The government's eminent domain power is just one example of the multitude of laws that require individual citizens to cede some of their rights or power to make independent decisions for the greater good.  These kind of laws correct for the fact that individuals make decisions based on the cost/benefit to them and cannot account for the true cost of their actions to the community.  Environmental laws like anti-leaf burning ordinances or anti-dumping laws are obvious examples. 

 

Individuals have the right to own property and use it as they see fit, subject to the limitations imposed upon that right by society.  Zoning restrictions, building codes, noise ordinances, and the like, are designed to prevent an individual's self-centered decisionmaking process from negatively impacting the community.  I may love the ceaseless wail of a flourescent orange air horn on a five-story mast.  That does not mean I have the right to build and operate one anywhere I choose.  If society condemns my land use, my right to use the land is checked.  Similarly, you may want nothing more than a Hardee's with a drive-thru, but that does not mean you have the right to build and operate one anywhere you see fit.

 

But where does society get its authority to restrict the rights of individuals?  Most importantly, it largely prevents the killing of individuals to gain ownership of their land and possessions.  If it wasn't for society and the resulting government, if I lived next door to your Hardee's and the headlights of the cars in the drive-thru kept me awake at night, I could just kill you, bulldoze the structure, and plant some grass and a couple of trees there.  If you think about that, eminent domain doesn't seem so bad.

Well if anyone has followed my comments, they would notice that I support eminent domain, even in controversial cases like Norwood.  I think it was terrible that the former land owners won their case.  If I was in their situation I would have been more than happy to sell my property for twice, three times as much as it was worth for the betterment of the community.  I think older cities and communities need eminent domain to compete with newer sprawl.  If the inner core can't revitalize there regions with new development within reason, how can you sit back and bitch about sprawl?  Yes I know their are still pockets of land available for the taken over other built out properties but some parcels are more desirable.

Cincinnati land seizure overturned

Calhoun Street properties not blighted, judge rules

BY STEVE KEMME | [email protected]

January 27, 2007

 

CINCINNATI - Using the Norwood eminent-domain case as a model, a state appeals court Friday nullified Cincinnati's seizure of two parcels on Calhoun Street in Clifton Heights and declared the city's eminent-domain ordinance unconstitutional.

 

The ruling reverses a lower-court decision that upheld the city's right to take the properties.

 

http://news.enquirer.com/apps/pbcs.dll/article?AID=/20070127/NEWS01/701270432/1056/COL02

We lose Inn The Woods, but keep Hardy's and Arby's...gah.

 

What a mess this will be.

 

Does this can the projects in development for those former sites?

We lose Inn The Woods, but keep Hardy's and Arby's...gah.

 

Nope...not really both bldgs that Hardy's and Arby's had are now past the point of repair...and Arby's has actually reopened just up the street (across from Chicago Gyro's).  So this is obviously a positioning strategy to get the most out of a lawsuit that I'm sure is coming.  I will now no longer go ANY Arby's for some time!!!  I would say the same for Hardy's but there really aren't any around anymore!

I won't eat at Hardees because I still hold a grudge over them for blocking the bathroom during the Pumpkin Show in Circleville. I could never give up Arbys though. Its just too hard to find roast beef like that anywhere else.

We lose Inn The Woods, but keep Hardy's and Arby's...gah.

 

Nope...not really both bldgs that Hardy's and Arby's had are now past the point of repair...and Arby's has actually reopened just up the street (across from Chicago Gyro's).  So this is obviously a positioning strategy to get the most out of a lawsuit that I'm sure is coming.  I will now no longer go ANY Arby's for some time!!!  I would say the same for Hardy's but there really aren't any around anymore!

 

All that can happen now is either the city appeals to the supreme court of ohio which is a discretionary appeal that they may not hear or Clif Cor, the people who own the properties can sue for attorney's fees.

Damn judges...  Between this and the Norwood case, I am pissed off.  I was behind both eminent domain projects.

I read this news story yesterday and as a resident of the area was most interested.

 

So what does mean now?  Unfortunately, it looks like if Acropolis Chili and Inn The Wood had continued the fight they would still be open.  I miss both businesses.

 

What's going on up there, though?  Hardee's has been closed for 5 years or so and there is already another Arby's.  Why are these really shitty looking buildings still sitting there?  Is this whole project dead in the water?  If that is the case, this area lost a good bar, a UDF, and several restaurants for nothing.

 

It lost the UDF?  Isn't that past where the university was taking property?  I must have misunderstood what was involved...

 

It lost the UDF?  Isn't that past where the university was taking property?  I must have misunderstood what was involved...

 

Not the UDF closer to Ludlow, that's still there.  The UDF on Hartshorn, right across from Inn The Wood.  It was one of the first things to go, but perhaps it closed on its own?  Not sure, they seemed to do great business.

 

Yeah, that's the one I meant...didn't remember the street name...hmm - wonder why they closed...they weren't part of the project, were they?

It also lost a great replacement project that would have increased the vitality and continued the revitalisation of the area. It's no secret that Cincinnati had many blighted areas, neglected for decades as the middle/high-incomed moved outward.

 

And now when we want them back, we hawk that it isn't good for the area? And now with this mess, these blighted properties are just going to sit abandoned that much longer.

I imagine the project will end up going forward - it'll just cost more money to acquire the property is all...

 

I think this one is dead, I can't remeber if the city changed the zoning on the property while this was going on.  the last thing we need is more drive through resturaunts.

Why not work around the buildings that are left - this is just greed by the one group that owns the former Arby's and Hardee's.  I would have been more sympathetic toward Inn the Wood or Acropolis fighting this.  It seems to me if/when they get financing there is still a lot of space to build on, and this was never one contiguous block of development.  Again, however, I keep thinking why blight the area until you are really ready to break ground?

City loses Clifton Heights eminent domain case

Cincinnati Business Courier - January 26, 2007by Dan MonkSenior Staff Reporter

 

Hamilton County's First District Court of Appeals has struck down a portion of the city of Cincinnati's eminent domain ordinance, dealing a major blow to a $100 million Clifton Heights condo project.

 

The ruling prevents the city from taking two parcels held by Clif Cor Co., a real estate partnership that owns two parcels in the Calhoun Avenue business district. That's where the Clifton Heights Community Urban Redevelopment Corp., or CHCURC, has been trying since 1999 to build McMillan Park. The $100 million development was supposed to bring hundreds of new condominium units and several new retailers to the business district south of the University of Cincinnati. Today, the district stands empty, most of its buildings demolished.

 

http://cincinnati.bizjournals.com/cincinnati/stories/2007/01/22/daily58.html?surround=lfn

From earlier, they are having issues with the eminent domain thing. Meanwhile, a very desirable piece of property sits vacant.

The Cincinnati Business Courier reported today (Print Edition) that a hotel is in the works for the corner of Vine and Calhoun.  The full story is posted in another thread, but I thought I'd share some of the specific details here:

 

-150 room hotel

-400 space parking garage

-mix of retail and office

-Gold's Gym

 

 

Oh, and on another note...The property across the street that is tangled up in the eminent domain battle (Hardy's & Arby's), is being cleared and prepped for grass.  That is everything except the two properties...I think the area will look much nicer with grass in place of the graffiti covered rubble that was left behind from the original site prep.  I wouldn't expect this to be permanent, but I'm sure CHCRUC would like to clean up the image a bit while they regroup.

I noticed that they put down straw...hell it already looks nicer. I never would have expected a hotel and Gold's Gym. Sounds good.

I met with the CHCURC guy a year and a half ago and he mentioned that a boutique hotel was in the workds for that site but until I here a name attached to this this is dead to me but I'm eagerly awaiting that news.

Finally! Now if we can get the other holes in the Calhoun Street area filled...

I hope its not a golds gym it'll flop. theres no way they can compete with the rec center (a pool, jacuzzi, gianormous basketball court the size of like 6 regular ones, non-stop equipment for like a mile lol) I have to say getting my alumni rate there was the best thing I've done recently and a gold's would have to try really hard to match their rates and quality

UC and OSU's gyms are making the Ping Center at OU look like a dirty sock.  No doubt the the Ping Center sent shivers up spines back in 1996 but it just shows how outrageous the facilities arms race is getting with universities.  The Ping Center's running track is 1/10th mile and is responsible for the shin splints I nursed the whole time I was a student there.  It had 90 degree turns and I could never make myself slow down enough to avoide messing up my legs.  Also the place is big but the free weight room is about the size of BP with a Subway in it. 

 

That said a lot of people at any university are anti-campus and choose not to use the resources included in their tuition and fees and so between them and people in the neighborhood there might be enough people.  That goes for companies too, where people choose not to use campany workout facilities. 

There really isn't another non student gym in that area outside downtown.

Actually there is some kind of old YMCA over on I think McMillan toward Highland Ave.  I've been in it but it was in the evening in the winter and I didn't drive so I can't really remember where it is.  It's got one of those old wood floor basketball courts with a metal running track hanging from the ceiling where a bouncing basketball echos like crazy.  It's also got some old racquetball courts that I remember you can view from that running track.  It has a newer basketball gym and probably some weights but I didn't see them.   

I think you can use UC's Rec Center if you're not a student. It just costs a lot. But a Gold's Gym would definitely be nice.

^^ Is that that community center on Eden and, maybe, Univeristy??

The Rec Center? No, this is the Rec Center (behold!).

 

 

Williams Y is the one of McMillan near St. Ursula. It is a decent adult only facility, though a Gold's in Clifton could be its death-knell since it lost a bunch of people to the Gold's at Cornerstone in Norwood. Anyone heard anything about development at the old Friar's club which abuts the McMillan/Calhoun strip?

Why not a first run movie theater?  even a small one would do well

Why not a first run movie theater?  even a small one would do well

 

Agreed...It's been my stance that a nice stadium seat movie theatre in the inner city (downtown/uptown) would do a killing.  But I would prefer it locate downtown somewhere.

Well Newport has 20 screens right across from downtown so I don't know how that would do.  Maybe an indie movie theater though.

^esquire is right there on Ludlow

 

but a small first run movie theatre right around UC would probably do very well.  Newport is pretty far away from UC if you live on campus and don't have a car.

What happened to that shuttle bus that we voted for an $8/quarter increase in tuition for in spring 2005? The shuttle would have run to Newport amongst other places.

up here at osu, there is lennox, which is a huge theatre similar to newports.  we also have drexel gateway which is a smaller theatre that shows smaller budget films as well as big bidget films and does very well.  Also, there is Arena Grande in the Arena District which does well also so if it can be done here, it can be done in Cincy as well, although in Cincy the university is closer to dt than osu is here.  but still......it seems to me uc def. needs a theatre withn walking distance. 

What happened to that shuttle bus that we voted for an $8/quarter increase in tuition for in spring 2005? The shuttle would have run to Newport amongst other places.

 

that money is a contributing source of funding for the free metro

^ i don't think that is quite accurate. It is my impression that the shuttle service will continue, including the shuttles to mt. adams, mainstreet and newport, along with the free metro service.

Judge orders Cincinnati to pay fees

Restaurant owners awarded $335,000 in eminent domain case

 

BY STEVE KEMME | [email protected]

 

Cincinnati must pay $335,000 in attorney and witness fees to the owners of two fast-food restaurants in Clifton Heights who successfully challenged Cincinnati's right to use eminent domain.

 

That's the ruling by Hamilton County Common Pleas Judge Ralph Winkler, whose written decision included a stern scolding of Cincinnati for the way it tried to take the owners' properties.

 

http://news.enquirer.com/apps/pbcs.dll/article?AID=/20070731/NEWS01/707310387

I just would like some closure with these a-hole companies so that this project can potentially move forward.  Congratulations big corporate restaurants, you've succeeded in taking hundreds of thousands of dollars from taxpayers so that your buildings can continue to sit vacant.  Well done!

Looks like we can finally get that barren hole known as progress developed!

 

I wonder if it will be the same developers...

I just would like some closure with these a-hole companies so that this project can potentially move forward.  Congratulations big corporate restaurants, you've succeeded in taking hundreds of thousands of dollars from taxpayers so that your buildings can continue to sit vacant.  Well done!

 

wasn't corporate resturaunts, they were only the tennants.

^What I'm saying is that two large enterprises (Arby's and Hardee's) are the ones receiving this windfall and the taxpayers expense.  We should all feel much more secure about the eminent domain precedents that have been set that essentially take from the taxpayers to pay those large entities.  Everyone else sold their property and most likely for a healthy sum.  The same can be said in nearly EVERY eminent domain case.

 

It would be an example of the law of unintended consequences.

no they aren't, Clif Cor is the enitity owns the property, they will be receiving the money.  Actually hardee's had been paying the lease on the property long after they had pulled out of the cincinnati market.

The people that ran the restaurants owned them as franchises. They lost a hell of a lot of business in this battle, and as much as I don't care for fast food being on Calhoun, I side with the Hardees and Arbys on this. The city shouldn't have tried to take private land and sell it to another private entity.

I believe that Hardee's had shut down before this process even took place...I could be wrong though.  I know that it was probably wrong for the city to go about this situation in this manner, but damnit ENOUGH IS ENOUGH already in my mind.  Suburban communities get away with murder in terms of exclusionary zoning practices and what not...and the city can't even try to accumulate land in order to redevelop a piece of property for a higher use.  I am just getting quite fed up with all these precendents and lawsuits that continue to screw the inner-cities around the country!

 

Hell suburban communities can limit a gas station to a tiny a$$ sign or regulate against billboards and what not...but the City can't even get the plethora of bench billboards, plastic newspaper stands and what not cleaned up without a bloody battle.  I would just like the legal system to error on the side of inner-cities for a change!

On the other hand, if you're being given a large sum of money and it makes financial sense to sell, you need to leave. You shouldn't be forced to but you should just do it, because there's no sentimental value in a fast food restaurant. How much were they offered?

 

 

 

 

On the other hand again, if you own property, you sorta, ya know, own it, and at least according to the fifth amendment, your private property shall not be taken for public use without just compensation...and even though Kelo says an increased tax base is a public use, I don't imagine that precedent is due to last very long - though hey, I could be wrong...

 

The people that ran the restaurants owned them as franchises. They lost a hell of a lot of business in this battle, and as much as I don't care for fast food being on Calhoun, I side with the Hardees and Arbys on this. The city shouldn't have tried to take private land and sell it to another private entity.

 

I believe both resturaunts were closed, but still paying their leases when the litigation began.