jim uber

I'm attaching some information about the tax credit status put out this morning. I'll summarize some highlights: - There is time to save the program and we can have an impact - Making phone calls in support of the program TODAY can really have an impact. The attached document has details including phone numbers of relevant members of the Senate Finance committee. It's also suggested we call our own state senator. Thanks to all for helping to save this valuable aid to historic revitalization.

Thanks Steve!

Do you know anything about this - are these real? There's no activity now, even though the link lists them as under development. There's an empty warehouse in that location - are they going to tear it down?

^well, we have a lot of infill that is going to be built. So far we have very mediocre examples of restrained modern design and Italianate style copies having been executed. I mean, nobody needs to be convinced that OTR architecture is all about the historic and the new structures are, I would put it, tolerated. I guess that would be because we don't deserve excellent infill (at least not yet), or it just can't be done, or the historic guidelines (or how they are perceived) are warping the design landscape in a bad way. I wish I was as convinced as you are that the guidelines are just basic common sense and are doing no harm, but I'm not. Time will tell and I hope I'm wrong.

Actually the full quote from the guidelines is "New construction must employ a strong element that terminates the uppermost part of the building. Distinctive elements in the architecture of Over-the-Rhine are elaborate projecting cornices, decorative parapets and the expressive use of materials." I think that the expressed intent of those adjoined examples is pretty obvious.

^and so you get lots of confusion because the projects don't appear, at least to the non-architect, to obey the guidelines, and the arguments end up being about that lack of adherence, instead of about what parts of the modern infill design do we consider not excellent.

Why couldn't the urban design review board perform such a function. I'm just very skeptical of arguments that are based on extrapolating into an unknown. That's what I think we are doing by assuming that all modern expressions in OTR would look like univ square. Let's put in some smart encouragement for good modern infill, along with the necessary safeguards, and do the experiment for Gods sake. I don't believe that an intelligent and engaged community like OTR is going to suddenly wake up after 10 years and realize that "oh goodness my neighborhood has been screwed by mediocre infill."

I certainly agree; see above. Seems the only approach to actually getting this done, as opposed to talking about it, would be to build political forces for a change in the board guidelines. Perhaps that would start with a sympathetic councilperson, perhaps with the OTR neighborhood council, perhaps.... I don't know.

To follow up on this point would it really be a terrible thing to put a traditional style cornice on a John Hueber home for example? Would it really confuse people as to what's historical and what's not or detract from the significance of what's already there? And is it that big of a deal that it must be regulated? ( I am making the assumption that the "don't imitate" clause is why more new buildings don't have elaborate cornices, although cost is a factor as well I realize.) I don't think the board has any problem with putting an elaborate cornice on new buildings; correct me if I'm wrong. They just seem to be executed poorly. I mean, there aren't a lot of people left who can create tin cornices these days. So we get whatever can be made on site out of wood, or purchased prefab out of foam. This gets installed in the field, of course, by a finish carpenter, if you're lucky. I just doubt that those sorts of folks have the same attention to detail as the tin smiths did 100 years ago, working in a shop environment.

Why can't new buildings in OTR look new? Why must the brick veneer often be "weathered" masonry? Why must we put up cornices that pale even in comparison to the original tin stampings? (Go ahead, show me a new cornice that really replicates the feel of the original, no matter what the building cost. I'm waiting.) It seems that the historic conservation board guidelines are to blame. The thing is, this board, enabled by the city administrative code, consisting of 7 members appointed by the city manger and approved by council, is charged with writing its own guidelines. The members could be selected differently, and they could be asked to re-write their guidelines to allow and even encourage modern infill that is of high quality. I for one think they should definitely do just that. For those who are interested but haven't seen them, I'm attaching the boards own conservation guidelines. They start out well enough: "New construction should be well-designed but should not replicate the existing buildings." And then they go on... "New buildings should have a well-defined base. Within the district most buildings have a base that is distinguishable from the rest of the building." "Details on new buildings should relate to the detailing of adjacent or nearby buildings." "New construction must employ a strong element that terminates the uppermost part of the building. Distinctive elements in the architecture of Over-the-Rhine are elaborate projecting cornices, decorative parapets and the expressive use of materials." And especially, window openings should be just as they were when a 3 x 4 sheet of plate glass was a luxury to behold: "Window openings are extremely important in this district. The openings of new buildings should be related to the size and placement of openings found on historic structures of similar use in the district. In residential buildings, window openings are typically found individually rather than in pairs or grouped. The openings are taller and wide (typically in a proportion of 2:1), window sash are set back from the wall surface, and openings have some form of definition, such as lintels, sills or decorative surrounds. Window openings, which are typically aligned vertically, usually occupy between 20% and 50% of the principal facade." I have no problem at all with these sorts of guidelines applying to rehabilitation of existing historic structures; those must be preserved. But these are restrictions applied to new infill housing. It's just ridiculous in my opinion. No wonder that we get the architecture that is submitted for OTR infill. You have to really be gearing up for a fight to do otherwise. I think these guidelines need to be rewritten, and the new ones need to embrace high quality modern infill, and turn people away from the inevitable poor copies of historic architecture that we're getting. Take a look at the new 3CDC design for the Race and 15th project, and you'll see the maximum that the envelope can be pushed toward a modern interpretation of these rules. Frankly it's not good, cause it's neither historic nor high quality modern design, cause the rules stick the architects in this muddy middle where nothing can be really good. And if the board (or urban conservator) has no appetite for that sort of change, then maybe they should be replaced by those who do.

^ Agreed. It will be moved eventually cause it makes too much sense. Personally, I don't go to Taste or Octoberfest cause to me its just a crowded mess and I feel like cattle moving along with the crowd as it snakes down 5th street,... and back,... If I could grab a beer and listen to music in a more two-dimensional environment, and go hang out on grass by the riverfront when I got tired of it, then that sounds like a fun day to me.

Have you ever seen that continuous sill on the second floor windows? That's unusual to me, and interesting.

Market Play: Why Developers are Betting on Findlay -- http://www.bizjournals.com/cincinnati/print-edition/2015/05/08/market-play-why-developers-are-betting-on-findlay.html?page=all "We like (property) north of Liberty, but we only like it within the streetcar line. That makes people like us want to develop there,” said Wyant, referring to the Cincinnati streetcar system set to open in 2016." That's from Peg Wyant, Grandin Properties CEO

Well you know that Steiner has designed liberty center with millenials in mind. Lol.

Personally I'd really like to see a Melt or Sidewinders cafe in OTR (these are Northside establishments, and both have that Northside feel). They are definitely not slick, yet they are both high quality. I actually just went to Sidewinders for the first time yesterday. They have big live bunnies in the back patio.

I think it was GlaserWorks that did a rendering of a modern structure with lots of glass that sort of connected the two buildings without trying to become part of them. I really liked it, but I think I was in the minority.

The wires certainly, yes, but haven't you been noticing the galvanized horizontal booms from each pole? I'm not really complaining - I mean the wires can't suspend themselves. But I have noticed how the booms "line up" from a distance and create a visual that's hard for me to completely ignore. It's made me wonder if they could be painted a particular color to make them less visible. Although I'm not sure that's possible and it would cost money to do.

Wow Cincinnati is well represented. They got 54 applications this round and we've got 23 of them.

Jake you have an interesting idea of fun [emoji12] We submitted for the current round. The building self scores a 72+ and last round the small projects category needed a 68 to win. This round is the biggest yet so it will be more competitive. I am not certain that single family is excluded. There is a special category where they give out 2-3 million for projects requesting less than 250K. I thought those could be single family. Some might not know that the state credits are given to you in the year after your rehab is done and certified. So if you certified for 50K in credits and you owed $5K in Ohio taxes they'll send you a check for $45K. That's right! No wonder the program is getting more popular.

^ Thanks - much appreciated. I'm getting a little further out of my element here. I'm not a designer. I've just noticed more of it, along with other things like vinyl composition tile (think checkerboard pattern flooring in lots of different colors), and painted glass for backsplashes and other surfaces. And you can readily buy interesting stuff like ribbed metal edging for Formica countertops. Whereas 5 years ago I think if you'd asked, I'd have wondered if Formica was still making laminates. The tie in with the other elements I was mentioning is that they're all relatively cheap and - maybe it isn't the right word - overvalued. But that's just me and it's just a guess. Personally I like it and think potential renters would too; my wife disagrees!

Folks, I don't think my rehab costs are "anecdotal" or "unusual" for individual-scale OTR projects. It may be that because 3CDC has taken on a number of truly challenging properties, that their rehab costs are actually the unusual ones. Take a look at Wade street west of Elm, for example. From the exteriors, many of those structures are in as good a shape, possibly better, than my 1527 or 1529 Elm properties. The recent rehab of 218 Wade was 4000 sq. ft. and sold for 500,000, or $125/ft. That's what it sold for, which is obviously greater than the costs. And that building had significant stabilization requirements, more I'd wager than any other building on that street will end up needing. One way to get around the "anecdotes" is to talk about what the actual costs are to a GC -- the type of GC that you could work with as an individual. At 1527 Elm we rebuilt 1/4-1/3 of the rear masonry wall from the roof line down, and tuck-pointed the remainder of that wall. The cost - about $6,000. Scaffolding, removing the bricks one by one, and putting them back together again. These were professionals, but ones that do small scale projects. There's a building on Elm st. next to Washington Platform that recently had the entire facade removed and rebuilt. You know what the bottom tier laborers made on that job? $12/hour. That's disgusting, but it's true -- I know who they are. You know how much granite costs a good GC? $35/ft installed. Insane, and maddening, when you realize that your price as an individual is double that amount. Drywall installation and finishing for 4500 feet and 6 units at 1527 Elm is $31,000, or about $7/ft. And that's for rental construction that requires 2 hour fire partitioning. A 2 hr. partition is three layers of gypsum board, followed by a metal frame, followed by a fourth layer of gypsum. You won't need to do that in a single family home or smaller rental property. A completely new roof deck tearoff and replacement, new shingles, front cornice stabilization, rebuilt box gutters and lining, and 80 feet of new from scratch metal cornice and box gutters at 1527 Elm - $25,000. These are all significant costs. It's just that they don't add up to $200+/ft. in most instances. At the same time, let me say again that I'm fully in support of 3CDC and others getting whatever the market will give them for their properties. I hope they make a great profit. But there is room below those selling prices for those who can and want to take a different approach. I'm firm about that. Oh yeah, then there's "luxury." I'd never be so arrogant as to lecture someone else about what constitutes luxury for them. But a lot of the properties that have been redeveloped in OTR are not what I'd call "luxurious." I bought and still own a great Bill Baum property at the Trideca lofts on Vine, back in 2008 when only Lavomatic was open on that street. I paid $220/ft. for that condo! No regrets at all. Bill used ultra-low 3" sawed pine boards for molding, left all of the brick exposed, big unpainted spiral ducting running through the unit, single pane exterior windows (!), exposed metal conduit with galvanized surface mounted outlet boxes, mid-range appliances, a cool half wall that held a closet behind it (without requiring any doors!), and it all worked ... beautifully. Cheapest finish construction in the world and it comes off as trendy and high-value. I just find that really interesting. About the only thing he missed was Formica countertops instead of granite (but that retro-y thing wasn't so much appreciated in 2008). I couldn't stop laughing when I read jmicha's admonishment that "IKEA is never luxury." I happened to read that late last night, after a full day installing an IKEA PAX sliding door hack for my bedroom closets. It turned out great, but at that moment I couldn't have agreed more!

Since I said I would... I've attached the Design/Development construction bids for the 1527 Elm property, to begin in July. You can ignore the "alternate 1" as that adds a new basement unit, still to be determined if that's cost effective. Please note these are not cost estimates; they are bids. Here's a summary: The bid cost is about $461,000, with 10% contingency. To this figure add: $18,000 architect; $7,200 LEED; $5,000 loan/appraisal fees; $35,000 roof/gutter/cornice; $5,000 additional masonry stabilization; $2,000 cleanout; $15,000 purchase; $5,000 legal. These latter costs fall under "predevelopment" and have already been spent. So all together, the costs are about $553,000. These costs will completely rehabilitate 6 units including a large 4th floor loft, for a total of 4500 sq. ft. Result: $123/sq. ft. It's actually a bit better than that, cause for this cost we're also getting a 650 sq. ft. storefront finished to the "white box" stage, but I haven't included that in the above figures. This compares to the $200+/sq. ft. where folks are "losing money." Fine, I'll accept that happens, as long as it's also accepted that I'm able to do it for much less. For that price we'll meet LEED Silver. And I think that the finishes will be roughly comparable. We'll have ceramic tile bathrooms and showers. The kitchens will probably be IKEA Abstract with the Blum drawers. Appliances will be good quality ceramic cooktop, oven, and dishwasher. We might do IKEA PAX closets or at least use the sliding PAX doors. We'll save costs in all sorts of ways that individual owners like us can, such as scouring Building Value for things like ceramic tile. So as long as you can get a building for a reasonable cost that doesn't require tons of stabilization (such as rebuilding the entire facade, etc), then I would insist that $125/sq. ft. is a target you should be able to meet. I hope that encourages more individual owners with the wherewithal to take that plunge.

I'd be very afraid for our local music scene if I had heard of anyone on that list. [emoji12]

^ Technology can solve these problems, so multi-space stations are, to me, obviously the better solution, for aesthetic, parking efficiency, and cost reasons. Think about it - All you have to do is figure out some way to identify the car with the pay station, and you can do away with the little slips of paper and meter ticketing inefficiency, plus enable things like adding time remotely. A quick google search for "multi-space parking pay station" shows that there's at least one company that's done all of this already (too bad, this would be a great business idea). Check out digitalpaytech.com for instance. They allow their systems to be set up for "pay by ticket" "pay by license plate" and "pay by space". Paying by ticket is what Cincinnati is currently doing, with all the problems noted. Paying by license plate is pretty self-explanatory -- you put in your plate number and the meter reading people use automatic plate reading software as they drive down the street. Paying by space would require the city to designate space numbers somehow -- I'd guess by striping and numbering on the pavement, or perhaps only on the curb. Both of these support adding time remotely. So I think that individual meters are archaic and destined to go away at some point. Technology just provides better solutions nowadays. I don't know that Cincinnati's new pay stations support these features, but I'd sure hope so.

You should not ignore the commercial space. It's fair market value needs to be added to the sales revenue. When I have more than cost estimates for my building I'll post them in all their gory detail. We're bidding it now. It's useful to compare what a hack like me can do with an individual building, to the professions. That margin might entice others to do the same.