Which lot are we talking about?

 

For reference, the St. X lot has 147 spaces that are $150/month. That's $264,000 in monthly passes. I believe that lot goes to hourly parking outside of certain hours meaning all spaces then generate revenue above and beyond that $150/space/month. Then there are big events where they'll charge $20 to park. I remember hearing that lot alone pulled in something like $750,000 annually.

 

The Joseph lot has 239 spaces at $155/month. That's $444,000 in monthly passes plus whatever they make in additional hourly/daily revenue above that.

 

As for your example, 209 East Court has 44 spaces that are $120/month for monthly pass income of a max of $63,000 plus whatever they get in hourly and daily rates above and beyond that.

 

Many lots are owned by families that own a bunch of them and they've built businesses that pull in hundreds of thousands or millions with very little risk. As much as I hate surface parking it's an incredibly intelligent business move to own it since it's essentially an annuity that you might be able to sell off for a giant lump sum at some point in the future.

I don't mean to argumentative, but do any of you have any actual numbers for parking?

 

No, I haven't looked at actual tax records for those parking lots, but it's hard to believe that they aren't printing money.

 

Take for example, 209 East Court St. Most all of the spaces are monthly and I think they are still $60.

 

The property is 8000 square feet and that translates to about 30 cars. It is assessed at 862000 and even with half of that being tif, the taxes are 29000.

 

It requires snow and debris removal, some security, blacktop and striping and if there were hourly parkers, attendees.

 

If all 30 spaces in that lot are occupied by people with $60 monthly passes, then he's only bringing in $21,600 in revenue, which seems unlikely since that's less than his tax bill. The owner probably makes more money from people paying the $5 daily rate and/or jacking up the daily rate during special events, Bengals games, etc. But that's also in the CBD which is a bit different than the lots in Pendleton.

 

Let's take for example, the lot at 316 Elliott Street in Pendleton which is owned by Arnold S. Levine. His tax bill for that lot is $5,600/year and the lot holds 40 cars. I'm making up the following numbers but bear with me: If he rents out only 30 of those spaces to monthly parkers and charges $40/month, then he's making $14,400/year in revenue, which is plenty to pay his taxes and resurface the lot every few years, and still make a good profit. That's not including any money that lot makes from hourly/daily parkers and special events.

 

And that's just one lot in the sea of parking that exists between Alumni Lofts and Reading Road. I just looked on Google Maps and I counted 530 parking spaces in those two blocks (Reading to 13th, Sycamore to Broadway). And that's even considering that many of those lots don't use the space as efficiently as possible. If one owner bought several of the adjacent lots and combined them, you could redesign the traffic flow to be more efficient and probably add another 30 spaces or so.

This would all work itself out with a more sensible land tax versus the skewed property tax system we have today which rewards neglect and demolition by reducing the tax burden despite the amount of public services, utilities, and infrastructure serving the property.  It sounds like the MSD fee is one avenue for doing this, at least for sewer, since the amount of runoff is the same if it's a paved parking lot or a 100 story skyscraper.  Still, that doesn't mitigate the deal such lots get for the city streets, sidewalks, police and fire protection, water lines, and other utilities that are in place and not being used. 

The Business Courier reports that the remaining 6 unsold condos in 3CDC's Parksite building have been bought by JBN Investments LLC, who will lease them out as apartments. Towne Properties will be hired to do the day-to-day management.

 

“There are a lot of properties to buy, but there is very little inventory for lease,” Oscherwitz [of Towne Properties] told me. “They just felt there was a market for it.”

Minor news I guess, but 15th and Race project is now officially known as, "The Allison" building. Also there will be 3 retail spots available for lease (before it was unknown if it would be just 2).

 

 

Hm....3 seems like too few. How many square feet will they be? Don't want to wind up with a similar situation as The Banks where the retail spaces are too large and therefore suffer long-term from high rent and carrying costs.

I wonder if they are back to the drawing board on that corner building since they haven't started yet on that?  It would make for an awesome corner type market / bodega / even like a UDF with apartments above in a 3 or 4 story building

I don't know if it ever was more than a simple rectangular mass in a larger general massing model.

 

Personally what I feel should happen is that a 4 story building should be constructed on the corner that is integrated into the existing building there to create a large 4 story corner building that is half historic, half new, that has some sort of retail on the ground floor and then has residential units above utilizing the existing circulation core in the historic building to maximize square footage efficiency. That would properly anchor that corner and make use of that historic building nicely.

 

A 1 or 2 story building will leave a portion of the existing building's side wall exposed that wasn't historically exposed and that's a bad choice in my mind. Those side walls are often messy looking and make an area seem unfinished or gap toothed, even if there is a building directly next to it at ground level.

Yeah I was thinking something similar to this, obviously not as far flung out and something taller, but something that meets the corner on a corner ;-)

Hm....3 seems like too few. How many square feet will they be? Don't want to wind up with a similar situation as The Banks where the retail spaces are too large and therefore suffer long-term from high rent and carrying costs.

 

4,500 SF in total. Divide that by 3, and you get 1500 SF of space for each retail spot.

 

Also, I was under the impression that 3cdc kept the rent relatively low/affordable compared to the banks.

 

 

Random note, but I like that 3cdc is giving names to these buildings. It's a nice little homage, and gives it meaning I feel like.

Smaller than I would've thought. I guess that makes sense though since they're not super deep since the rear of the first level is parking for the units above.

 

I'm pretty sure 3CDC charges some pretty substantial rent, but maybe someone has real numbers instead of anecdotal evidence which is all that I'd be able to provide.

I always heard that 3CDC charged a percentage of revenue for retail spaces, which made it less risky for the businesses. Success wasn't guaranteed at first so it was nice that businesses wouldn't be on the hook for huge rents if they didn't make a profit. It also incentivized 3CDC to hand-select the businesses that they thought would be successful. I have no idea if they still do this.

I don't care if you use vinyl siding on the back of your building where it's only visible from the alley, but putting it where it's visible from Elm Street...? This shouldn't have been approved like that.

Tear them down!

 

But for real, these suck. They are inappropriate and insulting.

Street pops on main St has shut down permanently. Again the viability of main Street and its retail is incredibly concerning to me.

Street pops on main St has shut down permanently. Again the viability of main Street and its retail is incredibly concerning to me.

 

A few things.

 

1) That's sad. I liked Streetpops and will be sad to see them go.

 

2) It's not really an indication of how Main Street performs. Partially because they were at the very end of the street, so that storefront needs to be a destination not something you pass and think "that sounds good."

 

3) You cannot count on walk-in customers for a popsicle shop to survive. I know they didn't do that, and a vast majority of their business was likely special events. So I don't think this was a case of them closing because of troubles with Main Street.

 

That being said, there needs to be more destination restaurants on Main for the retail to survive. Hopefully Urban Sites is looking at adding some really unique places to Main to solve that problem.

IIRC Fork Heart Knife closed because it got TOO popular in that same space.

^Right, but forkheartknife was a destination. Popsicles are not typically a destination (obviously sometimes people seek out popsicles, I understand that).

It doesn't concern me for the reasons ryanlammi[/member] already mentioned. Didn't Streetpops close their shop every winter anyway? So they were paying rent for a storefront that didn't get used.

 

Several new businesses are getting ready to open east of Vine. The new bar in the former Urban Sites office is getting close, Please at 14th & Clay is getting close, a few new places are making progress on 13th, and a few new places on Main between 12th and 13th have opened recently.

 

I was a little concerned about Second Sunday on Main this year. Two years ago they expanded the festival so that it stretched from 12th to Liberty. This year it struggled to fill that space with vendors and activities. September's event only stretched from 13th to Liberty. Maybe there just isn't as much interest in a low key festival like SSOM as opposed to something more "curated" like CityFlea, which seems to be thriving.

For comparison sake, Boba Cha is on Main just north of Streetpops (north of Liberty, actually) and seems to do okay. They sell a similar niche product, though it might be a bit more of a 'destination' product than Popsicles because "Bubble Tea" is still kind of hard to find in Cincinnati.

 

IIRC Fork Heart Knife closed because it got TOO popular in that same space.

 

IMO this was the most 'hipster' thing to happen in Cincinnati in years, perhaps ever. It seemed like something right out of a Portlandia episode.

 

Did the owners/chef of Fork Heart Knife ever start another restaurant locally or go to work somewhere else? We need hipsters like that to stick around.

Hen of the Woods will open on Main St, one day.....It seems like the owners are currently more concerned about selling their kettle chips to Whole Foods.

So what has happened with that North Point development project?

 

I saw this on the Keep the Courts FB page:

 

Victorious step forward! The City of Cincinnati Department of Community and Economic Development has NOT renewed the Preferred Developer Agreement (PDA) with Northpointe for the 86,000 square feet of city-owned land at E. Clifton and Main St. The PDA previously gave Northpointe, a private, for profit developer the exclusive rights to plan the development this public land with no community leadership requirements. We sent the content below to the City outlining our reasons why we thought the PDA should NOT be renewed.

This is a victory in what will continue to be a long struggle and is the outcome of over a year’s worth of hard work. There is much more to be done. We must ensure that our neighbors in the community are directly involved and lead the shaping of the future of this land. Please stay tuned to join us in creating a broader vision to do development differently.

---------------------

"The following points summarize why our coalition, and the many residents with whom we have engaged, find it improper and detrimental to the community to renew the existing agreement. This contract:

• Includes utilized public recreation and green space with no mandate to retain, protect, and/or invest in these assets, and does so without any form of community approval

• Offers no commitment to racial and economic inclusion

• Prioritizes the creation of market rate housing, which no longer reflects a pressing need in a community where the real estate market is thriving and the affordable housing stock is rapidly diminishing

• Was created and implemented without any public process, neither through Cincinnati Recreation Commission as stewards of this land, nor through Cincinnati City Council

• Has been repeatedly extended with no community consensus; evidence that the vision is too narrow to meet city and community needs

• Involved no competitive bidding process among potential developers

 

For about a year and a half, we have been in constant contact with local residents on this issue. We feel confident that the consensus you seek on this development will not be achieved without the following:

• The land containing the current utilized public space (the plaza, basketball courts, open green, and eco garden) must be excluded from the development deal and retained as public land, to be improved in place.

• A large, diverse public meeting, with primary focus on key stakeholders in close proximity to the site, must be held. Key decisions regarding the remaining land must be driven by community input from this meeting.

• Once overarching goals are determined by this meeting, decisions to follow must be guided by a steering committee that includes representation of these stakeholders and primary users of the space.

• Development of the remaining land must prioritize economic inclusion, and incorporate affordable housing targets that mirror the housing goals outlined in the Over-the-Rhine Comprehensive plan.

The Keep Our Courts/Do Development Differently coalition cares deeply about quality of life in our community and city. Our work on this issue has been in service to a goal we share with the Department of Community and Economic Development—to find success in development that brings significant benefit to our community. We believe wholeheartedly that the path to this goal requires a broadening of engagement and participation among our neighbors, especially those who are most marginalized and underrepresented in the power structures of our city. For this reason, we will continue to advocate for a more open and inclusive way forward."

 

No idea if that has caused this project to stall.

Yet another example of extreme NIMBYism killing a development in OTR.

 

You're either growing or you're dying.

So what has happened with that North Point development project?

 

I saw this on the Keep the Courts FB page:

 

 

 

No idea if that has caused this project to stall.

 

 

Good find. If i was the developer that would cause me to look in a different city all together. Those people appear they will NEVER be satisfied with anything on that land. Yea victory!?

 

NorthPointe has done a lot of work in Cincinnati so I don't think this will cause them to leave. But it's unfortunate that two big developments that have been proposed North of Liberty have now been squashed or downsized because of the community council.

Yet another example of extreme NIMBYism killing a development in OTR.

 

You're either growing or you're dying.

 

Its could get to a point where only 3CDC does developments north of Liberty because all the other developers will be chased away by NIMBY's and anti-gentrification advocates.

Does anyone know for certain that they really had any impact on this?  It seems like I've heard a lot of talk about this project or other version of it but have never seen much in the way of renderings or site plans that I can recall.  And isn't this all in Mt Auburn?

I know someone who did work on the site planning for this project a long time ago. It was very much moving right along towards construction until it was met with extreme opposition.

I guess what I'm trying to say is that the keep our courts things is pretty new and I fell like I'd heard about this project a year or two before the courts issue was raised. I remember it more being a garden/green space issue.

Public basketball courts for unsupervised street pickup ball are a menace. They are a venue for neighborhood turf conflict and man on man conflict. Basketball is a contact sport. 10 players on scholarship in a televised game cannot even keep from punching one another. The notion that disaffected young men are soothed by letting off steam on the courts is pure nonsense.

 

Anything that can be done to eliminate unsupervised basketball courts in edgy locations should be a top priority.

Public basketball courts for unsupervised street pickup ball are a menace. They are a venue for neighborhood turf conflict and man on man conflict. Basketball is a contact sport. 10 players on scholarship in a televised game cannot even keep from punching one another. The notion that disaffected young men are soothed by letting off steam on the courts is pure nonsense.

 

Anything that can be done to eliminate unsupervised basketball courts in edgy locations should be a top priority.

 

That's a little bit much no? Kids want to have fun, and playing basketball, or any sport can relieve that. Being in a edgy neighborhood shouldn't have any reflection of your negativity towards kids wanting to enjoy a pick up game of basketball.

 

 

I hate to come off as rude, as I know OTR is still a predominately African American community, and basketball is an incredibly popular sport, but why the hell do they need so many basketball courts? Their is literally a large court right on East Mickmicken Ave by that park there and it's literally a 2 minute walk from the school. I feel like there is a slight obsession over these basketball courts, and I can't help but feel it's due to OTR having a large African american community.

 

I'm really not trying to turn this into a race matter, it's just an observation more than anything else, because I do feel like there is a large obsession over basketball courts even though there abundant throughout OTR.

 

 

 

In regards back to North Pointe, I do feel like they have some valid arguments. Community input isn't a bad thing, and having affordable housing is also a plus. If I was North Pointe I'd just readjust the project with the courts in tact, rather than go through all this BS.

Yet another example of extreme NIMBYism killing a development in OTR.

 

You're either growing or you're dying.

 

Its could get to a point where only 3CDC does developments north of Liberty because all the other developers will be chased away by NIMBY's and anti-gentrification advocates.

Problem is 3CDC has stated that they do not plan on doing much if any work north of Liberty. 

Public basketball courts for unsupervised street pickup ball are a menace. They are a venue for neighborhood turf conflict and man on man conflict. Basketball is a contact sport. 10 players on scholarship in a televised game cannot even keep from punching one another. The notion that disaffected young men are soothed by letting off steam on the courts is pure nonsense.

 

Anything that can be done to eliminate unsupervised basketball courts in edgy locations should be a top priority.

My son goes to the neighborhood court whenever he has free time and I much prefer he do that than stay in the house and play on his phone.  I'm so sick of people eliminating places for teens to hang out. 

There are courts a block away on McMicken and Walnut. What's the big deal about saving these ones? Grant Playground has room for more, if capacity is an issue. The urban garden also shouldn't be an excuse. That's a great use for vacant land that isn't in demand, but it is about as opposite from "highest and best use" as you can get.

 

I imagine the real opposition to this development is the usual crowd with the usual reasons, which aren't the reasons they're pretending to care about.

Didn't NorthPoint alter their plan to either keep some public space in the development plan? I recall something like that but can't find an actual rendering.

 

But the opposition of this development by the community council actually has very little to do with the courts. If you look on their Facebook page you will find a number of posts about "gentrification" and the need for affordable housing to be part of the development. It's the same way that they tried to modify the Liberty & Elm project by insisting that it should be a higher percentage of affordable housing, that construction workers on the project should be paid a living wage, etc.

The urban garden also shouldn't be an excuse. That's a great use for vacant land that isn't in demand, but it is about as opposite from "highest and best use" as you can get.

 

Yes, this exposes the problem with putting temporary parks or community gardens on vacant land. As soon as you put it there, even if you make it clear that it's temporary from the very building, the community starts to believe that it's "public land" and if you ever try to develop it later, they will claim that it's vital to the neighborhood.

Public basketball courts for unsupervised street pickup ball are a menace. They are a venue for neighborhood turf conflict and man on man conflict. Basketball is a contact sport. 10 players on scholarship in a televised game cannot even keep from punching one another. The notion that disaffected young men are soothed by letting off steam on the courts is pure nonsense.

 

Anything that can be done to eliminate unsupervised basketball courts in edgy locations should be a top priority.

 

So what activity can these kids do that wouldn't be a 'menace' for you. Would you rather them hang out idly on the corner? Race dirt bikes around the neighborhood? This is the attitude of the gentrifier, and it sucks.

I actually don't know much about this particular project, and don't even know if this is City-owned land, but I will stand up in support of basketball courts.  When Washington Park basketball hoops were removed, they said there will be hoops at the new SCPA playground.  But SCPA stops the boys from playing in the evening and even removed the hoops all summer.  Then, since Ziegler Park is under construction, there were no hoops south of Liberty all summer... and trust me they are in very high demand.  Community basketball IS how my son lets off steam and also how he makes new friends.  What else in the whole neighborhood is suitable for teenage boys?  What are they supposed to be doing for fun? Serious question.

Public basketball courts for unsupervised street pickup ball are a menace. They are a venue for neighborhood turf conflict and man on man conflict. Basketball is a contact sport. 10 players on scholarship in a televised game cannot even keep from punching one another. The notion that disaffected young men are soothed by letting off steam on the courts is pure nonsense.

 

Anything that can be done to eliminate unsupervised basketball courts in edgy locations should be a top priority.

 

So what activity can these kids do that wouldn't be a 'menace' for you. Would you rather them hang out idly on the corner? Race dirt bikes around the neighborhood? This is the attitude of the gentrifier, and it sucks.

 

Well, first of all, it is not a menace to me in the least. It is a menace to public safety and the neighborhoods in which these courts are located. It is moronic to provide a battle venue for angry young men. And, I am not impressed that some otherwise well motivated kids with a little extra time on their hands shoot hoops at the nearby playfield. But, bring them down to 13th and Sycamore and let's see how long it takes for a fight to ensue.

 

And, yes, they are safer and less likely to breach the peace standing on the corner. If they can't work and won't study, they are better off there than showing who has the biggest you know what on the basketball court. Best of all, video game time would be good, exercising minds and dexterity and becoming comfortable with technology. Perhaps video game kiosks.

 

And, for the record, I am proud to be a gentrifier. The locals have had 60 years to run Pendelton down. When I arrived 20 years ago or so, ungentrified, no person was safe, old or young, black or white.

 

We will bring it back to be a nice neighborhood including for those who are able to stay. It is not my job to enable them. We do them no favors by enabling their former violent, drug ridden, crime filled lifestyle. Gentrifiers call the police and describe the perpetrators and go to court when the time comes. That is really all it takes.

 

The rest of your post about dirt bikes is a straw man argument and therefore absurd.

^ lol look at the Cleveland threads if you think the dirt bikes thing is a straw man. It's actually a national trend that, unsurprisingly, Cincinnati is evidently late to. Illegal behavior shouldn't be condoned, but basketball isn't a crime, nor is being young and black. People don't have to conform to your lifestyle because you moved in. How imperialist of you. Disgusting, really.

The motorcross bikes aren't a harmless form of self-expression -- it's all extremely dangerous.  Aside from getting run over, I don't want my car or anyone else's hit by some kid without insurance.  Plus, riding with off-road tires on city streets is simply idiotic. 

 

What's more, these packs of motorcyclists are compelled to keep pushing things because they're recording all of it with GoPro's to show off.  The pack of 100 bikes I saw two Fridays ago had a cameraman following them standing up on the front passenger seat of a convertible. 

^ lol look at the Cleveland threads if you think the dirt bikes thing is a straw man. It's actually a national trend that, unsurprisingly, Cincinnati is evidently late to. Illegal behavior shouldn't be condoned, but basketball isn't a crime, nor is being young and black. People don't have to conform to your lifestyle because you moved in. How imperialist of you. Disgusting, really.

 

I am thinking that you do not actually read the posts you reply to.  :roll:

 

What I said was that I would be ok with the young men convening on the corner. That IS their chosen lifestyle and I am ok with it.

 

You, on the other hand seem to want them on the basketball courts to keep them out of site.

 

 

How Imperialist of you! Disgusting, really. 

Folks - can we please focus on the conversation on Over-the-Rhine, and refrain from ad hominem attacks?

Developer plans luxury single-family homes in OTR

Oct 21, 2016, 2:30pm EDT

Chris Wetterich

Staff reporter and columnist

Cincinnati Business Courier

 

A developer plans to build five high-end single-family homes in an Over-the-Rhine parking lot currently owned by the city of Cincinnati.

 

The Cincinnati Planning Commission unanimously approved the sale of five parcels at 1512-1520 Republic Street on Friday to Rhine Development Corp. The properties currently are a gravel parking lot.

 

http://www.bizjournals.com/cincinnati/news/2016/10/21/developer-plans-luxury-single-family-homes-in-otr.html

Yet another missed opportunity for proper infill. This plot of land is about 2/3 the size of Trinity Flats for a point of reference. Trinity has 25 units so we could have gotten 16 or 17 units out of this site. Instead we'll get 5.

 

It's about 10% larger than the plot of land the new apartment building in Mercer Commons on Walnut sits on. I can't find how many units are in there, but I know it's a decent amount.

 

We're selling ourselves short.

Yeah, that square footage per unit is way too large even for luxury accommodations in OTR.  I'm sure they could have decreased the space per unit even down to 2,000 sq/ft and had no issue getting luxury buyers for the units.  3,000 sq/ft is an obscene amount for OTR.

3,000 sf is insulting in this neighborhood.

If there's any "good" place to build single-family homes in OTR, those middle streets like Republic are the place to do it. It's a real shame that we're allowing them on Elm and Race though.

The more single family homes use up these empty lots, the more valuable existing vacant buildings become, and so the more likely that ones with major structural issues will be renovated before they collapse.