|
buildingcincinnati
|
 |
« on: September 30, 2007, 05:48:33 PM » |
|
Historic Newport home in dangerBuilding Cincinnati, 9/27/07  Photo of 825 York Street from Campbell County PVAA home at 825 York Street faces possible demolition, despite its place on the National Register of Historic Places. The Muehlenkamp-Erschell Funeral Home would like to demolish the house, ostensibly to expand their parking lot. The funeral home, which is located at 835 York Street, already owns a parking lot at 827 York. Last Thursday, the Newport Board of Adjustment denied by a 2-2 vote Muehlenkamp-Erschell's application for the parking lot. The fear is that the funeral home will demolish the home and then re-apply with the Board of Adjustment in the hopes that, with the house being gone, the parking lot proposal might have a better chance of passing. Local preservationists believe the Greek Revival home to have been built sometime between 1850 and 1860, making it the oldest home on the block. Some of the historic character of the home has been altered, including the installation of vinyl windows. It is currently a blighted multi-family property, and some local residents believe it might be a drug house. An inspection in 2004 listed the property in "good" condition. No more recent inspections are available, though both officials involved in the city's historic preservation and the city's own code enforcement officers know nothing about any structural issues. This area of Newport has seen quite a few rehabs in recent years. WINDOWS LIVE BIRD'S EYE VIEW
GOOGLE AERIAL MAPhttp://www.building-cincinnati.com/2007/09/historic-newport-home-in-danger.html
|
|
|
|
David
|
|
« Reply #1 on: September 30, 2007, 05:54:55 PM » |
|
What constitutes "Italianate" and "Greek Revival"? I don't see much of a difference between this and local "Italianate" buildings. Regardless, it would be sad to see it go 
|
|
|
|
UncleRando
|
|
« Reply #2 on: October 01, 2007, 12:52:05 PM » |
|
The framing around the door looks to differentiate it from Italianate. I could easily be wrong, just throwing it out there.
|
|
|
|
Jskinner
|
|
« Reply #3 on: October 01, 2007, 03:01:13 PM » |
|
I think that is is a simple version of Italianate that may be classified as Greek Revival because of the trim around the front door and the plainess of the elevation. It is more common for a Greek Revival to have the gable face the street and the entry to be centered. However it may be transitional because Italianate is more post civil war and Greek Revival started earlier.
|
|
|
|
dglenn
|
|
« Reply #4 on: April 14, 2008, 04:51:22 PM » |
|
I haven't posted on here in awhile but wanted to spread the word about efforts underway to save the Meiners Building at 1500 Vine. The building has been slated for emergency demolition, and, like so many others, will quietly be turned to rubble in the next two weeks unless something is done. I know there are diverging opinions about the importance of saving various buildings in OTR....but this one, I believe, is an easier sell on the preservation side. If you're unsure, drive by the intersection of 15th and Vine and observe the 5-storey building with the stone facade on the NE corner. What we're trying to do is raise money to demonstrate some level of private financial committment to saving the building. This financial committment is critical to leveraging $100,000 the City has available for restoration, and another $150,000 that 3CDC has for potential use on the building. If you're interested in helping, please check out www.pledgebank.com/Over-the-Rhine, or www.pledgebank.com/1500Vine (different pledge levels) There is much more detail about this that I can get into if people have specific questions. Thanks much, and please pass on the word.
|
|
|
|
|
|
JoeL
|
|
« Reply #6 on: April 15, 2008, 02:09:33 PM » |
|
Obviously there is considerable neglect and fire damage, but why is it slated for emergency demolition? I'm assuming there are massive structural problems? Also, who is the owner of the building? Was it the owner or the city that initiated the demolition process?
Edit: Nevermind - the blog link answered my questions. Quite a shame.
|
|
|
|
UncleRando
|
|
« Reply #7 on: April 15, 2008, 02:51:29 PM » |
|
If I had any money at all...AT ALL, I would help out. Unfortunately I'm broke...I'm more than willing to do a write-up on my website to help spread the word.
|
|
|
|
buildingcincinnati
|
|
« Reply #8 on: April 15, 2008, 08:00:03 PM » |
|
dglenn...I did a writeup with links to the pledge pages on my blog and on Soapbox. Hopefully that sends a few folks your way.
I still haven't pledged yet...should do that.
|
|
|
|
ink
|
|
« Reply #9 on: April 15, 2008, 09:22:45 PM » |
|
I'm so glad to hear someone else is concerned about this!
|
|
|
|
jmecklenborg
|
|
« Reply #10 on: April 16, 2008, 09:02:15 AM » |
|
One problem...people are receiving checks ranging from $300 to $2000+ so I don't see how they can precisely measure how many stimulus checks they're getting. Also, my SS number ends in the 90's so I'm not getting my check until July, which will probably only be $300.
|
|
|
|
UncleRando
|
|
« Reply #11 on: April 16, 2008, 09:37:16 AM » |
|
Also, my SS number ends in the 90's so I'm not getting my check until July, which will probably only be $300. Alright...jmecklenborg's SS# xxx-xx-xx9x hheheheheh...1 down, 8 to go. 
|
|
|
|
Jimmy_James
|
|
« Reply #12 on: April 16, 2008, 10:09:10 AM » |
|
One problem...people are receiving checks ranging from $300 to $2000+ so I don't see how they can precisely measure how many stimulus checks they're getting. Also, my SS number ends in the 90's so I'm not getting my check until July, which will probably only be $300.
I'm guessing that they're counting on the $600 figure that a single person above poverty level will receive. The assumption here would be that for couples, half of that $1200 isn't really yours to donate, and people getting the $2000 have children, which are expensive, making disposable income less likely, and the people getting the $300 check really don't have the money to pledge for something like this. That would have been my rationale anyway.
|
|
|
|
dglenn
|
|
« Reply #13 on: April 16, 2008, 03:03:58 PM » |
|
Thanks for all of your replies.
BuildingCincinnati, thanks for your writeup. A couple of large pledges (i.e. rebate checks) are starting to come in, and the target is starting to look obtainable. All of your efforts at wider disemination, as well as your individual pledges, are critical to this effort and very much appreciated.
Important Update -- Channel 9 is doing a story on the building tonight. It will run between 5:30 and 6:00, and will be posted online after 9. Please check it out and refer as many folks as you can to it.
Finally, if anyone is able to help connect us to additional forums/listservs with relevant viewership, that would be extremely helpful. There are innumerable preservation groups across the country that maintain ongoing dialogues and might be willing to make the smaller $10 pledge, but contact info is needed for these groups.
|
|
|
|
dglenn
|
|
« Reply #14 on: April 16, 2008, 03:26:38 PM » |
|
Uncle Rando, thanks also for your writeup. Succinct and well done. Much appreciated.
|
|
|
|
|
|
TheCOV
|
|
« Reply #16 on: April 25, 2008, 03:28:27 PM » |
|
Whats the latest on this? Can DCI or whoever be approached with the existing pledges to show what support does exist?? Can the current pledge group collectively increase their support???
|
|
|
|
dglenn
|
Checkout www.meinerflats.blogspot.com for the latest. This is now the official website for the 1500 Vine preservation effort. We are currently attempting to collect pledges from those who made them. This is a very critical time for the building. Your support and any other interest you can generate is much appreciated.
|
|
|
|
UncleRando
|
|
« Reply #18 on: September 02, 2008, 10:37:44 AM » |
|
City considers $187,000 for Meiner Flats stabilizationhttp://www.building-cincinnati.com/2008/09/city-considers-187000-for-meiner-flats.htmlCincinnati City Council is considering an emergency ordinance that would establish a new $187,000 capital improvement account for the stabilization of the Meiner Flats building at 1500-1502 Vine Street in Over-the-Rhine. The City would then enter into an agreement with 3CDC (OTR Holdings, LLC) to bring the structure up to Vacant Building Maintenance License standards as part 3CDC's neighborhood redevelopment plan. The funding would be transferred from the OTR Arts District Home Buyers Loan account and from several hazard abatement and demolition accounts. 3CDC has agreed to contribute an additional $200,000 toward the work. Built in 1875 by the Meiner family to advertise their skills as stonemasons, the building has sat vacant for over 20 years. A roof collapse, combined with bricks and pieces of cornice falling to the sidewalk below, forced the City to order an emergency demolition in March. Formerly owned by Big Dog Holdings, it was acquired in May by Christopher Tucker by quit claim deed for $1,000, according to auditor records. Although the demolition permits have been pulled, the building remains condemned and a safety hazard to Vine Street's pedestrians.
|
|
|
|
|
|
UncleRando
|
|
« Reply #20 on: September 18, 2008, 11:07:44 AM » |
|
And a follow up... Cincinnati approves $187K for Meiner Flats stabilization agreementhttp://www.building-cincinnati.com/2008/09/cincinnati-approves-187k-for-meiner.htmlCincinnati City Council has approved an emergency ordinance authorizing the transfer of $187,000 to stabilize the Meiner Flats building at 1500-1502 Vine Street in Over-the-Rhine. The transfer will create a new Meiner Flats capital account, with money taken from the OTR Arts District Home Buyers Loan account and several hazard abatement accounts. The City will now draw up an agreement with 3CDC (OTR Holdings, LLC), who will contribute $200,000 of their own funding, to bring the structure up to code. Built in 1875 by the Meiner family to advertise their skills as stonemasons, the building has been vacant for over 20 years. A roof collapse, combined with bricks and pieces of cornice falling to the sidewalk below, forced the City to order an emergency demolition in March. Although it has been removed from the hazard abatement program for the time being, the façade remains hazardous and the sidewalk below remains closed. In May, it was acquired by Christopher Tucker from Big Dog Holdings by quit claim deed for $1,000, according to auditor records. No plans for a full restoration have been released.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Ram23
|
|
« Reply #22 on: January 09, 2009, 11:57:55 AM » |
|
“They’re arguing that it is financially infeasible to do anything with those properties, including sell them to somebody else who would develop them. But at the same time they’re making that argument, they’re saying we’re unwilling to offer these properties for sale on the open market,” Morgan said. “It makes their argument the perfect test case for what they want to do.”
Mike Morgan summed it up nicely. As for the claim they spent more on maintenance than they could make in rent: there are dozens of apartment buildings like this around the Mt. Auburn and Clifton areas that operate in the green every year. If they can't manage to make a profit, they should probably try and sell to someone who can properly manage the property. Check these images out on the auditor's page, and you'll see it's hard to believe these buildings are too dilapidated to be profitable:  
|
|
|
|
BDRUF
|
|
« Reply #23 on: January 09, 2009, 05:57:29 PM » |
|
It would be terrible to loose either of these especially the one closer to the hospital. I know that someone else could make these profitable. Like it has already been said this is one person pulling some b.s. to get what he wants.
|
|
|
|
UncleRando
|
|
« Reply #24 on: February 20, 2009, 09:15:05 AM » |
|
Not exactly pending demolitions, but I thought this would be a good article to share here...As some historic complexes fall apart, expanded uses breathe life into othersRenovations, ruinshttp://cincinnati.bizjournals.com/cincinnati/stories/2009/02/23/focus2.htmlProcter & Gamble, Crosley, Milacron, Hudepohl, United States Playing Card. They’re the companies that embodied Cincinnati’s emergence as an industrial and consumer goods powerhouse in the first half of the 20th century.
|
|
|
|
Ram23
|
|
« Reply #25 on: February 20, 2009, 11:47:44 AM » |
|
^ Those are some of my favorite buildings in Cincinnati. Hudepohl and Crosley are by far the worst off (except for Milecron, of course; most of the significant parts are gone already).
I have been very interested in doing a research project of sorts on the Crosley Building and have also tried to contact the owners at Hosea a few times, they have never responded. They pay a lot in taxes on the place to seemingly not care about it at all. It's not used at all, and basically filled with left-behind stuff from the former tenants. The building has huge potential, though, as the article points out. It's not the easiest to get to, but not extremely difficult via Hopple Street from I-75, or Spring Grove. If the huge Kahn's building around the corner (surprised this one wasn't in the article) gets renovated into a recylcing center as mentioned in the forum elsewhere, it could bring some livlihood back into the neighberhood. Machine Flats is next door as well.
|
|
|
|
dmerkow
|
|
« Reply #26 on: February 20, 2009, 01:08:52 PM » |
|
The other challenge with some of these buildings which isn't mentioned is the problem of environmental contamination. I have to imagine that the Crosley Bldg and the Playing Card building could both have serious lead issues among others.
|
|
|
|
jmecklenborg
|
|
« Reply #27 on: February 21, 2009, 12:40:06 AM » |
|
My inside source tells me there were talks to convert the US Playing Card complex into condos when the move was finalized, but I doubt that's still an option. It's a very complex complex so surely some of it will be demo'd. They still have a coal fired power plant that used to sell extra power to parts of Norwood. Hard to believe that there was a time when businesses independently sold extra electricity to neighbors but apparently there was.
|
|
|
|
dmerkow
|
|
« Reply #28 on: February 21, 2009, 11:08:46 AM » |
|
Playing Card does have a fair number of recent and not particularly valuable building on site. Saving the main building would be most important. I wonder if Seimens might grab some of their land since they have basically filled up their site at this point.
|
|
|
|
|
|
