On January 26, the Historic Conservation Board reviewed designs of the SCPA renovation. The large (22mb) PDF is available online: http://www.cincinnati-oh.gov/planning/historic-conservation/historic-conservation-board/jan-26-2015-packet/

 

The proposal is for a 2-story garage on the northern edge of the building. One story would be under ground and one would be on the surface.

 

 

^that is a modest unassuming garage proposal.  You can hardly see it from any direction.

^that is a modest unassuming garage proposal.  You can hardly see it from any direction.

 

Yeah I take back my earlier comments up thread. They should go ahead with it.

That parking garage is actually much more tasteful that I had been anticipating. I still would prefer to see the city or 3CDC get involved and pull a "Washington Park" over there. Hide two levels of parking under the playground, eliminate all of the parking surrounding the SCPA, and redevelop the parking lot across the street (between 14th and Woodward).

That parking garage is actually much more tasteful that I had been anticipating. I still would prefer to see the city or 3CDC get involved and pull a "Washington Park" over there. Hide two levels of parking under the playground, eliminate all of the parking surrounding the SCPA, and redevelop the parking lot across the street (between 14th and Woodward).

 

I totally agree. From 3CDC's latest presentation to City Council, they're looking at a $25m renovation of "Ziegler Park"... but they also include a photo of the SCPA greenspace (what is that "park" named?). It would be great for 3CDC to add funds to build a few extra levels of underground parking, which would provide enough spaces to serve the serve the (rebuilt?) Peaslee Center lot, as well as the renovated Ziegler pool space. When you look at all of that space together, and think about reconfiguring it all, you could some up with something great. It doesn't make sense to have a pool at a busy intersection (put a 4-story building there to match the rest of the intersection!), and the pool could be incorporated into a better-designed park layout, which would be a real draw for the neighborhood.  The whole are is roughly 5.5 acres.

 

 

There's a huge opportunity here to create a great greenspace and open up development opportunities.

 

I think I'm in the minority here, but I personally think Ziegler Park and the Peaslee Center should be completely removed and sold off to developers to have buildings built on them. The Peasley Center can exist within a new building designed into a mixed used development, a large building can take the spot of the existing Ziegler Park and the SCPA greenspace can become the park focal point for this neighborhood.

 

The way it's set up now created a dead zone between Pendleton and OTR and closing this gap by eliminating the existing Ziegler Park will help bridge them together.

I think I'm in the minority here, but I personally think Ziegler Park and the Peasley Center should be completely removed and sold off to developers to have buildings built on them. The Peasley Center can exist within a new building designed into a mixed used development, a large building can take the spot of the existing Ziegler Park and the SCPA greenspace can become the park focal point for this neighborhood.

 

I imagine the Peaslee Center would be happy to get a new building, as long as they're included in the design/visioning process for the area. This is a good example of where public-private partnerships are necessary to create the right kind of new development.

Exactly. This site is severely underutilized and has a ton of potential to create a ton of community assets. The Peaslee Center can get a new home that's better than its existing building, the parking can become structured behind buildings, housing can be built, and a new centralized greenspace that makes better use of its acreage can be constructed.

 

$25 million is a lot but I fear that it's not enough to really do this correctly. If Ziegler stays where it is, even if it's redone, that'll be a huge wasted opportunity.

I think the green space next to SCPA is too small to truly serve as a real neighborhood park, especially with half (maybe a third?) of it being taken for the parking garage for the redevelopment of that building.  I think a renovated and expanded Ziegler park could be great for Eastern OTR, Prospect Hill, and Pendleton, and it could serve as the 'living room' for these communities as they continue to re-densify.  There are still plenty of surface lots along Sycamore and Broadway that could and should be redeveloped, but I think the really narrow streets of Yukon and Woodward are more suited to neighboring open space than additional large scale development.  If executed correctly, I think this park could serve as a great bookend to OTR, and give a little bit of distinct identity to this part of the neighborhood.   

I think the green space next to SCPA is too small to truly serve as a real neighborhood park, especially with half (maybe a third?) of it being taken for the parking garage for the redevelopment of that building.

 

Here's a site overview from Core's proposal for the SCPA renovation, with the proposed parking structure. Note that it doesn't take up much more of the greenspace than the existing surface parking that's there currently. In the proposal, the greenspace is still nearly 2 acres (1.94 acres), which is a nice size for an urban park. 3CDC says they're considering the "Ziegler Park" project as having 4.95 acres of "civic space acreage", which counts the land on both sides of Sycamore.

The best solution would be for 3CDC to build an underground garage under Cutter Playground (the SCPA green space) that would serve both the Alumni Lofts residents and people visiting/living in the surrounding area. In this scenario, the parking deck that has been proposed would be scrapped in favor of the underground garage.

 

Then I would like to see Woodward Street reconnected all the way through to Sycamore. Ziegler Park could retain the swimming pool in its current location and add a basketball court in the same block. Cutter Playground would then be used as an open green space. Finally, the block between Woodward and 14th (between Sycamore and Goetz Alley) could be developed as a new mixed-use development that incorporates the Peaslee Center into a new building.

Whad'ya suppose the 38k sq ft of commercial space incuded in that project is?

Whad'ya suppose the 38k sq ft of commercial space incuded in that project is?

 

The current Peaslee Center is 16k sq feet, so the new building would provide a bit more than double the size of the commercial space. I'm not sure if there would be any additional sq footage for residential or not... but I sure hope they'd incorporate more housing into the mix.

 

I'd love to see a mixed-use space, with the Peaslee Center on the first 2 floors and 2 or 3 floors of apartments above.

It looks like some serious work is finally taking place in the old SCPA building. The Ohio Development Services Agency also just posted some new photos from inside the building.

The best solution would be for 3CDC to build an underground garage under Cutter Playground (the SCPA green space) that would serve both the Alumni Lofts residents and people visiting/living in the surrounding area. In this scenario, the parking deck that has been proposed would be scrapped in favor of the underground garage.

 

Then I would like to see Woodward Street reconnected all the way through to Sycamore. Ziegler Park could retain the swimming pool in its current location and add a basketball court in the same block. Cutter Playground would then be used as an open green space. Finally, the block between Woodward and 14th (between Sycamore and Goetz Alley) could be developed as a new mixed-use development that incorporates the Peaslee Center into a new building.

 

If the pool and Peaslee center are removed, then Sycamore St. could be widened with a center esplanade similar to Piatt Park between 13th and 14th. 

 

In the Enquirer's interview with Cranley about residential parking permits, he says this about Ziegler Park (around 4:30): http://www.cincinnati.com/story/news/2015/05/07/cranley-open-eliminating-residential-parking/70957230/

We're also working to build another huge garage at Ziegler Park for 3CDC's next foray over there to transform that corner of Over-the-Rhine.

​SCPA redevelopment deal gets tweaks to benefit city

 

The project calls for Core to build:

 

* 116 one bedroom units;

* 23 two bedroom units;

* 3 studio units, and

* A parking garage.

 

The average square footage in the apartments will be 900 square feet. Core will preserve chalkboards, 13 Rookwood Pottery water fountains, two acres of greenspace to be used by both the community and residents, and built-in bookcases. The apartments also will feature 13-foot ceilings, exposed duct work, refinished hardwood floors, some exposed brick, solid wood cabinets, granite countertops, stainless steel appliances and full-sized washers and dryers. The building will have a fitness center, a rooftop sun deck and enclosed interior courtyard.

 

Construction is set to begin in July, with leasing starting in January and a July 2016 grand opening.

The Enquirer has shared more details on this project. Apartments will range from 550 to 2000 square feet in size and $800 to $1200 in cost. Leasing will begin soon and you can find information at the official Facebook page.

$1200/month for a 2000 sf apartment is really good.

Very good pricing.  I might actually look into these apartments.

I'm not sure why/how they can offer a 2,000 sq/ft apartment for $1,200/month.  We've got a rental at Walnut and Central Parkway that's the opposite at 1,200 sq/ft for $2,000/month and had no real issues finding a tenant.

Yeah. I don't know if there has been a miscommunication, but their largest unit is 2000 SF and they claim pricing will range from $800-$1200. I thought it was a mistake at first. We'll see what happens when they list the actual units.

The average apartment will rent for $800 - $1,200 a month.  I'm sure that quote was taken out of context, which would be a shocking thing for the Enquirer to do. 

The average apartment will rent for $800 - $1,200 a month.  I'm sure that quote was taken out of context, which would be a shocking thing for the Enquirer to do. 

The Enquirer was wrong. Naturally..

 

From the Facebook page:

 

Alumni Lofts

1 hr ·

We wanted to thank everyone for your interest and excitement about our community! We wanted to go ahead and give you what information we have available:

-We will have studios, 1 Bedroom and 2 bedroom apartments

-Move-in will be late summer

- Price ranges (we don't have the specific price points available yet) but studios will start at $769, 1 bed start at $809 & 2 bed start at $1529

-We will allow cats, but no dogs

-We plan to start taking applications soon and will announce it on Facebook when we are ready

* In the meantime please check our page for future updates and information. Thank you so much!

-We will allow cats, but no dogs

 

#catsofotr rule, #dogsofotr drool!

The average apartment will rent for $800 - $1,200 a month.  I'm sure that quote was taken out of context, which would be a shocking thing for the Enquirer to do. 

The Enquirer was wrong. Naturally..

- Price ranges (we don't have the specific price points available yet) but studios will start at $769, 1 bed start at $809 & 2 bed start at $1529

 

Or you can buy a house in Price Hill or Elmwood Place or Norwood for $5,000/down and $450/mo including taxes.  The dog can run free!

 

 

^People looking to live in the "Alumni Lofts" are likely looking for something different than one who would buy a home in Price Hill. Nothing wrong with either, but different strokes for different folks. Maybe in a few years they will buy a home in Price Hill. But that may not be realistic (downpayment) or desired (not looking to stay in Cincinnati long term). Seems strange to keep dogs out of the place being almost surrounded by parks, though.

The average apartment will rent for $800 - $1,200 a month.  I'm sure that quote was taken out of context, which would be a shocking thing for the Enquirer to do. 

The Enquirer was wrong. Naturally..

- Price ranges (we don't have the specific price points available yet) but studios will start at $769, 1 bed start at $809 & 2 bed start at $1529

 

Or you can buy a house in Price Hill or Elmwood Place or Norwood for $5,000/down and $450/mo including taxes.  The dog can run free!

 

 

 

and use those extra savings to get a fried chicken dinner every Thursday from Andy's Cafe! (the chicken is very good)

The average apartment will rent for $800 - $1,200 a month.  I'm sure that quote was taken out of context, which would be a shocking thing for the Enquirer to do. 

The Enquirer was wrong. Naturally..

- Price ranges (we don't have the specific price points available yet) but studios will start at $769, 1 bed start at $809 & 2 bed start at $1529

 

Or you can buy a house in Price Hill or Elmwood Place or Norwood for $5,000/down and $450/mo including taxes.  The dog can run free!

 

 

 

Or you could just buy a house in Tulsa. It's a lot cheaper.

The average apartment will rent for $800 - $1,200 a month.  I'm sure that quote was taken out of context, which would be a shocking thing for the Enquirer to do. 

The Enquirer was wrong. Naturally..

- Price ranges (we don't have the specific price points available yet) but studios will start at $769, 1 bed start at $809 & 2 bed start at $1529

 

Or you can buy a house in Price Hill or Elmwood Place or Norwood for $5,000/down and $450/mo including taxes.  The dog can run free!

 

 

 

Unless you, you know, have no desire to live in those places since. Elmwood Place is a mess and not even remotely desirable, hence the exceptionally cheap real estate.

 

Your investment in Price Hill might go south since it continues to have trouble with population loss.

 

Norwood has its moments, but it also has plenty of problems.

 

And Elmwood Place and Norwood require you to live outside of city limits which might not be desirable for some people.

 

 

Pretending that real estate is interchangeable and that location can just be brushed aside is comical. Location has always and will always be the most important factor in real estate.

To get back on topic - cats can really only cause major damage to furniture, and minor damage to carpet, so I've never understood why apartments that don't have any carpet, like most modern ones, don't allow cats. A bad dog, on the other hand, can wreak havoc upon anything and everything, so I understand the logic behind not allowing them in rentals. There's also the barking issue, which can be much more disruptive than even the whiniest cat.

Well, cat piss can definitely cause more than just minor damage to a place. That can really ruin a place. Once that smell is in something there's no getting it out. And wood floors can absorb that if left too long.

 

I like dogs but totally get why developers don't want them in their buildings. And from a general livability standpoint it seems like most dog owners are irresponsible so you wind up with noisy, messy creatures that are disruptive.

 

My building has problems with people not picking up after their dogs in the courtyard which is disgusting and lazy. And whenever I hear a dog barking without the owner telling it to stop I want to go ask them where they get off thinking that's okay.

I'm not sure why/how they can offer a 2,000 sq/ft apartment for $1,200/month.  We've got a rental at Walnut and Central Parkway that's the opposite at 1,200 sq/ft for $2,000/month and had no real issues finding a tenant.

 

If you don't mind me asking - that price point is for a unit in the American Building?

The average apartment will rent for $800 - $1,200 a month.  I'm sure that quote was taken out of context, which would be a shocking thing for the Enquirer to do. 

The Enquirer was wrong. Naturally..

- Price ranges (we don't have the specific price points available yet) but studios will start at $769, 1 bed start at $809 & 2 bed start at $1529

 

Or you can buy a house in Price Hill or Elmwood Place or Norwood for $5,000/down and $450/mo including taxes.  The dog can run free!

 

 

 

Unless you, you know, have no desire to live in those places since. Elmwood Place is a mess and not even remotely desirable, hence the exceptionally cheap real estate.

 

 

Pretending that real estate is interchangeable and that location can just be brushed aside is comical. Location has always and will always be the most important factor in real estate.

 

 

The big problem with OTR is that people are moving to this walkable area but are still keeping their cars and driving to work and driving to the grocery.  From a personal finance perspective, that erodes the argument for living in the area, esp since visiting the area for socializing two or three times a month via Uber costs a heckuvalotless than living there. 

 

Meanwhile we are in the cheapest housing market of any city in the United States that isn't a total dump.  The houses that were selling for $20k back 2009-2012 were the ones with water damage and ripped-out copper and have all been torn down.  Now the old ladies are dying off one-by-one and you can get perfectly maintained two and three bedroom houses with some old lady wallpaper in those neighborhoods for $30k.  You can live like a king for $50k.  I bike around and look at listings in these neighborhoods at least once per month.  There absolutely are young professionals buying these cheap houses and living in Latonia, Price Hill, St. Bernard, Norwood west of Montgomery, etc.  There is no investment to lose because housing prices cannot conceivably go lower than they are now. 

 

 

 

I'm not sure why/how they can offer a 2,000 sq/ft apartment for $1,200/month.  We've got a rental at Walnut and Central Parkway that's the opposite at 1,200 sq/ft for $2,000/month and had no real issues finding a tenant.

 

If you don't mind me asking - that price point is for a unit in the American Building?

 

It's a mainly condo complex with a few apartments rented by a few of us who needed to rent their units due to moving elsewhere, so there really is no standard price point.

The big problem with OTR is that people are moving to this walkable area but are still keeping their cars and driving to work and driving to the grocery.  From a personal finance perspective, that erodes the argument for living in the area, esp since visiting the area for socializing two or three times a month via Uber costs a heckuvalotless than living there. 

 

Meanwhile we are in the cheapest housing market of any city in the United States that isn't a total dump.  The houses that were selling for $20k back 2009-2012 were the ones with water damage and ripped-out copper and have all been torn down.  Now the old ladies are dying off one-by-one and you can get perfectly maintained two and three bedroom houses with some old lady wallpaper in those neighborhoods for $30k.  You can live like a king for $50k.  I bike around and look at listings in these neighborhoods at least once per month.  There absolutely are young professionals buying these cheap houses and living in Latonia, Price Hill, St. Bernard, Norwood west of Montgomery, etc.  There is no investment to lose because housing prices cannot conceivably go lower than they are now.

 

I don't think you understand how often people go out in OTR. They don't go out only two or three times a month. I'm out at least two or three times a week. I drive to work, but I'm not going to live out in Fairfield. Therefore the entire tri-state region is open to me, and I want to pick the place that I will enjoy the most. Which is walking distance to downtown/OTR. Not everything is done for dollars and cents. If it was, I would never go to the bar, buy ice cream, or attend a Reds game. I would be a hermit and stay in all the time, cooking cheap meals at home, and keeping the thermostat at 60 in the winter. I understand it's a good time to invest (I did), but that's not for everyone. And I wouldn't have bought a house in Norwood, Latonia, Price Hill, or St. Bernard because I don't want to live there.

^Exactly. I work in Hyde Park and my job takes me to job sites in areas without quick access to transit so I drive to work. But beyond that the vast majority of what I'm doing I do without a car. I grocery shop in OTR, I go out in Downtown/OTR the most of any neighborhood and if I want to go elsewhere I'll generally Uber. If I'm going to anywhere around UC I just walk since I enjoy the walk. If I'm going to Mt. Adams I walk since I enjoy that walk as well. If I'm not in the mood to walk Red Bike is always available and gets me access to NKY as well.

 

I have no desire to live in Elmwood Place. There's nothing for me there. I don't want to live in Norwood because the type of home I want can't really be found there. I don't want to live in Price Hill because I just plain don't like it there and have no desire to invest money into a neighborhood I don't like.

 

And, let's be real, if we're talking about investments here buying a property in OTR two years ago like I did has had a hell of a lot larger return than if I was to buy a property for the same amount in Norwood, Price Hill, etc.

 

Not everyone wants their daily lives to be a sacrifice to save money on housing. And a lot of people don't need to. I don't make that much but I invest in a lot of other ways other than real estate (even though my condo has quite a large chunk of equity at this point) and I'm doing quite well for myself without having had to make that sacrifice to save a couple hundred a month. My quality of life would be nowhere near as high if I lived in Norwood.

This is getting off topic a bit, but I guess overall on choices to live, it is all about preference.  For me what is most important is having a walkable neighborhood or being close to a park.  I lived in OTR and moved for a couple of different reasons, but I lived before in Mt. Adams and now in Mt. Lookout / Columbia Tusculum.  I like the fact I am about halfway between Mt. Lookout and Columbia Tusculum, the area is safe and sidewalks really easy to jog and walk.  Also I am close to Hyde Park as well.  The only issue is that real estate is going up in Columbia Tusculum fairly fast it looks like at the moment, and I am still a year or two away from looking to purchase a house.  I think by that time, CT may be a bit out of my range and I may have to look towards Norwood.  I also am watching the area where the Port is doing rehabs in Evanston. 

 

I think what I am trying to say is that, I agree that it is all about living preference for most people.  I would rather pay more rent per month, be a close drive to work, and live in the area of CT and Mt. Lookout, then to live up further in Elmwood Place and save money, even though I am renting.  It may not be the smartest move financially, but if I am not going to be happy with the neighborhood or commute, I won't enjoy it at all.

It's off-topic because owning vs. renting are always two different animals, but on-topic because in Cincinnati things are quite unusual because paying a premium to rent in OTR doesn't really make any sense given the circumstances.  Few people could get loans 2009-12 to buy houses at crash prices, but crash prices have remained throughout 2016 because people are finally being forced to put their houses on the market after delaying in the hopes that prices would recover.  In many neighborhoods they haven't recovered because the markets are flooded with good houses.  West of I-71 prices have recovered in CUF and Clifton and some western neighborhoods outside Metro's service area and the Mill Creek watershed.  They have only accelerated in Northside and Over-the-Rhine.  This means if you buy a house in either of those neighborhoods you're betting that prices will be higher when you want (or NEED!) to sell, and there is no guarantee of that, as we saw with the 2008-09 crash. 

I'm just glad that I bought a my condo in OTR a few years ago because if I was still renting, it would be hard to me to justify (to myself) paying that much in rent. So I get Jake's point. But at the same time, the reason that "market rates" are so high in OTR is because people are willing to pay that premium for a good location.

 

Back to the topic of the SCPA... I have had several acquaintances contact me over the past few weeks to ask if I knew anything about the Alumni Lofts project. All of these people had looked at OTR in the past but settled on other neighborhoods (Walnut Hills, Covington/Mainstrasse), but are obviously keeping their eye on OTR and looking to get into the neighborhood when something becomes available.

I'm totally appreciating what Jake is getting at - an idea that is obvious in a lot of other places.  It seems like a lot of Cincinnatians just complain about OTR being expensive without taking any effort to find nearby decent areas that are undervalued.  Areas in a lot of cases they can walk, bike or bus to without too much issue...

 

Taestell is also right about the valuation too in OTR - people want to live there its expensive.

 

A combination of the two thoughts reveals how gentrification works - it starts one place and spreads outwards when people finally figure out that other nearby areas are undervalued.  Cincinnatians can be thick headed and aren't quite getting it, though I'd think economic pressure is going to be strong enough that it will change - so buy now in some of these areas you could be too late in a few years.

Nearby areas are usually "undervalued" for a very good reason, because they're not "there" yet.  It takes a very specific type of person to be a pioneer in a neighborhood, and there's not many of them.  While Walnut Hills or East Price Hill or Camp Washington or the West End could be nice some day, they're frankly not nice now.  Even if they're not dangerous, they're run-down and have few amenities that appeal to an urban clientele.  Farther out neighborhoods like Carthage or Westwood or Pleasant Ridge may be in better shape, but they lack nightlife and walkability, plus they're a non-trivial distance from neighborhoods that do have those qualities. 

 

There may be good bones in those neighborhoods, but there's little meat, and that's why they're still cheap, they have a long way to go before they're firing on all cylinders.  If you want nearby shops and walkability and such things, then those neighborhoods do NOT provide, so unless you're a pioneer who wants to start a small business and begin to plant the seeds of a better community, then it doesn't make sense to live there.  It could be a long wait for the neighborhood to reach critical mass.

There may be good bones in those neighborhoods, but there's little meat, and that's why they're still cheap, they have a long way to go before they're firing on all cylinders. 

 

Now THAT's a good mixed metaphor! :)

There may be good bones in those neighborhoods, but there's little meat, and that's why they're still cheap, they have a long way to go before they're firing on all cylinders.  If you want nearby shops and walkability and such things, then those neighborhoods do NOT provide, so unless you're a pioneer who wants to start a small

business and begin to plant the seeds of a better community, then it doesn't make sense to live there.  It could be a long wait for the neighborhood to reach critical mass.

 

You can have the cows reproduce get a few calfs and viola you eventually have meat - neighborhoods grow.  Economic pressure on OTR is too great and if like minded people want to start businesses with lower entry points in these other areas its going to be easier.  There is an entire mixed used development in the west end for instance which as far as I know just has cellphone stores, yet you can easily walk there from OTR.  That's a good opportunity for someone who wants to take a risk to capture some overflow from OTRs marketplace with lower entry fees.  Seeing commerical areas in pendleton starting to get filled in is an example of this as is East Walnut Hills.

 

I'm not even going to get started on the massive amounts of empty storefronts in Covington and architectural quality down there....

The fact that Cincinnati now has OTR as an example, will make it easier (not easy, just easier) for the West End, etc., to turn around. It is truly an amazing thing to observe the change from almost complete ignorance and denial, to people even have discussions (like this) about the possibility of the "next place." Quite frankly in my experience, these sorts of discussions never happened in Cincinnati City proper, prior to 2013 (I know OTR started before that - I bought in 2009 - but in my estimation the larger scale discussions were delayed until maybe a couple of years ago).

The fact that Cincinnati now has OTR as an example, will make it easier (not easy, just easier) for the West End, etc., to turn around. It is truly an amazing thing to observe the change from almost complete ignorance and denial, to people even have discussions (like this) about the possibility of the "next place." Quite frankly in my experience, these sorts of discussions never happened in Cincinnati City proper, prior to 2013 (I know OTR started before that - I bought in 2009 - but in my estimation the larger scale discussions were delayed until maybe a couple of years ago).

 

Weirdly though a lot of people are in denial about this ever happening.  OTR MUST be in a bubble because its value has gone up and value never goes up like that :P.

 

Real world works very differently and Cincinnati through an artificial stimulus via 3CDC is getting a dose of the real world.

There may be good bones in those neighborhoods, but there's little meat, and that's why they're still cheap, they have a long way to go before they're firing on all cylinders.  If you want nearby shops and walkability and such things, then those neighborhoods do NOT provide, so unless you're a pioneer who wants to start a small

business and begin to plant the seeds of a better community, then it doesn't make sense to live there.  It could be a long wait for the neighborhood to reach critical mass.

 

You can have the cows reproduce get a few calfs and viola you eventually have meat - neighborhoods grow.  Economic pressure on OTR is too great and if like minded people want to start businesses with lower entry points in these other areas its going to be easier.  There is an entire mixed used development in the west end for instance which as far as I know just has cellphone stores, yet you can easily walk there from OTR.  That's a good opportunity for someone who wants to take a risk to capture some overflow from OTRs marketplace with lower entry fees.  Seeing commerical areas in pendleton starting to get filled in is an example of this as is East Walnut Hills.

 

I'm not even going to get started on the massive amounts of empty storefronts in Covington and architectural quality down there....

 

Please don't try to open a business there soon. It will fail. EDIT: And by "there" I mean the West End buildings on Linn Street.

Regarding the "spill-over" into other closer-in neighborhoods due to rising prices in over-the-rhine, I wonder what role transportation will have in helping or hindering their development. By comparison, my girlfriend lives in Bushwick, Brooklyn, which until recently was exclusively a low income, minority neighborhood with an industrial wasteland flavor. However, it is well connected to Manhattan via the L subway, with direct connections to subways servicing lower manhattan and both upper west and east sides. in other words, it already has good transportation infrastructure and connection to the jobs centers.

 

Everything in Cincinnati begins and ends with parking, at least for now. It seems to me that the neighborhoods we're discussing don't have the transportation infrastructure to handle a large influx of people. Metro is too infrequent. There aren't large garages to act as catch basins a la Mercer. And furthermore the city insists on maintaining antiquated minimum parking requirements. So unlike northern Brooklyn, our old, close-in neighborhoods can't readily accept a large influx of residents and visitors, without a huge capital cost of garages (boo) or increased bus service (unlikely to happen).

What are covington's requirements vs Cincinnati?

 

Part of the transit problem is cultural

 

Nearby areas are usually "undervalued" for a very good reason, because they're not "there" yet.  It takes a very specific type of person to be a pioneer in a neighborhood, and there's not many of them.  While Walnut Hills or East Price Hill or Camp Washington or the West End could be nice some day, they're frankly not nice now. 

 

It could be a long wait for the neighborhood to reach critical mass.

 

Just a handful of blocks of OTR are "there" as of now.  The thing is that in other cities, when the money moves its attention to a particular neighborhood, prices always get out-of-hand well before the neighborhood is "there".  If you want to realize a return on your primary residence (without renting out spare bedrooms or buying and living in a multi-family), you need to buy in a cheap neighborhood.  And right now you can find houses that need basically zero work other than some paint for very, very cheap and you can get the loans more easily than you could during the years following the crash. 

 

Over the past 15 years housing prices have skyrocketed in Nashville, TN to the point where there is no house of any kind priced under $300k within a 5-mile radius of their DT.  It doesn't matter if the house is next to high tension wires, a bowling alley parking lot, a freeway on-ramp, or what.  These houses don't have basements and they usually look like something in Lockland or North College Hill.  I think in Cincinnati we're going to see a similar push in 15-20 years that is going to catch a lot of people off-guard and kicking themselves for not having gotten in when the getting was cheap.