Jump to content
The_Cincinnati_Kid

Cincinnati: Over-the-Rhine: Development and News (non-3CDC)

Recommended Posts

There's room for improvement but I don't mind it. I think the terracing was done to provide a transition from Central Parkway scale to OTR scale. The density is what is needed and a 7 story building at the corner will really help connect Pendleton to OTR.

Unless I'm looking at the rendering wrong, the terracing faces north, away from Central Parkway.

 

You're looking at the rendering wrong. Look at the third picture. The building that used to house a charter school on Central and Sycamore is in the top of the frame.  This is the view of the third rendering: https://www.google.com/maps/place/Cincinnati,+OH/@39.1090645,-84.5114666,204a,35y,90h,39.39t/data=!3m1!1e3!4m5!3m4!1s0x884051b1de3821f9:0x69fb7e8be4c09317!8m2!3d39.1031182!4d-84.5120196

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I think if it doesn’t block the view of the Bell Event center steeple from the west looking across OTR then it is OK. It’s pretty tall but there is also an elevation difference between the two so it might be OK.


www.cincinnatiideas.com

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I'll be the NIMBY:

 

Probably block some of my skyline view from 14th and Sycamore. Same for some units at 1310 Sycamore.

 

I don't think it will. It seems like this building would be shorter than the existing building at 1100 Sycamore.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I'll be the NIMBY:

 

Probably block some of my skyline view from 14th and Sycamore. Same for some units at 1310 Sycamore.

 

I don't think it will. It seems like this building would be shorter than the existing building at 1100 Sycamore.

 

I'll try to get a snapshot from the 4th floor at 1400 Sycamore tomorrow. It is elevated from 12th. Pretty good view from up there now.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Also, a 5 story mixed use building, with (I believe ground floor retail) was proposed for 1518 Race St (the vacant lot right next to the church on race).

 

Its in the latest HCB....Definitely feel like development is speeding along quite well in OTR as of late.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I really like this quote in the letter from Graham Kalbli in reference to the Race Street project:

 

"I urge you to approve this Project, as it robustly and successfully addresses the design guidelines for the district. Further, I urge the city to take a principled stand, to countermand some of the voices in the neighborhood, who are not trained in architecture or design, and who continue to thwart growth, progress, and redevelopment in the neighborhood by opposing creative developments such as the one proposed for 1518 Race Street."

 

We need to get the density of projects correct now, because we are filling many of the remaining empty lots and only have one shot to get it right for the foreseeable future.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Could we send all the naysayers and Margy Waller on a three hour tour out to sea... We will just end up with crappy brick front face facade two story buildings from Towne Properties all over OTR if they had there way.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

^That photo shows my point, between Woodward Highschool and 1100 Sycamore, the height is already in that part of the neighborhood so there should be NO reason for nimby's to complain about height (though everyone has a right to complain about pointlessly staggered windows instead of a simple factory window aesthetic similar to what was installed in Baldwin).

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

On 1518 Race, it was already denied so I wonder what they come back with to make it work?

 

Great news on the Sycamore project, hopefully that gets passed!

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I don't think it was denied. It was recommended to be denied. The HCB meeting is on the 10th I thought. I'm out of town but if I were here, I'd definitely be attending that meeting and trying my best to channel what Graham Kalbli said (see above post by ucgrady[/member])

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

^ I just now looked at the HCB packet for 1518 Race, and what is hilarious is the owner of the building to the south is writing to oppose it, when his building is very similar in massing and style.  Talk about NIMYs in glass houses throwing rocks.

 

Also, Platte looks like they are almost exactly replicating the design aesthetic that they used at 1218 Race, which was approved last year but has not yet begun construction.

 

https://www.cincinnati-oh.gov/buildings/historic-conservation/historic-conservation-board/september-10-2018-staff-report-and-attachments/

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I can say nobody around the office who I shared the renderings of 12th and Sycamore with think it's a good looking design.  And this is an architecture firm.  It would actually look just as appropriate in a Mason office park, it's that generic and dated. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

So it appears from what I’ve learned is that the hcb called for the developers of 12th and sycamore to go back to the drawing boards and involve more community engagement for this project.

 

I think that this could be a good thing and a good call from the hcb. The current design of this project is quite horrendous tbh for the historic district.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Dos anybody have any information about the Prince of Peace Lutheran Church on Race Street, just south of the Liberty/Race streetcar stop? Scaffolding recently went up, so I assume they're just doing a renovation?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Dos anybody have any information about the Prince of Peace Lutheran Church on Race Street, just south of the Liberty/Race streetcar stop? Scaffolding recently went up, so I assume they're just doing a renovation?

They wrote in to the HCB in opposition to a few recent projects, so I assume they're not going anywhere.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Dos anybody have any information about the Prince of Peace Lutheran Church on Race Street, just south of the Liberty/Race streetcar stop? Scaffolding recently went up, so I assume they're just doing a renovation?

They wrote in to the HCB in opposition to a few recent projects, so I assume they're not going anywhere.

 

I disapprove of their scaffolding, it "towers over the 2-story building next door".

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

What’s in the final OTR parking plan sent to City Council?

 

Residential parking permits for Over-the-Rhine south of Liberty Street would cost $60, the city would sell an unlimited number of them and there would be 500 on-street spaces available under a parking plan Acting City Manager Patrick Duhaney sent to City Council on Thursday.

 

The special parking plan for the neighborhood reverses a previous concept that would have capped the number of permits issued and charged $120 per permit per year. Both versions charge low-income residents in subsidized housing $25 per permit.

 

But there’s a catch: In the ordinances Duhaney sent council, the city manager would have the authority to raise or lower the price of permits.

 

More below:

https://www.bizjournals.com/cincinnati/news/2018/09/14/what-s-in-the-final-otr-parkingplan-sent-to-city.html


"You don't just walk into a bar and mix it up by calling a girl fat" - buildingcincinnati speaking about new forumers

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I really wish they weren't voting on both the residential parking permits for OTR and the removal of parking minimums at the same time.  I am afraid those two items will be lumped together.  Removal of parking minimums needs to happen regardless of what happens with residential parking permits.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Vote on OTR plan, repeal of parking minimums expected today

 

The Cincinnati City Council is expected to vote Wednesday on two plans: One would repeal city regulations that require a certain amount of parking spaces for development in downtown and Over-the-Rhine, while the other would set aside a certain number of on-street spaces for OTR residents.

 

Council’s Zoning Committee, composed of council members Greg Landsman and Amy Murray and Vice Mayor Christopher Smitherman, voted on Tuesday to send both plans to the full council for a potential vote at 2 p.m. today.

 

The OTR Community Council continues to object to the plan to set aside 500 on-street spaces for neighborhood residents at $60 per year with an unlimited number of passes because the ordinance will allow the city manager to change those amounts without council approval. It also believes the plan has not received enough community input. Today, there are no on-street spaces in OTR set aside for residents. The city has residential parking districts in Clifton, Columbia Tusculum and Pendleton.

 

More below:

https://www.bizjournals.com/cincinnati/news/2018/09/19/vote-on-otr-plan-repeal-of-parking-minimums.html


"You don't just walk into a bar and mix it up by calling a girl fat" - buildingcincinnati speaking about new forumers

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

City Council eliminates parking minimums in 3 neighborhoods, passes OTR plan

 

Developers working in downtown, Over-the-Rhine, Pendleton and adjacent parts of the West End will no longer have to include parking as a part of their projects, the Cincinnati City Council decided in an 8-1 vote on Wednesday.

 

Council also voted unanimously to set aside 500 on-street spots in Over-the-Rhine for residents, an ordinance opposed by Mayor John Cranley.

 

The two ordinances have been under discussion for most of the summer, with developers and small businesses pushing for the parking minimum repeal because of a tightening urban core with less room for surface parking lots.

 

More below:

https://www.bizjournals.com/cincinnati/news/2018/09/19/city-council-eliminates-parking-minimums-in-3.html


"You don't just walk into a bar and mix it up by calling a girl fat" - buildingcincinnati speaking about new forumers

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

The elimination of parking minimums is huge for OTR, Pendleton and downtown.  This obviously helps apartment and condo builders but it will also be a great help to restaurants/bars as well.

 

Do you think an existing restaurant or one that is currently under construction could add space and not have to build/lease more parking? Or since they started/existed before this new rule do they still have to abide by the previous parking minimums?  I remember reading about quite a few places that had to cut down their space because or parking requirements.  Specifically I remember Mikey's Late Night/Oddfellows and Dan Wright's new restaurant both had to downsize due to parking requirements. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Starting October 20th or so, any new project, which would include additions or expansions, will not have to consider the parking regulations. So for most of these, I think the projects are baked from when HCB approved their variances but if they want to expand in the future they will be exempt.

 

I would have to think the regulatory staff will try to fight for the existing parking requirements right up to the moment this is enacted, they have been against this policy because the current policy allows them to leverage the requirements in exchange for concessions.

 

While this is a blow to NIMBY's in OTR, it's also a potential blow to the city's ability to stop potentially undesirable projects from moving forward.

 

What undesirable projects? I don't know, but that was a concern that I heard being raised during this latest push.


“All truly great thoughts are conceived while walking.”
-Friedrich Nietzsche

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

https://www.cincinnati-oh.gov/buildings/historic-conservation/historic-conservation-board/september-24-2018-staff-report-and-attachments/

 

 

Latest HCB packet has been uploaded... looks like the former Boys and Girls Club at Liberty/Central (purchased by Fortus Group who is partnering with the elm and liberty project) is going to be demolished and replaced with a parking lot... I am wondering if this is to avoid building the parking garage part of the development?

 

Disappointing to see as that is a major corner and opportunity for some height and density.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Wow...I really hope that's denied. No parking lots should be allowed to be built anywhere in the core, let alone ones of that scale on prominent corners. That's horrible.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I find it hilarious that so many here talk about these projects as though they are some type of super race whose opinions are more important than those of the persons who actually own the land and pay for the development and live with the results. Kind of a nerd elitism.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Sorry but this is the shit that happens when Margy and her crew of OTRCC get involved. They piss off developers so much they find ways around doing what they want because of the unreasonable amount of demands. This parking lot is a big f*** you to the community for dragging out this process as long as they did with so many meetings and hearings. We are seeing the NIMBY crowd winning more and more and this is creating shitty projects from OTR to Oakley.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I find it hilarious that so many here talk about these projects as though they are some type of super race whose opinions are more important than those of the persons who actually own the land and pay for the development and live with the results. Kind of a nerd elitism.

Nobody here is claiming to be a "super race". This is a community forum for sharing ideas and opinions. If you don't want to read other people's opinions, you are certainly welcome to not read them!

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

https://www.cincinnati-oh.gov/buildings/historic-conservation/historic-conservation-board/september-24-2018-staff-report-and-attachments/

 

 

Latest HCB packet has been uploaded... looks like the former Boys and Girls Club at Liberty/Central (purchased by Fortus Group who is partnering with the elm and liberty project) is going to be demolished and replaced with a parking lot... I am wondering if this is to avoid building the parking garage part of the development?

 

Disappointing to see as that is a major corner and opportunity for some height and density.

 

I would speculate the parking lot is more a condition of getting financing for the development. If you look at the report, they are preparing to build the parking lot into a garage in a future phase. My guess is this:

 

1.) Demo the building for a temporary surface lot/staging area to secure financing for the approved plan.

2.) Phase 2 will be a structured garage as designated in the approved parking lot for Liberty and Elm, with a new mixed-use building fronting Central Parkway.

 


“All truly great thoughts are conceived while walking.”
-Friedrich Nietzsche

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I find it hilarious that so many here talk about these projects as though they are some type of super race whose opinions are more important than those of the persons who actually own the land and pay for the development and live with the results. Kind of a nerd elitism.

 

Hey guess what?  When buildings in the core are torn down and replaced with parking lots, it's the rest of us who end up subsidizing that property owner.  The streets, sidewalks, pipes, wires, lights, police, fire, schools, libraries...those don't go away when a building is demolished, but they still have to be operated and maintained.  The property owner however has their taxes reduced to a pittance.  So the burden of all that infrastructure and services falls on the rest of us to cover through our taxes and utility rates.  So yeah, we have every right to be upset when projects get scaled down, canceled, or turned into vacant lots (which parking lots are too).  Your self-righteousness is misplaced and ignorant.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Not to mention they seemingly killed the Liberty and Elm project.  The OTRCC is not a positive for the neighborhood. 

This quote from the CoA review for the proposed Lot seems to indicate otherwise: "The proposed parking lot will be built in association with the previously approved development at the northwest corner of Liberty Street and Elm Street. Under common ownership, the lot will likely initially serve as public parking until the parking lot is needed for the development. Upon completion of the building, the lot will serve the residents of the Liberty and Elm residences. Eventually, a parking garage is intended to serve the development at which point the subject property could be redeveloped to commercial or mixed-use."

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I find it hilarious that so many here talk about these projects as though they are some type of super race whose opinions are more important than those of the persons who actually own the land and pay for the development and live with the results. Kind of a nerd elitism.

 

Huge surface lots in the urban core are well-documented negative assets. They starve streets of life, increase rainwater runoff, and as reduce property taxes collected as mentioned above. We have every right to criticize their creation.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I find it hilarious that so many here talk about these projects as though they are some type of super race whose opinions are more important than those of the persons who actually own the land and pay for the development and live with the results. Kind of a nerd elitism.

 

Huge surface lots in the urban core are well-documented negative assets. They starve streets of life, increase rainwater runoff, and as reduce property taxes collected as mentioned above. We have every right to criticize their creation.

 

We need to move to a stormwater charge like they have in Philly and throughout Maryland:

 

http://www.phillywatersheds.org/non-residential-stormwater-information

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I find it hilarious that so many here talk about these projects as though they are some type of super race whose opinions are more important than those of the persons who actually own the land and pay for the development and live with the results. Kind of a nerd elitism.

 

Huge surface lots in the urban core are well-documented negative assets. They starve streets of life, increase rainwater runoff, and as reduce property taxes collected as mentioned above. We have every right to criticize their creation.

 

We need to move to a stormwater charge like they have in Philly and throughout Maryland:

 

http://www.phillywatersheds.org/non-residential-stormwater-information

 

And a land value tax instead of a property tax.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

^ Key phrases:  will likely, eventually, intended to, could be

 

I'm not responding to your criticism of the building tear down. I was responding to the comment that the Liberty and Elm project was killed. See the first sentence with "will be" in it.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Some of you guys on here remind me of PTSD patients. Scars from the past, make some of you so untrusting about others intentions in an almost paranoia type of way..it's kind of scary, and it's very unique to this cincinnati section from what i've noticed. The columbus/cleveland sections on this forum are way more relaxed for whatever reason when discussing development (for the most part) lol.

 

Like jim uber said, it seems like this parking lot is a temporary lot, and will eventually be replaced with phase 2 of elm and liberty.

 

If the sycamore lots can be redeveloped, then I have faith that this won't be a long term surface lot situation. It also sounds like this is why elm and liberty was held up, so it's good news that this project can finally move forward once the boys and girls club building is demolished.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Proposing to demolish a building, even a non-historic one, to only replace it with a surface parking lot in OTR should 'scare' anyone. We just got rid of parking requirements in the neighborhood, and now we have a proposal for a frickin' surface lot a couple blocks from Findlay Market? Nonsense. If the developer doesn't have the chops to pull off a decent project, then they need to get out of the way, and let someone who's better equipped to develop the site do so. I would definitely imagine if a plan was floated to put a surface parking lot in the heart of the Short North, Columbusites (Columbusonians?) would be similarly pissed.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    No registered users viewing this page.

×
×
  • Create New...