Jump to content

Featured Replies

 

  Maybe joseph auto group is on a mission to tear down that entire block for parking..

 

They are. Also, assuming the demo costs are as high as $75k, $8 parking a day for a year with 50 spaces could come close to $75k. The rest of their lot is full pretty regularly.

 

Wouldn't it be difficult to tear down this structure as it is designated historic?

 

Difficult, yes, but not impossible.

  • Replies 1.1k
  • Views 74.2k
  • Created
  • Last Reply

Top Posters In This Topic

Most Popular Posts

  • mcmicken
    mcmicken

    Yes, the Brewery District CURC is working with the Port to salvage them. No current plans for reuse as of yet.

  • Go ahead, demolish your history. Who will care when it's gone? /s   It amazes me that the statement "it would be too costly to rehabilitate" is even used here. Then don't buy it. Find somewh

  • I've been trying to find a photo of the neon that has that particular H we salvaged as well. Word from the demo guys onsite is smokestack is coming down this Friday 6/14. Conventional demolition, no i

Posted Images

I think I remember reading somewhere on UrbanOhio that 1217 Clay Street may be demolished, but I can't find that now. Is that true, or am I mis-remembering?

^^it is going to cost much more than 75k to demolish the Dennison Hotel.

Some shots of the Goetz House and Clifton Natural Foods, which are likely to be demolished:

 

10029616626_05e2e6034b_c.jpg

 

10029618145_19f3103bb9_c.jpg

The signs in the windows were likely written by the developer, not the family who owns the house.  And if "medical bills" are in fact the reason why they have to sell the house, it's a pretty damn good argument for better health care coverage in the United States for small business owners. 

They were trying to sell the house to the developer before any medical issues existed. It wasn't until after the historic designation application was applied for that the father started having health problems. Now they have successfully used the health issues as the reason for selling/demolishing despite the actual order of events.

They were trying to sell the house to the developer before any medical issues existed. It wasn't until after the historic designation application was applied for that the father started having health problems. Now they have successfully used the health issues as the reason for selling/demolishing despite the actual order of events.

 

Yeah, previously they said they needed to sell the property so they could afford to retire.

The property had been for sale for about 10 years.  The owner of adriatico's said he looked at buying it for adriatico's several years ago but that it would have cost him far more than building his new structure down the street.

 

I've heard rumors about 1217 as well. To be turned into parking. 

1606 and 1608 Walnut are being threatened with demolition AGAIN by Freestore/Foodbank.

 

First they want to tear them down for a loading dock and were denied. They they got government funding to put an unsupervised transitional housing facility, going as far as submitting for permits and zoning changes. Now they want to tear them down again.

 

  • 3 weeks later...

 

There are construction fences and an O'Rouke sign around Wilson Auditorium at the University of Cincinnati.

 

 

  • 1 month later...

Looks like the flatiron building at the top of Sycamore St. is being partially if not completely demolished. 

  • 4 weeks later...

In the Uptown area which looks to be changing increasingly to commercial use. Are there plans to redevelop the site? The structure itself looks sound and in good repair in the St-view.

In the Uptown area which looks to be changing increasingly to commercial use. Are there plans to redevelop the site? The structure itself looks sound and in good repair in the St-view.

 

Two buildings (118-120 William Howard Taft) are for sale. Apparently the new owner is going to move into 118 and demolish 120 (the green one) for more parking.

Goetz House was demolished this morning. 

Goetz House was demolished this morning. 

ugh, people are blaming the government & implying the pension fund deficit is behind the demolition.

Guessing WLW listeners.

...umm...how did they even make that connection?

Now it's a streetcar conspiracy....

I keep thinking Rod Serling is in the room.

  • 1 month later...

Looks like 116 W Third St downtown is prepping for demo. Not sure how that works with the attached buildings, but it is fenced off and windows were removed today. Another historic building that could keep downtown unique biting the dust  :-(

 

Same ownership on 108 and 112, so I'm sure those will be applied for soon as well. No loss on 112, but 108 looks decent.

^That sucks. 

That is unfortunate, the building appears to be in decent condition.  I hope that that entire row of buildings is not being torn down to expand that surface parking lot to its left. 

 

The building has had the same owner since 2005.  But that owner owns the 2 buildings between that and the parking lot as well.  I really hope they are not all coming down for more parking... sheesh.

Can almost guarantee it will be additional parking to profit on the 8 Bengals games a year...

If that is the case, then it will be a shame.

 

It really sucks that people can profit more from tearing down buildings for parking lot, than to use an existing building and remodel it for a modern use. 

 

What Downtown does not need is loss of historic 1880's buildings and replaced with asphalt. 

Are these part of an historic district, on the national register, or something?

That's a shame, I walked by that the other day and saw workers going in and out and thought in passing that they were renovating it.

 

I recently posted this photo on my website of that block in 1927. It's tough to tell because things have changed so drastically, but those buildings are down half the block on the left. They have all lost what looked like beautiful cornices.

 

b46_f03_n002-elm-3.jpg

Sucks that they're tearing that place down, but between the road being too wide and FWW, Third St is just a terrible location to do almost anything. The city would be wise to expedite those caps and figure out a way to tie 3rd street to the banks somehow.

A permit was issued to demolish 116 W Third in October 2013

 

No permits applied for on the adjacent buildings.

I moved the discussion about 116 W Third Street into this topic.

The demolition of Davis Furniture (1119-23 Main Street) is on the Historic Conservation Board's agenda today.

Demo'ed this weekend

 

309  MULBERRY ST cincinnati

 

 

 

http://goo.gl/maps/ZuD53

Demo'ed this weekend

 

309  MULBERRY ST cincinnati

That's truly a shame as it looks structurally sound in the streetview. Moreover, it's already in an area with too many vacant lots where historic townhomes once stood. The aggressive pattern of indiscriminate "blight eradication" by the City is one of the most problematic issues in Cincinnati. It seems no matter how often people point out that Cincinnati's treasure trove of historic architecture is one of the Queen City's greatest assets there are others who are determined to degrade and decimate this unique historical legacy. One can almost hear the remorseful sighs from the future when citizens rhetorically ask: "What were we thinking!?" in reaction to a time when these once plentiful old residences have become few and far between. This Brave New World of modern structures to reshape Cincinnati while beneficial will never equal what is being lost in the name of "Progress" IMO. Rehabilitation and restoration generates as much economic activity and jobs as new construction, saves otherwise wasted resources, and preserves the unique achitecture that makes Cincinnati special. Why can't the restorations on-going in OTR include the rest of the City? Are there no developers in Cincinnati who believe the old architecture has value?

Demo on West 3rd is underway:

"It's just fate, as usual, keeping its bargain and screwing us in the fine print..." - John Crichton

One can only hope a structural engineer has been consulted and is confident the adjacent buildings are not structurally weakened by this demolition removal. If rehabilitation of this block is pending, it would be better to save the façade and the cast iron front components so the streetscape remains the same. A new structure can then be built within the footprint of the original structure to modern standards and sometimes preserving the façade qualifies for historic tax credits. But my gut feeling is another vacant lot is pending. Frankly, I'm surprised the old structures remain next to the newer building.

Every time I bring up the topic of historic buildings being demolished, I'm shocked at how many people come to the defense of the property owners. Many of these property owners (including UC) are neglecting the historic buildings they own, and then turning around and using the poor condition of those buildings as an excuse to demolish them.

 

Why are we seeing so many demolitions in the span of just a few months? Goetz House, Clifton Natural Food, Wilson Auditiorium, old Sears, Davis Furniture, FreeStore Food Bank buildings, 3rd Street buildings...

I have also thought that we are seeing a lot of demos lately and some pretty prominent ones ... Add to your list the ones near Christ Hospital at Glencoe and the apartment building on Mason.

A big part of it is that the tax code rewards depreciation and punishes renovation, remodeling, and even simple upkeep.  You can't write it off if you keep it in good shape. 

Every time I bring up the topic of historic buildings being demolished, I'm shocked at how many people come to the defense of the property owners. Many of these property owners (including UC) are neglecting the historic buildings they own, and then turning around and using the poor condition of those buildings as an excuse to demolish them.

 

Why are we seeing so many demolitions in the span of just a few months? Goetz House, Clifton Natural Food, Wilson Auditiorium, old Sears, Davis Furniture, FreeStore Food Bank buildings, 3rd Street buildings...

 

The same people who complain about tax breaks for solar, geothermal, wind, and electric cars, are the same ones who pay $300+/mo homeowners fee to keep their neighbors from putting up a tool shed.

 

 

I bet that 309 Mulberry lot has some awesome views. 

A big part of it is that the tax code rewards depreciation and punishes renovation, remodeling, and even simple upkeep.  You can't write it off if you keep it in good shape. 

 

Care to elaborate? The amount of depreciation taken on a building for tax purposes is independent of the condition of that building. CapEx is also depreciable. By definition, the money spent on keeping a property in good shape can and should be "written off".

I'm referring mainly to property taxes, so write-off probably wasn't the best choice of words.  The point stands though; better maintenance, more improvements, higher taxes; poor maintenance, tear-downs, parking lots, lower taxes.  It's a perverse incentive. 

I bet that 309 Mulberry lot has some awesome views.

 

The same real estate agent that developed the $400k+ row condos on Boal St owns most all of the land at this end of Mulberry. Guessing we'll see a similar development here soon with demand continuing.

 

https://maps.google.com/maps?q=300+Boal+Street,+Cincinnati,+OH&hl=en&ll=39.113871,-84.509228&spn=0.000017,0.016512&sll=39.113986,-84.510722&layer=c&cbp=13,55.19,,0,-9.79&cbll=39.113868,-84.509113&hnear=300+Boal+St,+Cincinnati,+Hamilton,+Ohio+45202&t=m&z=17&panoid=OnrGcuaWPZOLEuFN2SW2Gw

 

Edit: Further digging - he also owns most of Seitz St right above on the same end. This could be a huge development.

That...makes...sense...

While I always appreciate new development incorporating existing historic structures when possible, its less discouraging when new construction is going to go up when demolition occurs. The worst is demolition of structurally sound buildings

just because the owner hasn't complied with a VBML order or other bureaucratic issues that should have never resulted in a taxpayer-paid demolition. The city nor its taxpayers do not gain when a taxable improvement (building) is demolished. The demo automatically decreases the taxable property value. (and adds the costs of the demo to the property which are hardly ever recovered) I'd also argue demolition visually depreciates the appearance of the neighborhood. In extreme cases, the neighborhood disappears and blight soon returns via weedy lots, illegal dumping, and trash-strewn surroundings. Far too often neglected but restorable historic buildings are seen as a liability instead of the unique assets they really are. Every time a significant structure is lost a sense of place is lost with it. Only buildings deteriorated to the point of imminent collapse should be razed and far too often perfectly restorable structures are demolished with the hope that development will quickly follow. That concept was proven as a failure in urban revitalization over 50 years ago yet some contemporary urban planners still believe it has validity. A city cannot demolish its way to prosperity although some appear to believe that it can.

From what I heard, no decision was reached on the Davis Furniture building yesterday. The new owner seems open to exploring other options that would not involve demolition.

I bet that 309 Mulberry lot has some awesome views.

 

The same real estate agent that developed the $400k+ row condos on Boal St owns most all of the land at this end of Mulberry. Guessing we'll see a similar development here soon with demand continuing.

 

Edit: Further digging - he also owns most of Seitz St right above on the same end. This could be a huge development.

 

306 Mulberry St recently went on the market a week ago and is already pending sale. We need to keep an eye on this one to make sure it doesn't get picked up by the same guy and demolished.

 

https://maps.google.com/maps?q=306+Mulberry+Street,+Cincinnati,+OH&hl=en&ll=39.115136,-84.511814&spn=0.000017,0.016512&sll=39.115305,-84.511812&layer=c&cbp=13,32.47,,0,-8.5&cbll=39.115146,-84.511943&hnear=306+Mulberry+St,+Cincinnati,+Ohio+45202&t=m&z=17&panoid=JwPuZvMhrrlizFGO6PC32A

 

http://www.cbws.com/property/details/198951/MLS-1388693/306-Mulberry-St-Cincinnati-Mount-Auburn-OH-45202.aspx?SearchID=3905472&RowNum=5&StateID=41&RegionID=0&IsRegularPS=True&IsSold=False

306 Mulberry St recently went on the market a week ago and is already pending sale. We need to keep an eye on this one to make sure it doesn't get picked up by the same guy and demolished.

 

I heard from a real estate agent yesterday that a building on Mulberry was purchased with the intent of demolition. Not sure who the person was who bought it...

The listing says it all: "developer's dream". I don't think the modest price would be any obstacle to a developer tear-down and redevelopment; however, this group of Victorian Italianate townhomes has long been a strong visual component going up to the Mt. Auburn neighborhood. (which itself is being carved away and redeveloped by Christ Hospital) Too bad a visionary developer couldn't rehab the existing townhomes and build compatible in-fill so the Victorian era flavor is not lost. Given how far the old character of Corryville has been degraded and obliterated, I don't have much hope for preservation of these structures despite abundant examples of older architecture having significant value after rehabilitation. Gotta' love the page ads...below I'm seeing a "Quotes on Demolition" ad from demolition homeadvisor-all you have to do is enter your zip code and a list of "demolition experts" will appear. Too bad a list of preservation/rehab contractors isn't found. The house and building wrecking business has been very good in recent years.

The problem is that the newer buildings on Mulberry, Boal, etc., aren't very impressive.  Somehow those new row houses on Boal list for over $300,000.

  • 4 weeks later...

Photos of the now demolished 116 West Third Street building. First photo courtesy of Google StreetView. Second photo from March 6, 2014. Building dated back to 1885. Most recent owner: Robert S Brown (Auditor info matches up with this info: http://www.cincybar.org/news-resources/legal-directory.php/18370). Sad to see that building go. Any news on what will be put in its place?

Create an account or sign in to comment

Recently Browsing 0

  • No registered users viewing this page.