Good point. But I look at the alley ways in otr and how they are a preservation asset even though they are just old brick.

 

Hopefully the demolished brick can be used elsewhere in otr rather than just going straight to the rumpke landfill. That's what bothers me the most.

Looking over the packet for the Race street project, I noticed a ton of letters in support from neighbors, plus the following in opposition:

 

- "We believe that the construction of a 6th floor (and the 5th floor to a lesser extent) will adversely impact our ability to grow grass in our common areas." From the Bremen lofts association, who are "adamantly opposed" to construction of the 6th floor. The Bremen folks are also "adamantly against" a 50% parking requirement variance, and they think the new development will bring too much additional noise. I'd suggest that Bremen folks seriously consider moving to Mt. Lookout.

 

- The infamous "OTR Foundation Infill Committee" has, as expected, raised its collective noses. (Has the esteemed infill committee ever come out in support of an infill project? Perhaps they should be renamed the anti-infill committee.) They have a rigorous review process that is based on analysis of things like "Base", "Middle", "Top" and the like. They are obviously very experienced in leveraging existing historical guidelines, as dumb as they can be sometimes, to maintain their victorian vision of an OTR designed for tourists who are interested in living in the past for a weekend. Example drivel from the committee: "The principle façade lacks a top. However, the setback fifth floor does provide a sense of a top from a certain distance but it is likely that an observer on Race will not be able see this and hence will be seen as having no top (Race Street is an important vantage point i.e. street car line)."

 

- And of course, we simply must invoke the mysterious requirements of height of our buildings. The infill committee notes: "The rear building is 6 stories in height and is thus 2-3 stories taller than the buildings to the north (2) and south (3), respectively. This does not meet the guidelines for height."

 

These sorts of comments actually make me sometimes regret living in a historic district. I'd like to modify the entire set of guidelines with a statement that they are only to apply to existing contributing structures. Leave the empty spaces alone to the architects and their owners.

^ and just to get the full picture, 1218 Race, which is proposed to be demolished, is listed as non-contributing because of it's ugly façade, but it is a 130 year old beer hall.

 

What is the interior like today and what has it been used for most recently? From the outside, the facade is definitely "non-contributing" (if anything, those glass block windows detract from the historic district).

 

My friends father owned that building and my band played shows there a few times. The inside is not neat or old or interesting and more or less just looks like most places that have been slowly gutted over the years and re done with hillbilly shitty garbage. So no there isn't much worth saving there. It bums me out when people want to pull that card and stop development where it's needed, but don't seem to do or say anything as thousands of other historic buildings all over the city slowly rot.

I love how the height guidelines act as though the only context is what's IMMEDIATELY next to a structure. There's a five story building literally two buildings away...

 

This shit infuriates me. Why is NIMBYism such a huge thing? What are people so afraid of?I don't get it. Gimmy YIMBYism any day of the week.

The problem with local government is that it attracts nutty personality types.  For every educated and reasonable person there is always some nutty and eccentric individual desperate for attention.  It's all about them, all the time.  They bog down HOA's, school boards, and Cincinnati's community councils. 

Mini-iconoclasts they are... in their heads.

Looking over the packet for the Race street project, I noticed a ton of letters in support from neighbors, plus the following in opposition:

 

- "We believe that the construction of a 6th floor (and the 5th floor to a lesser extent) will adversely impact our ability to grow grass in our common areas." From the Bremen lofts association, who are "adamantly opposed" to construction of the 6th floor. The Bremen folks are also "adamantly against" a 50% parking requirement variance, and they think the new development will bring too much additional noise. I'd suggest that Bremen folks seriously consider moving to Mt. Lookout.

 

- The infamous "OTR Foundation Infill Committee" has, as expected, raised its collective noses. (Has the esteemed infill committee ever come out in support of an infill project? Perhaps they should be renamed the anti-infill committee.) They have a rigorous review process that is based on analysis of things like "Base", "Middle", "Top" and the like. They are obviously very experienced in leveraging existing historical guidelines, as dumb as they can be sometimes, to maintain their victorian vision of an OTR designed for tourists who are interested in living in the past for a weekend. Example drivel from the committee: "The principle façade lacks a top. However, the setback fifth floor does provide a sense of a top from a certain distance but it is likely that an observer on Race will not be able see this and hence will be seen as having no top (Race Street is an important vantage point i.e. street car line)."

 

- And of course, we simply must invoke the mysterious requirements of height of our buildings. The infill committee notes: "The rear building is 6 stories in height and is thus 2-3 stories taller than the buildings to the north (2) and south (3), respectively. This does not meet the guidelines for height."

 

These sorts of comments actually make me sometimes regret living in a historic district. I'd like to modify the entire set of guidelines with a statement that they are only to apply to existing contributing structures. Leave the empty spaces alone to the architects and their owners.

 

I feel if you throw out guidelines your definitely leaving OTR at risk of losing it's character by some really inappropriate designs that would be bound to happen by some developers.

 

I feel OTR has lost so much of it's stock, that you need to create new construction around certain strict guidelines in order to restore it's aesthetic connectivity. That's why I'm a pretty big fan of alot of 3cdc current work (though I wish they could do over the Gateway Garage structure, and the Walnut 16 bit structure) such as the 15th and Race Project, 15th Vine, Empower Media 14th St project. They all look like buildings that belong in OTR, but made from a perspective that reflects our current time and place in history.

 

I feel that if we just throw out the guidelines and leave it to be a free for all we'll get a mix bag of great ambitious looking designs, mixed in with concepts that look ripped straight out of West Chester, and thus damaging OTR's charm in the process. 

 

 

Free for all? No. Less strict guidelines that force mundane designs unless you get lucky and catch the board on a good day? Yes please.

 

This building is a nicely thought out, contextually massed building that would add to that stretch considerably. No reason it should be downsized, made less modern, reduced in height, etc.

While the interior of 1218 Race currently has a drop ceiling, the roof structure that covered the beer hall is barn-like heavy timber and is pretty interesting and unique.  Regardless, it is not protected by the historic district because it is listed as non-contributing

 

Also, since there is parking inside now, they are actually reducing the number of parking spaces.

 

The courtyard is an awesome idea but the 6 stories for that width might be too narrow

 

 

Steiner plans apartments, retail across from Washington Park

 

 

Steiner + Associates, the Columbus-based developer of the $350 million Liberty Center mixed-use project, is working on plans to build apartments and street-level retail across from Washington Park.

 

More below:

http://www.bizjournals.com/cincinnati/news/2017/04/07/steiner-plans-apartments-retail-across-from.html

Findlay Market expands hours

 

 

When Findlay Market, Ohio’s oldest public market, surveys its customers, their No. 1 obstacle to using the market more is that it shuts down at 6 p.m., says CEO Joe Hansbauer.

 

Starting May 3, the city-owned market will begin to address that issue, staying open until 8 p.m. on Wednesdays through at least Sept. 27.

 

More below:

http://www.bizjournals.com/cincinnati/news/2017/04/12/findlay-market-expands-hours.html

Findlay Market expands hours

 

 

When Findlay Market, Ohio’s oldest public market, surveys its customers, their No. 1 obstacle to using the market more is that it shuts down at 6 p.m., says CEO Joe Hansbauer.

 

Starting May 3, the city-owned market will begin to address that issue, staying open until 8 p.m. on Wednesdays through at least Sept. 27.

 

More below:

http://www.bizjournals.com/cincinnati/news/2017/04/12/findlay-market-expands-hours.html

 

Just change the hours from 9am-6pm to 10am-7pm every day

Findlay Market expands hours

 

 

When Findlay Market, Ohio’s oldest public market, surveys its customers, their No. 1 obstacle to using the market more is that it shuts down at 6 p.m., says CEO Joe Hansbauer.

 

Starting May 3, the city-owned market will begin to address that issue, staying open until 8 p.m. on Wednesdays through at least Sept. 27.

 

More below:

http://www.bizjournals.com/cincinnati/news/2017/04/12/findlay-market-expands-hours.html

 

Just change the hours from 9am-6pm to 10am-7pm every day

 

We have been saying that for years. Most of the old school purveyors absolutely abhor that suggestion.

 

Avril-Bleh is the same way.  It is simply not done.

 

Let's not forgot how staying open on Sundays, something which seems mandatory and natural, was met with howls of protest--not that long ago--and threats by many longtime vendors to pull out altogether.

 

Old traditions die hard with many of these people.

This is a nice effort but I don't think staying open late 1 day per week is going to convince many more people to do their grocery shopping there. Hopefully when Market Square opens, which will include a small grocery store and a few specialty merchants, the Findlay Market merchants will gain the confidence to stay open longer hours. I'm glad that many of the restaurant have take their own initiative to stay open later. I'm sure many of the people there to eat would also pick up a few groceries if the merchants were open.

Let's not forgot how staying open on Sundays, something which seems mandatory and natural, was met with howls of protest--not that long ago--and threats by many longtime vendors to pull out altogether.

 

This is STILL a problem in OTR as a whole, how many other hip neighborhoods in the US have over half their restaurants close on Sunday?

 

You pretty much have to go by the university to avoid that in the Cincinnati area... :/

 

I understand the time off thing, they should close on Monday if they want a way off, its a lower volume day anyways.

That should solved when more of otr is developed. As it is their is just a really small core population of establishments mainly situated on race and vine on a few block radius.

Let's not forgot how staying open on Sundays, something which seems mandatory and natural, was met with howls of protest--not that long ago--and threats by many longtime vendors to pull out altogether.

 

This is STILL a problem in OTR as a whole, how many other hip neighborhoods in the US have over half their restaurants close on Sunday?

 

You pretty much have to go by the university to avoid that in the Cincinnati area... :/

 

I understand the time off thing, they should close on Monday if they want a way off, its a lower volume day anyways.

 

Which restaurants are closed on Sunday? All I can think of are Abigail Street (not a high volume restaurant), Zula, Salazar, and Anchor OTR. The other three are all right around the park, and I wonder if that has something to do with it. It's not as simple as snapping your fingers and opening the doors. There's a ton of prep work for these types of places, and anyone who doesn't do a large lunch/brunch crowd is going to really struggle on Sundays.

Let's not forgot how staying open on Sundays, something which seems mandatory and natural, was met with howls of protest--not that long ago--and threats by many longtime vendors to pull out altogether.

 

This is STILL a problem in OTR as a whole, how many other hip neighborhoods in the US have over half their restaurants close on Sunday?

 

You pretty much have to go by the university to avoid that in the Cincinnati area... :/

 

I understand the time off thing, they should close on Monday if they want a way off, its a lower volume day anyways.

 

Which restaurants are closed on Sunday? All I can think of are Abigail Street (not a high volume restaurant), Zula, Salazar, and Anchor OTR. The other three are all right around the park, and I wonder if that has something to do with it. It's not as simple as snapping your fingers and opening the doors. There's a ton of prep work for these types of places, and anyone who doesn't do a large lunch/brunch crowd is going to really struggle on Sundays.

 

I take back what I said, looks like within the last 6 months or so a lot more places are open on Sunday now than their used to be.

I received this email:

 

Support Community + Preservation at Elm/Liberty in Over-the-Rhine

 

Urgent: City Counci Vote on Monday April 24 at 1 PM. 

 

Dear Neighbors,

 

Thank you to all who sent letters and came to hearings over the past fifteen months to voice your concerns with the proposed development at Elm & Liberty street in Over-the-Rhine. This large project is opposed by the Over-the-Rhine Community Council, the Over-the-Rhine Foundation, Over-the-Rhine Community Housing, and the Greater Cincinnati Homeless Coalition. (You can read more about this plan and our concerns below.)

 

The developer’s request for economic benefits in the form of a tax abatement and sale of PUBLIC alleys will be considered by Cincinnati City Council on Monday at 1 PM in the Budget and Finance Committee. We are asking City Council members to postpone approval of these benefits until the developers have made a good faith effort to hear, consider, and respond to the community concerns about these plans. City benefits should only be given when the city residents realize a community benefit in return. At a minimum, the developer must generate more community support from the neighborhood. At this time there is overwhelming opposition.

 

Here's what you can do:

 

1) Attend the committee meeting on Monday. The hearing will be held in the city council chambers on the third floor of City Hall, 801 Plum Street. We are hoping for a large gathering to show the council that there are many concerns about these plans.

 

2) Speak at the committee meeting on Monday. Anyone can speak for two minutes. If you’d like to speak you’ll want to arrive a few minutes early to sign up using a yellow speaker card.

 

3) Send a letter or email expressing your concerns to city officials:

 

[email protected]

[email protected]

[email protected]

[email protected]

[email protected]

[email protected]

[email protected]

[email protected]

[email protected]

[email protected]

[email protected]

 

You can also send one letter to all members of city council at this address: [email protected]

 

4) Express your support on the Facebook event page, found here: http://bit.ly/2nJxJ0F. You may also invite friends and neighbors to join the event using the share button. (If there are changes to the time or date of voting we will update you via the Facebook page.)

 

Please help us ensure that the community has a continued voice in development decisions in Cincinnati.

 

For more information about the community's concerns, please see the summary below.

 

Thank you,

 

Brad Cooper

Matt Deininger

Peter Hames

Danny Klingler

Margy Waller

Jennifer LeMasters Wirtz

 

Background on Elm + Liberty Planned Development

 

You probably know that there is a large new development planned for our gateway corner at Elm + Liberty. The developers of this project, Source3, are seeking economic benefits for the development from City Council. We have concerns about the buildings and the community process for conferring a significant economic benefit from the city to the developer. 

 

We are especially concerned because the benefit was conferred in the form of a valuable zoning change with the understanding that the developers would work with the community on design, size, mass, materials and community benefit issues, before returning for final approval on the plan. The developer has failed to do this.

 

If this developer is able to seek and receive city economic benefits on the basis of a promise they never have to fulfill, all developers going forward will understand they don't have to actually work to address community goals. This would hurt residents of every neighborhoods in our city.

 

The Over-the-Rhine Community Council, The Greater Cincinnati Homeless Coalition, and the Over-the-Rhine Foundation are ALL opposed to this project. Over-the-Rhine is one of the largest and most intact urban historic districts in the country. It is also a community that for decades has stood for an ideal of being a place of diversity -- where people of different backgrounds, income levels, races, and social classes are welcome. Our vision is that Over-the-Rhine will remain a nationally significant urban historic district with an open door to all, not just a few. (See detailed letter from the community council here.)

 

Unfortunately, the proposed project works counter to this vision, and despite the repeated attempts of community members to express and discuss these concerns, the developer has decided to turn a blind eye and a deaf ear and push forward. Among the most prominent community concerns are:

• The developer is seeking a lucrative benefit from the City (a "PD" zoning designation), but is not reciprocating by working with the community meet its vision.
   
  
• NEW While the project originally included a multilevel parking deck behind the apartments, the garage was deleted, at the last minute, and replaced by a smaller surface lot.  That act raised major concerns for businesses and residents in the area. The parking provided will not be enough for residents of the apartments, let alone the commercial customers of the first-floor businesses.
   
  
• The project is not consistent with the principles and stated goals of the community's comprehensive plan or the city comprehensive plan, both plans approved and adopted by City Council.
   
  
• The project will bring a generic and pedestrian architectural design to our beloved historic district, on a prominent gateway corner of Over-the-Rhine less than 2 blocks from Findlay Market, thereby diminishing the sense of place in the district. (See letter from Jennifer LeMasters Wirtz.)
   
  
• Though it is the largest infill project developed here in the last 75 years, there will be NO units of housing affordable to people of very low, low, or moderate income. The project is 100% market rate, with rents ranging from $900 for a studio to $1,700 for a 2 bedroom apartment.
   
  
• The developer has not answered our questions about the target demographics for these units—including whether they might be rented to people who will use them as a weekend place in the city or an income producing Airbnb rental.
   
  
• The project is out of scale with the traditional size of buildings in the Over-the-Rhine historic district.
   
  

We ask you not only to withhold your support of this project, but to stand with us, your fellow community members, in registering your opposition to it.

 

We are not at all opposed to development or to market rate housing. There is plenty of great development going on in our community. We are speaking up for the principles and vision we hold as a community, and insisting that when a public benefit is given to a developer, there be compensating benefits to the community in return.

I walked past the Towne townhomes on Elm this past weekend and noticed how cheap the doors are.  If individual owners eventually replace the doors with custom doors of their choosing, it will go a long way toward breaking up monotony of the block. 

^ its a good point. My wife and I noticed exactly the same thing. We were aghast when they installed them. They're a little better after paint. But it's not the door I would expect to get for an $850K investment.

At that price point if your door is bought off a shelf you did it wrong. And if that shelf is at Lowe's or Home Depot you did it even more wrong.

2 new infill projects for OTR. Both single family homes. As well as market phase 2 and other rehab projects.

 

http://www.cincinnati-oh.gov/buildings/historic-conservation/historic-conservation-board/april-24-2017-staff-report-and-attachments/

Seems like a lot of single family homes. Kinda not into it.

I imagine the developers will see more of a profit that way versus higher density smaller units (the lot is pretty small as well). Similar listing prices for a single family home that close to music hall can definitely fetch 700-800k in otr current market.

The ones in here are definitely not by developers built on spec. These are clients who hired architects for their personal home.

 

I generally don't like single family homes, but the one on the corner of the alley on 15th is on a TINY lot. I honestly don't know if there's really a great way to even use that site for multi-family. I could maybe see 2 units, maybe 3 if you're lucky, fitting onto that site but a single family home isn't bad there. Plus it's a decent looking modern design which I think we need more of in OTR.

 

I don't mind when single family homes fill in one-lot gaps. It's not perfect or ideal, but it's a lot less offensive than when you build a row of crappy townhomes on a site that could have fit 50 units. I'm looking at you Elm Street Townhomes.

Existing zoning often doesn't permit construction of a multifamily on lots where these sorts of multifamilies once stood.  If they do, it's only two units.  As I understand it it's basically impossible to get a permit build a 6 or 8-unit building on a 20 or 25-foot lot, even if that's what stands on either side of a vacant lot. 

Yeah zoning is not set up for new single lot multifamily construction. Which is ridiculous. There's no good reason for it to be restricted other than a dated suburban mentality.

It's very complicated in Over-the-Rhine and throughout much of Cincinnati's neighborhoods because there are so many oddly-sized lots.  A standard 25x90 lot usually only permits a single-family house.  Even in "high density" areas, it's often only possible to do a single-family on some lots. 

 

Also, many Over-the-Rhine lots (and in fact throughout the rest of the city) are oddly shaped or not as big as they look.  A 20x65 lot looks as big as a 25x90 lot to the casual observer but one is almost twice as large as the other. 

http://www.bizjournals.com/cincinnati/news/2017/04/20/exclusive-this-could-be-3cdc-s-next-big-otr.html

 

The project includes three large buildings... and is contingent on getting historic tax credits. If they receive the tax credits, here's how they'll renovate the buildings:

• 1500-1502 Vine - first floor commercial, upper floors office
  
• 1434 Vine - first floor commercial, upper floors office
  
• 1301 Walnut - first floor commerical, upper floors residential
  

Hmm... OK, but I hope they don't start going nuts building out office space. I really do think OTR works better as a residential neighborhood. An office doesn't need to be in a "human scale" neighborhood but it's extremely beneficial for a residence to be.

I disapprove of 1500 Vine being commercial. Should 100% be lofts. I'm cool with everything else though. Office space helps with daytime population which helps most businesses and helps get essential services into the neighborhood quicker since offices pack more people in per square foot than residential.

I think 1500 Vine would make a great hotel

Good to see. The one on Walnut will especially help in bridging the gap between Vine and Main. When are they going to do something with 1410 Vine? I really hope that becomes the beer hall that it use to be.

In my mind I think it's OK these buildings on the NE and SE corner of 15th and Vine will be Office.  Really Vine Street is going to be a corridor for Tech companies with commercial/restaurant/bars below.  There is so much room on the side streets with empty lots and abandoned buildings to add many more residents, and possibly this will induce more people working at these companies to invest some money into the residences on the side streets.

 

There is so much room for development on the 1400 block of Walnut and also on East. 15th there.  I think that is another huge project where they need to build some structured parking behind the Kroger.  Most likely they will tie in a huge Mercer type development there once Kroger builds a new store on CP and Walnut...

On-street parking is going to be difficult in the eastern part of OTR this week. Utility work is about to begin on Orchard Street and "no parking" signs have been posted on the entire north side of the street. Parking continues to be restricted on Sycamore and 13th due to Ziegler Park construction. People are parking in the Ziegler Park garage now, but I think it's just Alumni Lofts residents; I don't think it's open to the public yet.

Urban Sites investing $10 million along OTR’s Main Street

 

 

Urban Sites, a longtime developer in Over-the-Rhine, is redeveloping two properties to add more than 23,000 square feet of office space along Main Street.

 

More below:

http://www.bizjournals.com/cincinnati/news/2017/04/24/urban-sites-investing-10-million-along-otr-s-main.html

It's great to see Main ST finally catching up to the rest of OTR!

http://www.bizjournals.com/cincinnati/news/2017/04/24/major-otr-project-in-limbo-for-at-least-two-more.html

 

“I know the discussions that have gone on. The sides aren’t going to come together any more than they already have,” Murray said.

 

How they voted on the 14-day delay:

 

Yes: Vice Mayor David Mann, council members Chris Seelbach, Christopher Smitherman, Wendell Young, Charlie Winburn

 

No: Council members Kevin Flynn, Amy Murray, P.G. Sittenfeld

 

Absent: Councilwoman Yvette Simpson

 

Sounds like that their might be a chance of this project becoming further in limbo if city council decides to vote no in 2 weeks.

 

I'm in the boat that if this project happens great, if it gets a redesign great. I think both alternatives are fine.

 

Right now, I'm more distressed about this 2 buildings remaining on the block, and fear if the project falls into limbo that those buildings might be emergency demo'd (they look to be in rough shape). I'd really give a round of a applause the otr community council then!

The "community" wants them to chop 8 feet off the height of the building. That really means an entire floor, which probably makes the development unprofitable. 5 stories is a pretty good sweet spot for a building of this size.

 

It's interesting that Yvette didn't show up. "Abstain" is probably the best position she could take from a campaign standpoint, though the worst one from an urbanist standpoint. I'm a little surprised about Winburn and Smitherman - they aren't usually the ones who want to roll out the extra red tape on projects like this.

^Well he apparently doesn't need to build the parking garage anymore, so maybe that could make up for the loss of the floor.  I don't know what his numbers look like.  But the fact is when the parking garage requirement was dropped thanks to the zoning change this project went from being solidly profitable to a grand slam. 

Shouldn't this project at the very least be revisted by the HCB? If nothing more due to the revise design without a parking garage structure (first I've heard about this, seemingly done with a whisper)...

Sorry if this was already posted. Meiner flats, Rosco building on Vine, and the Columbia building have the potential of having become rehabilitated in the 4th Quarter of 2017 if historic credits are approved for 3cdc projects. Columbia building will 34 rental units, and the Meiner building and Rosco building will be commercial and office. Serious amounts of office space popping up it seems like in OTR. Not sure if this is a good or bad thing, but none the less would be awesome to see these buildings restored in such a quick turnaround in the revitalization of OTR.

 

It just concerns me that alot of projects lately have really are heavy focused on Office space, and I'm wondering why is the residential density aspect sort of dimming?

 

http://www.bizjournals.com/cincinnati/news/2017/04/20/exclusive-this-could-be-3cdc-s-next-big-otr.html

I feel like both office and residential are necessary for a healthy neighborhood.

I like the warehouse style windows on the upper floors of the Elm + Liberty development. It seems appropriate for such a large building on a major street. Also, I'm not sure that I'm mad if they scrap a parking garage for a parking lot. The garage was not going to do any favors for Logan Street on the back of the project. It would have made that street really undesirable to invest in. Not that a parking lot will make it super desirable, but at least that can be developed at a later point.

It just concerns me that alot of projects lately have really are heavy focused on Office space, and I'm wondering why is the residential density aspect sort of dimming?

 

http://www.bizjournals.com/cincinnati/news/2017/04/20/exclusive-this-could-be-3cdc-s-next-big-otr.html

 

Residential construction is picking up, not "dimming" by any means. There are significantly more units coming online in 2017 than there were in 2016 and 2016 was a good year for population growth in the core.

 

Office space is good for neighborhoods because it adds to daytime population. Businesses that need a steady flow of people do better in mixed use neighborhoods. So this is a good thing overall.

Landlords collect much more rent per square foot on office space as opposed to apartments.  So if it costs $1 million to renovate a building one way or the other, a landlord will see a higher return with office, and can sell it for a higher price once it's rented. 

 

We see Class B and C conversions to residential all the time if a developer knows they can get higher rent on a new hotel or luxury apartments.  The conversion of Class A space to residential is rare, but we just saw it with the 580 Walnut Building.  That's because Queen City Square stole tenants from a variety of older Cincinnati and Covington office buildings and there was little hope for new ones to appear. 

Urban Sites seems to be focusing on office space around the intersection of 12th & Main which I think is a really good thing. Main Street has mostly had a combination of residential and bar space until now, with a few convenience stores and other businesses sprinkled in. In order for more restaurants and other businesses to succeed on Main, we need more office space filling the upper floors to increase the daytime population here.

Now just to fill in that parking lot....

Having office space mixed in is critical for a healthy restaurant scene, so long as the jobs are well paid enough that employees aren't brown bagging it five days a week.  I don't think Job and Family Services folks go out much more than to the hot dog cart or Subway, which is sad because there's a lot of people in there.  Anyway, central business district eateries tend to be almost entirely lunch focused, many times closing around 4:00.  That almost always requires higher volume lower quality fare.  Restaurants in residential-only neighborhoods also struggle without a lunch crowd that has faster turnover and can draw more people in with the lower prices compared to dinner.  In mixed neighborhoods it's more symbiotic.