But Mcmicken, I am not convinced that they won't continue to hold the Walnut Street buildings and let them deteriorate and eventually demolish.  They need to be presented with a realistic plan of rehabbing them or selling them, otherwise we will be revisiting this issue next year.

^

I don't disagree with that.  It's just nice in the short term to get a win.  That doesn't mean the fight is over. 

does anyone know if the building at the back of the parking lot for Duncanson Lofts is being renovated?  If you are standing in the lot, it's the big structure with no windows directly along the back edge of the lot.  It must face on 13th or Republic or something

There is a building that is about to get underway there that is part of 3CDC efforts.  Currently the windows are all knocked out and the building has pretty much been gutted.  Full-blown work should begin relatively soon on that building...and you're right it is just about on the corner of Republic and 13th.

Are there two seperate structures, one on republic and one on 13th or are they the same building?  To me it looks like one building is actually on 13th between Vine and Republic and backs up to the parking lot, and another building is on the very corner of 13th and Republic...or are they one in the same?

 

Do you know of any other new developments or retail going in up there?

I'm talking about the orange building just north of the lot.  By the way, it is interesting to note some of the other orange (future) projects that will be coming online within the next year.

 

all of those projects, except one, are within two blocks or less of the streetcar line

One of you planners/architecture students on this thread with a need for a thesis project should do it on a comprehensive plan to stop all demos of historic structures in OTR by 2010.

Rando-

 

What else is in the pipeline for the GQuarter?

What else is in the pipeline for the GQuarter?

 

I was told (informally) that there are ongoing discussions that would essentially fill the rest of the retail space in the Q.  A jewelry store, restaurant (next to Lucky Step), lighting store, and Embrace Sweets (next to Mica 12/v on 12 Street) were all mentioned.

What else is in the pipeline for the GQuarter?

 

I was told (informally) that there are ongoing discussions that would essentially fill the rest of the retail space in the Q.  A jewelry store, restaurant (next to Lucky Step), lighting store, and Embrace Sweets (next to Mica 12/v on 12 Street) were all mentioned.

 

 

I would love to know more.  Can you "informally" provide any more details?  Any more specific names or anything like that?

Thats really cool.  The Gquarter building looks great too.  I was driving thru OTR yesterday and of all the streets there, Vine has the most potential to be a major hotspot.  Not just because of the Kroger, but because it's so close to Music Hall, new scpa and park.  I was wondering if OTR would ever have highrise condo's there.  There's definitely good possibilities.

 

off topic really quick...does anyone have ANYnews on broadway Commons? technically it sits right by OTR anyway.  They should've built Ikea there lol.  Could you imagine?

Vine has the most potential to be a major hotspot. 

 

That's the idea.  Sounds like a great mix of retail coming to complement what's already there.

 

Btw, had lunch at Lavomatic, it was awesome!  Also took a peek at the deck outside, that will be great when it's ready.

The two buildings directly north of the Duncanson parking lot are next in line for the developers of the Duncanson Lofts. It will only be 8 units. As the map above says, names are still TBD...

What else is in the pipeline for the GQuarter?

 

I was told (informally) that there are ongoing discussions that would essentially fill the rest of the retail space in the Q.  A jewelry store, restaurant (next to Lucky Step), lighting store, and Embrace Sweets (next to Mica 12/v on 12 Street) were all mentioned.

 

I haven't heard anything about the restaurant, but I have heard rumors about the "jewelry" store (which would be relocating from another location into the GQ), the lighting store and Embrace (which is looking for investors for the GQ store).

Does anyone know how the business that are there are doing?  IMO there seem to be an awful lot of stores selling the same thing.  I also can't figure out how the furniture store will stay in business.  You either love or hate the stuff they carry because it's ultra contemporary.

Does anyone know how the business that are there are doing?  IMO there seem to be an awful lot of stores selling the same thing.  I also can't figure out how the furniture store will stay in business.  You either love or hate the stuff they carry because it's ultra contemporary.

 

I have spoken with most of the owners, and they have all told me they are doing very well...with most proclaiming that they are doing better than expected.  Outside opened without receiving any of the tax incentives that most of the others received...I was also told this was the case for A Lucky Step, but I can't verify that.  If this is indeed true, then that is a very positive sign to have businesses continuing to open without the incentives.

 

In the case of Outside and A Lucky Step where you don't see heavy traffic...they don't need it.  They can sell just a few items and cover their minimal expenses in running their stores.  The owners at both also run other businesses and use the retail stores as their offices since they don't have the high volume of sales.  This gives them a bigger bang for their buck on their leases.

 

Park + Vine is always packed and is doing exceedingly well according to Dan (the owner).  I don't know much about Mica 12/v or Metronation, but I would assume that you would hear much of the same from those two with the owners doing multiple things out of their retail spaces as they are there.

In the case of Outside and A Lucky Step where you don't see heavy traffic...they don't need it.  They can sell just a few items and cover their minimal expenses in running their stores.  The owners at both also run other businesses and use the retail stores as their offices since they don't have the high volume of sales.  This gives them a bigger bang for their buck on their leases.

 

That's pretty interesting.  I often wonder if OTR could end up housing lots of businesses with similar situations, where the trendy location makes having a store front a bonus to go with the cheap rent.  This would also apply to stores that do most of their business online.

From my understanding 1 of the 9 is already pre-sold.

 

Urban Sites opens Trideca Lofts in OTR for presale

May 21, 2008 | CINCINNATI BUSINESS COURIER

 

OVER-THE-RHINE - Urban Site Properties' Trideca Lofts condos in Over-the-Rhine will be completed in July and are now available for presale, the developer said.

 

The nine condominiums are located in a renovated historic building at 1232 Vine St., Urban Sites said in a news release. They range from 840 to 1,685 square feet, with 3,330 square feet of retail/commercial space at street level. Residential sale prices range from $179,000 to $329,000.

One of you planners/architecture students on this thread with a need for a thesis project should do it on a comprehensive plan to stop all demos of historic structures in OTR by 2010.

 

I think I want to do mine on gentrification in OTR in general...and what happens all the people who get pushed out of the neighborhood.

^Except nobody's going to get pushed out since hardly anyone actually lives there and there are countless similar areas within walking distance like the West End that are similarly underpopulated.  It's a totally different situation than in New York. 

I don't buy that at all. It's inevitable that it will reach a point where the value of nearby housing stock increases and people are kicked out. Just because it hasn't happend 'yet' doesn't mean that it won't. It would just happen at a slower pace.

What, exactly, are these hundreds of fragile family-owned businesses lining the commercial avenues of Over-the-Rhine that are at risk of being driven out by high rent?  Who, specifically, are the tens of thousands of people who have lived in this neighborhood for generations who will be driven out?  OTR is more or less a vacant neighborhood, with hardly any residents (literally 1/10th) or businesses relative to its historic high or future capacity.     

^ 70+% vacant.  I'm really sick of the tired gentrification argument.  I know what OTR is like when it isn't "gentrified".  I'd kind of like to see what happens when it is.  Given the current state of OTR, this transition will take years, if not decades.  In that amount of time, the city can easily take steps to aid and protect lower income residents who are interested in contributing to the neighborhood.  By this, I mean those that will rent, own, work, etc.  I don't really care what happens to places like the Drop Inn Center.  If OTR changes too much, they'll move.  No big deal. 

There's enough empty buildings in OTR in which up to 10,000-20,000 people could move into the neighborhood without displacing a single person.

They could seriously put the names of all the low income renters living there right now on a list and guarantee them all that they will be provided a similar sized apartment and there would still be room for all the gentrifiers OTR could handle.

^Thats very true and very insane to think about.  But, it all matters WHO moves in.  All those vacancies need to continue to be renovated so less "bad" people move there.  IF that means 10-20,000 higher income people, white/black/asian etc...then so be it!.  I think we can step back and say a strong movement is nfinally under way and its all a matter of time.  It looks strong enough to where this OTR movement won't stop any time soon.

I think I want to do mine on gentrification in OTR in general...and what happens all the people who get pushed out of the neighborhood.

I am with Jimmy James. I too am sick and tired of the same old rich vs poor, white vs black gentrification argument that has no basis in fact whatsoever but is thrown out there by the uniformed, disingenous few who simply want to pretend for a moment that they know, let alone care about the people of OTR.

 

I moved to OTR because I believed in the community and what it could be, a vibrant, safe and clean place for anyone and everyone to live work and play. Am I rich or poor? Am I white? Am I black? that is not what should define OTR anymore. This is not a "poor" neighborhood, it is not a "white" or "black" neighborhood, and I do not want bigots, racist, and xenophobes to define "OUR" neighborhood as such anymore. Why don't you write your thesis on INCLUSION and ACCEPTANCE, instead of who should and shouldn't be here, or do they no longer teach that?

 

I don't buy that at all. It's inevitable that it will reach a point where the value of nearby housing stock increases and people are kicked out.

Was that statement true 40, 30, 20, 10 years ago? Why are people like the Robinini's unable to fill their buildings, why are so many section 8 apt in OTR and the West End sitting empty? Because that is what the landlord wants? Was that Denhart's goal was to sit on one empty building after another in OTR and go bankrupt? Your cause and affect equation is a bit off. Do you really believe that voucher recipients are moving to better parts of the city because they have to? They chose to, just like you or I they want something better than a delapidated, neglected building that has seen no improvements in 40 plus years smack in the middle of a crime and drug infested neighborhood. These aren't animals, they are human beings making logical decisions to better their, and their families lives. And that leaves an empty building behind and an owner who faces a decision of improvements to the property (cost) or sell. Now should we just herd them back? Should we take the choice away? Should we say this will stay a community of containment and hopelesness and trap yet another generation in a poverty cycle? I say NO!

"This is not a "poor" neighborhood, it is not a "white" or "black" neighborhood, and I do not want bigots, racist, and xenophobes to define "OUR" neighborhood as such anymore.  Why don't you write your thesis on INCLUSION and ACCEPTANCE, instead of who should and shouldn't be here, or do they no longer teach that?"

 

Wow, it's an idea for a paper, there's no need to freak out and get all defensive.  I think the paper could be better written on gentrification in a different city like San Francisco, DC, New York, or maybe even Chicago.  I would personally go with NYC and the gentrification happening in Wash Hts. or Harlem.

 

I think everyone should take a deep breath and calm down.  OTR is nowhere near the point of gentrification so I find it to be somewhat of a moot point.

The remaining buildings on the SCPA block are being torn down today.

Yea this is a touchy subject.  Since I'm blunt I'll just say it.  Property value will rise whether people like it or not and it WILL push people out.  Just look at the East End as a prime example.  If that Gateway Quarter extends all the way down the street to the Kroger, I'm willing to bet all those people on wellfare wouldn't hang out there anymore.  Think of it as a medicine.  The whole reason OTR was/is rotting in the first place is exactly that..low income housing which USUALLY brings unhealthy, drug-infested, mean people.  You have landlords forced to move or fix up what they own  because its the only way to compete.  So if that means OTR will be gentrified then so be it, it doesn't mean "acceptance" isn't an issue.  Do you want to walk down the North end of Vine street with section 8 housing still?  no, so don't lie.   

The whole reason OTR was/is rotting in the first place is exactly that..low income housing which USUALLY brings unhealthy, drug-infested, mean people.  You have landlords forced to move or fix up what they own  because its the only way to compete.  So if that means OTR will be gentrified then so be it, it doesn't mean "acceptance" isn't an issue.  Do you want to walk down the North end of Vine street with section 8 housing still?  no, so don't lie.

 

Look, I don't know how many times it has been said, but it is EASIER to evict someone from Section 8 housing than it is to evict a regular renter.  And the largest Section 8 landlord in the City (and in Over-the-Rhine as well) Tom Denhart, went BANKRUPT, so clearly the product he was offering wasn't desired even by people whose circumstances allows them to enroll in the Section 8 program.  Also, someone on this forum mentioned that District 1 (of which Over-the-Rhine is a part) has the lowest crime rate in the City.  So how do these facts jibe with your statement above?

 

There is also the issue of enforcement.  I lived in a shithole apartment on Court Street for a year in 2001-2002.  The next year I lived in an incredibly nice apartment in the 1100 block of Walnut.  My experience was that activities that were tolerated by police (specifically loitering) in OTR were not tolerated once you crossed Central Parkway going south.

 

Let's stop blaming poor people as being the abettors and incubators of crime.  It is silly, it is ahistorical and not fact-based, and it is a notion that is bandied about far too frequently on this forum.

Also, the assertion that most of the people loitering in OTR until the recent crackdown were from other neighborhoods seems to have been confirmed by the success of the crackdown.  In other words it always appeared that there were actually a lot of people living in OTR until very recently when it was proven that they weren't.  In 2003~ Vine was lined by /tons/ of people at all hours of day and night, now you can make that drive at midnight and see under 10 people.  Heck, now you can *walk* that at midnight and hardly see anyone. 

Also, someone on this forum mentioned that District 1 (of which Over-the-Rhine is a part) has the lowest crime rate in the City.  So how do these facts jibe with your statement above?

 

I've heard this statement over and over again from many forumers in many different contexts. I don't see how the crime rate of police district boundaries are pertainent for people living in walkable neighborhoods. District 1 includes Mt. Adams which is the richest neighborhood in Cincinnati, if not behind Hyde Park and has absolutely nothing to do with Over-the-Rhine. It also includes Queensgate which has no residents. To get statistics on a neighborhood basis, you can go here:

 

http://www.cincinnati-oh.gov/police/pages/-5304-/

 

They also provide statistics from the past several years. As you can see, OTR isn't by any means one of the safest neighborhoods and is actually worse than Avondale which I believe has more people but I could be wrong about that; I'm not sure.

 

I didn't mean to open a can of worms. I would much rather see OTR gentrified than see it decay; I just think it's unrealistic to expect no one to be displaced in the long run. I'm never going to be the guy outside with picket signs protesting new development but if property values increase, of course lower income people are going to be priced out--it happens all the time.

There's enough empty buildings in OTR in which up to 10,000-20,000 people could move into the neighborhood without displacing a single person.

 

Where does one find a comprehensive list of all the empty buildings? I have no idea, so I did a quick search of "for sale" multi family buildings in the 45202 zip code. Of 463 listings (vacant land, multi family buildings, SF buildings, condos, etc), only 57 are multi family, and this was all of 45202 not just OTR. If each building had 10 units, and each unit housed 5 people, thats room for 2,850 people. I always hear the "400 vacant buildings in OTR" but I wish I could find accurate numbers.

 

 

I would much rather see OTR gentrified than see it decay; I just think it's unrealistic to expect no one to be displaced in the long run. I'm never going to be the guy outside with picket signs protesting new development but if property values increase, of course lower income people are going to be priced out--it happens all the time.

 

I think that's a really good way of looking at it. If developers don't come and renovate 100+ year old buildings now, the buildings could decay within the next 100 years and be gone forever. On the other side of the coin, people will be pushed out, no doubt. It's happened to friends of mine who moved to OTR just a few years ago, when rents were cheaper. Of course it will happen to long time residents too.

Where does one find a comprehensive list of all the empty buildings? I have no idea, so I did a quick search of "for sale" multi family buildings in the 45202 zip code. Of 463 listings (vacant land, multi family buildings, SF buildings, condos, etc), only 57 are multi family, and this was all of 45202 not just OTR. If each building had 10 units, and each unit housed 5 people, thats room for 2,850 people. I always hear the "400 vacant buildings in OTR" but I wish I could find accurate numbers.

 

I wouldn't know where to begin to look.  But on NPR today, Councilman Bortz said that 7 out of 10 buildings in OTR are vacant, which is a staggering number, especially when you consider how many of those buildings have 3 or 4 apartments.

I think that gentrification is inevitable given the current progress combined with the current state of the population patterns and what not.  Displacement does not have to be inevitable though.

 

The property values can and hopefully will rise, in the neighborhood, but there is plenty of room to allow for both the existing poor residents and the wealthy residents moving in.  It will take some sort of action, by the City, to require that such inclusionary techniques are employed in the redevelopment of OTR (or any poor neighborhood for that matter - see East End).

 

I personally think this is very unlikely to happen as very few communities have done this sort of thing, and those that have are quite liberal areas where they're not shy to throw some regulations on the private sector.  In Cincinnati, and the Midwest as a whole, this is not the way things work.

There is the gentrification definition of improving community and there is the gentrification implication of rich people kicking out the poor.  It is an easy argument that is debated on here, protested in various parts of OTR and brought up time and time again primarily by suburbanites who feel we are simply relocating our problems to their neighborhoods now.  Any community would want to gentrify if using only the definition where property values rise due to increased demand and therefor spurring addition investment into supply.  But when people put the spin of "kicking people out" then it takes a whole other meaning.  I have been accused of being a gentrifier in the latter sense more than most and it came from both sides.  I have been told that when I rehabbed my then vacant house on Mulberry that I must have done it at the expense of some poor person (drunk lady from Peete had that very loud discussion with me over the past weekend) and on the other hand when I have any issues with nuisance level crimes I am told by the other side "why would you move down there at all?  Because people like you do not belong here."  So I ask, where do I belong, and what people are you going to choose who should not be there?  No poor?  No black?  We fight this argument in communities on one hand and then argue basically the same segregationalist point on the other.  My community needs no modifier in front of it.

 

I, and most others moved here not because we thought this was some sort of gold mine (risk negates just about any reward) we moved here because we saw what it could be.  No longer does OTR have to be a place that people have to live, but a place that rich, poor--black, white or anyone would want to live. 

 

Property value will rise whether people like it or not and it WILL push people out.  Just look at the East End as a prime example.  If that Gateway Quarter extends all the way down the street to the Kroger, I'm willing to bet all those people on wellfare wouldn't hang out there anymore.  Think of it as a medicine.  The whole reason OTR was/is rotting in the first place is exactly that..low income housing which USUALLY brings unhealthy, drug-infested, mean people.  You have landlords forced to move or fix up what they own  because its the only way to compete.  So if that means OTR will be gentrified then so be it, it doesn't mean "acceptance" isn't an issue.  Do you want to walk down the North end of Vine street with section 8 housing still?  no, so don't lie. 

 

If the market were allowed to work on its own, but it is not.  Model, who purchased the bulk of Denhart's buildings keeps many of them Section 8 for up to 15 more years (regardless of market forces) because they accepted low income tax credits to remodel many of them in order to entice those who I spoke of earlier who want something better.  Other, in the gateway quarter are being built out for lower income families by Karen Blatt and Mary Burke on Pleasant.  Even City West is 60% subsidized and are those property values on places like Elizabeth going up and up because of this?  So acceptance is an issue, acceptance of new people who are buying here everyday and are told by others that someone had to loose their home in order for you to have yours.  That is the lie, and Section 8 housing does and will exist in the quarter and throughout OTR for a long time to come and I will be more than happy to walk through my neighborhood.  Am I lying?

 

 

I've heard this statement over and over again from many forumers in many different contexts. I don't see how the crime rate of police district boundaries are pertainent for people living in walkable neighborhoods.

Brian Tiffany, Capt. Ken Jones, and I have all said that Dist. 1 crimes, as seperated by Part I and Part II crimes have for specific time periods that were stated by each of us, the lowest in the city.  Crime rate is one of the top reasons that a person decides to buy or rent in a given area.  We are quick to put out positive information like this as it comes up because we have to combat 50 years of perception as well that does not ring true today. 

As you can see, OTR isn't by any means one of the safest neighborhoods and is actually worse than Avondale which I believe has more people but I could be wrong about that; I'm not sure.

The difference is that we qualify our statements with specific facts including type of crime and time period.  Are you comfortable, seeing the stats, that this is always true?

 

Bottom line is that when you read back through the various post two seperate meanings are being employed.  When I here words like "kicked out" or "displaced" are used it is generally not reflective of the positive things that are happening in OTR today and fail to mention any of the efforts to supply safe and affordable housing to everyone. 

 

 

^ Commendable argument Michael

 

One thing that I think needs to be highlighted about the displacement argument in OTR may be summed up as follows:

 

1) OTR has a VAST supply of vacant property (some of which has been rehabbed already by folks like you)

2) Even if some enormous and highly unlikely percentage of that under developed property is taken and developed (and consequently, property values rise) there will remain some amount of developable property (given the lower than possible current population density) for more affordable housing, and this doesn't even account for the large number of properties already owned that are dedicated to this purpose (and which will likely continue to be dedicated to that purpose)

 

To me, given the smaller than possible current population of OTR, and the likely prospect of the continued availability of affordable housing in OTR, the likelihood of gentrification, in the population displacement sense, is unlikely to be a problem there.

 

edit - contrast this situation with the situation in other classic "gentrified" neighborhoods, the south end of boston for example, which had densely populated neighborhoods before their "remake"

Over-the-Rhine sees new life

After years of work, key city area blooming

BY LISA BERNARD-KUHN | [email protected]

http://news.enquirer.com/apps/pbcs.dll/article?AID=/20080530/BIZ01/805300375/1076/BIZ

 

OVER-THE-RHINE - The last year and half has marked a huge leap for business growth and development in one of the city's formerly most troubled and now most rapidly transforming neighborhoods.

 

Since 2007, Over-the-Rhine has become home to nearly a dozen new businesses and more than 100 newly rehabbed condos, representing more than $100 million in private and public investment.

What has happened in New York City and other big cities is where the term "gentrification" was born doesn't apply here.  The situation here is a lot different so use of the word is automatically different.  The word gentrification should be used when there is a group of low or middle-income people being rapidly replaced by a higher income group of people, typically people who aren't even natives to the city.  I don't understand why "gentrification" has come to describe the rehabbing of industrial areas for residential or the rehabbing of vacant neighborhoods like Over-the-Rhine.  When 40,000 is mentioned as OTR's historic peak population, keep in mind that's twice the current population of Norwood and approaching the current populations of Green Twp or Colerain Twp (certainly if you tossed in Central Ave. and John St. you would have gotten to that number).  It won't return to anything close to that level (maybe 20,000) because so much of that population figure was kids and people don't have as many kids now, aside from people demanding more space than in the past.  Also, there isn't enough space available for parking for 20,000 cars, probably well under 10,000.   

 

 

^ The individual rehabbed units are much larger than the original (Honeymooners style - late 19th / early 20th century) immigrant housing too.    Now units can average between 1200 sq ft or larger compared to original 3-400 sq ft apartments.  (Kitchen, bathroom, 1 br that often served as sitting or living room as well.)    It's funny, they used to raise a whole litter of kids in these houses 100 years ago.

The historical tax credits thread is still locked so this seemed like a good replacement.

 

Ohio may reinstate historic tax credits

Business Courier of Cincinnati - by Dan Monk Senior Staff Reporter

http://cincinnati.bizjournals.com/cincinnati/stories/2008/05/26/daily39.html?surround=lfn

 

There is good news in the new Ohio jobs bill for Cincinnati developers shut out of a state tax credit program for historic properties earlier this year.

 

Language friendly to local projects was inserted in the $1.57 billion economic stimulus package prior to its passage by the Ohio Senate Wednesday. Assuming those changes are adopted by the House, local developers will have a good chance of securing some $34 million in state tax credits to help finance $108 million in renovations.

PNC is doing their cleanup day today and has provided mulch to tree wells throughout OTR.  OTR 5K is this weekend as well as Final Friday tonight, look for the volunteer ambassadors out this weekend at both events.  More good news coming to Mulberry, word on the street is that Jerry Hunderlaw will be breaking ground sometime in the next 6 months on new homes at Mulberry and Sycamore which is good timing considering the city has just cleaned out the top of Hughes St and will provide a great view for those homes.

The historical tax credits thread is still locked so this seemed like a good replacement.

 

Ohio may reinstate historic tax credits

Business Courier of Cincinnati - by Dan Monk Senior Staff Reporter

http://cincinnati.bizjournals.com/cincinnati/stories/2008/05/26/daily39.html?surround=lfn

 

There is good news in the new Ohio jobs bill for Cincinnati developers shut out of a state tax credit program for historic properties earlier this year.

 

It was locked because it created a heated debate. Clevelanders couldn't understand why it was a big deal that they got all the credits and Cincy got the shaft just because they we're first. Nah-nah. For something that was a State_WIDE program.

On an unrelated note, it appears that a retail space in Duncanson is being finished up for the long awaited salon/spa/barbershop that had been rumored to move in.

 

Embrace Sweets, still looking for financing, still hopes to lease the spot on 12th.

If they keep at it, that whole street will look so kickass.  The streetcar is expected to go down Vine correct?

^No the current proposal calls for the streetcar to go north on Elm and south on Race.  Vine would be problematic given that it is already congested and is a two-way street.  Don't worry though the line will only be one short block away...and will still have a major impact on Vine all the way up the route.  Additionally the plan calls for the route to head west along 12th Street (right through the heart of the Gateway Quarter).