|
JNAPIER
|
 |
« on: February 29, 2004, 03:58:24 PM » |
|
Calhoun Street Market Place is currently under construction and is a mix of retail and housing, with future phases known as McMillan Park.
|
|
|
|
buildingcincinnati
|
|
« Reply #1 on: September 18, 2004, 10:22:21 AM » |
|
You knew it would happen...from Local12 (9/18/04):Clifton Heights Business Owners Fighting Eminent DomainSome Clifton Heights business owners are fighting the city possibly seizing their property by eminent domain to make way for new construction. Several businesses have already closed due to construction, including Wendy's and Taco Bell. If the city were to seize properties, businesses such as Acropolis Chili and Inn the Wood would be forced to close. In order for the city to seize a property by eminent domain, the property must be declared blighted. http://www.wkrc.com/news/local/story.aspx?content_id=E2C3FC14-A2C3-4DD9-A816-30EA91831D9E
|
|
|
|
kendall
|
|
« Reply #2 on: September 19, 2004, 09:11:02 AM » |
|
These business are currently surrounded by empty lots as the buildings around them are demolished. Their buildings aren't architecturally significant. Why don't they just move to another storefront on Calhoun or McMillan and let the project go forward. The completion of the project will help businesses along that stretch immeasurably.
|
|
|
|
Cincinnatus
|
|
« Reply #3 on: September 19, 2004, 05:04:29 PM » |
|
^I agree. All this foot dragging is very counterproductive. That sort of thing held up tearing down the 5th and Race Tower so long that by the time it was settled and they got it torn down, there was no need since the whole project had fallen through.
|
|
|
|
buildingcincinnati
|
|
« Reply #4 on: September 19, 2004, 06:01:55 PM » |
|
What would always be best is for developers to try to include local businesses that will have to be moved out in the plans--say, offering space within the development, etc. What usually ends up happening is that the businesses close down, or are forced away because the rents are bumped up.
|
|
|
|
jmecklenborg
|
|
« Reply #5 on: September 20, 2004, 12:49:22 AM » |
|
>These business are currently surrounded by empty lots as the buildings around them are demolished. Their buildings aren't architecturally significant.
Well I guarantee you the crap UC throws up won't be architectually significant either. We've been through this discussion before. Why, I ask for the millionth time, are row houses and unique businesses (what people claim to be striving for) being demolished when the Shell gas station remains? Look at the plan for that particular block. That building will tear down (if they haven't been torn down already) a strip of potentially decent looking row houses and replace them with a parking lot.
>Why don't they just move to another storefront on Calhoun or McMillan and let the project go forward. The completion of the project will help businesses along that stretch immeasurably.
Not necessarily if their rent goes up. Acropolis Chili and Inn the Wood/227 Tavern likely have their mortgages paid off. They don't want to move to another location where they have to pay rent. Frankly, the development will be more interesting if they are forced to build around those two buildings.
There are two little row buildings that refused to sell in the middle of Rockefeller Center. The place has more character because of it.
|
|
|
|
kendall
|
|
« Reply #6 on: January 05, 2005, 07:05:17 AM » |
|
I think the development is a good thing, although I wish they hadn't demolished such a large swath for it. As the area stands now is almost a prairie.
What really needs to go are the structures at the corner of Vine/McMillan/Calhoun. *shiver*
|
|
|
|
kendall
|
|
« Reply #7 on: January 05, 2005, 07:05:48 AM » |
|
^ I mean the ones north of McMillan... the decrepit old strip mall
|
|
|
|
MR.COFFEE
|
|
« Reply #8 on: January 05, 2005, 08:55:03 AM » |
|
I went up there last week and was shocked at the size of the project, the one thing that bums me out about the uc area is the traffic, people drive like maniacs and crossing the road is like crossing the old fort washington way in parts. I am not against new construcion but some of those old buildings that were torn down were beautiful, and I'm bummed to see them not there anymore.
|
|
|
|
NatiCat5
|
|
« Reply #9 on: January 06, 2005, 11:40:59 AM » |
|
As much as I would like to of had the Reds in Correyville, I def don't think it could handle 40,000+ people going through that area. Its bad enough at 6 pm on a weekday trying to get around. BTW UC football usually pulls in 20,000 people. I really wish that area would go back to what it was a decade or 2 ago, I heard that used to be the hang out of UC students. I hardly go over there on short vine anymore, used to goto Martinos.
|
|
|
|
CiNYC
|
|
« Reply #10 on: January 06, 2005, 11:56:46 AM » |
|
Yet, as I have pointed out numerous times, UC attacks these family-owned, unique businesses, and allows the Shell gas station to remain I spoke with Dan Deering, head of CHCURC last year, and he said that the residents and business owners in the neighorhood wanted to keep the gas station. There was a lot of community involvement in the whole process. What really needs to go are the structures at the corner of Vine/McMillan/Calhoun. This will happen in a later phase.
|
|
|
|
|
|
The_Cincinnati_Kid
|
|
« Reply #12 on: January 31, 2005, 07:00:59 AM » |
|
Clifton Heights restaurants lose domain battle
Dan Monk
Courier Senior Staff Reporter
A Hamilton County judge has ruled in favor of a Clifton Heights redevelopment initiative that wants to use the city's power of eminent domain to tear down and rebuild part of Calhoun Street south of the University of Cincinnati.
"There can be no doubt that a public purpose is served by this urban renewal plan designed to revitaize a declining, deteriorating neighborhood," wrote Hamilton County Common Pleas Judge Thomas Crush earlier this month.
|
|
|
|
buildingcincinnati
|
|
« Reply #13 on: January 31, 2005, 10:15:47 AM » |
|
No surprise there. Developers always win eminent domain battles these days.
|
|
|
|
dglenn
|
|
« Reply #14 on: January 31, 2005, 01:03:25 PM » |
|
what bothers me most about it is that they're going to tear down Inn the Wood's nice old Itallianate building
|
|
|
|
buildingcincinnati
|
|
« Reply #15 on: February 22, 2005, 05:14:59 PM » |
|
I noticed that part of Block 1 (the entertainment district) involves tearing down part of the old PrimeTime club that I went to when I was a dumb teenager. It's halfway ripped down now (good riddance, it's hideous).
Supposedly, this is supposed to be the site of underground parking, a movie theater, upscale restaurants, office space, and perhaps a concert venue.
|
|
|
|
The_Cincinnati_Kid
|
|
« Reply #16 on: February 22, 2005, 08:29:01 PM » |
|
I am glad that is finally coming down. That intersection is such an eyesore and is such a gateway entrance to the university. That block could be the one that brings the most punch to the entire redevelopment.
Although I will miss the old Burgundy's/Prime Time.....It was the first bar I was ever thrown out of! (circa 1988 as a freshman).
|
|
|
|
CiNYC
|
|
« Reply #17 on: February 22, 2005, 09:52:05 PM » |
|
i noticed the demolition of the block today, and while i'm still excited about what they're gonna do here, it truly bothers me that this building couldn't have been saved and incorporated into the plan. It is now a pile of rubble. RIP 
|
|
|
|
|
|
The_Cincinnati_Kid
|
|
« Reply #19 on: February 25, 2005, 11:13:35 PM » |
|
I am with you Monte, this is going to remake the face of Clifton Heights and hopefully jump start a long needed resurrection of the entire UC neighborhood. Between this, Stratford Commons, and all the residential going in on MLK between the main and medical campuses, things are going to be looking really sweet in a few years.
|
|
|
|
RiverViewer
|
|
« Reply #20 on: February 25, 2005, 11:52:27 PM » |
|
Oh yeah, it's great. I wish they'd let Inn The Wood survive, but regardless, this will be a fantastic development for the campus and the neighborhood...
|
|
|
|
mcmicken
|
|
« Reply #21 on: February 26, 2005, 10:47:10 AM » |
|
Speaking of demolition, keep an eye on CHCURC. They just purchased Old St. George. While it's better than Walgreens, which had offered them something like $1.6 million, I know they would like nothing better than to tear it down (though they are working on some other redevelopment plans that could be very cool).
|
|
|
|
Haynesm007
|
|
« Reply #22 on: February 26, 2005, 01:45:39 PM » |
|
Something not shown in the rendering above is the possibility of infilling the gap between the road and Calhoun Hall on the north side of Calhoun and adding even more storefront.
|
|
|
|
Haynesm007
|
|
« Reply #23 on: February 26, 2005, 01:48:55 PM » |
|
I haven't seen anything that would suggest CHCURC is thinking about demolishing Old St. George. In fact, if I recall, their plans make reference to saving specific buildings of historic value including Old St. George.
|
|
|
|
AndrewN
|
|
« Reply #24 on: February 26, 2005, 03:21:28 PM » |
|
"Something not shown in the rendering above is the possibility of infilling the gap between the road and Calhoun Hall on the north side of Calhoun and adding even more storefront. "
I don't think there is enough depth between the Calhoun Street and Calhoun Residence Hall to put in retail. The retail underneath University Park Apartments extends completely to the back of the building. To do that with Calhoun Residence Hall would require eliminating much needed common area/ administrative space and a floor of housing in that building. The only practical way to achieve what you presented is to knock the building down and start all over.
|
|
|
|
dglenn
|
|
« Reply #25 on: February 26, 2005, 09:40:28 PM » |
|
I'm definitely excited about this too
|
|
|
|
buildingcincinnati
|
|
« Reply #26 on: February 26, 2005, 09:56:54 PM » |
|
I'm down with it. There were a couple of aspects I wasn't so fond of (goes with the territory with urban renewal projects), but by and large I see it as a positive.
|
|
|
|
RiverViewer
|
|
« Reply #27 on: February 27, 2005, 12:29:33 AM » |
|
The only practical way to achieve what you presented is to knock the building down and start all over.
I wouldn't be opposed to that...I love having a skyline for the campus, so I'd love to see a 13 story (14 story?) building replace it, but man, Calhoun and Siddall have always struck me as excessively ugly structures.
|
|
|
|
Weedrose
|
|
« Reply #28 on: February 27, 2005, 05:24:51 AM » |
|
Take a look at the CHCRC plans because every indication in their plans indicated that the prices that they are charging for housing wont sale you can pick up the study for the Calhoun site along with McMillan Park at their office or get a copy from one of the local business owners who will be soon displaced.
This project although needed should have had larger input from the community on responsible development to enhance not displace. Their is roughly two-hundred million dollars of development going along in that area and silly mistakes are being made. For example, the condos/apartments In that development didn't take into account ADA access and parts of the structure had to be gutted also I believe that the restaurant project adjacent to these structures was only set up for electric, no gas. Very few restaurants cook with gas. And the piping for the project was a quarter inch off and needed replacing. Also, the wall sockets were at 120 not 220.
Things like this really push back development.
|
|
|
|
The_Cincinnati_Kid
|
|
« Reply #29 on: March 02, 2005, 01:46:46 PM » |
|
Longtime locations resisting 'renewal' Four businesses fight Calhoun Street changes By Lori Kurtzman Enquirer staff writer It's raining when Joe Kennedy and his wife drive up to their restaurant. He steps out of the car and walks to the building's side door, the one with the cracked glass, and pulls it open. Water runs from the roof and drips inside. Kennedy, a thin man with curly hair, passes beneath the stream and grunts. "Another thing I'm not going to fix," he says, " 'cuz they're going to tear this place down." Although Kennedy's fighting it, that's exactly what might happen. 
|
|
|
|
