Big weekend for new OTR retail:

 

We Have Become Vikings (prints, garments, creative goods) opens April 1 at 1355 Walnut: http://www.bizjournals.com/cincinnati/news/2016/03/30/otrs-newest-shop-opening-april-1.html

Piston Society (motorcycle gear and rentals) opens April 1 at 1428 Race: http://www.bizjournals.com/cincinnati/news/2016/03/17/urban-motorcycle-shop-opening-in-otr.html

Artichoke (kitchen supplies) opens April 2 at 1825 Elm: http://www.soapboxmedia.com/devnews/032216-artichoke-OTR-cookware.aspx

Enquirer just posted an article on OTR if anyone is interested:

http://www.cincinnati.com/story/news/2016/04/10/what-over--rhine-look-like-15-years/82270534/

 

Found this interesting, 3CDC is moving their focus to court street. Anybody know what they are planning?

"Mileham said there are still plenty of vacant buildings in Over-the-Rhine that can be renovated. The developer plans to focus its efforts on the urban core, from west to east. Specifically, the area around Court Street is a new focus for 3CDC."

 

 

Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

 

Regarding the "Liberty Corner" (Liberty & Elm) project details in the April 15 Planning Commission packet, I was happy to see this:

• "Freeport Alley will be maintained provided access between Logan St and Elm St. Logan St currently is a one way street with a southbound direction and will be converted to a two way street between Green St and W Liberty St to facilitate access to the parking garage."
  

 

I was less happy to see this:

• The height was reduced from 85 ft to 75', resulting in a loss of 8 units.
  

Wonder if we will ever see a project that doesn't shrink in the planning phases.

It's exceptionally rare, anywhere, for projects to grow from initial proposal to reality. Though there are some examples.

 

But ours are shrinking because of a pesky thing called the Historic Conservation Board which seems to love giving into NIMBYism and claiming, "historic precedent" but throw out actual historic precedent in favor of a romanticized version of reality.

 

*I very clearly dislike the HCB and want them to either disband or rework their process/requirements since they continuously force developers to make poor choices which result in bad architecture*

I did a search and I don't see this mentioned yet, but sorry if it already has been!

 

Apparently Parvis Lofts is being converted into for sale condos soon. Folks who live there have received notices about it, I think they were given 90 days. It looks like OTR will be getting a significant amount of condos for sale in the that high desirable 200-250k price range. Apparently they are going to do a bit of upgrades to the units. I wonder if they are giving the parking back to some of the units - folks would pay a lot of on premise parking. Very interesting to be converting these into condos. I know something similar happened with The Belmain, but those were always intended to be sold as condos - I didn't expect this to happen to parvis lofts.

Did they use historic tax credits to do Parvis? If so I wonder if they had to make it rental apartments for some set period of time, and if that time period has now expired.

Did they use historic tax credits to do Parvis? If so I wonder if they had to make it rental apartments for some set period of time, and if that time period has now expired.

 

Yea they certainly did. They had federal and ohio historic tax credits for that project. I'm not sure if that means anything in terms of converting them into condos. Anyone know if they will still get their full 10yr taxabatement?

I doubt it. That 10 years begins when the certificate of occupancy is given after a renovation.

The State and Federal Historic Tax Credits are structured in a way that makes sense to keep the building as income producing apartments for 5 years before selling off as condos. So it makes sense to me that the owners chose to manage the building as apartments, then sell off as condos after the 5 year time period elapsed. The tax abatement transfers with the property, so it will be built in to the price (they can sell each unit at a premium since the new owner will have a lower tax basis until the abatement expires).

Can we all agree it's a good thing these are being transferred to Condos?

 

When I think of very urban areas, the only place I really know personally a bit about is Chicago and Minneapolis.  In Chicago, you have a ton of stone and apartment buildings that are condos in what seems like much more established neighborhoods like Lakeview and Lincoln Park.  Then, you have more of the rentals in areas like Wrigleyville where I think it would be harder to sell condos because of the party atmosphere. 

 

In Minneapolis, you got the Loring Park neighborhood which is basically the neighborhood in between downtown and uptown.  These are mostly rentals then transition to more single family and condo types when you are moving towards the uptown commercial district.

 

I would think this trend will continue, where apartments are made on the peripherary of the revitalized area, and as that pushes further out, in 5 years or so, these apartments will transition to condos so that the developer can sell and get it off their books.  This is all what I think in my mind happens to revitalized neighborhoods but not certain if that is how it usually works?

 

Therefore, I would conclude in my own mind this is a good thing? ;-)

There's a balance a healthy neighborhood will have. Too many condos or too many apartments can be detrimental to the long term success of a neighborhood.

 

Too many apartments and you run the risk of a too-transient population that stops the neighborhood from really establishing itself and finding residents interested in investing themselves in it.

 

Too many condos and you don't leave room for the newcomers to test out living in the neighborhood. A lot of people prefer to rent for awhile before buying so you need to have the apartments to give them that.

 

OTR is currently seeing a pretty decent balance in my opinion. It's split in a manner that allows for people to try out the neighborhood and then purchase and plant roots here when their lease is up.

I never bought the idea of renters being too transient.  Maybe in college areas or really rough half-way house type situations ok, one year is probably the max, but the average American moves every 5 years.  Single-family homeowners stay in their house on average less than 10 years from what I can see.  That's not long-term by any stretch, so it's something of a pot calling the kettle black situation. 

When I think of very urban areas, the only place I really know personally a bit about is Chicago and Minneapolis.  In Chicago, you have a ton of stone and apartment buildings that are condos in what seems like much more established neighborhoods like Lakeview and Lincoln Park.  Then, you have more of the rentals in areas like Wrigleyville where I think it would be harder to sell condos because of the party atmosphere.

 

You can find apartments in every trendy neighborhood in Chicago.  Even in Lincoln Park where teardowns of multifamilies are happening there are still apartments.  Also there are apartments for people who aren't ready to buy even though they can afford it - something for every price point or lifestyle (yes there are affordable apartments mixed in scattered as well even in very expensive areas like Wicker Park).

 

There are also condos in Wrigleyville as well, some people like the party atmosphere and want to live in it.

 

The only thing that is noteworthy by neighborhood is number of single families versus multifamlies - a neighborhood of pseudo suburbanites like Franklin Park has way more single family housing than condos or apartments where as Edgewater - the densest neighborhood in the Midwest - is almost entirely multifamily buildings.

 

As a renter I don't appreciate the attitude people have towards us, we can care about and contribute to our neighborhoods/communities just as much as homeowners.

When I think of very urban areas, the only place I really know personally a bit about is Chicago and Minneapolis.  In Chicago, you have a ton of stone and apartment buildings that are condos in what seems like much more established neighborhoods like Lakeview and Lincoln Park.  Then, you have more of the rentals in areas like Wrigleyville where I think it would be harder to sell condos because of the party atmosphere.

 

You can find apartments in every trendy neighborhood in Chicago.  Even in Lincoln Park where teardowns of multifamilies are happening there are still apartments.  Also there are apartments for people who aren't ready to buy even though they can afford it - something for every price point or lifestyle (yes there are affordable apartments mixed in scattered as well even in very expensive areas like Wicker Park).

 

There are also condos in Wrigleyville as well, some people like the party atmosphere and want to live in it.

 

The only thing that is noteworthy by neighborhood is number of single families versus multifamlies - a neighborhood of pseudo suburbanites like Franklin Park has way more single family housing than condos or apartments where as Edgewater - the densest neighborhood in the Midwest - is almost entirely multifamily buildings.

 

As a renter I don't appreciate the attitude people have towards us, we can care about and contribute to our neighborhoods/communities just as much as homeowners.

 

The most ridiculous attitude is that renters don't pay property tax when of course they do.  The rent would be cheaper if there was no property tax. 

 

 

I had to explain to someone who was adamant that renters don't pay property taxes and therefore they aren't contributing to the tax base for the school district and therefore the kids living in apartment complexes shouldn't benefit from the special needs bus service the school district I grew up in offers for people in wheelchairs or with other disabilities. And this was a person who worked for the school district...I eventually pulled up the auditor's site and went, "see this here? What does that say next to property taxes?" It was some gigantic number since it was huge apartment complex and she went, "well THEY don't pay it, the owner of the building does" as if that somehow makes a difference...

A neighborhood made completely of renters is transient and very vulnerable to a quick disinvestment IMO.

 

A neighborhood made completely of condo owners can become stale and unexciting.

 

A neighborhood with a good mix allows new people/energy/money to enter the neighborhood and a solid base of people with investment in the area. Obviously there are renters who care deeply about their community, but as a general rule, renters are less concerned about their neighborhood's longterm health than their owner counterparts because they can just get up and move.

Was anyone able to attend the zoning hearing on Friday for the Liberty and Elm project? Did they approve the planned development designation?

They did not.

^thanks. I'm guess that means back to the drawing board for the developers. Any guess whether they'll try again for a PD with a revised concept plan, or go ahead under the existing zoning (or, I guess, just forget the project, which I'd think is unlikely).

I was a little surprised since it looked like the developers have already made clear concessions to to the community concerns, some of which will result in a decrease in revenue for them across the lifetime of the development. If this initial rejection results in a better project, so be it. I just hope everyone realizes the trade offs involved in insisting on different goals- for example, lowering the height results in a decrease in the number of units which through supply and demand makes each unit more expensive (when staying affordable is another goal of the neighborhood.)

Seems like standard operating procedure where they ask for more than they expect to get, and the neighborhood smacks them back down.  That way the developer gets what they want and the community members feel like they accomplished something, because they have to meddle.  Unfortunately this becomes something of an arms race, always escalating.  The community asks for more and more concessions so the developer has to start with an even bigger proposal, but it starts to spiral out of control.  It's sort of like with ad blockers versus advertisers.  There's no "we'll all just get along" agreement because as soon as someone makes a move beyond what the other thinks is reasonable then the game starts all over again. 

My biggest complaint about this whole debacle is that the developer tried to get a vote from the community council for three straight months. They never approved or denied the development. If I were the developer, I would have tried to go around the community council, too. Not everything can move at the pace of a community council. Every month is another month not collecting revenue.

Looks like the Boys & Girls Club was bought and will be redeveloped by Grandin Properies.

http://www.bizjournals.com/cincinnati/news/2016/04/21/exclusive-grandin-properties-to-redevelop-former.html

 

 

Does it mention whether or not they will demolish that building? It's pretty ugly.

  Because of the building’s size and unique features – the basketball court and swimming pool have 20- to 30-foot ceilings – the potential uses could range from a brewery to a sports club to a restaurant/bar and bowling alley. 

 

Since this will be sandwiched in between the Sam Adams Brewery and the Elm and Liberty parking garage it might make a good Sam Adams taproom/restaurant. (They're going to at least retrofit with windows.)

  Because of the building’s size and unique features – the basketball court and swimming pool have 20- to 30-foot ceilings – the potential uses could range from a brewery to a sports club to a restaurant/bar and bowling alley. 

 

Since this will be sandwiched in between the Sam Adams Brewery and the Elm and Liberty parking garage it might make a good Sam Adams taproom/restaurant. (They're going to at least retrofit with windows.)

 

I believe it's being converted to apartments by grandin.

I still feel like the Boys and Girls Club building will be gutted and the structure repurposed and added onto. If they're thinking residential it'll need to be wildly altered anyway, so it would make sense to use it as the base for a larger development.

Did anybody attend the Main Street 2-way conversion open house on Wednesday? I wasn't able to attend.... so just curious to hear what was presented/discussed.

 

http://www.urbancincy.com/2016/04/could-main-street-become-two-way/

I could not attend but apparently the city is unwilling to convert Main to two-way because of the traffic levels on the street. They also want to wait for the streetcar to open to see how traffic on Main is or is not affected by the streetcar.

Two-way went down in flames after DOTE took traffic on Reds Opening Day. They said there is too much traffic on Main to make it two-way.

 

 

^Seems good. Didn't most of us sniff out that this is probably a ploy to blockade Main as a future streetcar route?

I attended and was very underwhelmed with DOTE's whole presentation. Within the first 5 minutes they made it known that given current traffic levels on Main street, which they recorded twice, it was "impossible" to turn the street 2 way. They could not say if some capacity could be absorbed by Sycamore, nor did they take a serious look at converting Walnut at the same time, to maintain an equal number of north-south lanes. Beyond a 2 way conversion, the City presented few concrete ideas for calming traffic and reducing excessive speeding, which DOTE frankly admitted happens with relative frequency.

 

The only person that really spoke in favor of maintaining Main as one way in expectation of extending the streetcar/light rail was John Schneider. The City people said they'd never heard of his Tunnel plan.

 

Basically, DOTE took a look and decided that inconveniencing bar hoppers getting dropped off at 12th and Neons by 30 seconds was too big a hurdle to overcome, despite requests from the Business Association and many residents.

 

 

I know this may be the unpopular opinion here, but I don't feel it's necessary to convert Main to two-way. Turning the street two-way is one possible tool we could use to slow traffic and make the street more ped-friendly. However, there are lots of other things we could try. I'd like to see some options like adding sidewalk bump-outs at crosswalks, and adding zebra crossings (or perhaps even raised crosswalks) to make them more prominent. I also think people are giving the two-way conversion of Vine Street way too much credit for that street's success. There was a ton of investment that happened on that street, and the success of those businesses is what slowed traffic and make it more ped-friendly. As more businesses open on Main and congestion increases, traffic will naturally slow there too.

Cincinnati Development Fund just posted the before/after photos of their renovation at 1224 Race St:

 

They did a great job with the renovation and the rebuilt cornice looks amazing.

^Very nice.

 

I hope that the cornice is one day reinstated on the building directly north as well.

^Agreed. You're talking about 31 W 13th St (<a href="https://www.google.com/maps/@39.1092127,-84.5165989,3a,75y,152.82h,118.51t/data=!3m7!1e1!3m5!1soqcI3u_gtX74igwf9bGVNw!2e0!5s20150701T000000!7i13312!8i6656">streetview</a>). That building is a slightly different architectural style, so I'm not sure what the original cornice would have looked like. Anybody know what kind of cornice would be appropriate on that building?

Those cornice brackets were made by Otis Taylor and are about 4 ft tall. He says they are the largest brackets he's ever made and he has been in business for decades

I don't care for the color scheme, but it does look like a great renovation.

^Same. The olive green looks great with the orange, but that yellow is doing nothing good with those other two colors. Desaturate the yellow by 50% and you'd have a really attractive color scheme.

Whats up with that block and it's lack of retail activity?

 

You would think being right next to Washington Park/Music Hall that it would be lined up to brim like Vine St is with Bars and Resturuants and different retail options. But for whatever reason that hasn't really happened, and I don't understand why?

Retail/commercial has trouble on single-sided streets generally.  Even in Manhattan 5th Avenue goes residential once it hits Central Park. 

That and there are a lot less traditional storefronts than one would imagine fronting the park. If you include the corners catty-corner to the park there are only 11 traditionally designed storefronts along all sides of the park. It's not necessarily the type of built environment that lends itself to a strong retail situation despite being along a fantastic public amenity.

High St. in Columbus is lined with restaurants and retail for the 1/2 mile that it runs next to OSU's campus.  But that situation is much different than Central Park or any park.  There is little retail on Summit or 4th whereas 5th Ave. parallels a half dozen retail-lined avenues. 

Have any of the packet-watchers seen any news on the Central Parkway CMHA or LibertyElm developments? I haven't heard anything in awhile, although I think neighborhood groups are pushing to downsize both of those projects.  :x

Have any of the packet-watchers seen any news on the Central Parkway CMHA or LibertyElm developments? I haven't heard anything in awhile, although I think neighborhood groups are pushing to downsize both of those projects.  :x

 

We live nearby and XUMelanie sat down with the developersa week or so ago.  It sounds like demolition will happen this year and the early project estimates have the project completed some time in 2018-2019.  So, basically we're a ways off.

 

I wouldn't doubt that the OTR Community Council is looking to stop this project and others in the neighborhood.  They've really gone off the deep end lately.  Seems like their leadership is lacking and in some serious disarray.  The extreme elements of the community have taken the opportunity to hijack the organization sadly.

Have any of the packet-watchers seen any news on the Central Parkway CMHA or LibertyElm developments? I haven't heard anything in awhile, although I think neighborhood groups are pushing to downsize both of those projects.  :x

 

We live nearby and XUMelanie sat down with the developersa week or so ago.  It sounds like demolition will happen this year and the early project estimates have the project completed some time in 2018-2019.  So, basically we're a ways off.

 

I wouldn't doubt that the OTR Community Council is looking to stop this project and others in the neighborhood.  They've really gone off the deep end lately.  Seems like their leadership is lacking and in some serious disarray.  The extreme elements of the community have taken the opportunity to hijack the organization sadly.

 

Im not in the OTR community loop but I'm curious who the extreme elements are. Is it NIMBY folk or a resurgence of the homeless advocates of old or something else entirely?

It's mostly hardcore preservationists who want to act like OTR is Disneyland and not a functional urban city. They say that because a these developments are taller than their immediate neighbors, they are "too big" and must be downsized. Of course, anyone who knows about the history of OTR knows that smaller buildings were replaced with bigger ones in the past. And there are plenty of really tall buildings at random places in the neighborhood.

 

There is definitely a "social justice" aspect to it as well. OTRCC was trying to insist that the developers pay living wages to the construction workers which is really outside the bounds of an architectural review.

The irony of all this is that the streetcar was developed to reinvigorate the dense walkable urban core of the city but all we can get through are low density townhomes like the ones on Elm Street.

 

The former H&R Block at 14th & Main: