jim uber

Calling all folks who are interested in OTR infill development. In the coming weeks the OTR Foundation "Infill Committee" apparently plans to submit for council approval their concept of infill guidelines. If nothing else, this has motivated me to finally become a member of the OTRCC, because I'm sure that the Foundation will seek their approval.

I listened to a little of the discussion at the council meeting today. The easy one to fix, for which they have parts, is out of commission for "weeks". the other one will take longer.

I don't know when/where that meeting was supposed to be held. You'd think it must be public, but I didn't see it on the council calendar.

I listened to a bit of the council meeting today where they discussed issues related to Liberty and Elm. Four council members abstained from voting, seeming to believe that the OTRCC opposition represents the community. There is a meeting tomorrow with council, the developers, and the "opposition" prior to a vote by council on Wednesday. I live so close to this corner that I pay a lot of attention to it. But if you also can't stand what is going on, I'd say it's a good time to write council, if you haven't done so already. I'm pasting my letter below, explaining what I see as the issues. --- Dear City Council Members, My name is Jim Uber, and I live with my wife at 1529 Elm st, about 100 feet from the proposed development. We rehabbed that property in 2012, and just completed the renovation of a 7 unit building next door at 1527 Elm - a building that sat vacant for over 30 years. We are partners with the City; you provided meaningful support that helped secure Federal and State tax credits for 1527 Elm, just as one example. As a neighbor, I support the proposed development at Liberty and Elm streets. The vocal opposition (and, I believe, minority) that pretends to speak for me, does not. My support is explained in three related points, below. [*]I’m not a fan of the proposed architecture. But that issue is secondary; no-one should be allowed to hold a project hostage because of their romantic fantasy of what OTR is and must remain. That is the thinking of preservationists who envision OTR as an Italianate mecca for tourists, not as a bustling home for workers and families. They believe not only in preserving what is there, but in making certain that every new thing fits an architectural mold that mimics the past. It’s a foolhardy notion, and will lead us down the wrong road. [*]OTR needs density and people, of all shapes and sizes. Not every set of vacant parcels can support a large and dense residential development, but if there ever was a corner screaming out for density and height, it is Liberty and Elm. The stoplight walk sign gives you almost 30 seconds to cross the street! Here we have the opportunity for an appropriate scale of architecture, and one that would bring life and love and light to that corner. And then here come the opponents, in the name of “my” community council, forcing the developer to lop off an entire story. Let’s be clear - that was an entire story to be filled with people, bringing in revenue that could have supported good materials and design, not to mention an appropriate number of affordable units. [*]On this last point, City Council should not reward the hypocrisy of crying out for height restrictions, while at the same time complaining about the lack of affordable units and poor design quality. The height restriction was the opponents first and most concrete demand, and they won it. That removed the money and incentives to ask the developer for affordable units, not to mention for a better overall design. In pushing forward their romantic notion of OTR architecture, they gutted any opportunity for real progress. That fact belies their true interests. I fear that this situation is already scaring off good developers. Please don’t make the problem worse by validating this false notion of what the “OTR community” wants. The real solution here involves moving forward with form-based codes and re-making the historic conservation board process for infill development - both with real structured community involvement, not the stand-in that we’re seeing here. -Jim Uber

What's the source of this information?

^ I agree. put in 4/5 glass panels and the building is completely different.

^ its a good point. My wife and I noticed exactly the same thing. We were aghast when they installed them. They're a little better after paint. But it's not the door I would expect to get for an $850K investment.

I agree. I think that what depresses some of us is that we expected that finally, once this thing is built and operational, people will see the light. And we'd be seeing calls for extensions as well as real transit plans being dusted off. At least I thought so - but I was naive. It will take time, probably even if the operational aspects were ideal. Just sucks to listen to Cranley use the streetcar as part of his scorched earth class warfare campaign. If he can get beat while using that strategy it could be big.

Jesus. I have to say, I sense a depressing stall here. It is so sad that Cranley had to get elected at just this time. He is doing everything he can to keep the streetcars empty.

Looking over the packet for the Race street project, I noticed a ton of letters in support from neighbors, plus the following in opposition: - "We believe that the construction of a 6th floor (and the 5th floor to a lesser extent) will adversely impact our ability to grow grass in our common areas." From the Bremen lofts association, who are "adamantly opposed" to construction of the 6th floor. The Bremen folks are also "adamantly against" a 50% parking requirement variance, and they think the new development will bring too much additional noise. I'd suggest that Bremen folks seriously consider moving to Mt. Lookout. - The infamous "OTR Foundation Infill Committee" has, as expected, raised its collective noses. (Has the esteemed infill committee ever come out in support of an infill project? Perhaps they should be renamed the anti-infill committee.) They have a rigorous review process that is based on analysis of things like "Base", "Middle", "Top" and the like. They are obviously very experienced in leveraging existing historical guidelines, as dumb as they can be sometimes, to maintain their victorian vision of an OTR designed for tourists who are interested in living in the past for a weekend. Example drivel from the committee: "The principle façade lacks a top. However, the setback fifth floor does provide a sense of a top from a certain distance but it is likely that an observer on Race will not be able see this and hence will be seen as having no top (Race Street is an important vantage point i.e. street car line)." - And of course, we simply must invoke the mysterious requirements of height of our buildings. The infill committee notes: "The rear building is 6 stories in height and is thus 2-3 stories taller than the buildings to the north (2) and south (3), respectively. This does not meet the guidelines for height." These sorts of comments actually make me sometimes regret living in a historic district. I'd like to modify the entire set of guidelines with a statement that they are only to apply to existing contributing structures. Leave the empty spaces alone to the architects and their owners.

^Please do tell. Where does this information come from? Is the study currently in progress, and does this come from actual direction being given to the engineers from the City?

Yeah I can't remember their name but they made good beer and had decent pub food too. They reopened on west liberty and were there for a while after getting booted by the Art Academy. Just too far ahead of their time. I also distinctly remember that when you went to that brew pub (in the AA space), you had a feeling of risk, like you had ventured off of the relative safety of Main street and were now in a no-man's land. How times change.

I agree. On the end of real estate, I am also saddened by the fact that I can do an MLS search for homes in clifton and corryville, but not downtown or OTR. I don't think that is a minor problem at all, and given there are zero real hurdles for doing so, I'd have to assume it reflects an anti-city bias.

I can't seem to see that from MLS. But my guess is > 4000 sq. ft. plus it has a basement (and garage, of course). Sure, I understand. But I think you also understand that its a big world out there. I mean, we even have Trump voters.

To be accurate, the $1.2M is for a 4 bed, 4 bath, 4 story single family home. It's a big home. And as for the open air drug dealing, it's a full 1.5 blocks away - a light year by OTR standards. I do appreciate, though, you referring to simply "blight", as opposed to "urban blight" or even "inner city blight". That was nice. Seriously the only thing that might scare me more than living in OTR right now, is the thought I might wake up someday and find myself waving to neighbors as I cut my lawn.

^ Looks like one under contract and one sold

Really - so including the Towne properties townhomes?

^Actually I've heard those are going to be apartments, not condos.

^ I'd thought that building was one that got state historic tax credits too. I'm surprised that they allowed that to be done to a prominent facade.

Speaking of that, has anyone heard what's up with the Liberty and Elm apartments? They were supposed to go in front of the zoning board of appeals this morning.

^ By my calculations, $500/sq. ft. If they get that I am impressed.

^That was a little depressing. The article said they needed $590/sq. ft. to make the condo project work, whereas downtown condos are currently getting around $400. That is such a large gap, I'm sort of amazed that the design team had to take this long (and so much work) to arrive at this conclusion. Were they thinking that the downtown market would spike that high by now?

Yes!

Hey all just a quick note about our open house in case anyone was interested... its been postponed till next Saturday, March 4 (March 4!) from 2:00-4:00PM. Sorry for the confusion; it was unexpectedly busy this week after we put these on the market. Incidentally, to anyone who is interested in developing a property in OTR, after my (first time) experience entering the rental market as a landlord, there is surprising pressure for good quality and inexpensive 1-BR units in OTR (<=$800/month). I think this is likely to be true whether south of Liberty or near Findlay market. I mean, you put the listing out there and you better allocate the better part of your next few days interacting with people. So you may be thinking that this is obvious. But where this takes me - and I hadn't really realized it - is that we should be prioritizing the development of many, many more small units than are being done now, so that the above price point works. For example if you need to rent for $2/sq. ft. to make the project a good one, then I think that 400 sq. ft. units would rent no problem at all. Good people just want to live here, and they have budget constraints, but they care a lot less about how much space they have. I was originally a little nervous about showing 500 sq. ft. apartments and they were by far the most popular and I never had one person say it was small. And the quality of tenants looking for that type of unit seems high. I met many people in their 20s who were just starting out and making maybe $3,000 a month, had some student loans, and they wanted flexibility in their budget to save and do other things. It was really refreshing. A few people even came with their parents! I mean, a gaggle of mom and pop and siblings who had lived forever in the suburbs and now being pulled out into the world by their 22 year old who just finished college. Anyway, if I were to be looking for properties to redevelop right now in OTR, I'd be looking for buildings that lent themselves to mostly 350-450 sq. ft. units, put in nice finishes, and rent them for $1.75-$2/ft. OTR will be a better place with a lot more of those units and a lot more of those people that would flock to fill them.

Specifically for the Towne properties units, the cornices are not actually that bad. The thing that makes the whole thing bad is the copy/paste of one unit to the next. It ends up feeling either like a strip mall, or like a single massive building that's strangely been broken up into identical parts.