^It only took something like 19 days to get there as well. Quite an impressive feat.

 

Just checked listings, one of the three to-be-built townhomes on Republic sold. Impressive as well at $609k.

I did a quick search but I haven't seen this one mentioned before:

 

221-235 W. 12th St, corner of 12th/Central, the Strietmann Bakery Building, 88,000 square feet, to be developed by Grandin Properties. This building is a monster.

 

It is currently listed on the Auditor's website as being owned by CW REALTY INVESTMENTS LLC, however there is a resolution before council to support Grandin's efforts to obtain Historic Preservation Tax Credits, so I'm assuming it has been sold or will be closing soon.

That building is indeed a monster. That's going to bring a ton of life to that relatively quiet corner of OTR.

I got the chance to see the Taft Ale House from the inside tonight.  It is an extremely impressive place.  I think it is going to be wildly successful. 

Rents and condo prices rising dramatically doesn't mean they're necessarily profitable. Fixing up completely vacant, deteriorated buildings is an insanely expensive endeavor and in many situations is such a large expense that it's not possible to turn a reasonable profit without grants/tax breaks/etc.

 

$2/sq. ft./month is basically the low point for new construction. That means cheap construction, not nice construction. Something like the tower planned for 8th and Sycamore is of a quality much higher than $2/sq. ft./month can really justify to investors and banks.

 

$250/sq. ft. for condos is a lot, but think about other cities. We use examples of building quality we want and ignore the fact that units in those buildings go for $400/sq. ft. and up. There is a lot of money in real estate in OTR/Downtown, but not really when compared to other cities and the cost of construction.

 

We're getting to the point where less subsidy is needed but we're not at the point where it's not needed at all. And probably won't be for awhile.

 

Well then, sir, you've just talked yourself into suburban housing for the median American household.

I didn't do anything. I'm stating facts of construction costs. We don't have to like it, but it is what it is. Construction and materials are insanely expensive right now and doing anything beyond the minimum requires a huge premium.

 

In the last year or so our estimates on a per/sq. ft. basis for like projects has risen like 33%. Things are expensive and good labor is hard to come by because everyone is busy building. The result is a waiting list for good contractors who are charging way more than before because of demand and most of the cheap contractors went out of business during the recession. We're not really in a "pro construction" period right now from a financial standpoint.

Rents and condo prices rising dramatically doesn't mean they're necessarily profitable. Fixing up completely vacant, deteriorated buildings is an insanely expensive endeavor and in many situations is such a large expense that it's not possible to turn a reasonable profit without grants/tax breaks/etc.

 

$2/sq. ft./month is basically the low point for new construction. That means cheap construction, not nice construction. Something like the tower planned for 8th and Sycamore is of a quality much higher than $2/sq. ft./month can really justify to investors and banks.

 

$250/sq. ft. for condos is a lot, but think about other cities. We use examples of building quality we want and ignore the fact that units in those buildings go for $400/sq. ft. and up. There is a lot of money in real estate in OTR/Downtown, but not really when compared to other cities and the cost of construction.

 

We're getting to the point where less subsidy is needed but we're not at the point where it's not needed at all. And probably won't be for awhile.

 

Well then, sir, you've just talked yourself into suburban housing for the median American household.

 

^ That response makes no sense with regard to Jmicha's statement.

That is awesome.  Towne was also looking at it, but I'm happy it was picked up by Grandin.  Peg Wyant is a very forward thinking person when it comes to urban living.  She has fully embraced OTR.  One thing that will be interesting... That building has no parking, but is across Central from the City owned $40 a month parking "Town Center" Parking garage.

That is awesome.  Towne was also looking at it, but I'm happy it was picked up by Grandin.  Peg Wyant is a very forward thinking person when it comes to urban living.  She has fully embraced OTR.  One thing that will be interesting... That building has no parking, but is across Central from the City owned $40 a month parking "Town Center" Parking garage.

 

A $2 a day garage right next to $1 an hour meters.

Reminds me of the 9th St parking lots that are $3.75 all day next to $2 an hour meters.  Or the parking lot on 8th St which is $2 all day sat and sun, or $2 an hour at the meters.... Hmmm...

That is awesome.  Towne was also looking at it, but I'm happy it was picked up by Grandin.  Peg Wyant is a very forward thinking person when it comes to urban living.  She has fully embraced OTR

That may be, but I think design is lacking so far.  Hopefully she is learning and will do better with each rehab.

That is awesome.  Towne was also looking at it, but I'm happy it was picked up by Grandin.  Peg Wyant is a very forward thinking person when it comes to urban living.  She has fully embraced OTR.  One thing that will be interesting... That building has no parking, but is across Central from the City owned $40 a month parking "Town Center" Parking garage.

 

A $2 a day garage right next to $1 an hour meters.

 

Over Christmas the year before last I met up in OTR for lunch with a college friend who went to UC and moved to Boston.  The first thing she was blown away by was that her normal spot she'd park at to get to the Ensemble theater was filled up - took her a long time to find a spot, as we were heading out after lunch I reminded her that in spite of the changes she was still in Cincinnati and pointed at the ridiculously low price on the garages, lol.

Playing a really nasty Devils advocate. If median household income is about 52K, reasonable housing cost would be about 1300 monthly. So right there the median household is priced out of urban renovation and urban new construction. How then do you develop housing for median households that are not $100/sf greenfield new construction? I would argue that housing in the very center should be expensive because it reflects the true location value, but if it's $250/sf even in outlying city neighborhoods, the first realistic option for the median household is inner ring suburbs.

Even accepting that 250/sq ft is the best you can do (and I don't believe that), you can support about 250K mortgage for 1300 monthly, which buys you 1000 sq ft.

 

There are two numbers involved, the $/sq ft, and the square feet. People moving away from cheap land and 1/3-1/2 acre lot sizes will have to want to decrease their footprint.

 

Fortunately an increasing number want to make that trade off. We definitely need more good options for them.

One answer would be that you *don't* develop new housing for that market.  You let it filter down from the higher income housing as it ages.  Unfortunately that does mean areas that were left to rot and now need significant renovation or rebuilding will be too pricey for that market, but c'est la vie.  Of course, with construction prices being what they are, the next option is then to just develop (or accept) smaller units.  $1,300/month at $2.50/sf/month is 520sf.  That's not big, but it's a totally workable 1-bedroom for a couple.  It could even be a half decent 2-bedroom for someone with one kid.  Even so, you *can* get construction costs down to around $100/sf in this market.  That's not easy, but even if you can only get down to say $150 or $175 that still gets you a much bigger unit. 

I don't have stats, but I believe there are already lots of units in that size range in a place like OTR just waiting to be rehabilitated in the original format. A building we are getting ready to start was built around 1900 into two flats per floor, each around 600 sq ft. And that's what it's going to stay.

Not sure this is the right place, but they removed the barriers at 15th and Vine yesterday. There was a noticeable difference in foot and car traffic after they removed it which is good since we've (Westfalen) had a handful of break ins stemming from that side of the property. Hopefully this will help stop this from happening.

1737 Vine St at the corner of Vine/Elder is to be developed into 6 apartments plus 1 commercial space by Eric Haberthier for $1.1M. This property is a city-owned property that is a part of the preferred developer agreement with 3CDC.

 

http://city-egov.cincinnati-oh.gov/Webtop/ws/council/public/child/Blob/42065.pdf?rpp=-10&m=1&w=doc_no%3D%27201500360%27

You're so on top of all the small things happening that could easily slip through the cracks until there's visible construction. Good work!

 

I noticed this weekend most of the building on the east side of Elm between 15th and Liberty now have a construction fence up around them. It's quite an attractive row of buildings on that side of the block and it looks like many will be receiving work soon.

You're so on top of all the small things happening that could easily slip through the cracks until there's visible construction. Good work!

 

Thanks. Unfortunately my detective work is limited to projects that receive some sort of public subsidy and/or works its way through public documents (not permits). Though for Cincinnati right now that's a large percentage of the construction projects!

Even so you've brought to light a ton of projects I hadn't noticed or heard anything about so it's nice to have someone willing to go through those public documents and report their findings to us.

109 E. 12th, between Rhinehaus and Half Cut, just sold and is now owned by DAFFIN INVESTMENTS, OHIO, LLC.

Just posted some photos from 219 Wade and 16-18 East 14th on UrbanCincy.

EXCLUSIVE: 3CDC unveils plans for its second-largest development

Mar 24, 2015, 4:00pm EDT

Chris Wetterich Staff reporter and columnist- Cincinnati Business Courier

 

The Cincinnati Center City Development Corp. plans to build 63 housing units, including some affordable apartments, and 37,500 square feet of commercial retail at the intersection of 15th and Race over the next two years.

 

 

The redevelopment of existing buildings and construction of new ones will encompass 2.2 acres and almost an entire city block. It will be the nonprofit developer’s second-largest project next to its 2.48-acre, now-completed Mercer Commons project.

 

http://www.bizjournals.com/cincinnati/news/2015/03/24/exclusive-3cdc-unveils-plans-for-its-second.html

I don't mind it, but there are some glaring issues.

 

First: A one to two (!!!) story addition to the corner of 15th and Race? Are they serious? Someone tell me I'm misreading that and they don't seriously intend to occupy a major corner along the streetcar with a one or two story building. That's insulting. And absolutely awful urban planning.

 

Second: I really think 3CDC needs to look back to the complaints about this project. The scale complaints were about the garage, not everything else. This feels like a huge missed opportunity to build a massive amount of apartments in a super dense manner to showcase streetcar induced transit-oriented development. I don't mind townhomes, but those 10-11 townhomes could easily house 50 apartments instead. Or more.

 

Third: That entrance to the parking lot better be as small as possible. Considering it'll be bound by a one-two story building along the corner that spot is going to feel awful from a pedestrian standpoint.

Exactly -- people weren't opposed to the scale of the development, people were opposed to another massive new parking garage in the heart of OTR. Along the streetcar route is the perfect location to build a major new development with no parking and see how the market reacts. They should add a forth story to the new building along Race, unbundle the parking spaces from the units, and allow the residents that want a parking space to purchase one. The other units will sell to people that don't own a car or are willing to keep their car elsewhere (Washington Park, Mercer Commons, etc.).

In regards to the corner building- Maybe they wanted some of the historic building to peek through to address the corner of 15th and Race? Or maybe they thought the lot was too narrow for a larger structure?  I don't know, but I would agree the plans should be ambitious given the location. 

 

In regards to parking, someone's gonna be the first to "get away with" not building parking, and this will spark a sea change.

 

 

I also learned over the weekend that the elimination of parking restrictions in OTR and the CBD was never fully adopted by the city. And under the current administration, it's probably not going to happen. So for each person who rehabs a building into a home in OTR, they still have to go in front of planning commission to get the requirement waved on a case-by-case basis.

Yeah studios are really tough to do correctly when you're dealing with an existing space. The proportions are often not right for a studio to really work. I built 3D models of every studio available when I was searching and decided which to buy based on how well my furniture fit into the space. There was only one studio in the entire neighborhood at the time that properly allowed for the three main spaces to fit nicely without any real sacrifices in comfort. And I bought it. The finishes could be a little less suburban-developery but that's easy to change and I have been making changes since I moved in. And I have a nice view of the hills and Downtown with a decent outdoor space so I'm pleased with my decision to go smaller and spend less money than I would have on a one bedroom.

 

I have a question for folks on here with opinions about the design of small units. Would it be interesting if I posted the current designs for smallish 1BR units that we're contemplating for an OTR rehab? The idea would be a discussion about what people wanted or needed in a small urban apartment, and the resulting tradeoffs. I'd obviously be interested -- we're still prior to permit drawings, so there's time to make changes -- but I'm also sensitive to this looking like I'm trying to get something for nothing. For the record, I do have an architect (and will continue paying him!), and I wouldn't give out the name of the firm.

 

Anyway, if anybody has any strong opinion either way about the interest or propriety of this, just say so. I'm not sure this forum is best, but if it looks useful I'll follow up with a couple of drawings for discussion. Otherwise, I'll be silent!

 

I would be interested. Being an architect who lives in a 490 square foot studio, I have a lot of opinions on how to live in and with a small amount of space.

 

taestell[/member] , are you referring to the full elimination of any parking requirements in Downtown/OTR, or the elimination of parking requirements for anything under 20 units?

Exactly -- people weren't opposed to the scale of the development, people were opposed to another massive new parking garage in the heart of OTR. Along the streetcar route is the perfect location to build a major new development with no parking and see how the market reacts. They should add a forth story to the new building along Race, unbundle the parking spaces from the units, and allow the residents that want a parking space to purchase one. The other units will sell to people that don't own a car or are willing to keep their car elsewhere (Washington Park, Mercer Commons, etc.).

 

The good thing about the lack of a garage is that the backs of the buildings can have windows.  This will avoid the situation that exists at much of Mercer Commons. 

 

The drawing makes it unclear as to whether the town homes will each have a small rear courtyard or if that space will be consumed by parking.  In my opinion a rear courtyard, even one just extending ten feet from the rear of a home, adds a ton to the quality of life in a house in the city.  Too many balconies get very little use because of their unpleasant design which makes them feel too "exposed".  The Mercer town homes obviously do not have rear courtyards because they are mushed up against the parking garage.   

 

Has anyone seen a mention of the price of these town homes? 

 

There hasn't been any mention but I'm going to imagine they'll be in the $600-750k range based on the sale price of other similarly sized homes recently.

109 E. 12th, between Rhinehaus and Half Cut, just sold and is now owned by DAFFIN INVESTMENTS, OHIO, LLC.

 

They did the rhinehaus building and some other buildings up Clay and I think the building at the NW corder of 12th & clay.

That is a ridiculous price.  Single-family homes downtown on 9th St. still sell for way less than that, not to mention "City Hall West".  It's basically impossible to rent a house that expensive because an unexpected vacancy hits your bank account to the tune of $3,000/mo. 

Jake, we get it. You don't agree with other people's finances. People you literally know nothing about. It's tiresome that you assume you know how to handle other people's finances better than they do. I'm going to let you in on a secret. You know nothing about the people who will buy these and it's precisely none of your business. $3,000/month is chump change for a lot of people.

 

It's location. You're paying for a product you can't find in this location.

Yeah, I've been saying for a few years now that the prices in Over-the-Rhine are not for longtime Cincinnatians.  They're for the young professionals that P&G, Macy's, Kroger and accompanying companies ship in from out of town with loads of disposable income.  New York Prices in a Cincinnati market.  They're selling like crazy, so clearly it's an effective model.

They're not even really NYC prices, though.  600K in Manhattan would get you a one bedroom apartment.  These are going to be sizable townhomes in an unbelievably hot neighborhood. 

Well you can buy the best houses in Prospect Hill for $300k right now.  These are historic houses with charm and a back view of something other than a parking lot. 

 

Housing prices in Cincinnati are still not inflating anything like some second-tier cities.  Prices of junky shotgun homes in barely-walkable neighborhoods in cities like Nashville and Charlotte have blown past OTR prices in the past 2-3 years.  Way more wealthy people from origins unknown are moving into those cities than are moving into Cincinnati. 

 

For example, a similar development to this planned 3CDC in East Nashville, about two miles from DT Nashville in hipster central:

http://www.trulia.com/property/3189316673-Farrow-at-Five-Points-1004-Russell-St-2-Nashville-TN-37206#photo-3

 

An exorbitantly priced bungalow around the corner...would sell for about $225-250k in Oakley:

http://www.trulia.com/property/3028963141-East-End-320-S-11th-St-Nashville-TN-37206#photo-4

 

 

 

And you've still ignored the most important factor. Location. These people don't WANT to live in those other neighborhoods, they want a townhome in OTR. A big townhome for a family.

 

$600k is nothing compared to other markets.

I understand that these houses are priced at market rate and they will sell for $500,000-$600,000, but I agree that they're "overpriced" if there is such a thing. There's a limited supply for a massive demand, despite the fact that there are hundreds, if not thousands of empty lots and units in OTR. For whatever reason most developers seem to still not trust OTR. I'm not sure if they don't realize the demand is there or don't want to risk doing something "new." The profit margins for those building in OTR have to be huge, though.

It looks as though they are playing off of the "Pleasant Street" plan on this development.

 

If you look at the total number of units though, it is actually more units than what was originally proposed.  I believe now they are going for 63 vs. the original 57. 

 

They could definitely get more units in, just based on demand alone if they made the new construction 4 stories instead of 3, but they are worried about... parking.

 

That said, it looks like private development continues to ramp up.  Rookwood Properties is building a high density development a few blocks east of there.  I am certain soon we will hear about another larger project like this taking shape. 

 

The more development progresses though, the more it seems OTR is destined to be geared towards higher, upper class type, empty nest residents.  It will be interesting to see if they can make some more "young professional" type developments on those huge empty lots in downtown, close to the edge of OTR.  OTR and the streetcar will need dense development around the stops to keep pushing up the ridership numbers.

 

Also want to say, in 5 years once this is all built out, the trees mature, Liberty Street is redone, and development has fully pushed North of Liberty almost up to Findlay Market, this particular development will fill in nicely with the neighborhood. 

 

I have never been to Portland but looking on street view, if you go through the northwest area where their streetcar runs, there isn't necessarily super high density development all around it.  Now that isn't to say there won't be eventually, but as of now it isn't the case all throughout the route. 

 

https://www.google.com/maps/@45.529926,-122.691376,3a,75y,100.12h,84.65t/data=!3m4!1e1!3m2!1sRQWueYDyToLlPW3vAq1MMg!2e0

They aren't though. The profit margins are nonexistent in many of 3CDC's developments. No private developer would have taken on many of their projects because they were money losers.

 

These homes won't be overpriced. They're going to be large, 3 story, likely 3000+ square foot townhomes. That's $200/sq. ft. which really isn't a lot at all if they're priced at $600k. How is this any different than the fact that an equally sized home in a desirable part of, say, Hyde Park being priced basically the same amount. It's not. We're just not used to these prices yet in OTR.

 

A dual income household where both income earners have good careers leaves something priced in this price range more than within reach. It's expensive, sure, but it's not like we're talking multimillion dollar shells being sold off like in Brooklyn. It's a brand new, large townhome in the most desirable part of the most desirable neighborhood of Cincinnati. What do people expect to happen?

I think two different arguments are being made here, both of which have merit.

 

Compared to many other markets across the United States, these units in Over-the-Rhine are not overpriced. On a per square foot basis, a new urban townhome or large condominium in any of the first or second "tier" cities is going to cost at least 50% more than one in Over-the-Rhine. New townhomes in the Washington, DC market (not just in DC, but across the metro area) sell all day long for $400+ psf. I know Cincinnati isn't DC. But living in Over-the-Rhine offers many of the advantages of living in certain parts of DC. If we're looking at the national urban for sale market, Over-the-Rhine is relatively cheap.

 

That said, the other argument is that within the Cincinnati housing market, Over-the-Rhine is expensive. You can't deny this is the case. If Over-the-Rhine is going to become anything but an enclave for wealthy buyers and newly minted college graduate renters, for-sale residential options are going to have to exist that can compete with suburban alternatives. Millennials who can afford to buy houses (and who want to) will make sacrifices in order to remain in vibrant, walkable urban neighborhoods, but only to a point. If the alternatives are a 600 s.f. one bedroom condo in OTR and a three bedroom in Pleasant Ridge, the three bedroom in Pleasant Ridge is typically going to win. I'm 29, about as passionate about urban living as one can get, and I don't want to live in a cramped condominium for the rest of my life. I also don't want to live in a McMansion in Mason. There is this middle ground that is being completely unserved by the market, not just in Cincinnati, but around the United States. It doesn't have to be that way.

I understand that these houses are priced at market rate and they will sell for $500,000-$600,000, but I agree that they're "overpriced" if there is such a thing. There's a limited supply for a massive demand, despite the fact that there are hundreds, if not thousands of empty lots and units in OTR. For whatever reason most developers seem to still not trust OTR. I'm not sure if they don't realize the demand is there or don't want to risk doing something "new." The profit margins for those building in OTR have to be huge, though.

 

Local Cincinnati mentality is holding back many developers, they don't understand that things have changed very rapidly, and how could they?  Cincinnati doesn't change quickly and now it has - its blown a lot of people's minds and they still can't wrap their heads around it.  Not to mention that OTR had many many fits and starts from the 1970s until the 2010s, this is the only one that's stuck, but if your some developer who wanted to try when they were a lot younger and got burned they'd still be skeptical.  There is a mountain of evidence that that skepticism is unwarranted, but remember this person only really travels to Gatlinburg or myrtle beach every year and doesn't really know anyone who lives in a tier 1 or tier 2 city.  That's one of the biggest problems with the prices on the marketplace right now (which are as other people have stated, still low by national standards).

Yeah studios are really tough to do correctly when you're dealing with an existing space. The proportions are often not right for a studio to really work. I built 3D models of every studio available when I was searching and decided which to buy based on how well my furniture fit into the space. There was only one studio in the entire neighborhood at the time that properly allowed for the three main spaces to fit nicely without any real sacrifices in comfort. And I bought it. The finishes could be a little less suburban-developery but that's easy to change and I have been making changes since I moved in. And I have a nice view of the hills and Downtown with a decent outdoor space so I'm pleased with my decision to go smaller and spend less money than I would have on a one bedroom.

 

I have a question for folks on here with opinions about the design of small units. Would it be interesting if I posted the current designs for smallish 1BR units that we're contemplating for an OTR rehab? The idea would be a discussion about what people wanted or needed in a small urban apartment, and the resulting tradeoffs. I'd obviously be interested -- we're still prior to permit drawings, so there's time to make changes -- but I'm also sensitive to this looking like I'm trying to get something for nothing. For the record, I do have an architect (and will continue paying him!), and I wouldn't give out the name of the firm.

 

Anyway, if anybody has any strong opinion either way about the interest or propriety of this, just say so. I'm not sure this forum is best, but if it looks useful I'll follow up with a couple of drawings for discussion. Otherwise, I'll be silent!

 

 

I know a lot of folks here won't like this, but don't think of the products think of the ideas for organizing a small space - I've always kind of been impressed by the space saving things they do in these displays:

 

http://www.ikea.com/ms/en_US/rooms_ideas/small_spaces/

^The biggest problem with those examples is that they're highly specialized which is the opposite of h what you want to do with a new space you're building on spec. Everyone handles their lives differently and the smaller the space, the more specialized each person's needs becomes and building something that's more or less empty and easily customizable is the best way to attract the most people to a small unit.

 

I know when I was looking for my unit the reason I went with the unit I did wasn't because of finishes (they're...cheap at best) or square footage, it was how open and empty it felt. It's a super basic layout that works well for adaptability. All the other studios I looked at had chopped up layouts that essentially forced one furniture/spatial layout and assumed a lot of things about the potential client. That was an issue because unless those uses align properly with the client, they're not going to like the space.

 

My suggestion for any small space is to create as open and ambiguous of a space as possible. Remove unnecessary partitions, remove excess doors to open up wall space, do the minimum with storage spaces (meaning, don't go overboard with how you layout your storage spaces since people in small spaces deal with storage in very different ways, etc.

 

Small spaces are tough, but if they're done correctly people can easily see themselves living in them. If you design for a very specific imaginary client, well, you'll alienate most people and have trouble drumming up interest. Look at the studios in that 3CDC building on Republic. They're not selling because they failed to create spaces that can be laid out in multiple ways or adapt to different users. And people feel that the moment they tour.

Walkable urban neighborhoods are in extremely high demand; especially neighborhoods where residents can walk or take high-quality transit to work. In Cincinnati, we have a handful of really great urban neighborhoods. But so far, OTR is the only one that meets that second criteria, and that's one reason why prices are exploding so quickly. The best two things we could do to keep OTR prices in check would be to: (1.) connect some of Cincinnati's other walkable neighborhoods to downtown with very fast, high quality transit; and (2.) keep building more housing in OTR, CBD, and the West End to keep up with the demand as much as is possible.

Remember when Mayor Cranley had an invertiew with Aaron Renn on Urbanophile and he said that they were planning to turbocharge development in OTR and downtown and double the population in 5 years?

 

I wonder if it is on track for that?  I bet there is a lot more development in early planning stages that we haven't heard of yet.  As spring is starting up, I am sure more announcements downtown and OTR will come up.  Though a lot of people don't like Cranley and his urban core vs. neighborhood talk, I still think he is smart enough to realize that the city needs to capitalize as much as they possibly can on the momentum in downtown.  AT least I hope he is.

He is. He puts on a show but understands exactly what is happening in this country and understands the importance of urban development.

 

Based on the rate of increase in number of projects happening I think this coming year will see the most redevelopment projects announced to date. I wouldn't be surprised if we hear about one or two new towers Downtown that have previously gone unheard of, more details come out about the Macy's Tower by Towne, the 8th and Sycamore project (likely very soon on that project), 4th and Race, and possibly even hear early rumblings of what W&S plan to do around Lytle Park, even if just a schematic idea. I think we'll also be seeing the number of large scale redevelopment projects in OTR continue its increase and see many more projects on the scale of the two large projects announced along Liberty recently.

 

It wouldn't surprise me if by this time next year there are a couple thousand new units announced that we have yet to hear any information on.

Remember when Mayor Cranley had an invertiew with Aaron Renn on Urbanophile and he said that they were planning to turbocharge development in OTR and downtown and double the population in 5 years?

 

I wonder if it is on track for that?  I bet there is a lot more development in early planning stages that we haven't heard of yet.  As spring is starting up, I am sure more announcements downtown and OTR will come up.  Though a lot of people don't like Cranley and his urban core vs. neighborhood talk, I still think he is smart enough to realize that the city needs to capitalize as much as they possibly can on the momentum in downtown.  AT least I hope he is.

 

I think we are more likely to hear about new high-rise towers sitting on top of parking garages in the CBD (and also Uptown). Cranley and Old Cincinnati seem to "get" those type of projects. The resurgence of mid-density neighborhoods like OTR, and the rising popularity of transit, is something that I think most long-time Cincinnatians simply can't comprehend yet.