Apartments may help Over-the-Rhine

 

By Marla Matzer Rose

Enquirer staff writer

 

 

OVER-THE-RHINE - Twelve new units of affordable rental housing were unveiled Thursday morning on a largely blighted stretch of East Clifton Avenue.

 

Councilman David Crowley cut the ribbon at 122 E. Clifton. He praised the effort that went into the project, saying, "It may only be 12 units, but that's 12 more than you had. That's a step forward."

 

http://news.enquirer.com/apps/pbcs.dll/article?AID=/20051118/BIZ01/511180395/1076/BIZ

The ordinance I posted passed, BTW, meaning that Mercy will get the money.

"It may only be 12 units, but that's 12 more than you had. That's a step forward."

 

That's the spirit!!!

 

In other news, the ordinance I mentioned in this post about Dottie Lewis becoming the preferred developer of 1735 and 1737-1739 Vine St. passed in city council unanimously last Wednesday.  This will be the site of 3 new condo units.

* On October 28, Model Management (under the name Magnolia Heights Limited Partnership) picked up the following OTR properties:

Logan: 1700, 1706

Magnolia: 210, 212

Pleasant: 1528

Republic: 1225, 1227

Vine: 1344, 1704, 1713

 

* 1828 Elm St., a former Scheer & Scheer property now owned by the city, will be torn down.  It appears it's been vacant since August 2004.  The city also owns 1824 and 1826, which are both in as bad of a shape--if not worse.  1828 Elm is the one in the middle:

 

* The city is shoring up a retaining wall on the property it owns at 1612 Pleasant St.  That's not really the news, though.  Upon looking this property up, I discovered that it has pretty much been vacant since 2000 (based on VBML applications).  The city has owned it since October 2001.  This building--estimated to have been built around 1825--is in one of the worst parts of OTR and has a bleak future.  1612 Pleasant is the second boarded-up building from the left:

 

It's sad to see these smaller buildings go.  There are more and more gap-toothed block faces in OTR. Chip, chip, chipping away at the neighborhood's future!

The tradeoff here is that this may be what the neighborhood needs to ensure a future.

The tradeoff here is that this may be what the neighborhood needs to ensure a future

Wrong every building lost is negative for OTR and hurts the future of the neighborhood.

Not wrong.

Not tearning down buildings-Historic conservation, old Cincinnati kept for generations to see.  All buildings could be rehabbed and returned to their former glory as loft structures or through mixed use.

 

Tearing down all buildings-Lose historic architecture; lose the character of what makes Cincinnati special.  Interferes with clear new urbanist principles.  Massive displacement.

 

Good policy-Tear down those buildings beyond repair and replace them with like buildings.  Buildings that can be rehabbed, rehab them.  Create sense of space and unified neighborhood districts.

 

I am not advocating destroying the entire lot but it is easily recognized that there are varying levels of quality in OTR and many buildings have suffered decades of neglect.  The other night I went on a walk from Corryville through Mt. Auburn, the CBD, OTR, Clifton/Fairview Heights.  While on Elm, I noticed that the block wasn't as hot as it should be over the past few years tear downs have been significant which is a shame but there is a reason for that.  Many buildings although tied to the past are beyond the point at which the average urban pioneer would even attempt to give a try.  There are some potentials but there are alot of nots in the neighborhood.

^ The real problem comes when buildings that no urban pioneer would attempt to save are torn down with no plan for what will replace them.  Most of the time it's "F___ this, I'm sick of taking care of this damn building and keeping it boarded up.  I'm just going to let it deteriorate and let it get condemned and torn down."

 

That doesn't help anyone.

every building lost is negative for OTR and hurts the future of the neighborhood

Max,

 

I know what you mean but I do not "entirely" agree.

Some buildings are beyond repair.  This is the fault of the owner as each property owner has the responsibility to maintain their building so that it does not become a danger to any adjacent property.  Mulberry St. several years ago had a building colapse into the street.  We need to go after the property owners and save the ones worth saving however some are beyond this.

 

 

This building for example will come down next year.  Owner, Larry Rhodes will go to jail on Dec. 19 due to imminent danger for this and several other buildings.  This building is beyond repair (you can see the back yard by looking straight through the building) and yet the  owner has an estimated net worth of 42 million.  If we do not find a way to unseat some of these deadbeat owners from their buildings we will lose many more.

 

Take a look at this thread for the names of the owners of the very buildings you are talking about and lets start doing something about it.

http://www.urbanohio.com/forum2/index.php?topic=5865.0

The only buildings that should be demolished in OTR are KFC,Shell gas station, Freestore foodbank, Health center@vine, New kroger parking garage, Short stop market AKA "crack pipe shop" on liberty at sycamore. Also the barn on vine st,the cinder block portion of Lighbourne and the old washington park school.  :-P

 

Jim Tarbell stepped up to the plate to save the corner building on race st at findlay market when the wall was damaged during rehabilitation. He has saved many buildings around OTR that had structural issues so that they would not be torn down. OTR needs more people like him to save the most vulnerable.

Maximillian are you apart of the Tarbell crusade.

I have the ability to sell any of these buildings to you, and I will wave my fee.  On Dec 19th as I mentioned above, Larry Rhodes is going to lose 4 of his buildings, 2 are asbestos, rotten framed buildings that are leaning, they are side by side on Mulberry St at 146 and 148, I am arranging for another of his buildings to be sold by mid month, are you willing to buy the other ones?  Or, I know Jim, perhaps you both are willing to put in an offer.  It will be torn down very soon so time is of the essence, email me and we will get the paper work under way.

 

Max, we must be realistic in order to move forward.  I want to save as many structures as possible also however sometimes it simply is not cost effective.  Mulberry alone has lost 55 homes in two decades and unfortunately it will have to lose a couple more- unless of course, you would like to take me up on my offer.

 

Grasscat, so we may have a bit of perspective, how many buildings right now are on the demo list? and how many vacant are there in OTR alone?  Then lets use low ball numbers, say 15,000 acquisition, 100,000 buildout (and that is low for many of these), holding cost ie taxes, ins., and all of this is assuming you can even get a clear title.  lets multiply these numbers out and you will not even be at half of what it would cost to truly save all of these buildings.  Then we have to find someone who is going to move into some of these buildings that are on, say Republic or Pleasant, now you find yourself shelling out more for debt service and continued holding cost.  Some buildings this is doable, but all of them?  So Maximillian (if that is indeed your real name :wink:), I am ready to start the paperwork if you are.

 

As a matter of a fact, I just thought of an example.  My wife and I were going to purchase the Christian Moerline Executive Office on Elm and convert it to our private residence.  138,000 for the building, and we had two separate buildout estimates that exceeded 750,000 because someone in the past decided to take out a load bearing wall (to make room for a church) and destroyed the building from 10' beyond the facade, now that is just 1 building.  So can you justify a million dollar home on Elm and McMicken?  If so, I will sell that one to you also.

People decry the demolitions, because, we know from experience that one of the following will happen to the space:

1.  vacant lot (very likely)

2.  parking lot (gravel likely, asphalt if we are lucky)

3. ugly new building (in some rare instances)

 

The preservationist would have much less support if the economic climate were such that new buildings would be built, and that the new buildings would be better than those removed.

 

I love the old buildings, partially because of the history, but also because they have better scale and better connection to the street than most new buildings. 

 

 

I agree, but in reality some of these buildings must come down unless someone is willing to invest a huge amount of there own personal money into a building that will see little return.  If you are willing to do this more power to you, but let some of this advocacy be supported in reality.  As I said before, there are no shortage of distressed structures in OTR and I would be happy to put you into one today.

Why buy one of these buildings when you can just break into it and crash for free?  ;)

The bottom line is sitting back and just saying fix all buildings in OTR is a noble statement but action is a different thing all together.  We can cry about losing a building and I will cry right next to you, but lets discuss reasonable, plausible solutions that are based in reality.  1612 Pleasant, what is the solution?  Who is going to fix it, or is the answer just let it sit for another 20 years, hope the neighborhood turns around then, if it hasn't fallen on its own, save it?  I hear complaints, not actionable solutions. 

I have been a proponent for CitiRama going in atop Hughes St.,  you would not believe the number of people who complained about design when no drawing had even been made.  This new construction (in a vacant lot) could have been the catalyst to save 10 buildings on Hughes.  Now the preservationist have their wish, no CitiRama, and a decaying Hughes St.  If you look back at the last couple of rebuts it is simply a circular argument and this has been the problem down in OTR well before I even got here.  Give me answers, not complaints.

How about this:  Using 3CDC to provide enough of a subsidy to make it worth an investment by a developer. 

 

Mr. Redmond, what is the possibility of trying again to bring CitiRama to the Over-the-Rhine and Mulberry Hill areas?

 

 

 

 

That's what I like to hear.  Perhaps 3CDC and City West can serve as a catalyst to surrounding areas on the West of OTR, the north is under massive redevelopment and is pushing southward, projects like Gateway and the American Building to the South, and Main St, well we are working on that.  But notice that some of this is new construction.  The buildings around these developments stand the best chance to be saved.  Outside investors can be pointed to these projects, and if successful, can help spur even more rehab downtown.  I hate to keep coming back to Mulberry but the new construction of Vinyard Homes is what made Mulberry take off, it is what spurred people like me and the rest of the street to really begin significant investment in older homes (mine is 1865) all around the new ones.  Sometimes new construction only serves to highlight the old.  Now I am with Max in that I do not like the buildings on his list either, but in order to save more structures in OTR and elsewhere, you need investment and to get investment an investor must feel secure, new construction in the immediate vicinity can do this.

 

Unfortunately CitiRama in our location is dead.  I did not really tell the whole story above.  An email campaign (fight) was going around debating the location.  Arguments came up about it not being open to builders outside the HBA (CitiRama is HBA so that argument did not make much since) so in an effort to be fare, the city offered another developer the lots that were closest to Main.  These lots were the most desirable and HBA pulled out.  The question now is will this developer (Doug Spitz) build on these lots.  I hope so, Doug, from what I can tell, has a line of lots going from the north side of Mulberry down the East side of Main.  All of this was being done while everyone else was debating over what the facade of the homes would look like and what will happen to the basketball courts.  Even without this, Vernon Rader's project on Main and Liberty may be just what Hughes needs.  He is doing tremendous work on saving those buildings and it will serve as a great gateway to the Hill.  The proposed CitiRama site will most likely just stay greenspace.

The bottom line is sitting back and just saying fix all buildings in OTR is a noble statement but action is a different thing all together.  We can cry about losing a building and I will cry right next to you, but lets discuss reasonable, plausible solutions that are based in reality.  1612 Pleasant, what is the solution?  Who is going to fix it, or is the answer just let it sit for another 20 years, hope the neighborhood turns around then, if it hasn't fallen on its own, save it?  I hear complaints, not actionable solutions. 

I have been a proponent for CitiRama going in atop Hughes St.,  you would not believe the number of people who complained about design when no drawing had even been made.  This new construction (in a vacant lot) could have been the catalyst to save 10 buildings on Hughes.  Now the preservationist have their wish, no CitiRama, and a decaying Hughes St.  If you look back at the last couple of rebuts it is simply a circular argument and this has been the problem down in OTR well before I even got here.  Give me answers, not complaints.

 

Here! Here! A mix of old and new is what OTR needs to move forward. Waiting for older buildings to be "save" creates a stagnate neighborhood that only a few could enjoy. When an older building is save and becomes useful, it's a beautiful sight, but that can't be expected for every building in OTR.

 

And for the folks who blew the chance for a CitiRama. Shame on them all. That was a big f*uck up.

And this does not make us anti- preservation, in fact just the opposite.

Just a few notes...nothing spectacular or Earth-shattering here:

 

* 228 Mohawk St. was bought by YB Real Estate Development Company on November 28.  They are already starting some work on it.  This is a two-family that was built some time around 1865.

 

* Model Management (dba Magnolia Heights Limited Partnership LLC) has purchased 1537 Pleasant St. (condemned), 217 Mulberry St. and 208 W. Fourteenth St.

       

 

* A vacant lot at 1725 Pleasant St. was also purchased last month.  I'm not sure who's project this is or what (or if) they might be building.  This lot has been vacant for nearly five years.

 

* 75 Peete St. was purchased.

 

* Downtown Property Management picked up 1420-1424 Central Pkwy (next to their building at 1416) and also a vacant lot adjacent to that property at 225 W. Fifteenth.

 

^To the above comments I've realized for a long time that OTR if its to be improved is going to look different then it does right now.  Many buildings in the area are just shells and much of the population living in OTR will have to move.  The future of OTR is most likely as an economically middle class  neighborhood with flashes of wealth and minor flashes of not.  But I'd rather have a decently vibrant neighborhood then a couple of street stretches followed by crap.

A few things of interest:

 

* Mohawk: The city unanimously passed an ordinance to enter into a Preferred Developers Agreement with the non-profit Mohawk Area Development Corporation to construct up to 10 single-family homes at 254, 258-266, 270-272 and 278 Mohawk St.  These parcels are currently vacant.  This is very good news for the Mohawk/Brewery District area.

 

* Verdin is renovating the office buildings at 1117 Pendleton St.

   

 

* The Department of Community Development and Planning is currently working with the Brewery District Community Urban Redevelopment Corporation to create an "Urban Mix" zoning for the area north of Findlay Market.  This would allow both residential and light industrial uses in the neighborhood and could lead to more condo/apartment conversions of old factory buildings.  It is expected that this proposal will be brought before the City Planning Commission in early 2006.

 

* The city will likely pull $972,430 from the OTR Plan Implementation fund to pay the judgement against it in Barnes v. The City of Cincinnati.  This case, of course, was the one in which Barnes, a transsexual police recruit, failed to make it out of his probationary period.  Barnes claimed sex discrimination, while the city cited poor performance.  The city lost the case and needs the funds to pay.  They are supposed to reimburse the OTR fund in 2006.  They had better!

 

 

Greg Badger's incomplete project at 100 Elder may be back on track.

 

The city loaned $240,000 in CDBG funds to kickstart this project.  Work was being done on this building during 2004, but due to bad market conditions/lack of additional funds he wasn't able to complete it.

 

Badger has now submitted a plan for a modified project.  The new project will include more commercial space and fewer residential units.

 

I am unfamiliar with the project plans for the former use or the amended plans.

 

The agreement for the new development states that it must be completed by March 31, 2007.

 

The ordinance allowing for this has been sent to Finance Committee to crunch numbers, with no timetable for return.

 

 

Also, SmartMoney (a non-profit that provides financial services to a community left without any banks) is moving from Vine St. to a new 4,700 square foot office at 19 W. Elder St.

http://news.enquirer.com/apps/pbcs.dll/article?AID=/20051216/BIZ01/512160362/1076/rss01

 

In the summer of 2004 they were rehabing the old apt. bldg. on the NEC of Broadway & Reading. I noticed some printing on the corner columns where apparently a 1st floor store existed.  I am very happy that I took these photos before they covered them back over. It's a real shame they did.  Thought you might enjoy them. 

 

The printing on Broadway1 says: Wine, Brandy, Alcohol, Terpentine, Powder, Shot, (I can't make out the bottom two words)

Broadway2 is illegible to me

Broadway3 says:  Linseed and (?) Lard Oil, ?ANAR?, RAPE (RARE?) (!!), AND HEMPSEED  :-D (good thing Simon Leis wasn't around) POWDER CAPS (?) AND SHOT (?)

Broadway4 is mostly illegible to me also, they had started to spackle it  :x  but the bottom word says GLUE...

 

Anyway, these will probably never see the light of day again, so thought I'd share the photos. 

snapped this pic today of a couple of places nearing completion.  they are in front of the Rothenburg School at E. Clifton & Main.  Don't know anything about their history, they appear to be 1850-1860ish, based on the exterior veranda and general design.  The roofs are shingled, there's a guy working up there, and that's the window of a DishTV truck in the lower right corner!

After a brief pause in construction on Peete, Frintz, and E. Clifton, Jim Hohlbein is back to work with a new builder.  72 E. Clifton (3 condos) will be finished within the month.  Joe Gorman called me last night and said he and Karen Blatt are moving forward with new construction on the South side of Mulberry (joe was the developer for the 5 new Vinyard Homes on Mulberry) and I can not give the addresses until closing but there will be at least 2 more major rehabs on Mulberry this year.  109 Mulberry top floor is now complete and owner occupied, the lower levels have just begun contruction and will be market rate condo hopefully on the market in the spring.  The same owner of 109 Mulberry, Michael Evans of GBBN along with Cathy Frank of Comey have purchased the lower unit of 29 Mulberry and plans are now drawn up to make it into 2 condo units (making the building 4 units, 2 already sold) both 1 bed 1.5 baths, this is south side closer to Vine. 

 

I saw it posted above about 75 Peete St being sold, it was sold to a man named Joseph George.  He and his wife came down for the tour and saw a side of OTR and Mt. Auburn they did not know existed, they live in Mason but now want to invest in the area.

^ Thanks for those updates!  That's great news!

 

Has Hohlbein been getting very many bites on the condos at 72A-C Clifton?  The reason I ask is because they have been listed on the market now for quite some time.  I was just wondering how much interest was there.

The project was all but shut down for a couple of months due to a string of problems.  Now he is turning the corner with a whole new strategy including a new builder and new marketing campaign.  There was one bite on 72A by a piano teacher, however that deal fell apart for whatever reason.  Fletcher Zorbec was to purchase one of the condos and I am assuming that is still on.  Jim has been very busy with more aquisitions in the area and now he has a new investor on board also, hopefully this year will see some major changes between Mulberry and Mcmicken.

I went ahead and changed the name of the thread.  When I first created it, I hadn't intended for it to be the catch-all OTR thread, which is what it became.  I thought I'd go ahead and take the "2005" out of the title since hopefully this thing will be added to for years to come!

 

This thread will remain the place for discussion of small projects.  The mega-projects still have their pages.

 

 

* In the Mohawk/Brewery District area, the owner of 278 Stark St. is starting a project to tear out the front of the house and repair it.  The front of the house was heavily damaged by fire a few months back. 

 

* Model Management is doing a full renovation of 1702 Elm St.  This may have been mentioned already.  The building has had tenants and will probably remain apartments.

 

Emergency demolition started yesterday at the rectory of St. Paulus Kirche, SWC 15th and Race.  This is the small building to the left of the church.  All the decorative carved stone faces and fish carvings were removed from the facade yesterday by the contractor and sold.  The demolition was ordered because of a collapse of a rear wing.  However, the rear wing is structurally independent of the front, which should have been saved.  This building was a true gem.  The only close up photos I have are in a box somewhere, otherwise I would post them.

 

As far as I know, the church structure will remain standing for the time being.

 

oh that is bad news about st paulus kirche :-(  I heard that there was a satanic cult using that church recently. That area is losing badly the last year or so. There was a fire about a couple of blocks away yesterday and the 4-5 story building will probably be lost, it's  near the corner of central pkwy and liberty.

I heard about the fire.  It's that bad, huh?

Reported by: 9News

Web produced by: Mark Sickmiller

Photographed by: 9News

First posted: 1/9/2006 12:04:03 PM

 

Firefighters were on the scene of a stubborn fire near the corner of West Liberty and Elm in Over-The-Rhine at noon Monday.

 

A building caught on fire around 11 a.m. Firefighters do have the fire under control.

 

There are no injuries.

 

Several streets in the area are blocked, so you'll want to avoid the area.

 

The church I believe is still up for sale by the city.  Jimmy, when was that pic taken?

The city removed the for sale sign 6 months or so ago.  I called to ask why, and they said all the city owned property in the area is being reserved for a private developer, (I suppose is 3CDC).  The pic is circa 1999.

 

15th to Liberty, west of Vine has terrible vacancy and drug dealing problems, and has had many demolitions and fires over the past several years.  This is also a key area in which 3CDC is making many purchases.

 

The recent fire damage is visible at the SEC of Liberty and Central Pkwy.  What a shame.

<b>3CDC to unveil more development projects</b>

 

By Jackie Demaline

Enquirer staff writer

 

Fountain Square may be a construction site now, but expect buzz to start building by spring. A national search for an experienced programming director is under way and a hire is expected to be announced by April. If all goes as planned, arts and entertainment will be a bold signature at the heart of downtown when Fountain Square unveils its $42 million makeover.

I wonder if any of 3CDC's plans include rehabbing the Emery?

I went ahead and moved the 3CDC posts over to the Washington Park thread:

http://www.urbanohio.com/forum2/index.php?topic=2568.0

 

 

* The St. Johannes Church (1868) at 1205 Elm St. just hit the market.  The Greater Bethlehem Temple Apostolic Church is selling it, as they have just about wrapped up construction of their massive, 3000-seat complex at Hamiton and Ashtree in Northside.  The asking price is $190,000.

 

* Schickel Design Co. has moved from Loveland into a building at 124 W. Fourteenth St.  They bought this building in 2004 and have renovated it.  The building had been vacant for 30 years.

 

* City council voted unanimously to amend its funding agreement with Greg Badger for the property at 100 W. Elder St., allowing him to complete the project.

 

From the 1/17/06 Enquirer:

 

 

PHOTO: Moeller teacher Mike Moroski (front) and freshman Brach Schwegman fix up an apartment building in Over-the-Rhine Monday as part of the ReSTOC effort.  The Enquirer/Meggan Booker

 

Students' rehab project turning 'vacant' into 'home'

By Denise Smith Amos

Enquirer staff writer

 

OVER-THE-RHINE - It has taken 15 months of hard work, but a dilapidated Over-the-Rhine apartment building is beginning to look like someone's future home, thanks to a group of Moeller High students and some skilled volunteer help.

 

Moeller students, led by English teacher Mike Moroski, have "adopted" an old apartment building on Republic Street, gutting and rehabbing it into apartments for ReSTOC, an affordable housing group. They have devoted their Saturdays and, most recently, their Martin Luther King holiday Monday to finishing the work.

 

http://news.enquirer.com/apps/pbcs.dll/article?AID=/20060117/NEWS0102/601170331/1058/NEWS01

 

I am a HUGE Emery fan, I haven't heard anything about this.  There was an effort maybe 4-5 years ago, a committee formed, etc. but couldn't raise the money (I think it was MAYBE $4M)  The auditorium, though plain, is nearly acoustically perfect.

I feel much better about the possible success of OTR with 3CDC at the helm.  Whether you like them or not the group has gotten the job done in every project they've been involved with (both financially and physically).  I have faith that everyone will be shocked to find out that 3CDC has been hard at work in OTR and will have results in the near future.

It appears that Jim Hohlbein's three-unit project at 72A-72C Clifton Ave. has been temporarily taken off of the market.  Michael--or somebody else--is he just waiting a while to re-list it?  That's what I had assumed, given the info you had on the development not too long ago.

---

This news is a little old, but still noteworthy.  From the 1/12/06 Cincinnati Business Courier:

 

 

Renter Equity program awarded $112,000 Impact 100 grant

 

The Community Views Renter Equity program, a joint venture of the Over-the-Rhine Housing Network and Cornerstone Community Loan Fund, will receive the second Impact 100 grant of $112,000 from funds donated in 2005.

 

Community Views replaces the Genesis Men's Program as a recipient.

 

http://www.bizjournals.com/cincinnati/stories/2006/01/09/daily32.html?from_rss=1

 

<i>What I don't like about the Enquirer redo is there being too many headlines and they seem to be constantly updated so it easy to lose track of what I read or didn't. It also harder to find articles like this. </i>

 

<b>Preservation work toured

National Trust comes to town</b>

 

BY MARLA MATZER ROSE | ENQUIRER STAFF WRITER

 

Local preservationists have a special opportunity this weekend to highlight hotspots in Over-the-Rhine and other areas that are ripe for renovation efforts.

 

The Washington-based National Trust for Historic Preservation is holding its quarterly board of trustees meeting in Cincinnati this weekend. The event starts today and runs through Monday morning.

 

http://news.enquirer.com/apps/pbcs.dll/article?AID=/20060128/BIZ01/601280344/1076

 

 

I don't want to bring anybody down, but I also want to post on this thread some of the buildings OTR is going to lose.

 

Demolition permits were applied for the following property:

23 E. Thirteenth

 

It was actually being listed for $239,000: "Deutche Gegenfeitige Derlicherungs - Gefellechaft von Cincinnati & the Stafford in Historic Over-the-Rhine."  I guess there were no takers.

 

LISTING

 

Goodbye:

 

Grasscat, I think you may have been mistaken about this building being demolished.  You mentioned that demo permits were applied for, but it is highly unlikely that they were granted by the historic conservation board (unless you meant that they were in fact granted, and not just applied for).  The board almost never grants a demo permit, and only does so when the building is so incredibly deteriorated that the owner can demonstrate convincingly that it can't be rehabbed.  That's the good thing about our preservation ordinance -- buildings are not coming down at the whim of developers...rather, they're coming down from demolition by neglect (which still sucks, cause we lost about 8-10 a year that way).

 

If the building you mentioned was in fact demolished, I REALLY hope that it wasn't actually the "Deutsche Gegenseitige Versicherungs Gesellschaft" building.  This stands for "German Mutual Insurance Company", and can still be seen painted on the side of the building.  Its one of OTR's quirks that signify its history.  I don't think this was the building with those words.  But please correct me if I'm wrong.

 

 

 

 

 

 

Damn...didn't mean to put that second part in quotes....here it is again:

 

Grasscat, I think you may have been mistaken about this building being demolished.  You mentioned that demo permits were applied for, but it is highly unlikely that they were granted by the historic conservation board (unless you meant that they were in fact granted, and not just applied for).  The board almost never grants a demo permit, and only does so when the building is so incredibly deteriorated that the owner can demonstrate convincingly that it can't be rehabbed.  That's the good thing about our preservation ordinance -- buildings are not coming down at the whim of developers...rather, they're coming down from demolition by neglect (which still sucks, cause we lost about 8-10 a year that way).

 

If the building you mentioned was in fact demolished, I REALLY hope that it wasn't actually the "Deutsche Gegenseitige Versicherungs Gesellschaft" building.  This stands for "German Mutual Insurance Company", and can still be seen painted on the side of the building.  Its one of OTR's quirks that signify its history.  I don't think this was the building with those words.  But please correct me if I'm wrong.

23 E Thirteenth is still there, but vacant and not looking good:

 

 

The one with the german writing is owned by the same company, JACKSON STREET WAREHOUSE 

LTD, but is separated by an alley:

 

 

This photo is not so good because it is of the east elevation (it is the building at the corner) and doesn't show the sign that is on the long north side.

 

I doubt that either of these will actually be demolished because structurally they seem pretty solid.

dglenn, I'm not sure if I meant the building you were referring to with the writing.  I doubt I meant that one since it has been (and still is) for sale:

http://www.cbws.com/property/propertydetail.aspx?property=c33d4260-378c-44f6-8bb2-15335f484b3e

 

ok cool, that's a relief...does $239,000 seem like a good price to you guys?  seems a bit high to me for that area

It is way way too high.