Taken 2/16.

On ‎1‎/‎9‎/‎2020 at 7:29 PM, climberguy714 said:

I really can't believe houses facing the duck Creek flood wall could sell for that much.

 

The interior looks nice but the rear and side views are pretty ugly.  Plus, no garage or space for hobbies since the basement is lavishly furnished.  

 

https://www.sibcycline.com/Listing/CIN/1636708/4100-Duck-Creek-Rd-Madisonville-OH-45227

12 minutes ago, jmecklenborg said:

 

The interior looks nice but the rear and side views are pretty ugly.  Plus, no garage or space for hobbies since the basement is lavishly furnished.  

 

https://www.sibcycline.com/Listing/CIN/1636708/4100-Duck-Creek-Rd-Madisonville-OH-45227

$580,000 and doesn’t have a garage. 

59 minutes ago, Ucgrad2015 said:

$580,000 and doesn’t have a garage. 

 

Still a lot nicer than a lot of the crap going up around Nashville at that price.  And by "around Nashville" I mean the $580,000 houses going up next to expressway sound walls, cheaply fenced-off cell phone towers, etc.  

These two building were torn down today for the Third phase of Madison and Whetsel.

 

Madison and Whetsel. Final touches on phase 1 are almost complete. Tenants have already moved into the apartments above though no word on the retail below. The new concrete that is blocked by the cones is where the old curb used to be so while the sidewalk is wider than it was before, it's about 3 feet back.  I'm not sure about the north sidewalk but that would mean eastbound Madison has gotten wider at this block, presumably to accommodate street parking.

EDIT: The center turn lanes on Madison are too narrow by modern standards. Widening might be insisted upon by DOTE so all five lanes can be brought up to modern widths.

Edited June 9, 20205 yr by Dev

See link for PDF presentation given to MCC last month: Ackermann Phase 3 update - 05/21/20

The current plan is for the Library to move into the entire retail space facing Whetsel as their current building is not accessible and too small. They intend to hold on to the old building as well.
 

The building in the NE corner has been scaled down to allow for a pool to be placed behind it. A lot of people are not happy about this as it feels exclusionary and excessive. The initial plan by Ackermann was to put it on the currently vacant Sierra and Whetsel lot that is mostly owned by the City (The Port owns one of the parcels as well).

The original plan was for the angled parking to be along Whetsel but I think DOTE shot that down. MCURC encouraged them to create a plaza instead. The red line on slide 7 indicates where the City's RoW will begin once construction is complete.

3 hours ago, Dev said:

EDIT: The center turn lanes on Madison are too narrow by modern standards. Widening might be insisted upon by DOTE so all five lanes can be brought up to modern widths.

 

This is why I roll my eyes when the city says that we are implementing "Vision Zero". Yes, in a handful of places across the city, we are narrowing streets, improving crosswalks, reducing turning radii, etc., to make our streets safer for pedestrians, cyclists, and transit users. But simultaneously, we are widening streets in other parts of the city to make things better for drivers and worse for pedestrians under the guise of "modern standards." If we had a real Vision Zero program, this wouldn't be happening.

Edited June 10, 20205 yr by taestell

I drove through Madisonville last weekend and was amazed with how much has already changed from Medpace through Whetsel. I personally understand the community's opposition to the pool, honestly. It's a central location that's what - three blocks from an existing public pool, unlike most apartment developments which can hide the pool. Did anything actually change with the developer as a result of them coming to talk to Council? Link to story, I remember it because I was annoyed by all the parking complaints. 

 

Hard not to feel like Madisonville did everything right and got screwed by DOTE. Which is ironic because every plan or reference for the area talks about the devastation caused by being a "drive-through" community and wanting to change that. The Vision Zero website at one point said a draft plan winter 2019. Then it was "early 2020." Now there's no date and hasn't been for months. May as well push it to 2021. 

12 hours ago, taestell said:

 

This is why I roll my eyes when the city says that we are implementing "Vision Zero". Yes, in a handful of places across the city, we are narrowing streets, improving crosswalks, reducing turning radii, etc., to make our streets safer for pedestrians, cyclists, and transit users. But simultaneously, we are widening streets in other parts of the city to make things better for drivers and worse for pedestrians under the guise of "modern standards." If we had a real Vision Zero program, this wouldn't be happening.

 

Oh yeah, completely agree. Way too many road widening on OKI's 2050 draft plan as well. I can't remember where the old sidewalk was on the north side of this block so hopefully they are shifting it, not widening it, but I doubt it. If you look at the phase 3 document, that curb will be pulled back for about 80% of the Madison facing block for that section as well. At least there are bump outs at the corners.

I also live in Madisonville and I'm seeing plenty of complaints at meetings and on social media about speeding and reckless driving. The only solution anyone talks about is getting a cop to sit and ticket drivers...

EDIT: I will say that the center turn lanes are dangerously narrow so they do need to be addressed, however that doesn't mean you widen the road. I don't know what that means in terms of design but I still figure it should have a 5-to-3 road diet. I think Madison has ADT of 34k or 36k.

Edited June 10, 20205 yr by Dev

11 hours ago, shawk said:

Did anything actually change with the developer as a result of them coming to talk to Council?

 

The CBA discussion is still on going. It's important to note that Ackermann has not yet closed on the property for phase 3 so it's still owned by the City. If that wasn't the case, the CBA process wouldn't be possible. If you are really curious, you can watch their presentation from last month's community council meeting on the council's Facebook page. It seems rather polarizing to me. Residents either love it or hate it.

I think the only changes forced by the community so far have been the location of the pool. As part of phase 3, Ackermann wanted to place a bump out in front of the existing building at 4901 Whetsel to link to their planned bump across the street. They've stopped talking about that and I'm not sure why. It was probably going to be paid for from the TIF district so that could be related.

The developer has consistently said more parking isn't needed but isn't doing anything to encourage people to move into the building who don't own cars. They are only giving out one parking space per unit, not per person so it will be interesting if they will have a high turn over on rents since tenants will be sick of walking 3 blocks to park their second car. Most of the units in all 3 phases are studios and 1-bedroom but there's just enough 2 and 3 bedrooms to make you wonder if it will be an issue. There also will not be any designated parking for the retail, which is hard for people to understand.

 

I think the whole thing is ironic since Madisonville's large expanse over a hundred years ago came in part because workers would be given a year-long pass for the train into the big city if they built a home here.

I had thought the street widening was related to an island or roundabout in the middle of Madison and Whetzel, but I now see that hasn't been an option for over a year.  The narrow turn lanes acted as traffic calming at the Stewart and Whetzel intersections. 

 

I think there is plenty of on street parking for retail, especially if Madison will have on street parking in front of Phase 1.  

5 minutes ago, nicker66 said:

I had thought the street widening was related to an island or roundabout in the middle of Madison and Whetzel, but I now see that hasn't been an option for over a year.  The narrow turn lanes acted as traffic calming at the Stewart and Whetzel intersections. 

 

I think there is plenty of on street parking for retail, especially if Madison will have on street parking in front of Phase 1.  

 

I thought the idea of creating an island or town "square" died a long time ago but I don't know if that had anything to do with Ackermann. What's the NACTO guideline for a center turn lane, 8 feet?

Meters haven't been installed yet but yes, both sides of Madison in front of phase 1 will have parking meters and the designs for phase 2 and 3 also show meters on both sides of Madison. There will not be any bump outs however which suggests to me that parking won't be allowed during peak hours. I think this is also the case in the recently redesigned Montgomery Road through Pleasant Ridge's business district.

At the very least the curb/sidewalk on the north side of Madison wasn't moved, it was just rebuilt in place.  It appears that Madison is only 45 feet wide so the current 5-lane configuration really isn't appropriate.  It's generally regarded that lanes less than 10 feet wide lead to more crashes and incidents like jumping curbs and whatnot.  I don't know if it reduces incidents involving pedestrians or cyclists, but 10 feet is the sweet spot.

 

The simplest solution would be to allow permanent street parking at the curb, which only needs to be 7-8 feet, leaving room for three 30 foot lanes.  Instead of parking it could be buffered bike lanes.  You could do the Chicago thing with parking plus bike lanes, leaving just one vehicle travel lane each way.  https://goo.gl/maps/miTX2pb7hw8mY8NS8  At intersections the parking stops and the bike lanes move over to allow room for a left turn lane. 

 

East of Whetsel is an absolute mess.  Nebulous parking bays, lanes that wander left and right, wide seemingly uncontrolled pavement.  Past the railroad overpass the street narrows a couple of feet and it looks like there's two lanes each way but it's not striped, etc. 

31 minutes ago, jjakucyk said:

It appears that Madison is only 45 feet wide so the current 5-lane configuration really isn't appropriate.  It's generally regarded that lanes less than 10 feet wide lead to more crashes and incidents like jumping curbs and whatnot.  I don't know if it reduces incidents involving pedestrians or cyclists, but 10 feet is the sweet spot.

I've been telling this to anyone who will listen. Too many people are too concerned about throughput, or at least what the perceive it to be.

 

Quote

You could do the Chicago thing with parking plus bike lanes, leaving just one vehicle travel lane each way.  https://goo.gl/maps/miTX2pb7hw8mY8NS8

 

Isn't this design more dangerous for bikes since they travel next to autos? I thought the new consensus is to move the bike lane to the curb side. The Montgomery Road diet is similar though the City did it to protect parked cars from getting side-swiped, essentially using bicyclists as human shields.

 

Quote

East of Whetsel is an absolute mess.  Nebulous parking bays, lanes that wander left and right, wide seemingly uncontrolled pavement.  Past the railroad overpass the street narrows a couple of feet and it looks like there's two lanes each way but it's not striped, etc. 

 

I couldn't agree more. I get passed all the time on this section of Madison, which is illegal, because I dare to go 32 in a 30. I've gotten takeout from Mazunte there a few times recently and passing drivers seem insulted that I dare park on the street. The shifting eastbound lane is still present in all of Ackermann's drawings too so that's extremely disappointing, especially since there is a crosswalk at Madison and Ward. Westbound drivers commonly pass on the right so they can turn onto Kenwood even though it is clearly marked as being illegal.

2 hours ago, Dev said:

 

Oh yeah, completely agree. Way too many road widening on OKI's 2050 draft plan as well.

 

Of note, OKI doesn't propose projects. What you see in the plan comes from the municipalities. So to get the priorities changed, we need a massive change in thinking from our elected officials.

^On that note, the plan still has the expansion of Red Bank Road south of Madison, within City limits. Really shows you their priorities.

As a resident of Madisonville I would really like to see them redo Red Bank as well as Madison Like they did with Erie at Brotherton By adding trees and plants in the median. Idk what their plan was when the put in Red Bank but I hate this ugly concrete median that’s always full of garbage (photo below).

the lack of sidewalks on most of red bank kill me 

Yeah was driving down Red Bank the other day and thought to myself, "all of these new apartments and development with Medpace and still no sidewalks and disintegrating roads"

The intersection from Red Bank to westbound Columbia Parkway is always confusing. That seems like it needs to be part of any possible improvement plan. 

15 hours ago, Ucgrad2015 said:

As a resident of Madisonville I would really like to see them redo Red Bank as well as Madison Like they did with Erie at Brotherton By adding trees and plants in the median. Idk what their plan was when the put in Red Bank but I hate this ugly concrete median that’s always full of garbage (photo below).

 

I think the Community voted to ask for Red Bank to be reclassified as a boulevard at one point, which sounds like the best long-term option considering how wide the ROW is. I also live in Madisonville, if that wasn't already obvious, on one of the side streets off Plainville. They also had gotten plans drawn up to turn Red Bank and Madison into a grade separated roundabout. As I recall, the designs were not particularly pedestrian friendly but they probably would have been safer. The last head of DOTE got it pulled because she was the worst.

The plan was to turn Red Bank into I-74. Looks like the City still hasn't gotten the hint that it ain't happening.

On 2/17/2020 at 4:45 PM, jmecklenborg said:

 

The interior looks nice but the rear and side views are pretty ugly.  Plus, no garage or space for hobbies since the basement is lavishly furnished.  

 

https://www.sibcycline.com/Listing/CIN/1636708/4100-Duck-Creek-Rd-Madisonville-OH-45227

Yeah, one of my friends bought one of those houses and I can't understand why, especially when he has much better options with location and having the same sq ft plus a yard!

Anyone know what's going on here? Looks like there's a lot of activity here over the last 2-3 weeks:

 

https://goo.gl/maps/8o2zS3QhwUXtEeDG8

13 minutes ago, Cincinnatus said:

Anyone know what's going on here? Looks like there's a lot of activity here over the last 2-3 weeks:

 

https://goo.gl/maps/8o2zS3QhwUXtEeDG8

 

A contractor acquaintance of mine said someone wanted to renovate the building a couple years ago but their budget was woefully inadequate.  Not sure what they wanted to do with it though, and if it's changed hands since.  Industrial/workshop buildings like that are so rare anymore, it'll be nice to see one fixed up, I just hope it's done decently.  

11 hours ago, seaswan said:

the lack of sidewalks on most of red bank kill me 

 

36 minutes ago, cincydave8 said:

The intersection from Red Bank to westbound Columbia Parkway is always confusing. That seems like it needs to be part of any possible improvement plan. 

Every time I drive by Medpace it kills me that the building isn't facing Madison or Red Bank. It's like a big middle finger to the surrounding area. The side walk situation is even worse considering the future connection between Wasson Way and the Murray Trail. That portion of Red Bank does have sidewalks but you still have to cross 5 lanes in front of the Walmart entrance. There is no safe way to connect The Red to either of these trails at the moment, which is a huge wasted opportunity.

I have to add that Medpace's food hall won't be linked to the Red where you have hundreds of tenants with disposable incomes who can't safely walk to the place, though I'm sure they don't care. Medpace's entire development strategy shows that they view themselves as an island. The Stewart Avenue parking lot is real egregious as well. They probably assume the food hall will draw people the way MadTree draws in people when OFF is there.

The last phase of development of the Red will include retail along Red Bank but it won't face the road and DOTE prevented them from building up to the road. The developer gets it though and as a compromise are going to use the large setback as an outdoor dining area, which is more reason to implement traffic calming. If the City ever abandons the plan to widen Red Bank, maybe the setback will make it easier to create a large sidewalk.

The Columbia Parkway ramps were obviously setup as temporary for future expansion. ODOT had several recommendations but their final plan is to just add more turn lanes to increase throughput and improve signage. Seems like they picked it just because it's cheap and efficient but it doesn't help with non-auto access and still costs over $1 million.

28 minutes ago, Cincinnatus said:

Anyone know what's going on here? Looks like there's a lot of activity here over the last 2-3 weeks:

 

https://goo.gl/maps/8o2zS3QhwUXtEeDG8

 

I still don't know what they intend to do with it but I have heard of who owns it. It's a married couple who invested early in the redevelopment of Oakley and have shifted their focus to Madisonville. They own the old IOOF lodge on Whetsel in the same block as phase 1 of Ackermann's development. It's the building that has the Cheesecakery in it and used to have CooKoo's. Apparently, they live in the apartments above too. The wife has been replying to occasional posts about the building on NextDoor, including a post from yesterday, but only talks about the difficulty of fixing the building and is still vague about what they intend to use it as. They also had trouble finding a contractor to take on the work of replacing the roof. The City was taking action to condemn the building and they had to fight them off. The permit log is an interesting read to that regard.

There is a sliver of the parcel on the west side of the building where parking could theoretically go but it's a steep slope that would be real expensive to re-grade. They could also try to pull back the curb on the east side to add a parking lane but that would prohibit creating a sidewalk in the future, which Ebersole desperately needs there. The reason I mention parking is because the building is in the form-based code overlay which requires parking depending on size. Retail/service requires parking if above 3,500 sqft, which it certainly is. I assume that would force them to subdivide the building into multiple businesses or ask for a variance. Residential requires 1 spot per 1,500 sqft as well.

 

12 minutes ago, jjakucyk said:

 

A contractor acquaintance of mine said someone wanted to renovate the building a couple years ago but their budget was woefully inadequate.  Not sure what they wanted to do with it though, and if it's changed hands since.  Industrial/workshop buildings like that are so rare anymore, it'll be nice to see one fixed up, I just hope it's done decently.  

 

The building also predates WWI making it even more rare.

22 hours ago, Dev said:

 

I couldn't agree more. I get passed all the time on this section of Madison, which is illegal, because I dare to go 32 in a 30. I've gotten takeout from Mazunte there a few times recently and passing drivers seem insulted that I dare park on the street. The shifting eastbound lane is still present in all of Ackermann's drawings too so that's extremely disappointing, especially since there is a crosswalk at Madison and Ward. Westbound drivers commonly pass on the right so they can turn onto Kenwood even though it is clearly marked as being illegal.

 

I've always found it strange that drivers in Cincinnati go so fast on the city streets but so slow on the highways. Not so much the basin but in the rest of the neighborhoods.

34 minutes ago, GCrites80s said:

 

I've always found it strange that drivers in Cincinnati go so fast on the city streets but so slow on the highways. Not so much the basin but in the rest of the neighborhoods.

 

And of course, the faster we funnel cars to the highway, the more congested they get during peak hours.

3 hours ago, Dev said:

 

I still don't know what they intend to do with it but I have heard of who owns it. It's a married couple who invested early in the redevelopment of Oakley and have shifted their focus to Madisonville. They own the old IOOF lodge on Whetsel in the same block as phase 1 of Ackermann's development. It's the building that has the Cheesecakery in it and used to have CooKoo's. Apparently, they live in the apartments above too. The wife has been replying to occasional posts about the building on NextDoor, including a post from yesterday, but only talks about the difficulty of fixing the building and is still vague about what they intend to use it as. They also had trouble finding a contractor to take on the work of replacing the roof. The City was taking action to condemn the building and they had to fight them off. The permit log is an interesting read to that regard.

There is a sliver of the parcel on the west side of the building where parking could theoretically go but it's a steep slope that would be real expensive to re-grade. They could also try to pull back the curb on the east side to add a parking lane but that would prohibit creating a sidewalk in the future, which Ebersole desperately needs there. The reason I mention parking is because the building is in the form-based code overlay which requires parking depending on size. Retail/service requires parking if above 3,500 sqft, which it certainly is. I assume that would force them to subdivide the building into multiple businesses or ask for a variance. Residential requires 1 spot per 1,500 sqft as well.

 

 

The building also predates WWI making it even more rare.

I feel like there’s only a few options you could do with this building and one of those would be my choice of a brewery (Urban Artifact). 

26 minutes ago, Ucgrad2015 said:

I feel like there’s only a few options you could do with this building and one of those would be my choice of a brewery (Urban Artifact). 

 

Yeah that makes too much sense. Looks like that is not allowed according to form-based code:

 

I thought the point of form-based code is to dictate how buildings fit into the fabric of the community, you know the form, and not the use. It seems like the form-based code is still regressive in that regard.

Am I reading this right, it would be required to have 4 parking spaces?

1 hour ago, Dev said:

 

Yeah that makes too much sense. Looks like that is not allowed according to form-based code:

 

I thought the point of form-based code is to dictate how buildings fit into the fabric of the community, you know the form, and not the use. It seems like the form-based code is still regressive in that regard.

Am I reading this right, it would be required to have 4 parking spaces?

 

I've written FBC's and I have insight into this one because I was there when the four neighborhoods got together at Centennial Plaza II to calibrate the code and were so concerned about the negative impact of undesirable bars and breweries. The consultants that worked on the code said that putting more limits on uses would be antithesis to an FBC and this was the compromise. The UP means the applicant has to go before the Zoning Hearings Examiner for a conditional approval. It's the exact administrative process hoop FBC's try to avoid. I can go all day about the flaws in the Cincy FBC...

6 minutes ago, JYP said:

 

I've written FBC's and I have insight into this one because I was there when the four neighborhoods got together at Centennial Plaza II to calibrate the code and were so concerned about the negative impact of undesirable bars and breweries. The consultants that worked on the code said that putting more limits on uses would be antithesis to an FBC and this was the compromise. The UP means the applicant has to go before the Zoning Hearings Examiner for a conditional approval. It's the exact administrative process hoop FBC's try to avoid. I can go all day about the flaws in the Cincy FBC...

Can it be changed so it could become an alcohol establishment or something other than what the code dictates it can be?  

7 minutes ago, JYP said:

 I can go all day about the flaws in the Cincy FBC...

 

I'd listen to that TED Talk.

 

I find the bar/brewery complaints ironic since every successful business district has one now. People insist on having small, local businesses but then don't support the things that incubate them.

^When they survey the general public on that stuff they almost always ask for the same things -- ice cream parlors, candy stores, no-alcohol diners, hardware stores, toy stores, independent coffee shops -- AKA stuff that can be extremely hard to attract and keep open under most circumstances. You almost can't ask the public what they want since things like sports bars, taprooms, dentists, insurance offices, and dog groomers (what actually end up being able to open and become successful) are actually way down on the public lists.

27 minutes ago, Ucgrad2015 said:

Can it be changed so it could become an alcohol establishment or something other than what the code dictates it can be?  

Yes, you would need to convince a City Council person to support a text amendment to the zoning code since the FBC is part of the zoning code.

 

27 minutes ago, Dev said:

 

I'd listen to that TED Talk.

 

I find the bar/brewery complaints ironic since every successful business district has one now. People insist on having small, local businesses but then don't support the things that incubate them.

 

It was 2012 and breweries like Rhinegeist (opened in 2013) were just getting started. The neighborhoods were less concerned with breweries than with bars. They wanted a process that allowed the neighborhoods to have input so that was the compromise. We give Neighborhood Councils tons of (unregulated) power in this city and this is a nod to that.

^It seems like results vary drastically with the community councils. Also, seems like the perfect breeding ground for awful NIMBY resentment.

counterpoint: community councils have no real power. It doesn't matter what they say, the city can do whatever they want, and there is no recourse for the CC. They are almost explicitly there for feedback.

 

The alderman system in Chicago creates real NIMBY-ism that prevents a lot of development from happening. It's a bummer that there are common use restrictions on the FBC in Cincinnati. There is recourse around liquor licenses if you have a bad actor in the neighborhood, but you have to be pretty persistent to get a bar shut down when the liquor license comes up for review.

^Yes, certainly all true, but I wasn't trying to argue that they did have power. People go to these things, get mad at a developer and then pressure elected officials to support regressive and exclusionary zoning policies.

On that note, Mann wants to introduce an ordinance requiring CC approval before TIF district funds are spent.

9 minutes ago, Dev said:

^Yes, certainly all true, but I wasn't trying to argue that they did have power. People go to these things, get mad at a developer and then pressure elected officials to support regressive and exclusionary zoning policies.

On that note, Mann wants to introduce an ordinance requiring CC approval before TIF district funds are spent.

 

I agree with the idea of restricting TIF funds. There are a few logistical issues. TIF funds are not technically tied to a neighborhood, despite the confusing name of some of them. Would every community council with a property in the TIF district have to agree? There is a Downtown/OTR East and Downtown/OTR West district. Would both OTR and Downtown have to agree to release funds from one of the accounts? 

TIF district funding is released so infrequently, I don't really have an issue giving some more say to the people in the communities. But basic stuff like what kind of business goes into a property? That should be liberally spelled out in the zoning/FBC without requiring community council approval.

7 hours ago, GCrites80s said:

^When they survey the general public on that stuff they almost always ask for the same things -- ice cream parlors, candy stores, no-alcohol diners, hardware stores, toy stores, independent coffee shops -- AKA stuff that can be extremely hard to attract and keep open under most circumstances. You almost can't ask the public what they want since things like sports bars, taprooms, dentists, insurance offices, and dog groomers (what actually end up being able to open and become successful) are actually way down on the public lists.

 

Yes, it reminds me of when a successful bar owner wanted to open a new bar at a prominent corner in Pendleton. The community council actually supported it but neighborhood residents banded together with those type of "we don't want another bar in our neighborhood!" complaints and it got cancelled — the operator will now be opening the same concept in another neighborhood. I'm sure Pendleton doesn't care about their "loss" but it just means the space is going to sit vacant for a few more years, because the urban core can only support so many G-rated businesses like dog groomers and Rookwood Pottery stores.

Don't discount things involving animals since current mindsets budget an unlimited amount for them, but people vastly overestimate their demand for stores and wholesome businesses while discounting how much they spend on nights out. Like they don't notice that they spent $125 on dog grooming last month and $400 at restaurants that sell alcohol but think about how they spent $6 at an independent retail store.

Edited June 12, 20205 yr by GCrites80s

OK story time. When I opened my first store in Grandview it was next to a dog grooming place. These people were printing money. They charged $125 per dog and there were always a ton of dogs barking in there non-stop. I could hear it through the walls. The people who owned it drove up from the South Side every day which means their house couldn't be worth more than about $62,000 (in 2010 dollars) and was probably paid off. So all these Land Rovers from Upper Arlington, Grandview, Marble Cliff and even further out such as Hilliard would pull up every evening and pick up 1-3 dogs. The rent couldn't have been more than $1500 a month and there were never more than 4 people working at a time. I remember there was a 4th of July Pet Parade that happened every year and the place almost turned into a riot. One day I was out back smoking while I let the heat out of my $3000 Porsche 944's interior (it was July and the car's A/C didn't work. Because it was $3000) and the workers yelled at me for not smoking in the car. I wasn't being "snooty" by not smoking in the car -- it was 150 degrees inside! So I got in the car with the cigarette still burning and drove off. I was struggling to sell $150 a day in video games and DVDs only while they were taking in more than that per customer.

 

The first year I was open next door they ripped out all their drywall since it had swollen and gotten lumpy from all the moisture and humidity from the dog grooming process. For the next four years plus (we moved the business to Lancaster after that) they operated the business on studs covered with 5 mil clear plastic sheeting. It looked like something out of Die Hard inside. None of the customers cared since it was for the dog. I have no idea if they ever actually spent the money to re-finish the space and they are still there 6 years on.

 

I suppose the lesson is that everyone thinks they want "strolley" storefronts but what they really get is ones that work on referrals.

1 hour ago, GCrites80s said:

They charged $125 per dog

 

10+ years ago I worked with this lady whose husband was making $700k per year before he killed himself.  When our group went out of town I had to go with her once to Camp Bow-wow to drop off Bogey.  Then when our group came back it was time to pick up Bogey.  This dog was a nothing but I had to hear about the thing endlessly.  This dog was so hyped I was expecting some super-dog, not...Bogey.  I actually heard more about this lame dog than I did her good-for-nothing son, who she told us received a new Porche for his 16th birthday.  Last I heard he was 26 and still hadn't graduated from OSU. 

I took the dog for a walk yesterday for lunch. Is it correct to assume the building will have little to no windows???

 

This City owned strip mall used to have two entrances along Madison. Now it only has one and it's the one closest to the Whetsel intersection.

Phase 1 parking lot with completed landscaping:
 

 

 

Curb pull-back is probably around 5 feet. Plans still maintain 5 lane design and there are no bump outs along Madison.

1 hour ago, Dev said:

This City owned strip mall used to have two entrances along Madison. Now it only has one and it's the one closest to the Whetsel intersection.

Sad that they weren’t able to Tear down this building and build something similar to what’s currently being built. I went to one of the community council meetings and Ackerman said it was cut due to costs, so they decided to rehab the building. It looks alright but from the looks of it (not having any signs for the businesses, with the exception of the Cincinnati health department) they are going to be ending the leases with the current tenants in that building. 

1 hour ago, Ucgrad2015 said:

Sad that they weren’t able to Tear down this building and build something similar to what’s currently being built. I went to one of the community council meetings and Ackerman said it was cut due to costs, so they decided to rehab the building. It looks alright but from the looks of it (not having any signs for the businesses, with the exception of the Cincinnati health department) they are going to be ending the leases with the current tenants in that building. 

 

It was my impression the community didn't want the building to be redeveloped but that pre-dates me. If that was true, I had assumed they were worried about the clinic being closed.

The strip is still owned by the City so I didn't think they would kick people out. Is Ackermann going to be managing it? I thought they were supposed to provide new signs as part of phase I improvements...

33 minutes ago, Dev said:

 

It was my impression the community didn't want the building to be redeveloped but that pre-dates me. If that was true, I had assumed they were worried about the clinic being closed.

The strip is still owned by the City so I didn't think they would kick people out. Is Ackermann going to be managing it? I thought they were supposed to provide new signs as part of phase I improvements...

I think it was 50/50 as mostly because of the clinic being closed. I know one or two of the stores have closed in the plaza and that the phase 1 improvements for the plaza have been done for some time. You can see that the clinic has its name on the brick but no other business has that.