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: Mount Auburn: Inwood Village  (Read 319 times)

0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.

Offline Maximillian

  • Burj Khalifa 2,722'
  • *****
  • Posts: 1305
Re: Cincinnati: Mount Auburn: Inwood Village
« Reply #60 on: December 08, 2006, 03:01:22 PM »
Quote
Mt. Auburn is not Mt. Orab.
I am a proud Mt auburn homeowner and I agree with that! Inwood village is a great idea.  There is nothing cooler than standing at the top or bottom of Glencoe and soaking in the beautiful stairstep architecture.  The neighborhood is one of the most unique in cincinnati.

Offline RiverViewer

  • Jeddah Tower 3,281'
  • *****
  • Posts: 3164
Re: Cincinnati: Mount Auburn: Inwood Village
« Reply #61 on: December 08, 2006, 03:52:48 PM »
^Amen to that!  It's a great location, and it's visually interesting from every angle.  It could be such a great little community, could be a center of life that flows out into the surrounding community - instead, it's a lifeless hole that depresses the whole area.  But wow, so much potential...

Offline Michael L. Redmond

  • Jeddah Tower 3,281'
  • *****
  • Posts: 1870
Re: Cincinnati: Mount Auburn: Inwood Village
« Reply #62 on: December 08, 2006, 04:00:24 PM »
OK, a different direction then I thought the update would go into.  The important thing now is that the project get started and completed.  Street blocking will be a mute point if the city does not see that this is an immensely important project, not just for Mt. Auburn, but for the entire area. 
The City needs to fund this project, so send some emails, make some calls, let them know.  Either this project is going to happen and the city come through with what they already have agreed to, or it sits there indefinetly, maintaining the status quo.
« Last Edit: December 08, 2006, 04:05:03 PM by Michael Redmond »

Offline RiverViewer

  • Jeddah Tower 3,281'
  • *****
  • Posts: 3164
Re: Cincinnati: Mount Auburn: Inwood Village
« Reply #63 on: December 08, 2006, 04:22:39 PM »
Michael, do you know what plans are for parking?  If these places were all renovated and filled up, there's absolutely no way there'd be enough space on the stree for even half or a third of the residents.  How is that going to be handled?  Or is the issue a non-issue right now, and will be addressed at a hypothetical later date?

BTW, if anyone's interested, there are photos of the area from 2004 about halfway down the first page of this thread...

Offline thomasbw

  • Jeddah Tower 3,281'
  • *****
  • Posts: 5025
Re: Cincinnati: Mount Auburn: Inwood Village
« Reply #64 on: December 08, 2006, 06:59:59 PM »
^yeah i was wondering about that myself (the parking).  Had the light rail been built the mt. auburn stop would have alievated some of those issues.

Offline BallHatGuy

  • Global Moderator
  • Burj Khalifa 2,722'
  • *****
  • Posts: 1187
Re: Cincinnati: Mount Auburn: Inwood Village
« Reply #65 on: December 08, 2006, 11:01:18 PM »
If I remember it was a combination of parking lots, parking decks, and possibly individualy garages/carports.

Offline Michael L. Redmond

  • Jeddah Tower 3,281'
  • *****
  • Posts: 1870
Re: Cincinnati: Mount Auburn: Inwood Village
« Reply #66 on: December 09, 2006, 08:43:08 AM »
I could be wrong about this but I do know of two houses that Pauline is going to buy or has bought, they are both directly behind the model, I want to say that some parking is going to go there after they are torn down (one already has a tree sitting on it roof) As for the rest, I am not sure.  There is existing parking spaces at the bottom of the first row of condos on the right.
« Last Edit: December 09, 2006, 08:43:47 AM by Michael Redmond »

Offline RiverViewer

  • Jeddah Tower 3,281'
  • *****
  • Posts: 3164
Re: Cincinnati: Mount Auburn: Inwood Village
« Reply #67 on: December 09, 2006, 09:19:18 AM »
So how many buildings are gonna be torn down in the end?  (I hope you understand that the suggestion makes the ol' sphinkter tighten up a little...)


Offline Michael L. Redmond

  • Jeddah Tower 3,281'
  • *****
  • Posts: 1870
Re: Cincinnati: Mount Auburn: Inwood Village
« Reply #68 on: December 09, 2006, 09:25:00 AM »
two frame, non historic building, one that a tree has fallen on, both abandoned. 

Offline RiverViewer

  • Jeddah Tower 3,281'
  • *****
  • Posts: 3164
Re: Cincinnati: Mount Auburn: Inwood Village
« Reply #69 on: December 09, 2006, 09:36:32 AM »
Well, I guess the question is the long-term plans for parking...I understand if that isn't worked out yet, but obviously two lots isn't sufficient for demand.  I'm just not familiar enough with the area to know if there's ample spaces or not, it's just looking at Glencoe and LeRoy and all that, I just don't see it...

Offline Michael L. Redmond

  • Jeddah Tower 3,281'
  • *****
  • Posts: 1870
Re: Cincinnati: Mount Auburn: Inwood Village
« Reply #70 on: December 09, 2006, 10:23:13 AM »
to be honest, I don't know enough about the parking situation to really comment on it.  Next time I see Pauline, I will ask. 

If anyone has a camera and wants to take some new pics of the interior of the model, let me know and I will get you in.  The outside just doesn't tell the story.

Offline buildingcincinnati

  • Jeddah Tower 3,281'
  • *****
  • Posts: 15773
Re: Cincinnati: Mount Auburn: Inwood Village
« Reply #71 on: December 09, 2006, 01:04:20 PM »
Re: parking

The only parking I have heard of is a 57-space garage structure that the developers want the city to fund.

That doesn't seem like very much.

Offline Michael L. Redmond

  • Jeddah Tower 3,281'
  • *****
  • Posts: 1870
Re: Cincinnati: Mount Auburn: Inwood Village
« Reply #72 on: March 23, 2007, 08:55:31 AM »
Ok, there are just short of 2 parking spaces per unit.  There will be surface lots dotted all around the project in addition to the garage. 

This project I feel is about to happen, it is going in front of the finance committee to get approval for cost increases and all members of council and the mayor have been met with individually. 
The community, including Dist 4 and Dist 1 are getting behind this along with Christ Hospital because many of the problems associated with having a huge, vacant, neglected property are radiating outward and affecting the neighborhood as a whole.
UrbanOhio's voice should be heard as well on this project.  Here is a chance to do more than just talk about upcoming projects but to have a say in getting it done.  Please write council, tell them how important 68 historic, market rate homes in the heart of Mt Auburn could benefit us all in exposing even more to the urban lifestyle.
It is time to draw the line in the sand, Inwood Village has been neglected, and pushed to the side for years.  We have an opportunity to as a community, as people who realize the importants of building our urban core, to bring to life a project that will serve as a catylyst to even more development between uptown and downtown Cincinnati.  Please email council today, this is it!

Vice Mayor James R. Tarbell
Phone: (513) 352-3604
Fax: (513) 352-3621
james.tarbell@cincinnati-oh.gov

Y. Laketa Cole

Phone: (513) 352-3466
Fax: (513) 352-3957
laketa.cole@cincinnati-oh.gov

Jeff Berding
Phone: (513) 352-3283
Fax: (513) 352-3289
jeff.berding@cincinnati-oh.gov

Chris Bortz
Phone: (513) 352-3255
Fax: (513) 3264
chris.bortz@cincinnati-oh.gov

John Cranley

Phone: (513) 352-5303
Fax: (513) 352-4657
john.cranley@cincinnati-oh.gov

David Crowley
Phone: (513) 352-2453
Fax: (513) 352-2365
david.crowley@cincinnati-oh.gov

Leslie Ghiz

Phone: (513) 352-3344
Fax: (513) 352-3277
leslie.ghiz@cincinnati-oh.gov
   
Chris Monzel
Phone: (513) 352-3653
Fax: (513) 352-4649
chris.monzel@cincinnati-oh.gov

Cecil Thomas
801 Plum St. Rm 349
Phone: (513) 352-3492
Fax: (513) 352-3218
cecil.thomas@cincinnati-oh.gov
« Last Edit: March 23, 2007, 08:58:06 AM by Michael Redmond »

Offline UncleRando

  • Jeddah Tower 3,281'
  • *****
  • Posts: 14999
Re: Cincinnati: Mount Auburn: Inwood Village
« Reply #73 on: March 23, 2007, 09:30:12 AM »
This could be a great project that will help fill in some of the awesome density in the core.  I hate it when people compare density numbers...and it just doesn't add up.  There is NO WAY that Charlotte is as dense as Cincinnati, but thats what the numbers say.  If Cincy were to fill in these type of bldgs then the numbers wouldn't even come close.

Picture it this way...Inwood Village is a very dense area, but it is vacant...so if a place like Charlotte simply threw down 10 SF track homes over the same land area - then poof; higher density numbers.  When in all reality it isn't close.  I pray for the day when there are almost none of these places left in Cincy.  Our inner-city 'hoods are struggling...hopefully our city government takes the right action of this one; and allows a reuse to occur!

Offline Michael L. Redmond

  • Jeddah Tower 3,281'
  • *****
  • Posts: 1870
Re: Cincinnati: Mount Auburn: Inwood Village
« Reply #74 on: March 23, 2007, 10:37:11 AM »
Say it loud UncleRando, say it to the people who need to hear it, City Council, they are deciding now. 

Offline thomasbw

  • Jeddah Tower 3,281'
  • *****
  • Posts: 5025
Re: Cincinnati: Mount Auburn: Inwood Village
« Reply #75 on: March 25, 2007, 07:20:21 PM »
who do you need to sway?  I am just guessing a call or email to tarbell wouldn't be as beneficial to a call or email to (fill in the blank)

Offline Michael L. Redmond

  • Jeddah Tower 3,281'
  • *****
  • Posts: 1870
Re: Cincinnati: Mount Auburn: Inwood Village
« Reply #76 on: March 25, 2007, 07:38:38 PM »
Leslie Ghiz
Phone: (513) 352-3344
Fax: (513) 352-3277
leslie.ghiz@cincinnati-oh.gov


Chris Bortz
Phone: (513) 352-3255
Fax: (513) 3264
chris.bortz@cincinnati-oh.gov

These are the two that we are not sure of.  The others still could use emails or calls to let them know that they are indeed making the right decission on supporting Inwood.  Thank you Thomasbw and everyone else.

Offline Cincy-Rise

  • Jeddah Tower 3,281'
  • *****
  • Posts: 5083
Re: Cincinnati: Mount Auburn: Inwood Village
« Reply #77 on: August 19, 2007, 01:42:18 PM »
I was searching for a thread similar, but I couldn't find anything ...

I was wandering if anyone has heard anything in regards to Glencoe in Mt. Auburn? This place is amazing and has the potential to be a great area. I know Michael Redmond was mentioning something about city financing to get this project going, but I haven't heard anything recent. Any updates would be greatly appreciated!

Just a small sample of Glencoe for those of you that don't know about it (a bad and gloomy picture, if anyone has a better one -mods feel free to replace this one) ...



Offline buildingcincinnati

  • Jeddah Tower 3,281'
  • *****
  • Posts: 15773
Re: Cincinnati: Mount Auburn: Inwood Village
« Reply #78 on: August 19, 2007, 05:45:06 PM »
I haven't heard a thing.

Offline Michael L. Redmond

  • Jeddah Tower 3,281'
  • *****
  • Posts: 1870
Re: Cincinnati: Mount Auburn: Inwood Village
« Reply #79 on: August 20, 2007, 08:28:55 AM »
The hold up is that the city has already agreed to provide funding for improvements of their property (city property) which are the small concrete parks that are overgrown and an eyesore.  They now do not want to release that money until after the project is completed which we say will hender the sales.  The model is already complete and the project is ready to go, we just need to get over this one hurdle.

Offline buildingcincinnati

  • Jeddah Tower 3,281'
  • *****
  • Posts: 15773
Re: Cincinnati: Mount Auburn: Inwood Village
« Reply #80 on: September 29, 2007, 12:18:01 PM »
Inwood Village project seeking preservation tax credits
Building Cincinnati, 9/26/07

The developer of the stalled Inwood Village project in Mount Auburn is seeking state tax credits to help fund the rehabilitation a historic district abutting Christ Hospital.

Developer Pauline Van der Haer of Dorian Development has applied for Ohio Historic Preservation Tax Credits for a $20.5 million rehabiliation of the Glencoe-Auburn Hotel and the Glencoe-Auburn Place Row Houses.

The rehabilitation of the buildings, which were built between 1884 and 1891, would produce 68 market-rate homes priced in the $200,000-$300,000 range.

The tax credits, which are distributed by the Ohio Department of Development (ODOD), are equal to 25 percent of the owner's qualifying rehabilitation expenditures.*

ODOD has deemed $16 million of the project cost eligible for the tax credits.

Van der Haer had been loath to seek federal tax credits for the project after the district was placed on the National Register of Historic Places in 2004.

The project was first announced in 2004 with the promise of 31 units in Phase I, and a model was completed in late 2006.

Since then, the project has stalled due to funding. The City has already approved Community Development Block Grant funding for infrastructure improvements in the district, including the small concrete parks in the courtyards.

However, the City wants for the buildings to be completed before that money is released. Dorian feels that the overgrown courtyards would hurt sales.

In related news, parking capacity has not yet been ironed out, but it's likely to include at least one parking structure and numerous small surface lots.

* The credit can be claimed against the building owner's Ohio corporate franchise tax, personal income tax, or dealer-in-intangible tax liability.

http://buildingcincinnati.blogspot.com/2007/09/inwood-village-project-seeking.html

Offline Cincy-Rise

  • Jeddah Tower 3,281'
  • *****
  • Posts: 5083
Re: Cincinnati: Mount Auburn: Inwood Village
« Reply #81 on: September 29, 2007, 02:09:56 PM »
God, this would be amazing if it were redeveloped.

Online GCrites80s

  • Jeddah Tower 3,281'
  • *****
  • Posts: 7779
  • 1492 or 4,192?
Re: Cincinnati: Mount Auburn: Inwood Village
« Reply #82 on: September 29, 2007, 02:58:13 PM »
Seicer did a good writeup of this area at his Abandoned site (w/pix).

 http://www.abandonedonline.net/index.php?catid=349

Offline Michael L. Redmond

  • Jeddah Tower 3,281'
  • *****
  • Posts: 1870
Re: Cincinnati: Mount Auburn: Inwood Village
« Reply #83 on: October 01, 2007, 10:05:52 AM »
This project is not abandoned, it is still moving forward however the city needs to step up to the plate and take care of the property they own that is dotted all around this site.  Pauline has worked very hard to come to a reasonable agreement with the city and she is very close.  The mayor has said this project needs to happen and we have most of counsel on board however there are a few that either do not understand the importance of this site and its redevelopment, or simply have other priorities outside the turnaround of the area that links uptown to OTR and downtown.

One really cool change in the plan is the Glencoe Hotel that might find its way back into the boutique hotel business.  So many great things can happen if counsel will step up to the plate and do what they have already promised to do, but we need to tell them.  If anyone knows any of the counsel members personally, ask them--if anyone is at any of the "meet the counsel" meetings, tell them--we need Inwood!
« Last Edit: October 01, 2007, 10:14:39 AM by Michael Redmond »

Online GCrites80s

  • Jeddah Tower 3,281'
  • *****
  • Posts: 7779
  • 1492 or 4,192?
Re: Cincinnati: Mount Auburn: Inwood Village
« Reply #84 on: October 01, 2007, 06:30:36 PM »
I don't think Seicer was writing off the area as abandoned forever by putting it on his page, just that it was not occupied at the time he took pictures.

Offline Michael L. Redmond

  • Jeddah Tower 3,281'
  • *****
  • Posts: 1870
Re: Cincinnati: Mount Auburn: Inwood Village
« Reply #85 on: October 02, 2007, 09:41:45 AM »
Quote
I don't think Seicer was writing off the area as abandoned forever by putting it on his page, just that it was not occupied at the time he took pictures.
Understood, however I wish to reiterate the need for a push by everyone who would like to see Mt. Auburn begin the same path of change as Uptown, downtown and OTR.  If an area the size of Inwood can have the negative impact that it has had over the years by being a vacant site with the fostering of drug activity and prostitution--just imagine the positive impact that a new, totally rehabbed, 68 condos from affordable to luxury can bring.  Inwood does not exist in a vacuum, it impacts the community as a whole either negatively or positively, and we now have a chance at the latter. 

So call the counsel members, send them an email, or stop them on the street and tell them we need INWOOD!
« Last Edit: October 02, 2007, 09:42:10 AM by Michael Redmond »

Offline CraigMoyer

  • Excavation Site
  • *
  • Posts: 9
Re: Cincinnati: Mount Auburn: Inwood Village
« Reply #86 on: November 11, 2007, 08:07:34 PM »
Ha, I love this place.

I've been photographing these buildings, as well as writing about them for the last year or so.

Here are just a few of the hundreds of photographs I have of the row houses.

1.


2.


3.


4.


5.


6.


7.


8.


9.


10.


11.


12.


13.


14.


15.


16.


17.


18.


19.


20.


The condos that they have completed are really really nice. If I had the means, I wouldn't mind living in one.

Offline UncleRando

  • Jeddah Tower 3,281'
  • *****
  • Posts: 14999
Re: Cincinnati: Mount Auburn: Inwood Village
« Reply #87 on: November 11, 2007, 08:33:30 PM »
^Neat stuff...thanks for sharing.

Online ColDayMan

  • ♫ An Apollo Legend ♫
  • Administrator
  • Jeddah Tower 3,281'
  • *****
  • Posts: 20377
    • UrbanOhio
Re: Cincinnati: Mount Auburn: Inwood Village
« Reply #88 on: November 12, 2007, 08:37:04 AM »
Nice job!
"You don't just walk into a bar and mix it up by calling a girl fat" - buildingcincinnati speaking about new forumers

Offline dmerkow

  • Jeddah Tower 3,281'
  • *****
  • Posts: 3320
Re: Cincinnati: Mount Auburn: Inwood Village
« Reply #89 on: November 12, 2007, 10:50:33 AM »
There is a grad student at Penn who presented a paper on this at the recent Society for American City and Regional Planning Historians. Compared it with a neighborhood in Pittsburgh.