1706 Lang Street is stable:

 

I'm really happy they were able to do this as it really proves to locals that this kind of repair while tricky can be done and far too many places in better shape than this have been torn down.

Wonder what this little project to repair that brick wall cost?

^ Much, much less than demolition, hauling, and building a new (inferior) wood framed structure with brick veneer, just to get back to the same point as above -- a shell without any mechanicals. And that doesn't include the greenhouse gas generation that's external to that whole economic system.

 

Of course neither of those options make any financial sense right now. Then again saving any single building in OTR never made any financial sense until you factored in the possible future worth.

City Manager Harry Black attempts to appoint Shree Kulkarni, who does not have a very pro-historic preservation POV, to the Historic Conservation Board...

 

http://www.bizjournals.com/cincinnati/news/2015/08/05/otr-foundation-objects-to-historic-board-appointee.html

^Shree Kulkarni was approved. What a joke.

Why on earth in a city with so many people dedicated 100% to historic preservation is a suburban developer getting appointed to a historic conservation board? http://www.bizjournals.com/cincinnati/stories/2006/08/28/newscolumn1.html this is like when the super Tea Party Libertarian guy was appointed to SORTA board.

 

Ryan Lammi that should be YOU on that board!

Ha! I'm in no way qualified. But I would guess I'm more qualified than Kulkarni. So apparently I am?

 

His qualifications is that he owns a company in Sycamore Township that builds/leases office space. They have a portfolio with two city properties. Both are underutilized parcels that should probably be built up. Everything else is land and suburban office space. Unless he is involved in some other way, this is a move to diminish the HCB's power.

These are the two Downtown Cincinnati properties his company owns...

 

 

...what the f***.

 

How can we fight this?

He also deleted his Twitter account after the press and council brought up his opposition to historic preservation via Tweets. Everyone supporting him (PG, Cranley, Black) were basically like, "oh, that's not a reflection of who he is! He's a great guy!"

 

Such a sham. I'm embarrassed that council approved the appointment.

This is a return to the Luken era when everything that makes Cincinnati unique is framed as a liability. 

This is another example of Cranley sticking it to the OTR crowd again, with a bit of the good ole boy networking mixed in this time.

The current mayor ran on an anti-progressive platform (aligning with the COAST people against the already-funded and under-construction streetcar project) This single issue set the tone for his administration. Cincinnati is experiencing a renaissance of sorts with an aggressive pro-development agenda that trumps everything else including historic preservation. By weakening the voices of historic preservation in the City's administration, this assures pending and future projects having an impact on Cincinnati's unique historic neighborhoods will thus incur little official opposition. The loss of the James Gamble house in Westwood alerted developers that the City government does have a pro-preservation movement as the city council did attempt to stop the demolition in the courts and perhaps under different circumstances might have been successful in saving the landmark home. Therefore, to reduce the likelihood of City opposition in the future, the strategy now becomes to dilute pro-preservation voices by appointing people in key positions who will not oppose any project on the basis of endangered historic resources. This results in essentially giving carte blanche to developers. There is a lesson to be learned here in that when voters elect a leader openly opposed to an important change for the city's future, (i.e., the streetcar project, which unlike the doomed James Gamble house, was by the narrowest of margins given the green light to continue) a leadership style based on opposition will always carry additional ramifications. Whatever "collateral damage" occurs to Cincinnati's historic resources between now and the next election should be documented, remembered, and then presented as evidence at election time to usher in a more enlightened leadership. I personally find a total disconnect between the overall success (beyond the wildest dreams of many) of OTR, where property values have in some cases increased ten-fold since 2001, and the fact that Cincinnati could potentially have several more "OTR's" that will never get the opportunity for a similar turnaround because they will have been depleted of what originally made them unique and appealing. New apartments and townhomes built hastily with construction cost containment a priority will inevitably soon begin to depreciate and look dated. Cincinnati has almost countless older apartment blocks now often vacant and abandoned that were built with the same low-budget approach in the 1950's, 60's, and '70's. They now constitute some of the ugliest blighted architecture in a city renowned for its exquisite century old examples.  The new versions of the same cheap apartment blocks being built or planned decimate the historic homes and buildings they replace that could have potentially been much more valuable (as well as sustainable, and profitable) in the long term. (think: OTR) The developers, builders, managers of this apartment/town-home sector will  have in the next 30-40 years left behind another wide swath of these "disposable" obsolete dwellings for the next generation of Cincinnatians to deal with. Please remember these lessons the next time a more enlightened leadership seeks election or otherwise reconcile and accept that Cincinnati's model for the future is not that of a great American city (as it was a century ago) full of monumental architecture but one based on mediocrity and blandness. One grand project near the Riverfront does not offset or justify cheap development at any cost in the rest of the City. Just my two cents worth as a fan of the old Cincinnati...

^Cranley busies himself with emasculating the progressive voice.  He knows that his political career is doomed long-term if those sentiments become widespread. 

 

The fact is if the uneducated black population whose vote he bought through his unholy alliances with several of this city's chronically divisive black leaders are pushed out of the city limits by an influx of educated people (of any racial background) then his power base vanishes.  He'd still have the Tea Party republicans who he has dazzled with his cheap tricks, but that's not enough to win elections.  Not only does his own ability to get elected erode, so does Chris Smitherman and his ilk.  He needs a little gang of crazy people in office or else he can't do the old-money's dirty work. 

Someone did some sleuthing and discovered that Kulkarni donated $8,300 to Cranley's mayoral campaign between his own name, his wife's name, and his various LLCs.

 

He truly has the city's best interests at heart.  :|

Yvette Simpson was the lone vote against his appointment, and it isn't clear whether her dissent was based on his point of view on preservation or off-color jokes he made on twitter. It doesn't sound like he is going to be an anti-preservation extremist.

Yvette Simpson was the lone vote against his appointment, and it isn't clear whether her dissent was based on his point of view on preservation or off-color jokes he made on twitter. It doesn't sound like he is going to be an anti-preservation extremist.

Kulkani doesn't have to be an anti-preservation extremist, all he has to do is wield a rubber stamp and approve every development proposal that comes before him no matter what impact his decision might have on the existing neighborhood character. To be transparent, I do not live in Cincinnati (my spouse and I live in Texas) but we have many friends there and for almost a decade after making numerous visits have been in awe of the town's incomparable concentration of historic homes and buildings. But in recent years, we've noticed an on-going process of so-called "blight" eradication that for many other communities doing the same has been regretted in hindsight. Ohio's unique Moving Ohio Forward program targeting 100,000 structures state-wide has certainly been a mixed bag. While it cleaned up those properties arguably beyond redemption, it also eliminated the possibility of turning some back into the architecturally appealing examples they originally were. (in case anyone wonders, the same architecture that makes OTR unique and increasingly coveted) I offer that today's medium and lower-end construction lack the permanence of Cincinnati's old architecture.  In the 19th century, Cincinnati was a city of immigrants mostly from Europe and from Germany in particular. They brought over with them a building tradition stressing permanence and based on architectural arch-types going back centuries. That was because in many cases  any new construction had to be in harmony and balance with adjacent structures that were sometimes centuries older. That culture of building to last for generations disappeared in the 20th century as the concept of planned obsolescence took hold. We also lack the material wealth (low cost raw materials, highly skilled labor and its old world craftsmanship) of those by-gone days but Cincinnati is still renowned for its outstanding historic architecture.  As mentioned, a pattern of cheap housing in the form of (ugly, or undistinguished, if you prefer) apartment blocks took hold in the mid-20th century and continues to this day. (Corryville comes to mind) But to get back on-topic, if a City culture that any new development is good development becomes accepted, then invariably some of Cincinnati's potential OTR type neighborhoods are going to suffer. (because land for development is often cheaper in older faded neighborhoods)  As an outsider, I have no wish to become embroiled in debating local politics but I live in an inner city neighborhood in a city over twice the size of Cincinnati and have witnessed the processes of redevelopment up close and personally as well as seeing their impact on neighborhood character. Therefore, I hope that more enlightened minds prevail in Cincinnati so it can stand out as the world class city as it did in the past. World War Two English leader Winston Churchill called Cincinnati the most European-like city in America, not to be taken as a bad compliment. It would be a shame to see uncontrolled redevelopment diminish its potential and the only way to ensure that favorable outcome is by wisely choosing leadership at the ballot box. Thanks for letting me express my sentiments about your unique community; our next visit will likely be in about a month and our money would be spent somewhere else if Cincinnati wasn't what it is. I doubt we are the only ones who feel that way-Cincinnati consistently comes out favorably in recommended tourist destinations.

Thank you.

I just received word that Monday morning October 19 they will be tearing down the building at 2900 Reading Rd. This is at Reading and Lincoln the sidewalk and right lane will be closed for several months according to the construction company.

 

Is this the Sears building? I thought UC decided to rehab it back in February.

I just received word that Monday morning October 19 they will be tearing down the building at 2900 Reading Rd. This is at Reading and Lincoln the sidewalk and right lane will be closed for several months according to the construction company.

 

Is this the Sears building? I thought UC decided to rehab it back in February.

 

Part of the building is an addition made in 1945, and that has always been slated to be demolished. My guess is that's what they're demolishing, not the entire building (which was being worked on the last time I was nearby).

I just received word that Monday morning October 19 they will be tearing down the building at 2900 Reading Rd. This is at Reading and Lincoln the sidewalk and right lane will be closed for several months according to the construction company.

 

Is this the Sears building? I thought UC decided to rehab it back in February.

 

Part of the building is an addition made in 1945, and that has always been slated to be demolished. My guess is that's what they're demolishing, not the entire building (which was being worked on the last time I was nearby).

 

More details at: http://www.bizjournals.com/cincinnati/news/2015/02/24/uc-to-transform-1st-cincinnati-sears-store-into.html

And: http://www.urbanohio.com/forum2/index.php/topic,2749.msg745923.html#msg745923

 

In the latest Historic Convervation Board Packet (from Oct 26), the board denied a request to demolish 1349 E McMillan. The property is owned (through an LLC) by St. Ursula Academy, and they wanted to demolish the building to create more surface parking.

 

http://www.cincinnati-oh.gov/buildings/historic-conservation/historic-conservation-board/oct-26-2015-packet/

wtf!

Aren't there a few hundred surface parking spots across the street that are about to become available when Anthem moves? Wouldn't utilizing those be a wiser decision than demolishing a historic building?

Yet another example of establishment Cincinnati not giving a damn about its greatest asset, ugh.

The packet indicates that the parking lot wouldn't change, they'd just plant grass (whoop-dee-doo).  Not that it precludes expanding the parking lot in the future, but it looks like they bought the property for the existing parking lot and have no use for the building.  The board did what they're supposed to do here, but it does say something about St. Ursula that they thought they had any leg to stand on here. 

It's nice to see all of the local redevelopment organizations opposed the demolition request.

 

The Drop Inn Center has already been approved for demolition. Good to hear that this project is moving so quickly. New Shakespeare Co. building.

I had assumed that the Drop Inn Center was completely located within the blue building, so I was confused when people were talking about how a portion would be demolished and a portion would be saved. Turns out, the Drop Inn Center also owned the Teamsters building on 12th. So the historic Teamsters building will be saved but the non-contributing blue building will be demolished and replaced. They also own the parking lot on Elm between the blue building and the YMCA, so I hope that the new theater replaces that parking lot as well.

What's crazy about all of that was that they wanted to demolish the historic building because they couldn't afford the 3.4 million price tag to renovate.

 

I understand if a building is about to collapse and cause immediate harm, then sure, go ahead and demolish. But simply because you can't afford the price tag to rehab the building? Wtf?

I had assumed that the Drop Inn Center was completely located within the blue building, so I was confused when people were talking about how a portion would be demolished and a portion would be saved. Turns out, the Drop Inn Center also owned the Teamsters building on 12th. So the historic Teamsters building will be saved but the non-contributing blue building will be demolished and replaced. They also own the parking lot on Elm between the blue building and the YMCA, so I hope that the new theater replaces that parking lot as well.

 

The new building doesn't touch the parking lot but it's labeled as "future building" on their plans so at least the mindset is that it won't stay a parking lot.

I had assumed that the Drop Inn Center was completely located within the blue building, so I was confused when people were talking about how a portion would be demolished and a portion would be saved. Turns out, the Drop Inn Center also owned the Teamsters building on 12th. So the historic Teamsters building will be saved but the non-contributing blue building will be demolished and replaced. They also own the parking lot on Elm between the blue building and the YMCA, so I hope that the new theater replaces that parking lot as well.

 

The new building doesn't touch the parking lot but it's labeled as "future building" on their plans so at least the mindset is that it won't stay a parking lot.

 

Is there a rendering or site plan out there already?

Yep. They're in the packet for October 12.

 

http://www.cincinnati-oh.gov/buildings/historic-conservation/historic-conservation-board/

Thanks! Here's the Elm Street elevation for everyone's reference:

 

That looks like a light industrial warehouse where they make widgets and thingamajigs.

^I was going to go with storage out-building at a truck stop. I hope it's just an early rendering that's not doing the final product justice.

 

When this project was announced I had thought they were moving into the existing building, guess they're building new. I think this is a good use for the property. You're adding an arts institution to SCPA/Memorial Hall/Music Hall corridor, and you're avoiding the horrible optics/political fallout of replacing the Drop Inn Center with high end condos.

Take a look on the packet and, not certain how to do it, but the aerial rendering looks a lot better.  I think it should look good with a nice glass atrium at the corner of Elm and 12th.

Yeah those street elevation drawings are just bad drawings. The plan actually looks like it will be pretty interesting and a great asset to Elm Street.

In the October 12 packet the board approved the demolition of the Wesley Chapel and the corner of McMicken and Lang. The weird looking round building built in 1973. They will build a parking lot on the space with landscaping and fencing. Hopefully they eventually sell the land for a new apartment building. But for now, this is probably a better use of space.

Old Provident Hospital in Mt. Airy is a pile of rubble as of November 2015.

$250k renovation of home on Virginia Ave. in Northside...this is the side of the street that was to be completely demolished in the 1980s for the I-74 exit ramp to the Y-intersection of Hamilton Ave. & Virginia Ave.  Before that plan, there was to be a "Colerain Expressway" connecting I-74 at Colerain/Blue Rock St. to I-275 somewhere between the Colerain and Hamilton Ave. interchanges. 

 

https://www.sibcycline.com/Listing/CIN/1472421/4307-Virginia-Ave-Northside-OH-45223

Oh wow. I had looked at that house when it was not renovated. It was a pile of crap then. Looks great now!

In the October 12 packet the board approved the demolition of the Wesley Chapel and the corner of McMicken and Lang. The weird looking round building built in 1973. They will build a parking lot on the space with landscaping and fencing. Hopefully they eventually sell the land for a new apartment building. But for now, this is probably a better use of space.

 

I grabbed this photo while it's still here:

 

IMPENDING DEMOLITION OF 313 W. 5TH ST.

http://preservethenati.com/impending-demolition-of-313-w-5th-st/

 

Earlier this week, we learned that 313 W. 5th St., which is a 24,000 square foot building built around 1860, is proposed to be demolished due to a partial collapse that the building experienced.

^thanks for the link. I think this sentence is important for context:

 

We’ve since found out that the damage to the building appears to have been done intentionally and that the proposed demolition would make way for a parking lot.

Also of note: Shree Kulkarni is on the Historic Conservation Board. Shree Kulkarni tore down the building next door for the current parking lot (before being nominated to the board). Shree Kulkarni reportedly was the first to notice the building's partial collapse. Shree Kulkarni offered to purchase the land once 313 W. 5th was demolished so he could expand his current parking lot. Something is shady.

The link has a template email to send to the Director of Buildings and Inspections. I edited this and sent it. I suggest we all do the same. We cannot afford to lose anymore of our history (Especially to parking lots).

What's the evidence that it was done intentionally? Can criminal charges be brought against him? If he actually did intentionally cause the collapse, it should disqualify him from his role on the Historic Conservation Board.

I've seen photos from the interior and there is a clean cut along the floor joists where it collapsed, suggesting a controlled demo. I'm not suggesting Shree cut them himself. He isn't the current owner of the building, but immediately offered to buy it once it is demolished. At the very least, he should be required to recuse himself from the HCB meetings that concern this building since he's made an offer to the owner. Everything is really shady. And considering Shree's past actions and comments concerning historic preservation, I'm highly suspicious of his involvement.