University Impact District Review Board approves several signage packages with conditions

The University Impact District Review Board on Thursday approved several commercial signage packages for properties in the university district, conditioning some approvals to limit illumination, reduce clustering, and require mounting through mortar joints.

Board members voted to approve signage packages for multiple State House (L3 Campus) properties and for a mixed-use building commonly referred to in filings as the “Blue 1” garage and retail building. Applicants said the designs had been revised since an April review to remove or relocate signs and reduce overall sign area.

Staff presented each application and cited the University District Plan and the City of Columbus graphics code in recommending approval or conditional approval. For the Blue 1 application, staff told the board that the applicant had revised the package after the earlier hearing by pushing a projecting sign farther out from the façade and by changing the proposed mounting so the sign would be set in mortar joints rather than mounted through brick face; staff revised its recommendation from conditional approval to full approval after receiving those changes.

Rebecca Green, representing the State House applications, said the three related packages had been “substantially modified” since the board last reviewed them in April and described the applicants’ intent to prioritize a canopy/awning sign and reduce other elements that the board had questioned. Applicant representatives for the Blue 1 package said they had reduced the risk of light spill and revised the projecting sign location to improve sight lines and reduce impacts on adjacent units.

Board discussion focused on whether blade/projecting signs primarily served branding rather than wayfinding for pedestrians, and whether multiple near-identical blade signs across several properties were appropriate in the concentrated northwest corner of certain sites. Commissioners asked applicants to choose a smaller set of signs that provide location information rather than owner branding, to avoid clustering multiple large signs at one corner, and to make leasing-office blade signs non-illuminated.

Votes at a glance

- COA2500288 (Highline on Ninth / State House package): Motion: “Motion to approve with adjustments.” Vote record (as recorded on the roll call): Mr. Plummer — No; Miss Gunzelman — Yes; Mr. Seblett — Yes; Mr. Bennett — Yes. Outcome: approved.

- COA2500290/COA250029O (State House / Varsity building signage package — flagship building): Motion (board member text): approved with specific conditions: State House/Varsity sign approved; leasing-office blade sign approved only if non-illuminated; rooftop “State House” sign approved on west elevation; the northwest corner blade sign deleted; south entrance sign to be revised to show address or an entrance label rather than only a logo. Vote record (as recorded): roll call included Mr. Plummer, Mr. Zemanski, Mr. Manning among those voting yes. Outcome: approved with conditions.

- COA2500291 (related Varsity/Highline package): Motion: approve with conditions: Statehouse Highline wall sign on west elevation approved; leasing-office plaque approved if non-illuminated; two north-side signs not approved; masonry-mounted signage must be through mortar joints only. Vote record (as recorded): roll call included Mr. Plummer and other commissioners voting yes. Outcome: approved with conditions.

- COA2500426 (Blue 1 signage and variances including a projecting sign and parking garage entry sign): Staff reported the applicant moved the projecting sign forward to 10 feet 7 inches from the back of the sign to improve visibility and set the sign in mortar joints. After that update staff moved from recommending conditional approval to recommending approval. Motion to approve carried on roll call. Outcome: approved.

What the decisions mean

The board’s conditions are intended to reduce visual clutter on High Street and nearby side streets, prioritize pedestrian-oriented wayfinding over repeated owner branding, and limit light spill from illuminated projecting or blade signs. Staff will perform final permitting reviews to confirm the approved signage matches the mounted-through-mortar-joints requirement and the non-illumination stipulations noted by the board.

Next steps

Applicants will finalize permit drawings incorporating the board’s conditions. For the Blue 1 package staff indicated the revised designs received before the hearing addressed prior concerns and do not require a return appearance. The State House packages will proceed to permitting with the board’s conditions; one application was directed to return for final administrative sign-off with staff once the south-entrance plaque/entry text is revised.