PLEASE READ!!!

***** ALL users will have to request a password reset BEFORE you will be able to log into the forum. See the thread in the forum issues section for further instructions. If you have issues with this, email us at admin@urbanohio.com. Also, check your spam folder. *****

We are still having a lot of users try to log on before resetting your password. You will continue to get an error until you reset your password!!

Author Topic: Cincinnati: Over-the-Rhine: Development and News (non-3CDC)  (Read 10985 times)

0 Members and 3 Guests are viewing this topic.

Offline 1400 Sycamore

  • Huntington Tower 330'
  • **
  • Posts: 139
Re: Cincinnati: Over-the-Rhine: Development and News (non-3CDC)
« Reply #4440 on: March 06, 2017, 10:32:46 PM »
The lot is 49 feet wide at street frontage, and totals 3667 square feet.

It might not be twice the size of a lot on some streets, but it is certainly twice the width of 217, 219, or 221 W. 15th Street, its neighbors, which are all about 20-21 feet.

A good rule of thumb is 20-25% of total house cost for land. Sounds like it is priced right on the money.

Online jmecklenborg

  • Jeddah Tower 3,281'
  • *****
  • Posts: 13283
Re: Cincinnati: Over-the-Rhine: Development and News (non-3CDC)
« Reply #4441 on: March 06, 2017, 10:40:23 PM »
Okay I now see that.  I think the listing description changed because I don't remember seeing a lot dimension when I first looked at it.  So the main lot is 29x90 and the side lot is 19x30, which is probably too small to permit a house of its own, depending on the zoning.  Even if a small house is permitted on that small lot, it would also hopefully be exempt from parking requirements.  Otherwise the "house" would simply be a 1-car garage with a staircase next to it leading to 2-3 400~ sq foot floors. 

Offline jjakucyk

  • Jeddah Tower 3,281'
  • *****
  • Posts: 2351
Re: Cincinnati: Over-the-Rhine: Development and News (non-3CDC)
« Reply #4442 on: March 07, 2017, 08:37:46 AM »
^ Correct, basically no single-family residence can be built in the city on a lot less than 25 feet wide and at least 2,000 square feet.  If you do a multi-lot rowhouse development then you get a little more flexibility, but not much. 

Offline tleavitt

  • Excavation Site
  • *
  • Posts: 1
Re: Cincinnati: Over-the-Rhine: Development and News (non-3CDC)
« Reply #4443 on: March 13, 2017, 04:20:14 PM »
LEED and Modern Infill Development in OTR

My wife and I are the owners of 1514 Race St., referred to as one of the examples of "modern infill".  What I wanted to write about here was how LEED also plays into what we are doing and why.  First a bit of background is helpful.

We lived in London England for 16 years prior to coming to Cincinnati.  We lived here back in 1983-1984, and like others now with grown children, we felt the urge to move from our prior more suburban location to something more central.  OTR fit the bill.  We looked around for warehouse and loft space, which isn't Cincinnati's specialty and then looked at 3CDC redevelopment opportunities.  Given our clear objectives were to have lots of light and outdoor space, the (reasonable) constraints of Cincinnati historic preservation moved us in the direction of infill development. 

LEED comes into play not just because there are tax abatements to be had but energy efficiency and environmental considerations seem to be a natural part of urban building.  We have called our building "The Stannary" because it evokes the one of the places we lived in London -- light, vertical, interesting use of materials. . Compare to what 1514 Race looks like in its current state.  Ours are the top two floors, and we are renting the others as AirBnB apartments.

With LEED, things like solar heating and water retention/management are important things.  The former was a bit impractical on a property like ours, but the latter seemed pretty doable.  We bought two adjacent lots, which in the grand scheme of a building project wasn't prohibitive.  Few people tend to say down the road that they regret having bought a bit of extra land.  Having bought 50' of street front instead of 25', this allowed us to leave 5' to 13' on each side of the building to create private space, allow in light, and to allow for water retention systems.  We are doing this through a combination of landscape areas, permeable pavers instead of concrete, and a couple of water butts.

That's the outside.  Inside is a bit more behind the scenes.  Much of what is done seems pretty straightforward -- LED everywhere, low-flow plumbing, renewable lumber resource (or recycled), etc. etc.  One that I found was a new one were the Mitsubishi Mini Splits for HVAC.  They allow you to have multiple zones on a single floor and really seem to help with energy efficiency.  We did have an extended discussion with our LEED consultants regarding the type of insulation to use.  There were questions about closed-cell vs. open-cell and in the end, we had spray, close-cell insulation throughout the building.  The fact is that none of this comes inexpensively, but like others here, the use of good building materials and energy-efficient and environmentally-friendly practices will hopefully pay off down the road.  Fingers crossed that the energy bills are much lower than we are sometimes used to.

We don't yet know whether LEED leads (pardon the pun) to a good or better rating - Silver or Gold-certified in their terminology.  If nothing else, you end up with a place you feel good about regarding its standing in the community and in terms of use of our shared resources.  If you are looking for help going through this process, there are local consultants who know all the ins and outs of navigating LEED.  Given all the specific steps, it might be worth getting the help for anyone considering the LEED process.
« Last Edit: March 13, 2017, 04:22:19 PM by tleavitt »

Offline jjakucyk

  • Jeddah Tower 3,281'
  • *****
  • Posts: 2351
Re: Cincinnati: Over-the-Rhine: Development and News (non-3CDC)
« Reply #4444 on: March 13, 2017, 04:38:25 PM »
The most current version of the LEED for Homes standards give even more weight to well-connected urban properties so that the storm water retention and management points, which are really meant for more suburban projects, aren't needed, or at least they aren't penalizing you so much for not being able to use them.  Having to buy additional property just to satisfy storm water management is somewhat of an anathema to urban development. 

Offline Jimmy Skinner

  • Burj Khalifa 2,722'
  • *****
  • Posts: 1815
Re: Cincinnati: Over-the-Rhine: Development and News (non-3CDC)
« Reply #4445 on: March 13, 2017, 05:06:05 PM »
TLEAVITT; Welcome.  I'm a neighbor 2 blocks to the south.  Congratulations on the new place.  I've been watching it and it looks great.

Offline jmicha

  • Jeddah Tower 3,281'
  • *****
  • Posts: 3822
Re: Cincinnati: Over-the-Rhine: Development and News (non-3CDC)
« Reply #4446 on: March 13, 2017, 05:34:02 PM »
Welcome! I used to live one block south of you until about 9 months ago when I moved to NYC. Your home is one that sets the bar for new construction.

And you hired one of my favorite professors too so I have to love it haha.

I can't wait to see the finished product in person when I'm back in Cincinnati this summer.

Offline Jimmy Skinner

  • Burj Khalifa 2,722'
  • *****
  • Posts: 1815
Re: Cincinnati: Over-the-Rhine: Development and News (non-3CDC)
« Reply #4447 on: March 16, 2017, 10:57:22 PM »
Did the Historic Conservation Board approve this ????

Online taestell

  • Global Moderator
  • Jeddah Tower 3,281'
  • *****
  • Posts: 6394
Re: Cincinnati: Over-the-Rhine: Development and News (non-3CDC)
« Reply #4448 on: March 16, 2017, 11:25:01 PM »
Wow, that's special. Checking with some preservationists about this one...

Online jwulsin

  • Burj Khalifa 2,722'
  • *****
  • Posts: 1767
Re: Cincinnati: Over-the-Rhine: Development and News (non-3CDC)
« Reply #4449 on: March 16, 2017, 11:38:13 PM »
Looks like a work in progress (the balcony is obviously incomplete). Must have gone through the HCB at some point.

Offline Jimmy Skinner

  • Burj Khalifa 2,722'
  • *****
  • Posts: 1815
Re: Cincinnati: Over-the-Rhine: Development and News (non-3CDC)
« Reply #4450 on: March 17, 2017, 12:11:45 PM »
Removing the chimneys and cutting the windows in half looks goofy IMO, especially on a corner where everyone can see it.  And I thought one of the requirements for these roof deck rooms was that you wouldn't normally see them from the street.  I think some bad precedents have been set and almost anything is allowed now.

Offline jim uber

  • Rhodes Tower 629'
  • ***
  • Posts: 642
Re: Cincinnati: Over-the-Rhine: Development and News (non-3CDC)
« Reply #4451 on: March 17, 2017, 01:42:47 PM »
^ I'd thought that building was one that got state historic tax credits too. I'm surprised that they allowed that to be done to a prominent facade.

Offline jmicha

  • Jeddah Tower 3,281'
  • *****
  • Posts: 3822
Re: Cincinnati: Over-the-Rhine: Development and News (non-3CDC)
« Reply #4452 on: March 17, 2017, 03:17:22 PM »
It looks like there's unpainted new brick on the top of that wall. It might be that they've had to replace some of the masonry work up there and it just hasn't fully happened yet. I can't imagine they'd leave it like that...I hope at least.

The bulkhead I don't mind so much. I'm not all about hiding new additions to historic buildings. I just with the bulkhead itself was a little more interesting. But the way the requirements work is that from directly across the street you can't see roof additions. Which I'm sure this meets. But with corner buildings you can obviously get a much longer view of the building. There are a lot of new roof parapets you can see from the street when you look down the road as opposed to across it. Not a big deal in my mind as long as they're not designed to try to be all cutesy matchy matchy.

Offline TroyEros

  • One World Trade Center 1,776'
  • ****
  • Posts: 889
Re: Cincinnati: Over-the-Rhine: Development and News (non-3CDC)
« Reply #4453 on: March 20, 2017, 01:07:48 AM »
Does anyone have any inside information as to what is going on with Northpointe Rothenberg Row?

This was the latest update all the way back in July 2016

Quote
Victorious step forward! The City of Cincinnati Department of Community and Economic Development has NOT renewed the Preferred Developer Agreement (PDA) with Northpointe for the 86,000 square feet of city-owned land at E. Clifton and Main St. The PDA previously gave Northpointe, a private, for profit developer the exclusive rights to plan the development this public land with no community leadership requirements. We sent the content below to the City outlining our reasons why we thought the PDA should NOT be renewed.
This is a victory in what will continue to be a long struggle and is the outcome of over a year’s worth of hard work. There is much more to be done. We must ensure that our neighbors in the community are directly involved and lead the shaping of the future of this land. Please stay tuned to join us in creating a broader vision to do development differently.
---------------------
"The following points summarize why our coalition, and the many residents with whom we have engaged, find it improper and detrimental to the community to renew the existing agreement. This contract:
• Includes utilized public recreation and green space with no mandate to retain, protect, and/or invest in these assets, and does so without any form of community approval
• Offers no commitment to racial and economic inclusion
• Prioritizes the creation of market rate housing, which no longer reflects a pressing need in a community where the real estate market is thriving and the affordable housing stock is rapidly diminishing
• Was created and implemented without any public process, neither through Cincinnati Recreation Commission as stewards of this land, nor through Cincinnati City Council
• Has been repeatedly extended with no community consensus; evidence that the vision is too narrow to meet city and community needs
• Involved no competitive bidding process among potential developers

For about a year and a half, we have been in constant contact with local residents on this issue. We feel confident that the consensus you seek on this development will not be achieved without the following:
• The land containing the current utilized public space (the plaza, basketball courts, open green, and eco garden) must be excluded from the development deal and retained as public land, to be improved in place.
• A large, diverse public meeting, with primary focus on key stakeholders in close proximity to the site, must be held. Key decisions regarding the remaining land must be driven by community input from this meeting.
• Once overarching goals are determined by this meeting, decisions to follow must be guided by a steering committee that includes representation of these stakeholders and primary users of the space.
• Development of the remaining land must prioritize economic inclusion, and incorporate affordable housing targets that mirror the housing goals outlined in the Over-the-Rhine Comprehensive plan.
The Keep Our Courts/Do Development Differently coalition cares deeply about quality of life in our community and city. Our work on this issue has been in service to a goal we share with the Department of Community and Economic Development—to find success in development that brings significant benefit to our community. We believe wholeheartedly that the path to this goal requires a broadening of engagement and participation among our neighbors, especially those who are most marginalized and underrepresented in the power structures of our city. For this reason, we will continue to advocate for a more open and inclusive way forward."

I haven't heard anything moving forward, and the Keep the Courts facebook page is baron with any updates. I'm wondering if Northpointe is dropping this project completely.

Online JYP

  • Global Moderator
  • One World Trade Center 1,776'
  • *****
  • Posts: 1416
    • Urban Cincy
Re: Cincinnati: Over-the-Rhine: Development and News (non-3CDC)
« Reply #4454 on: March 20, 2017, 11:28:28 AM »
Yeah if the PDA was not renewed that would make it a dead project.
“All truly great thoughts are conceived while walking.”
-Friedrich Nietzsche

Online taestell

  • Global Moderator
  • Jeddah Tower 3,281'
  • *****
  • Posts: 6394
Re: Cincinnati: Over-the-Rhine: Development and News (non-3CDC)
« Reply #4455 on: March 20, 2017, 12:38:10 PM »


I still can not get over the fact that we approved a development with vinyl siding visible from Elm Street.

Offline savadams13

  • Metropolitan Tower 224'
  • *
  • Posts: 89
Re: Cincinnati: Over-the-Rhine: Development and News (non-3CDC)
« Reply #4456 on: March 20, 2017, 12:49:07 PM »


I still can not get over the fact that we approved a development with vinyl siding visible from Elm Street.

Towne Properties = Bortz Family
Bortz Family + John Cranely = FWB
Elm Street Development + Cranley appointed board members = approved development design.


Offline old edale

  • Jeddah Tower 3,281'
  • *****
  • Posts: 4824
Re: Cincinnati: Over-the-Rhine: Development and News (non-3CDC)
« Reply #4457 on: March 20, 2017, 01:28:33 PM »
Hideous. The lack of cornice on the side of the building is pretty awful, too.

Online jmecklenborg

  • Jeddah Tower 3,281'
  • *****
  • Posts: 13283
Re: Cincinnati: Over-the-Rhine: Development and News (non-3CDC)
« Reply #4458 on: March 20, 2017, 01:44:27 PM »
Also, there would never be a flat roof.  Most of the area roofs slope at something between 10-25 degrees up to an attic room that is usually the full length of the building.  There are usually very small windows under the gutter and then full-sized windows on the sides of the building. 

Online oudd

  • Administrator
  • Dirt Lot 0'
  • *****
  • Posts: 50
Re: Cincinnati: Over-the-Rhine: Development and News (non-3CDC)
« Reply #4459 on: March 20, 2017, 03:37:00 PM »
I think the 90s era faux-historic buildings on Walnut are actually better than Towne Property's attempt.

https://www.google.com/maps/@39.1104317,-84.5136498,3a,75y,115.18h,91.85t/data=!3m6!1e1!3m4!1s7jxX4EPDuVl6yfIzhNZUcQ!2e0!7i13312!8i6656

At least they're more than two stories, and as mentioned, have sloping roofs. Really they just need a fancier cornice. Pretty sad considering the different development environments between then and now, and the different price points

Offline Yves Behar

  • Kettering Tower 408'
  • **
  • Posts: 231
Re: Cincinnati: Over-the-Rhine: Development and News (non-3CDC)
« Reply #4460 on: March 20, 2017, 03:39:57 PM »
Don't look across the street. *shudders*

Online jmecklenborg

  • Jeddah Tower 3,281'
  • *****
  • Posts: 13283
Re: Cincinnati: Over-the-Rhine: Development and News (non-3CDC)
« Reply #4461 on: March 20, 2017, 03:54:30 PM »
I think the 90s era faux-historic buildings on Walnut are actually better than Towne Property's attempt.

https://www.google.com/maps/@39.1104317,-84.5136498,3a,75y,115.18h,91.85t/data=!3m6!1e1!3m4!1s7jxX4EPDuVl6yfIzhNZUcQ!2e0!7i13312!8i6656

At least they're more than two stories, and as mentioned, have sloping roofs. Really they just need a fancier cornice. Pretty sad considering the different development environments between then and now, and the different price points

Well also the floor height needs to vary.  There really aren't any examples of identical buildings built side-by-side anywhere in OTR.  One three-story building can be significantly higher than the 3-story building it abuts. 

Offline TroyEros

  • One World Trade Center 1,776'
  • ****
  • Posts: 889
Re: Cincinnati: Over-the-Rhine: Development and News (non-3CDC)
« Reply #4462 on: March 20, 2017, 03:55:14 PM »
Is it fair to expect that the infill will reach mt Adams quality in the next 5-7 years? I feel like as property value continues to rise that we are going to see very expensive infill to that match the quality we are expecting to see in otr.

I'm especially eyeing streets like Peete St and the more elevated streets with hilltop views of otr

Online ink

  • Global Moderator
  • Jeddah Tower 3,281'
  • *****
  • Posts: 6981
Re: Cincinnati: Over-the-Rhine: Development and News (non-3CDC)
« Reply #4463 on: March 20, 2017, 03:56:50 PM »
I think the 90s era faux-historic buildings on Walnut are actually better than Towne Property's attempt.

At least they're more than two stories, and as mentioned, have sloping roofs. Really they just need a fancier cornice. Pretty sad considering the different development environments between then and now, and the different price points

I hate the setback on those mixed with older buildings with first floor storefronts. There are three groups of each new and old buildings in one block, so you go back and forth between zero lot line development and 10 foot setback.

Online jmecklenborg

  • Jeddah Tower 3,281'
  • *****
  • Posts: 13283
Re: Cincinnati: Over-the-Rhine: Development and News (non-3CDC)
« Reply #4464 on: March 20, 2017, 04:10:44 PM »
Is it fair to expect that the infill will reach mt Adams quality in the next 5-7 years? I feel like as property value continues to rise that we are going to see very expensive infill to that match the quality we are expecting to see in otr.

Yes.  Most of the single-family homes that have gone up so far were built by Towne or another established developer.  In Mt. Adams, people often hire an architect and that's why there are so many one-off styles in that area.  There won't be many more groups of single-family houses going up in OTR because there aren't many spaces remaining where a developer can throw up a strip of attached row houses like Towne did on Elm St.  They will mostly be single homes built by people who own one lot. 

« Last Edit: March 20, 2017, 04:11:39 PM by jmecklenborg »

Online ucgrady

  • Kettering Tower 408'
  • **
  • Posts: 359
Re: Cincinnati: Over-the-Rhine: Development and News (non-3CDC)
« Reply #4465 on: March 23, 2017, 09:50:20 AM »
Yesterday I was driving down I-74 to I-75 south for the first time in a while and I noticed that there is a brown interstate sign for “Northside” off I-74. I thought that was interesting so I kept my eye out for a similar sign for Over-the-Rhine on I-75. There are no signs for OTR, Washington Park or the Brewery District anywhere along I-75, and only one green sign for Findlay Market. There are a plethora of brown signs for the riverfront, the stadiums, the casino and the convention center but nothing at all for OTR. The federal highway administration states that brown sings are “for guidance to sites of public recreation or cultural interest.” Our city is doing a really poor job of advertising and showing off OTR, which might have the most ‘cultural interest’ of any location in Cincinnati. For a city that prides itself on our marketing/branding we really aren’t doing a good job of drawing people into OTR, and I think this just adds to the fact that many suburbanites still don’t want to go there, and even when they do, have a hard time finding it. At the women’s march in January someone asked me while we were standing in Washington Park, “Is this the OTR?”.

Offline jim uber

  • Rhodes Tower 629'
  • ***
  • Posts: 642
Re: Cincinnati: Over-the-Rhine: Development and News (non-3CDC)
« Reply #4466 on: March 23, 2017, 10:33:24 AM »
I agree. On the end of real estate, I am also saddened by the fact that I can do an MLS search for homes in clifton and corryville, but not downtown or OTR. I don't think that is a minor problem at all, and given there are zero real hurdles for doing so, I'd have to assume it reflects an anti-city bias.
« Last Edit: March 23, 2017, 10:33:54 AM by jim uber »

Online neilworms

  • One World Trade Center 1,776'
  • ****
  • Posts: 1392
Re: Cincinnati: Over-the-Rhine: Development and News (non-3CDC)
« Reply #4467 on: March 23, 2017, 11:30:57 AM »
Yesterday I was driving down I-74 to I-75 south for the first time in a while and I noticed that there is a brown interstate sign for “Northside” off I-74. I thought that was interesting so I kept my eye out for a similar sign for Over-the-Rhine on I-75. There are no signs for OTR, Washington Park or the Brewery District anywhere along I-75, and only one green sign for Findlay Market. There are a plethora of brown signs for the riverfront, the stadiums, the casino and the convention center but nothing at all for OTR. The federal highway administration states that brown sings are “for guidance to sites of public recreation or cultural interest.” Our city is doing a really poor job of advertising and showing off OTR, which might have the most ‘cultural interest’ of any location in Cincinnati. For a city that prides itself on our marketing/branding we really aren’t doing a good job of drawing people into OTR, and I think this just adds to the fact that many suburbanites still don’t want to go there, and even when they do, have a hard time finding it. At the women’s march in January someone asked me while we were standing in Washington Park, “Is this the OTR?”.

I think its beyond bad, its inexcusable.  Every other city in the US that has that level of cultural treasure is proud as hell of it and wants everyone else to know about it.

Offline Yves Behar

  • Kettering Tower 408'
  • **
  • Posts: 231
Re: Cincinnati: Over-the-Rhine: Development and News (non-3CDC)
« Reply #4468 on: March 23, 2017, 11:39:51 AM »
I'm not sure but some of those signs seem pretty old. The ones downtown still have pics of Riverfront Stadium on them, and the sign for Northside on Spring Grove has a picture of a church that fell down in 1991...

Online taestell

  • Global Moderator
  • Jeddah Tower 3,281'
  • *****
  • Posts: 6394
Re: Cincinnati: Over-the-Rhine: Development and News (non-3CDC)
« Reply #4469 on: March 23, 2017, 12:00:56 PM »
I agree. On the end of real estate, I am also saddened by the fact that I can do an MLS search for homes in clifton and corryville, but not downtown or OTR. I don't think that is a minor problem at all, and given there are zero real hurdles for doing so, I'd have to assume it reflects an anti-city bias.

I love how on most realtor sites, there is a dropdown list called "suburb" and if you want to search in downtown, you have to select "city" from that list. The real estate business has been so focused on sprawl for decades that they don't even call them "neighborhoods" anymore, it's all about which suburb you want to live in.