tabled): One item on the agenda was tabled and will return to the commission when applicant and staff can supply updated materials.

Across the items, staff consistently noted remaining technical comments from the Department of Public Service (sidewalks, right‑of‑way, access points, traffic studies) and emphasized that forwarding a rezoning recommendation does not authorize construction; final approvals and any necessary council variances remain before Columbus City Council. Several items that had drawn public comment will appear before council with information packets summarizing the commission's discussion and outstanding issues.","mediaType","Video","parentTitle","Special Meeting: Development Commission (02/13/25)","oneSentenceSummary","At its Feb. 13 meeting, the Columbus Development Commission approved or forwarded multiple rezoning applications (cases Z24‑074, Z24‑077, Z24‑079, Z24‑059, Z24‑060, Z24‑0609, Z24‑0402, Z24‑028, Z24‑020); one item was tabled. Several cases were routine staff referrals while a few drew public comment.","taxTitle","Columbus City Council, Columbus, Franklin County, Ohio","taxId",75950,"location","Ohio","headline","","shortSummary",{"_33":77,"_35":36,"_37":38,"_39":78,"_41":79,"_43":80,"_45":46,"_47":81,"_49":82,"_51":83,"_53":84,"_55":56,"_57":58,"_59":85,"_61":62,"_63":64,"_65":86,"_67":68,"_69":70,"_71":72,"_73":74,"_75":74},6666741,"Development Commission approves 24‑unit Lindor Drive project despite neighborhood opposition",2724,6646000,"/Search/View?dp=1&key=2312703-314715cdc0876a28ad1e5be998277c11&start=6646&end=9370","https://assets.pipeline.soar.com/2312703-314715cdc0876a28ad1e5be998277c11/thumbnail_6646000.jpg","/articles/6666741/Ohio/Development-Commission-approves-24unit-Lindor-Drive-project-despite-neighborhood-opposition","https://secure.pipeline.soar.com/6666741-48fc81eb7ae9cf79ba25fab56cd5a8ea/orig.mp4?Expires=1776008370&Signature=gsJ8rgTuEDDV2nSH~zxnKO9bV9hE3lBeLovU5N-ELEFBeSt8JPIOrm4RgtGSLT1SlxHVLPjIwmmxcwf7FVxP6e2PFVZNxUxlN7IKqtzGbezLf2Y8iDGM1E7DFd2VrRUE85kDNfb3BTVWbyT~SxXzbpZz9UW6jSLVSBgtRATDj6hILL41x29lV5FzAmrp8NEgIoKt3JgfPD-K5F7uS5KWPjdU6xOBGaN5ehR0TkebUIpBdsE6q4bd4EbqZkUxweuXctsdtyVqiauOuj8s5kzgMFDUjppOFkNhShyRklmWr5r-O5mChqPo57zUwANc585BGzrvG~UwMyKrvYtSVHFg5Q__&Key-Pair-Id=KUT5TJCACFTXG","The Columbus Development Commission voted to forward a rezoning request (case Z24‑020) for a 24‑unit apartment project on Lindor Drive to City Council after neighborhood speakers urged denial, citing traffic, pedestrian safety at the adjacent park and a loss of established single‑family character.

Planning staff told commissioners the 0.92‑acre site has been commercially zoned since 1963, that the Southeast Area Plan supports mixed‑use or residential up to 24 dwelling units per acre in the location, and that the updated site plan increased north and east setbacks, added landscaping and agreed to provide a five‑foot screening fence and other concessions sought by the area commission. Staff recommended approval.

Multiple residents and Greater Southeast Area Commission members testified in opposition. Speakers said the project would increase traffic at an already congested neighborhood street, would create parking and safety issues near a city park used for youth sports, and would alter the established single‑family neighborhood; several residents asked the commission to require a different housing product (townhouses or mixed‑use) or to preserve the parcel for public use. \"We don't need apartments in the middle of this neighborhood,\" said Diana Bunning, a resident and area commission member.

The applicant's consultant said the site has been vacant for decades and that commercial redevelopment has not been viable; the current design reduced building length to increase setbacks, added screening, and adjusted landscaping. The consultant said a previous gas station occupied the site, and that commercial uses would remain allowed under current zoning. The developer committed to meet several technical items noted in staff comments.

After public comment and applicant response, commissioners voted to forward the rezoning with the submitted site plan and updated limitation text. In roll call, commissioners recorded multiple yes votes and one recorded no vote; the commission's recommendation now proceeds to City Council for final action and any required council variance review.","The commission approved a rezoning recommendation for a proposed 24‑unit apartment building on Lindor Drive (case Z24‑020) after extensive neighborhood opposition citing traffic, park access and neighborhood character concerns; staff recommended approval consistent with area plan.",{"_33":88,"_35":36,"_37":38,"_39":89,"_41":90,"_43":91,"_45":92,"_47":93,"_49":94,"_51":95,"_53":96,"_55":56,"_57":58,"_59":97,"_61":62,"_63":64,"_65":98,"_67":68,"_69":70,"_71":72,"_73":74,"_75":74},6666744,"Commission sends Treview Roberts mixed‑use rezoning toward council after extensive debate, asks developers to resolve design and cemetery questions",2385,4037000,6422000,"/Search/View?dp=1&key=2312703-314715cdc0876a28ad1e5be998277c11&start=4037&end=6422","https://assets.pipeline.soar.com/2312703-314715cdc0876a28ad1e5be998277c11/thumbnail_4037000.jpg","/articles/6666744/Ohio/Commission-sends-Treview-Roberts-mixeduse-rezoning-toward-council-after-extensive-debate-asks-developers-to-resolve-design-and-cemetery-questions","https://secure.pipeline.soar.com/6666744-506ecb74c1864363b5c2b16475cffc2f/orig.mp4?Expires=1776008369&Signature=m~L0QuzhuKC~MfZz7-o7frrZC9k4x3IeCOCERIjHpmRqAbZkY9xoHiQ7H9-N2M7kO98YinPm0AxHbvgGxU2VIK-YYleV0lQUZ38-H4yFRFpzmyUxa6qpq2sNZjq81XyTAdvwmU~xhc-jmvLn2HFksCPc1TBiPXAwD0G83Bs1a9ZaTGLqxVDUeSQKgyMgoWdWDu0A4d1sMmKHbMNg6Mx9AbnYDXmsJTlf4cTlhTBOGn6qEET4tOVQh780leH5r0INYMmF-0sHmRTZiNZ6iqwYSKaCBji0WWXlVlt-eW2l4IWQ~hasJ2iq~KAzGYHEXv2jMV413YBtIj2OaAQgAi6rLw__&Key-Pair-Id=KUT5TJCACFTXG","The Columbus Development Commission voted 4–2 on Thursday to forward a rezoning and companion council‑variance (case Z24‑028) proposing a mixed‑use development on approximately 18.3 acres in the Treview/Roberts planning area that would include up to 280 apartment units and limited commercial space.

Developer representatives said the plan had been reduced from earlier, higher‑density proposals after months of meetings with planning staff, the West Scioto Area Commission and neighborhood stakeholders. The most recent site plan includes an area to be dedicated to park/open space and three‑ and two‑story residential buildings arranged to preserve a green corridor along the creek. Developer attorneys described multiple iterations, reductions in building height in key places, and commitments to donate roughly 5.5 acres of green space to Recreation and Parks.

Despite changes, the item drew sustained public and area‑commission scrutiny about architecture and community process. Rita Cabral, zoning chair for the West Scioto Area Commission, told the Development Commission she and the area commission objected to the way new architectural elevations and color schemes were submitted late in the process and asked for more direct design involvement. Cabral also said the area commission had been informed of a possible cemetery on the property; she asked that the issue be placed on public record.

The developer’s representative acknowledged the architectural changes were submitted after the area commission’s final vote, said the team would return to the West Scioto Area Commission for additional review, and emphasized that the most recent elevations meet city C2P2 design guidance. The team also described design compromises reached during prior iterations — for example, reducing several buildings from four to three stories and moving amenity spaces to address neighbor concerns.

Planning staff recommended conditional approval, noting the proposal fits the Treview/Roberts area plan’s mixed‑use‑neighborhood recommendations and that outstanding items — a revised traffic study, documentation of approval from Franklin Township for a proposed access point on Britton Avenue, and other Department of Public Service comments — must be resolved before council.

Commissioners split on whether the design changes submitted after area‑commission review undermined neighborhood trust. Several commissioners urged the applicant to return to the West Scioto Area Commission to obtain explicit support for the revised architecture before going to council. The commission approved transmitting an information packet to council but emphasized the developer must address the cemetery question and finalize architectural details with the area commission and staff prior to (or during) the council process.

The commission’s 4–2 vote moves the rezoning and companion council‑variance to City Council with an information sheet documenting outstanding issues; the developer said it would seek a subsequent area commission meeting within weeks to resolve the architectural concerns.","The Development Commission voted 4–2 to forward a rezoning and council‑variance package for a 280‑unit mixed‑use project in the Treview/Roberts area, while several commissioners and the West Scioto Area Commission asked the developer to return with clarified architecture and to investigate an unverified cemetery report.",{"_33":100,"_35":36,"_37":38,"_39":101,"_41":102,"_43":103,"_45":104,"_47":105,"_49":106,"_51":107,"_53":108,"_55":56,"_57":58,"_59":109,"_61":62,"_63":64,"_65":110,"_67":68,"_69":70,"_71":72,"_73":74,"_75":74},6666749,"Development commission approves rezoning for Harlem Road self-storage after resident objections",1181,1330000,2511000,"/Search/View?dp=1&key=2312703-314715cdc0876a28ad1e5be998277c11&start=1330&end=2511","https://assets.pipeline.soar.com/2312703-314715cdc0876a28ad1e5be998277c11/thumbnail_1330000.jpg","/articles/6666749/Ohio/Development-commission-approves-rezoning-for-Harlem-Road-self-storage-after-resident-objections","https://secure.pipeline.soar.com/6666749-20a6a90318feb728606c3b1b9c8d88ff/orig.mp4?Expires=1776008369&Signature=X1-rSKgyYzGXDFB2aztM22eE2-Xm~tVlgXMfMT4nrMB4JOm4Yfp8JLLMzHJLQP5p8lxWL-H18H5y~2m7hzdup~lpwjDBemjeRRI3TaTgynTU9mEQ3jUYzV73WabkfWYE9m52ARCcmrffPSQvE7nl9UOMxtRfV~cYYquUJAZXQuiL3koQBbFEC61ulZtnRsDBDeovkUmZRRg8ki92IORAoiZbfLoZAtpuvNyrxFbq~HZCfdAv-lRBfR~SJdLoSEEHYuToK8YIUqz2rV3WlecamxUkqgK0Y~NeEIneUrqvLXNOEnvsVcLJ6ybrEbWUCMYGYejZTG6~Ri1BBlCjeXuFrQ__&Key-Pair-Id=KUT5TJCACFTXG","The Columbus Development Commission voted Wednesday to approve updated limitation text and forward to city council a rezoning application (case Z24‑059) that would allow a self‑storage facility on two parcels along Harlem Road.

Neighbors urged the commission to deny the rezoning, saying a 17,000‑square‑foot, two‑story storage building would encroach on a residential neighborhood, worsen traffic at the Harlem Road/Central College intersection and set a precedent for limited manufacturing uses next to homes. \"This is the first commercial building to invade an otherwise residential area,\" resident Lori Kiefer said, asking the commission to withhold approval.

The applicant and project representatives told the commission the development team had worked through multiple iterations with planning staff and added buffering, fencing, landscaping and a 10‑foot shared‑use path connection. Applicant representative Tom Gustafshek said the facility would be \"secure, well‑lit and very, very safe,\" and noted a 1.8‑acre parcel between the proposed building and the nearest single‑family homes.

Planning staff recommended conditional approval pending resolution of Department of Public Service comments, including showing shared‑use path connectivity and other technical revisions. The limitation text before the commission restricted use of the property to self‑storage and specified development standards for setbacks, height, parking, lighting, landscaping, fencing and signage.

Commissioners debated neighborhood notification, the 2003 Rocky Fork/Blacklick Accord referenced in public testimony and whether the proposal fit long‑range land‑use guidance. After a motion and a roll call vote, the commission approved the updated limitation text and the zoning recommendation to city council; staff will prepare an information sheet summarizing the commission’s findings for council review.

The project will next appear before Columbus City Council, where outstanding technical comments from the Department of Public Service (including shared‑use path details) must be resolved. The commission’s approval does not yet authorize building permits; construction and final site design remain subject to city review and the council variance process.

Votes at the commission were recorded with commissioners calling roll on the motion to send the item to council. The commission’s approval was accompanied by at least one recorded no vote and staff noted that an information packet will be transmitted to council documenting outstanding questions and the conditions commissioners relied on.","The Columbus Development Commission voted to forward a rezoning application allowing a self‑storage facility on Harlem Road to city council after residents raised traffic, precedent and notification concerns; commissioners included conditions in an updated limitation text.","actionData","errors"]

Article not found

Development Commission votes at a glance: most rezoning items approved, one tabled

Development Commission approves 24‑unit Lindor Drive project despite neighborhood opposition

Commission sends Treview Roberts mixed‑use rezoning toward council after extensive debate, asks developers to resolve design and cemetery questions

Development commission approves rezoning for Harlem Road self-storage after resident objections