This is of course good news . :clap:

 

I just want to caution everyone that this may not matter in the case before the court. The lawsuit is based on the denial of the demo permit by the city. The application for the demo permit was made BEFORE the property began the nomination process. The court could rule that the application was valid at the time it was applied for and the Historic Designation has no legal bearing since it came after the fact.

 

However if the court finds in favor of the city, and Greenacres doesn't appeal, in order to demo they would be bound by the overlay.

 

Of course the best case scenario would be for Greenacres to accept CPA's offer to buy.

 

I am hopeful that will happen , but it would not surprise me at all to see this go into appeal, regardless of what this Judge rules and this whole matter could be in the courts for many more months.

 

Greenacres strategy would be to 'wear us down'. Our strategy would likely be to get the State Attorney General to investigate them and sieze all their assets (including the Gamble House), for violation of 501C3 guidelines and the installation of a new board.

The other day Emilia Elementry, built in 1930 was torn down.  People of all ages came to watch.

 

http://communitypress.cincinnati.com/article/20100722/NEWS/7220354/Historic-Amelia-Elementary-comes-down

Activity at the Gamble Estate

Abandoned, September 21, 2010

 

It has been made apparent that construction contractors at the historic Gamble Estate  in Cincinnati, Ohio have been busy this morning. According to Reginald Goolsby, a Westwood neighborhood resident, several industrial trucks, including a dump truck and a front-end loader, have arrived on the scene. Two news crews, one from WCPO, and the other from WKRC, had arrived and were told that a spokesperson from Greenacres would be made available for comment. Instead, Greenacres called for the Cincinnati Police, and had them escorted from the property.

Since it hasn't already been reported here 142 E McMillian Street in OTR is on the road to being demolished by the CPS.  Such a shame, its a 4 story brick building.

 

There is a group of preservationists having an emergency meeting at 10am at the Iris Book Cafe.  Hopefully they won't be too late.  For those of you who live in Cincinnati that read these boards, please call the news and throw as much mud in the face of the CPS as possible.  This garbage should stop now!

The meeting was moved to the site. Camera Crews on site nowand I know they are trying to pursue legal remedies to stop demo, but I dont know if they will be sucessful.

 

These "back room deals' violate state ethics laws and I hope the AG's office and the State Ethics Commision decide to investigate CPS and the city's role in this.

For those who aren't following on social networks.

 

Here is an article on the Enquirer's Developing Now Blog: http://cincinnati.com/blogs/developingnow/2010/12/08/cps-demolishing-contested-building/?s=d&page=1#pluckcomments

 

Here is a listing of people who should be contacted to demand a stop to this nonsense:

 

Call Amit Ghosh (City of Cincy 352-3433)

Mike Burson (CPS 207-7715)

Charles Graves at City Hall

(513) 352-4851

 

And if you're so inclined the contact information of all of those in City Hall:

 

Vice Mayor Roxanne Qualls

City Hall, Suite 351

Phone: (513) 352-3604

Fax: (513) 352-3621

[email protected]

Cecil Thomas - President Pro-Tem

City Hall, Suite 349

Phone: (513) 352-3499

Fax: (513) 352-3218

[email protected]

Jeff Berding

City Hall, Suite 348

Phone: (513) 352-3283

Fax: (513) 352-3289

[email protected] Chris Bortz

City Hall, Suite 356

Phone: (513) 352-3249

Fax: (513) 352- 3264

[email protected]

Leslie Ghiz

City Hall, Suite 354

Phone: (513) 352-3344

Fax: (513) 352-3277

[email protected] Chris Monzel

City Hall, Suite 352

Phone: (513) 352-3640

Fax: (513) 352-4649

[email protected]

Laure Quinlivan

City Hall, Suite 346B

Phone: (513) 352-5303

Fax: (513) 352-5390

[email protected] Charlie Winburn

City Hall, Suite 346A

Phone: (513) 352-5354

Fax: (513) 352-5367

[email protected]

 

Wendell Young

City Hall, Suite 350

Phone: (513) 352-3466

Fax: (513) 352-3957

[email protected]

There is still an effort today to stop the demolition of the property.  Please contact the people above and demand an injunction to stop the demolition of McMicken street.

A group of about 8 homes are being demolished on Jefferson near the UC power plant.  Does anyone know what is replacing them?

^Any pictures of those homes?

Are they currently being demolished, or getting ready to be demolished?

Getting ready...they are fenced off and gutted.  I got the scoop though: Duke is building a second substation there.  In my opinion this is a really horrible use of the land as the already ugly MLK 5-way intersection is about to get even uglier.  It does indicate though that there is some new way in which that power plant is being incorporated into the grid after being mothballed for a year or two. 

Also, something big is going down on McMillan in Walnut Hills.  It's in horrible condition. 

The enquirer's blog writeup about a failed attempt to file an injunction against the CPS on 142 E McMicken: http://cincinnati.com/blogs/developingnow/2010/12/10/cps-vs-otr-heads-to-court/

 

Sean Rhiney talks about the recent 142 E. McMicken demo among others in this weeks Soapbox

 

"The fact that it probably housed brewery workers and families who attended the school adjacent to their home makes it no less important than say, the Gamble House in Westwood, originally owned by the son of P&G's co-founder and the recipient of a recent victory in an ongoing battle to prevent its owner's calls for demolition."

 

 

The City has a new index of historic deteriorated properties:

 

http://cincinnati-oh.gov/cdap/pages/-40642-/

Demolition today on 5th street.  I remember seeing this grouping of buildings being mentioned at some point, but i dont remember for what.  Sad.

 

http://maps.google.com/maps?hl=en&ie=UTF8&ll=39.100421,-84.518193&spn=0,0.001179&t=h&z=20&layer=c&cbll=39.100421,-84.518193&panoid=YlUKOyC1qYsFuvq3FyJ8bA&cbp=12,160.44,,0,-18.34

How many buildings?  Just those 3?

I guess that big surface lot on the other side of Plum didn't offer enough space for development.

That's too bad.  I was hoping that at very least 3cdc would've got their hands on these.  Let's hope rails in the streets incourages more private investment into these older buildings. 

How many buildings?  Just those 3?

 

All i could tell was they were taking down the old Emergency Medical Center.  It seemed surgical in the sense that they were only working on that building, so i dont know if they others are in line or what exactly.

How many buildings? Just those 3?

 

All i could tell was they were taking down the old Emergency Medical Center. It seemed surgical in the sense that they were only working on that building, so i dont know if they others are in line or what exactly.

 

Yes I walked by this yesterday. It looks like they are only demo-ing the medical center...the buildings to the right didn't look like they were a part of it. Although, the one right next to it (Lindemans or something?) was looking pretty sorry. It was depressing to watch.

That sucks.  This could be a really neat stretch with just a little investment.

Two sites you can scratch off of the demolition watch...

 

Two churches, two similar stories

 

Posted an update about two churches in Cincinnati that have seen reprieves at the last minute: Our Lady of Perpetual Help in Sedamsville and First German Reformed in the West End. Thanks to OTR Adopt and the Cincinnati Preservation Association for their hard work!

^That's great to hear! 

Demolition today on 5th street.  I remember seeing this grouping of buildings being mentioned at some point, but i dont remember for what.  Sad.

 

http://maps.google.com/maps?hl=en&ie=UTF8&ll=39.100421,-84.518193&spn=0,0.001179&t=h&z=20&layer=c&cbll=39.100421,-84.518193&panoid=YlUKOyC1qYsFuvq3FyJ8bA&cbp=12,160.44,,0,-18.34

 

Surface lot in the works...

 

Downtown Cincinnati building makes way for parking, renovations

Business Courier - by Tom Demeropolis  Date: Friday, January 28, 2011, 2:44pm EST

 

Been wondering what’s going on with the demolished building next to Mainstay Rock Bar in downtown Cincinnati? Me too.

 

After digging through property records, building permits and a few phone calls, here’s the scoop.

 

The building that was demolished, 305 W. Fifth St., was torn down to make way for a nine-space parking lot. Sean Buschmann, vice president of development for Kulkarni Construction and Development Group, said the building next door, 309 W. Fifth St., will eventually be redeveloped with first floor office or retail space, and the other three floors will become residential space

 

 

What the hell? Yeah, like there isn't a gigantic surface lot on the next block...

^There should be laws against this crap!

This is so frustrating.  There is a massive lot across the street from where this building was demolished.

where the hell is CPA?

^-I think RestorationConsultant is right when he says that the traditional Cincy preservationist group is timid and unwilling to really be loud when they need to be.

 

Look no further than the travesty that is Coryville... :P

 

As unhinged and crazy as some of the new preservationists coalescing on Facebook are, they are a welcome breath of fresh air in a city that doesn't give two shits about its best asset.

Uptown Properties is going to demolish yet another entire block of perfectly good Victorian houses in Coryville:

 

http://www.building-cincinnati.com/2011/02/uptown-rental-properties-plans-72-more.html#more

 

Here is the block affected:

 

http://maps.google.com/?ie=UTF8&ll=39.132454,-84.50758&spn=0,0.004823&t=h&z=18&layer=c&cbll=39.132454,-84.50758&panoid=WWJhErZY2CQuPHV8O3U4ig&cbp=12,230.87,,0,2

 

This is the quality of infill that Uptown typically builds:

 

This is what uptown could achieve if they cared about Cincy's built enviornment:

 

This was taken from University Village, which was an urban renewal style project that destroyed the little bit that was left of "Jewtown" in Chicago for student housing for UIC students (where the famous Maxwell street market used to be).  While the events surrounding the neighborhood's destruction were a bit suspect, the student apartment  infill is of a quality that Cincinnati could only dream of these days.  Granted its not as good as the original, but at the very least there is some effort to be urban here.

 

Here is a map link to the part of town this was taken in:

 

http://maps.google.com/maps?f=q&source=s_q&hl=en&geocode=&q=university+village+chicago+il&aq=&sll=37.0625,-95.677068&sspn=52.505328,79.013672&ie=UTF8&hq=&hnear=University+Village,+Chicago,+Cook,+Illinois&ll=41.864815,-87.646823&spn=0.006088,0.009645&t=h&z=17&layer=c&cbll=41.864706,-87.646812&panoid=GNtLBtMUGGZehcPFDDZjZQ&cbp=12,1.27,,0,7.2

 

As you'll notice there are even (GASP!) a few older buildings incorporated into the project.

 

Anyways, back to the subject at hand.  Their is a chance to stop this for those who are interested, but it would require getting the council to not approve the zoning changes required for this project.  I'm not sure when the meeting is, if anyone knows it would be greatly appreciated.

 

Either this gets stopped or at the very least Uptown should start researching higher quality urban design that can be done economically ala Chicago.

 

 

^ Half the block Uptown is building on is empty.  They could easily do infill and keep the existing buildings.  Instead, they're going to level what looks to be nine multi-family houses.  The problem is that Uptown wants to streamline their business as much as they can; they want units that are the exact same size, price, quality, etc.  They bought the building I live in last year, and are kicking me out to make a large one bedroom into a two bedroom, for example.  I'm surprised that the Corryville Community council is in support of this.. I understand supporting infill, as there are plenty of vacant plots and blighted buildings, but the houses on this block are in really nice shape.

 

Anyway, here's a streetview of a few of the buildings they're going to tear down:

 

http://maps.google.com/maps?hl=en&ie=UTF8&ll=39.132041,-84.508633&spn=0.002447,0.007065&t=h&z=18&layer=c&cbll=39.13219,-84.507601&panoid=R0tOzu9XI4JPIO0BN9iHMg&cbp=12,243.75,,0,-9.77

^  I know some people who attended a community council meeting a few years back. 

 

The head of the council at the time was a developer from Indian Hill.  I'm not sure if this is still the case, but the problem is that not enough of the community is actually involved in the council and the developers are calling the shots.

 

I used to live in a four unit apartment building and watched developers suck out a ton of character in that neighborhood while I was there :(  I can remember very clearly waking up every morning to house after house being torn down.  The high pitched noise that demo equipment makes when going through many layers of bricks is quite distinct and quite memorable.

This project can be easily stopped actually with little financial resources.  City Council has to approve a zoning change- If 100 people show up opposed to the zoning change I think it could be stopped.

 

If anyone has a little extra time, try to find out when that vote would be and send out an email!!!

Although long ago mostly converted to (mainly student) rental uses, the existing historic homes along Euclid Avenue were built as grand single family and apartment residences when Corryville was a prosperous 19th century neighborhood. These fine brick and frame homes sometimes sporting towers, dormers, ornamental porches, and turrets, would be considered cherished architectural landmarks in other cities less blessed with historic architecture. Only in Cincinnati would they ever be considered expendable for modern student housing. When these old homes are gone, so too will be the neighborhood charm created by having this unique architecture from over 125 years ago. We've all been to sections of cities which are "apartment-villes" with block after block of bland, low-rent contemporary residential complexes. and, unless we live there, they are usually areas to be avoided. Why re-develop (or "rebrand") Corryville into this uglier image?

 

It is unrealistic to hope that what might be built here will somehow be architecturally impressive; the original homes were individually designed at considerable cost and were considered "artistic" at a time when such things mattered in architecture. Today, functionalism rules and everything is about the numbers. (densities, profits) While in-fill housing can be designed to be compatible with the existing historic homes, we all know in this case it's about taking the easy and most profitable route and just clear-cutting everything.  The result is the same as if it were being built out in the far suburbs and nothing will distinguish this redeveloped area from any similar apartment housing development in Atlanta, Dallas, or Phoenix.

 

Surely there remains enough vacant land in Corryville for redevelopment to consider alternatives and preserve this unique picturesque historic streetscape. In the current rush to build a more modern Cincinnati, the past is being destroyed at an alarming rate. Other more successful cities have recognized their historic architectural assets and embraced them to enrich their neighborhood and city identity. Imagine San Francisco without its iconic Victorian row houses? Reading about these redevelopment plans is akin to being kicked in the stomach-such a senseless, short-sighted waste! And yes, where is the CPA's voice in this and why aren't Corryville residents enraged about some of their neighborhood's finest architectural assets being erased forever so that someone can make a quick buck without having to live with the results?

^ Half the block Uptown is building on is empty. They could easily do infill and keep the existing buildings. Instead, they're going to level what looks to be nine multi-family houses. The problem is that Uptown wants to streamline their business as much as they can; they want units that are the exact same size, price, quality, etc. They bought the building I live in last year, and are kicking me out to make a large one bedroom into a two bedroom, for example. I'm surprised that the Corryville Community council is in support of this.. I understand supporting infill, as there are plenty of vacant plots and blighted buildings, but the houses on this block are in really nice shape.

 

Anyway, here's a streetview of a few of the buildings they're going to tear down:

 

http://maps.google.com/maps?hl=en&ie=UTF8&ll=39.132041,-84.508633&spn=0.002447,0.007065&t=h&z=18&layer=c&cbll=39.13219,-84.507601&panoid=R0tOzu9XI4JPIO0BN9iHMg&cbp=12,243.75,,0,-9.77

 

Oh man, those homes are beautiful and look like they're in good shape. It's criminal to tear those down.

This project can be easily stopped actually with little financial resources. City Council has to approve a zoning change- If 100 people show up opposed to the zoning change I think it could be stopped.

 

If anyone has a little extra time, try to find out when that vote would be and send out an email!!!

 

Good point.  I think one could easily make the argument that half the block, along Van St. could be rezoned, but that rezoning the property along Euclid would diminish the character of the street and block.

At Gamble House, is it 'demolition by neglect'?

 

...

 

Demolition by neglect, she added, "is tough to prove, because there is a fine line between not keeping up your building and actively letting it go."

 

Goldwyn is the author of "Demolition by Neglect: A Loophole in Preservation Policy." Her work has been widely cited in court cases over preservation issues across the country.

 

She defines demolition by neglect as taking place, "when an owner, with malicious intent, lets a building deteriorate until it becomes a structural hazard and then turns around and asserts the building's advanced state of deterioration as a reason to justify its demolition."

 

...

 

Read More

This is a perfect example of the tension between supporting urbanism and preservation.  Allowing higher densities in already developed urban neighborhoods is generally a good thing (when done in reasonable increments), but when it threatens historic properties it can become a problem.  It was never an issue until about the last 50 years though.  As a society, we tore down lots of fantastic buildings of the Victorian era in the 1920s and 30s, and in many other periods in the past as well.  This was all ok because the replacement building was almost universally better than the old one.  This is not the case anymore.  Preservation and NIMBYism are fights against developments that are usually worse than the old buildings or even the empty corn field that they replace. 

 

So what we need for a situation like the one in Corryville is something of a two-tier approach.  If they want to upzone the area and demolish those nice existing houses, then the new development had better be so awesome that nobody could possibly object to it.  That CAN be done, but I won't pretend that it's easy.  If they can't deliver a good design, then no upzoning, and they'll have to make do with infill and preservation of the best properties.

" what we need for a situation like the one in Corryville is something of a two-tier approach.  If they want to upzone the area and demolish those nice existing houses, then the new development had better be so awesome that nobody could possibly object to it.  That CAN be done, but I won't pretend that it's easy.  If they can't deliver a good design, then no upzoning, and they'll have to make do with infill and preservation of the best properties. "

 

Some issues in the 800 block of Euclid Avenue make saving the stately historic homes there daunting. A check on the Co. Auditor's property data pages shows that most of these historic homes are owned by rental LLC's and other property management firms. To their credit, most of the homes remain unaltered and still present visually historic facades to the streetscape. However, the owners are there to make a profit and little else. From their perspective, so long as they are adequately compensated, few objections to a wholesale demolition would likely be voiced. In a more cohesive neighborhood with homeowner occupied residences, a strong opposition to redevelopment could be mounted and it might help preserve the area intact. Enough remains there to create a compact National Register historic district with appropriate in-fill housing, but finding property owner support is critical. In other places, financial incentives exist to preserve these 125+ year old homes but not in Cincinnati. Most likely, T.I.F. or "Enterprise Zone" incentives are available to the developer for demolishing and building new but none are available for preserving the existing homes.

 

Alternately, a developer who personally cared about preserving this impressive area of historic homes could also find a way to build in-fill, architecturally compatible housing on the current vacant lots while upgrading the existing historic homes  (most in good repair and currently rented) for a more upscale rental market. (perhaps for university faculty members and other professionals?) It is unrealistic to expect expensive new "mansion grade" housing in an area where most housing is decidedly marketed towards (less expensive) student housing needs. The wholesale conversion of Corryville into block after block of student housing does not bode well long term. A future fluctuation in student housing demand might bring in other renters who are only seeking the cheapest place to rent.  Student housing areas are rarely neighborhood points of interest unless you are a student so Corryville is forfeiting a lot of potential economic opportunities in exchange for immediate redevelopment.

 

Regardless of these issues, the most pressing problem now is finding someone or some people who live in this area and are willing to voice their opposition to demolition in exchange for redevelopment.  A preservation friendly solution, when there's little or no support from the existing rental property owners or few homeowner residents, is very challenging.  In a more preservation conscious city, the developer(s) would be required to take steps to mitigate historic home losses (even to the point of relocating some structures) but not in Cincinnati.  If nothing else, this situation points to a real problem for Cincinnati as it tries to balance the need for new growth as well as preserve its tremendous architectural heritage.  A balanced city policy which accomplishes both objectives has been proven in other cities but has yet to emerge in Cincinnati. Since the problem is inherently political and local it will be up to the citizens of Cincinnati to bring these issues into balance. The perception that Cincinnati does not care about its architectural heritage presents a serious impediment for bringing newcomers and investment into town. Now is the time to deal with this city-wide issue which is not limited to Corryville.

To their credit, most of the homes remain unaltered and still present visually historic facades to the streetscape. However, the owners are there to make a profit and little else. From their perspective, so long as they are adequately compensated, few objections to a wholesale demolition would likely be voiced. In a more cohesive neighborhood with homeowner occupied residences, a strong opposition to redevelopment could be mounted and it might help preserve the area intact.

 

Real estate investors in old areas aren't all uncaring about history.  Even if profit is the motive, some of them invest in the old buildings and work on them because they like them.  Making money is a nice perk to something they like doing for themselves or in a small group of people, instead of a 9-5 job.

 

 

Alternately, a developer who personally cared about preserving this impressive area of historic homes could also find a way to build in-fill, architecturally compatible housing on the current vacant lots while upgrading the existing historic homes  (most in good repair and currently rented) for a more upscale rental market. (perhaps for university faculty members and other professionals?) It is unrealistic to expect expensive new "mansion grade" housing in an area where most housing is decidedly marketed towards (less expensive) student housing needs

 

It doesn't have to be "mansion grade housing" the example I provided earlier in this thread was from a student housing area in Chicago called University Village.  They found a way to have good design and be economical.  I think a big part of it is using Cinder blocks with a brick facade.  The Cinder blocks are cheap but give the house a far more substantial look.  As they are not the facade they are hidden from view.  In Chicago, I feel they have a lot of good tricks for making cheap look good - Uptown would do wonders if they would study how Chicago developers do it.

 

Since the problem is inherently political and local it will be up to the citizens of Cincinnati to bring these issues into balance. The perception that Cincinnati does not care about its architectural heritage presents a serious impediment for bringing newcomers and investment into town.

 

Not only that but it can be a factor that chases people away.  Students who are renting in old buildings because they think the old building is cool and like the neighborhood only to be demoralized when the neighborhood is slowly being demolished. (this was me in part :P ).

 

A preservation friendly solution, when there's little or no support from the existing rental property owners or few homeowner residents, is very challenging.

 

Who's to say that responsible renters, including students and those who live in the neighborhood and care about the neighborhood can't make a difference?  Yes for this is a more transient group, but I think they can help out too ;).

Who's to say that responsible renters, including students and those who live in the neighborhood and care about the neighborhood can't make a difference?  Yes for this is a more transient group, but I think they can help out too ;).

 

For any successful effort to save these endangered homes, there has to be some vocal and visible support from those who live in the neighborhood. Right now, we only have a few folks on UO discussing this matter and our discussions are largely academic. I've been in contact with the Cincinnati Preservation Association (CPA) about the endangered Euclid Avenue properties during the past couple of days and they inform me they can present an argument for saving them but first there has to be visible support from neighborhood residents or from those having a direct stake in the neighborhood.

 

With few exceptions, no organization has the authority to implement historic preservation based solutions without the support of neighborhood stakeholders. Therefore, I urge if there are any individuals (students, faculty, renters) or, as you suggested, some sympathetic developers or property managers, they need to come forward quickly and represent an advocacy voice for saving these historic homes. Otherwise, we will once again be lamenting their loss and then quietly move on to discussing the newest Cincinnati preservation emergency.  If you or someone you know supports saving these unique homes, please personally contact the CPA and state your support.

 

Zoning hearings will be forthcoming as well as (likely) City Council project approval so the more visible the support for preserving historic Euclid Avenue, the more likely this objective can be accomplished.  Worth remembering is the more famous Euclid Avenue in Cleveland that was once "America's Showplace" (there's a book about Euclid Ave. by that name) encompassing 4 miles of grand Victorian era mansions, but all has been almost totally obliterated. Maybe those surviving homes on Euclid Avenue in Cincinnati will have a better fate.

With few exceptions, no organization has the authority to implement historic preservation based solutions without the support of neighborhood stakeholders. Therefore, I urge if there are any individuals (students, faculty, renters) or, as you suggested, some sympathetic developers or property managers, they need to come forward quickly and represent an advocacy voice for saving these historic homes.

 

I am working on this.  While I don't live in Corryville anymore, I know people who still do and are opposed to this.  There is also a new student organization on campus who is getting the word out as well.

 

Things are falling into place.  The preservation community in Cincinnati is growing stronger and more energized everyday.  Despite some of the more crazy statements some of them have made, this new blood is ultimately leading to much needed reform and activity.  I hope that the end result is a Cincinnati that both the city and the country can be proud of.  All it takes is a cure to chronic myopia.

Neil,

I've spent a lot of time looking at this project's footprint.  Interesting that the six homes along E. University are also going to be re-zoned, but not immediately demolished and redeveloped. I think it's safe to assume that those Euclid Avenue homes on the east side of the avenue as well as those fronting E. University will be the next redevelopment phase. These kinds of re-development projects, if financially successful, tend to spread with a domino effect by gradually consuming block after block until the old neighborhood disappears.

 

The questions to be answered: does Corryville have adequate new apartments and multi-family housing at this time? At what point will the neighborhood be saturated with this type of housing? Last, is this (multi-family redevelopment) the best and highest purpose for the land? One thing's certain-the historic homes up for demo are among the best of their kind surviving in Corryville. No matter what gets built, this picturesque slice of 19th century architecture will be lost forever along with the old world craftsmanship, designs, and now scarce materials (old growth lumber) that went into building these homes. In short: they don't build them like that anymore and never will again. I was also surprised to read in the aforementioned article about these homes being "slightly blighted to vacant to condemned". This description makes it sound like a virulent slum yet one has to look hard to find any of these deficiencies. These carefully crafted negative terms reduce the perceived value of what is being lost by converting them from picturesque to "eyesores". Taken literally, it makes the developer seem like he's doing the neighborhood a huge favor by eradicating this worthless "blight".

 

In any event, gathering all the support you can is a good idea. Perhaps create a facebook page (as has been done for the Gamble House) and see how many "friends" of Euclid Avenue can be quickly found. I do not have the timetable for the re-zoning but I'm sure time is short. Wish I could be there to lend a hand (I'm in Texas) but it's often outsiders who recognize the value in the things locals take for granted. I'm keeping my fingers crossed for a favorable outcome.

Has anyone driven by recently??  The Google streetview makes all of these properties look amazing- but it might be 2 years old.  Someone could have bought them, kicked the tenants out, and let them deteriorate. 

 

The easiest way to stop this is to oppose councils rezoning and hope enough of a voice can stop that.  There's no lawsuit, etc.  Just a simple grassroots protest of the rezoning shuts down the redevelopment.

^Recent shots:

 

http://www.facebook.com/album.php?aid=626121&id=185964090342#!/album.php?fbid=10150415202325343&id=185964090342&aid=626121

PM me if you live in the neighborhood and would like more information on who to contact to help get this stopped.

The RestorationConsultant wrote a pretty good piece here talking about alternative means that Uptown could use to redevelop this block for student housing without destroying the old houses:

 

http://victorianantiquitiesanddesign.blogspot.com/2011/02/uptown-properties-project-would-destroy.html

 

It would be amazing if Cincinnati had more outside the box thinking like this :P

Soapbox has an article about this development, and another much more welcome development at the old Benchmark site:

 

http://www.soapboxmedia.com/devnews/0215uptownapartments.aspx

I just got the below notice from the City of Cincinnati.  Anyone know what building is coming down?

 

"The demolition of a large building in the area will require the closure of Reading Road between Liberty Street and Sycamore Street. This closure will be in place on Saturday and Sunday, March 19th and 20th, from 7AM until 9PM. A detour will be in place directing motorists around the closure site."