The sheet cake that sat on a table at the Legal Aid Society of Greater Cincinnati Monday afternoon was almost as big as the smiles of the people waiting to eat it.

 

Scrawled across the top of the cake in red icing were the words, "We Shall Not Be Moved."

 

It was a fitting message for English Woods tenants who were celebrating both Martin Luther King Jr.'s birthday and saving - for now - their 700-unit public housing complex from being demolished.

Thanks for the post. You can see my replies on SSP. I can't provide a link, but fortunately everyone who has registered so far is also a SSP member.

Fourth Street rebuilds image as residential

Offices becoming posh condos

By Ken Alltucker Enquirer staff writer

 

Fourth Street in the heart of downtown has long been Cincinnati's hub of retail and commerce. But developers are betting that many will want to live along the bustling street, too.  Development firms are working to transform the long-vacant McAlpin's store and the nearby Fourth National Bank building into luxury condos.

 

Some real estate analysts see the street's collection of older office buildings as prime candidates for apartment or condominium conversion.  "Just 10 years ago, nobody would have believed these conversions would take place on Fourth Street," said Bill Schneller, a CB Richard Ellis broker.

 

"People didn't live downtown, other than in a few apartment buildings. But the trend seems really strong," he said.  The rush to build condos on Fourth Street and along other pockets of downtown is driven in part by the economics of real estate.  Older office buildings rich with architectural touches such as the Fourth National Bank building can no longer fetch lucrative rental rates as businesses gravitate to more modern, amenity-rich office buildings. Developers and property owners see retooling old office buildings as apartments or condos as a way to make more money.

 

Read full article here:

http://news.enquirer.com/apps/pbcs.dll/article?AID=/20051026/BIZ01/510260316/1076/

This would be an awesome area of DT to live!!

ooo those look nice

it would be awesome to live there

What does the Polk Building look like?

I checked and I don't have a good one that isn't hidden by trees. There's a small pic on the Huff Realty website:

http://www.huff.com/web/Builders/Bio/ParkPlace.asp

There is no sense in keeping them there if they are only 1/3 occupied. The town homes look nicer anyway.

Interesting article on Section 8...I'll keep an eye on this story and post updates on the recommendations.  From the 11/9/04 Cincinnati Post:

 

 

Housing program is under review

By Mark Hansel

Post staff reporter

 

A group formed to investigate housing in Cincinnati is expected to make recommendations tonight on how to improve a controversial housing voucher program.

 

The Housing Advisory Council -- made up of members of Cincinnati City Council and the Cincinnati Metropolitan Housing Authority, and community leaders -- is working on ways to more equitably disperse the voucher program, commonly known as Section 8, across the city.

 

http://www.cincypost.com/2004/11/09/hous110904.html

An update on last night's meeting, from the 11/10/04 Enquirer:

 

 

Housing policies proposed

Report draws praise and criticism

By Gregory Korte

Enquirer staff writer

 

Cincinnati City Council members lauded the final report on its first-ever comprehensive regional housing policy Tuesday night, but skeptics said it didn't go far enough to increase homeownership and reduce subsidized housing.

 

The Housing Advisory Council's recommendations include education for first-time homeowners, better relationships with landlords, and the use of city money to help acquire new sites for subsidized housing in affluent neighborhoods.

 

http://www.enquirer.com/editions/2004/11/10/loc_housing10.html

I've been saying this for years...from the 11/22/04 Cincinnati Business Courier:

 

 

Critics blast Section 8 patterns

Vouchers said to concentrate housing

Dan Monk

Courier Senior Staff Reporter

 

Changing demographics and perceptions about crime in Cincinnati's West Side neighborhoods might produce a backlash against the local agencies that administer federally subsidized housing programs.

 

"We're not going to take this stuff any more," said Paul Rudemiller, director of the Camp Washington Community Board Inc. "They are destroying the market for people who want to buy houses and live in them."

 

http://cincinnati.bizjournals.com/cincinnati/stories/2004/11/22/story1.html

Some recommendations...from the 11/25/04 Enquirer:

 

 

Council approves policy to push spread of low-income housing

By Gregory Korte

Enquirer staff writer

 

Cincinnati City Council adopted as policy a report advocating that low-income housing be spread out into wealthier areas of the city and county.

 

The final report of the Housing Advisory Council calls for the city to track Section 8 subsidized housing vouchers in high-concentration neighborhoods, crack down on predatory lending practices and boost enforcement of building codes.

 

http://news.enquirer.com/apps/pbcs.dll/article?AID=/20041125/NEWS01/411250370/1056/news01

I liked the 11/25/04 Cincinnati Post article better:

 

 

City wants housing dispersed

By Kevin Osborne

Post staff reporter

 

Cincinnati officials approved a regional housing policy Wednesday aimed at dispersing low-income housing more equitably throughout Hamilton County.

 

The strategy, designed to lessen the concentration of publicly subsidized housing in certain city neighborhoods like Westwood and Price Hill, still needs the approval of Hamilton County commissioners before it can be implemented.

 

http://www.cincypost.com/2004/11/25/hous112504.html

This article talks about the marketing of differing condo units throughout the city.  I am in agreement that we are moving towards a glut of high-end condos in the city, with no middle ground.

 

Renovating Condo Plans

Developers move away from glut of luxury units

Dan Monk Courier Senior Staff Reporter

 

Condominium sales in and near downtown surged to nearly $20 million this year, a 45 percent increase over 2003. But luxury buyers remain cautious about downtown's housing boom, prompting some developers to refocus their efforts.

 

At the so-called "Next" project on Sixth Street, developers are rethinking their approach to a condo conversion inside the former Crowne Plaza hotel, where only one of 78 units have sold. Two blocks south, at The McAlpin on Fourth, a New York designer has been tweaking interiors. Only three of its 68 units have been claimed.

 

On Cincinnati's eastern riverfront, where Towne Properties has sold 13 of 26 townhomes at Twain's Point at an average price of $600,000, the next step is to build lower-priced flats in a pair of four-story towers next spring. And a principal at Middle Earth Developers, one of the most active condo developers in the central business district, said the company is seriously considering an apartment project -- not condos -- as its next downtown venture.

 

Read full article here:

http://cincinnati.bizjournals.com/cincinnati/stories/2004/12/20/story2.html

Regarding Twain's Point:

The units are large -- up to 3,600 square feet -- and offer unobstructed river views.

 

There aren't any buildings blocking the view, that's true, but as the trees in Friendship Park continue to grow, the view will be plenty obstructed.  You'll still be able to see the river, but you just can't plant trees 25 feet above the riverbank, then build condos across the street, and expect to have an "unobstructed view" of the river.

^ I'd much rather live up on the hill for that very reason.

Seasonal views make you appreciate the view even more, maybe it's just me but..

I'm baffled by the number of high-end units ($400k+) that have been included in these condo projects.  $150-200k is the price range most of the "young professional" category is going to be willing to spring for.  Once you get much above that you're depending on dual income households and people later in their careers to buy the units, a demographic category that is perhaps less likely to "take the plunge" into downtown living. 

 

I think a CBD condo development with units in the $150-250k range would sell better than the results Next and McAlpin have seen so far.

^ Agreed.  We need more stable, middle-class housing.

^ Totally agree.  I currently rent downtown.  But condo/house purchase with significant others is on the radar in 2005.  I have a hard time selling a two bedroom condo for $200,000 + downtown to a person who built a 4 bedroom in 'burbs for well under $200,000.  There are very few cost effective solution downtown even though I want to stay.

Seasonal views make you appreciate the view even more, maybe it's just me but..

 

Yeah, you're right, there is great appeal in an ever-changing view.  That's a big part of what's great about living in this part of the world and having four distinct seasons.  Though for me, I think I'd rather have an unobstructed view of the river and watch the rest of the world change around it!

 

I googled up the Twain's Point website, and here's a picture from what I believe is the balcony of the unit furthest to the west, looking south:

 

I don't understand how that can be described as "unobstructed".  The trees are already tall enough to block the river.  For probably 8 months out of the year, you'll see leaves, the park, and traffic on Eastern Avenue in probably 65% of your field of vision - and that's in the units closest to the opening between the trees.

 

Twain's Point has an open house every Sunday (at least they were doing so).  Just show up and act like you have money and they'll show you around two different units.  They are pretty spectacular places - lots of built-ins, big open kitchens with two ovens, tons of closet space, a humongous master suite that I believe is the whole top floor, two balconies, a garage, and an elevator in every unit.  Way up-scale, but they're definitely putting in all the amenities.  You can check out floor plans on their site (just click around - it won't let me link it directly).

Get rid of all section 8 housing and crime will go away

^ That's simplistic, false, and insulting to a lot of people.

 

You can't just get rid of Section 8.  You can tighten the requirements to who has access to that program and you can do a much better job of dispersing section 8 units, though.

pardon me for being insulting but the section 8 down the street is where all the crime occurs IE, drug and prostitute transactions litter piles up  and property values plummet...section 8 should be moved to west chester and mason areas..let those sprawlers deal with it..oh and one other thing.. :behind:

I think my sister is on section 8.  Her boyfriend is a druggie like no other, so I can sort of see where mr.coffee is coming from.

I agree with you guys that section 8 has a dispropotionate amount of criminals and losers (compared to the general population) who cause all kinds of problems.  I'm just speaking up for the vast majority--who aren't criminals and who aren't losers.

 

Mr. Coffee, perhaps you wouldn't encounter the problem you're talking about "down the street" if section 8 wasn't quite so concentrated?

I agree, section 8 should be gone! 

^ And replaced with...what?

 

Anyway, we're getting off topic here as the meeting is about much more than section 8.  Please reply to:

UO: Cincinnati housing program is under review

 

Replaced with BUMS getting off their ass and working for a living.

^ That's retarded.  "Section 8" doesn't mean people sitting at home on their asses and not working (maybe in a few cases that can be cited, but not as a whole).  The vast majority of section 8 voucher holders work full time.  But your contept for the poor doesn't surprise me.

 

It's easy to think of people on section 8 as people who don't work, just like it's easy to think of people who receive welfare as the typical "welfare queen" stereotype.  Simplifying it and brushing them off as lazy makes everyone feel better.

 

You sound like Bill Cunningham, bro.

 

Please reply in the thread I provided, BTW.

I believe I said something like this regarding the poor in Cleveland and got chewed out.  Glad to see someone agrees with my stance on the over stereotyping of the poor.

its easy to say section 8 doesnt work, but I havent heard any better ideas.  Remember if you throw out the section 8 dwellers, youre throwing out kids and elderly into the street. 

Don't they have social security?? no more free handouts! It's crazy seeing ladies with Gucci's and a hair style that could pay a monthly rent payment buying caviar with a food stamp card!

^ That's the typical "welfare queen" stereotype.  That's not the norm by any means.

All the folks I've known who have been on food stamps or received Section 8 housing were not people spending money on Gucci and caviar, they were spending it on 2nd or 3rd hand coats for the kids and spaghetti.

BS and you know it..that is the old commie line you read straight out of the manifesto....the kid part is cute LOL

Dude, I have friends who spent time on the dole - it's not BS, and I know it.

You have friends??? :-D JK It is only my opinion you can agree or disagree.I am involed in social work and I am on the front lines...there are some genuine people who can and should be given assitance,the physically and mentally handicapped and elderly..thats it!! everybody  else should not get squat.

So if, say, someone works 70 hours a week, has a couple of children and doesn't make a living wage then they shouldn't get ANY assistance?

In what capacity do you work "on the front lines"? I'm suprised to hear such simplistic generalizations from someone thus informed.

70 hours a week doesnt pay the bills? they should work 80 hours a week or look for a better job. Better yet stop having kids if you can't afford them.

Dude, I have friends who spent time on the dole - it's not BS, and I know it.

 

Yep I used to hang out with kids on section 8 and food stamps back in my school days.  They used to take the food stamps to 7-Eleven and by pototo chips, beer and cigarettes with them, then the clerk would give them change in cash which they would use to buy drugs. 

 

Thank god I grew up and moved away from that shiit.

Are some people genuine?  Sure, absolutely.  But don't feed me the line that most are, the welfare system is so abused it is sickning.  I have personallly known people that don't get married because one collects food stamps, section 8 housing and the boyfriend gets a free ride because of his girlfriends status.  It they got married she would lose her welfare bennys!

I love how anecdotal evidence has suddenly become fact.  Oh, well...I tried.

70 hours a week doesnt pay the bills? they should work 80 hours a week or look for a better job. Better yet stop having kids if you can't afford them.

 

Yes, because 100% of jobs pay a living wage and there is an infinite supply of "better" jobs, right?

 

Yep I used to hang out with kids on section 8 and food stamps back in my school days. They used to take the food stamps to 7-Eleven and by pototo chips, beer and cigarettes with them, then the clerk would give them change in cash which they would use to buy drugs.

 

Well, the clerk is a criminal and both the clerk and the kids are guilty of fraud.  I know this goes on, but your anger seems to be directed at the program itself instead of the criminals abusing it.

 

Let's not throw the baby out with the bath water here.  I mean, hell, capitalists commit an awful lot of fraud and they abuse the system too.  Should we abandon capitalism?

P.S> Not that I expect anyone to actually bother to read these, but here are some books that make for some interesting reading:

 

The Working Class Majority, Michael Zweig

White Trash: Race and Class in America, Wray and Newitz (eds.)

Prisoners of the American Dream, Mike Davis

The War on the Poor, Randy Albeda

Welfare Realities, Bane/Elwood

Working But Poor: America's Contradiction, Levitan/Gallo/Shapiro

The War Against the Poor: The Underclass and Antipoverty Policy, (I forget the author)

Nickel and Dimed, Barbara Ehrenreich

 

No, these are not far-left commie propaganda rags, BTW...

Well, Barbara Ehrenreich is pretty damn leftist...but Nickel and Dimed is a really funny read, if nothing else...

^ Well, yeah, she's definitely liberal but she's not commie-lefty.

There were some issues with Section 8 where I used to live in Cincinnati (Newtown -- River Hills Subdivision).  A lot of the long-time residents hated the thought of people under the Section 8 program moving into the neighborhood because of the fear of lowered property values for not only those living in a government-bought house, but also their own house.  When we were planning to move, our neighbors begged us not to sell out to Section 8.  We didn't, and actually got a pretty decent price for the house ($88,000 but it had a furnished basement and two bathrooms, one of which was added a year before we moved).  Never had any problems with any of the neighbors who were living under Section 8 though, most that were in our neighborhood (approx. 4 houses) were just trying to make a decent living and were very friendly, at least from my perspective.

Grasscat, I'm with you here.  Bringing the discussion back to Section 8 in particular, to say that we should get rid of it is pretty insensitive.  Believe it or not, there are hardworking people out there who need Section 8 because they can't afford other rents.  And I would argue the reason they need subsidized housing is that our system of capitalism drives rents up and keeps uneducated, minority persons in low wage jobs.  We have such a crazy real estate market, where land is appropriated by capitalists for purely financial gain, and this behavior drives low income rents up as well.  So people need to work more, or get a better job, you argue?  Well as Grasscat said, they ARE working, and it's a misconception that they're not.  As for getting a better job, where would you work if you were a 28 year old black woman with only a high school education?  I have a college degree, and I still have a hard time getting a job that pays over $10 an hour.

 

My point is that so much of this is circumstance -- stuff beyond people's control.  We Americans don't like to buy into that, we like to believe in the rags to riches story...but given the constraints and obstacles working against people, I don't think it's reasonable to expect that.  So Section 8 is in place as a safety net, a "temporary" shelter for those who cannot otherwise afford it. 

 

Yes, I agree that the suburbs should have to shoulder their share of the Section 8 burden....but I imagine the political pressure against that is enormous.  I think the solution is just what the city is attempting -- dispersal.  Have we ever tried keeping Section 8 in low concentrations, spead throughout a city?  No.  It deserves a try.

 

And one other thing -- if you find yourself loathing welfare, Section 8, or whatever else and arguing strongly against it, I urge you to read a book on the subject before you really pass judgment.