U.S. CitiesCity-Data Forum Index
Happy Easter!
Go Back   City-Data Forum > U.S. Forums > Ohio > Cincinnati
 [Register]
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
View detailed profile (Advanced) or search
site with Google Custom Search

Search Forums  (Advanced)
Reply Start New Thread
 
Old 10-20-2012, 07:19 PM
 
Location: Mason, OH
9,259 posts, read 13,369,950 times
Reputation: 1920

Advertisements

Quote:
Originally Posted by jjakucyk View Post
The Glencoe site is so steep at least it's unlikely to ever be turned into yet another a surface parking lot.
Good citation, I doubt if it will be either.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message

 
Old 10-21-2012, 09:18 AM
 
2,886 posts, read 3,953,678 times
Reputation: 1499
Quote:
Originally Posted by CarpathianPeasant View Post
I'm "suggesting" one does not have to leave Cincinnati to have such service. Did your skim read miss the quoted statement?
Sorry, I didn't mean to imply that I had to leave Cincinnati based on the convenience factor. The surgery was in Columbus for unrelated reasons. In fact, a friend of mine recently had a similar procedure (just without the complications I had) at what I believe is the same type facility in West Chester.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 10-21-2012, 09:24 AM
 
2,886 posts, read 3,953,678 times
Reputation: 1499
Quote:
Originally Posted by neilworms2 View Post
Shifting back towards the original topic...



Its not just parking, its an OVERFLOW parking lot. In other words its only necessary if there are too many other cars that are already parked in the lot. That's what's really maddening about it its just an overflow lot in case something bad went down.

Now do a google sat view of the area, does street parking look very difficult there? No it really isn't notice the amount of stair cases that lead nowhere, tons of demos alreay happened and I know for a fact street permit parking doesn't exist there. What does that leave? An unnecessary lot for unnecessary demos of buildings that are of a stock most cities dream of.

And to those that said, oh its just a few buildings... meanwhile over in Northside an entire block of old houses are being leveled for a road widening. Cincinnati has a unique asset and it is quite literally pissing it away at an alarming rate. - I often wonder if its because people in the region don't travel enough to realize how unique it is.
With all due respect, you may be the only person in the entire Cincinnati area bemoaning the demolition of those houses along Colerain. They were dilapidated and of zero historic or architectural significance. AND the road widening supports an excellent new residential infill development that can't be anything but a big boon to the neighborhood. Yes, Cincinnati definitely does have a bunch of fine historic buildings. But people need to be rational when picking their preservation battles.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 10-21-2012, 09:30 AM
 
2,886 posts, read 3,953,678 times
Reputation: 1499
Just the mention of the Glencoe site raises my blood pressure, in light of the thousands of dollars of tax money the city poured into replacing the roofs of all those buildings a few years ago. Just to profit another shady but well-connected "developer" who figured out how to bury her snout into the public trough. Hell is certain to freeze over before anything happens with that site. It's a shame, because I really think there would be a market for those structures if they were redeveloped.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 10-21-2012, 09:46 AM
 
Location: Cincinnati
4,007 posts, read 4,830,579 times
Reputation: 924
Quote:
Originally Posted by Sarah Perry View Post
It's a shame, because I really think there would be a market for those structures if they were redeveloped.
Probably so. Between lack of housing downtown, and it's proximity to downtown and UC it may well turn out for the better one day. As I stated earlier, UC landlords are making inroads into Mount Auburn so there is at least student housing demand there. Not that I want to see that for Glencoe.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 10-21-2012, 02:02 PM
 
Location: Chicago, IL
477 posts, read 530,092 times
Reputation: 275
Quote:
With all due respect, you may be the only person in the entire Cincinnati area bemoaning the demolition of those houses along Colerain. They were dilapidated and of zero historic or architectural significance. AND the road widening supports an excellent new residential infill development that can't be anything but a big boon to the neighborhood. Yes, Cincinnati definitely does have a bunch of fine historic buildings. But people need to be rational when picking their preservation battles.
Examples of Colerain ave demos: Building Cincinnati: October 2012

I"ll agree that those homes aren't that special (there are a few pretty nice 2nd empire cottages but that's about it). Still I was more pointing to an alarming trend that Cincinnati is following in the macro - its not just isolated areas that are being demoed, every year entire blocks of houses, oftentimes very nice ones are being demoed to the point where the city will loose its unique character as a whole if it isn't slowed down.

Secondly, infill development in Cincinnati sucks. I'd have less problems with demos if there were better architects working on infill project in Cincy but its not happening. They are light years behind not just the bigger cities, but even a few neighboring ones. As a result, I expect what ever replaces those houses (as mediocre as they are, will be far worse).

Here's examples illustrating what I'm talking about.

Cincinnati Infill: https://maps.google.com/maps?q=Cinci...,38.78,,0,0.87

(nice neighborhood too, wow this is garbage).

Chicago (low end student housing): https://maps.google.com/maps?q=UIC+C...318.51,,0,0.87

Chicago (Yuppie mod condo building): https://maps.google.com/maps?q=UIC+C...34.07,,0,-5.09

Btw the only crap that's built like the cincy one above is low income housing in Chicago, and even then its at least somewhat brick :P.

https://maps.google.com/?ll=41.91194...68.56,,0,-6.83

And because Chicago is a more expensive real estate market, lets look no further than Columbus, where the infill IMO is compensating for the poor historic housing stock:

https://maps.google.com/maps?q=Colum...3.28,,0,-16.63

Why isn't stuff like this being built in Cincy with its rich architectural heritage?

Last edited by neilworms2; 10-21-2012 at 02:12 PM..
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 10-21-2012, 02:19 PM
 
112 posts, read 122,548 times
Reputation: 116
Neil, your Cincinnati example is actually a fairly old building (from the late 1960s) that was recently re-skinned. That doesn't make it great, and there's plenty of other bad examples to choose from, but it's not a contemporary of the others. I would say though that one reason these sorts of buildings get so little love, and why so much of the new stuff that's built is crap, is because Cincinnati still has so much good old stock that there's more supply than demand. When that happens, prices go down and there simply isn't a market for replacing it. I hope we can reverse the trend before so much of the building stock is lost that what little is left is highly coveted. Of course there's external factors that have no relation to the built environment such as crime, schools, or racism that simply make a place undesirable no matter how nice the buildings might be.

Also, similar to what I've said before, these road widening and other "redevelopment" projects all come with added infrastructure (frontage roads, new traffic signals, subdivision streets, additional sewer, retaining walls, etc.) while nearly always being lower density than what was there before. After all, who would want to rebuild relatively dense detached rowhouses along a now-even-wider and more highway-like road? No, what little redevelopment that happens, if any happens at all, retreats from such a road behind parking lots, retaining walls, or simply turns around to face a new internal street. The trouble here is that so much density is lost by doing this that the "new shiny" development in many cases has a lower total value than the "old and busted" stuff that was demolished. So once again, like the parking lot, a trade was made that yields not only less value and tax base on the same area of land, but more infrastructure and its concomitant maintenance costs to boot.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 10-21-2012, 03:02 PM
 
2,886 posts, read 3,953,678 times
Reputation: 1499
There's plenty of room for improvement as far as infill in Cincinnati goes, but on balance I don't see that the Northside development is something to be complaining about. For my personal taste the houses are way too large for their tiny lots, but for houses of their size, you can't say the development isn't dense. All in all, Cincinnati needs a lot more of what's happening there. And this time it's apparently happening without the usual government waste and graft. I'm a fan.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 10-21-2012, 03:16 PM
 
Location: In a happy place
3,707 posts, read 6,571,615 times
Reputation: 7332
Architects work for the client, in this case the developers. If they aren't producing what the developers are asking for, the developers would go elsewhere. The client always has final say, as long as it meets code and zoning requirements.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 10-21-2012, 03:33 PM
 
Location: Chicago, IL
477 posts, read 530,092 times
Reputation: 275
Quote:
Architects work for the client, in this case the developers. If they aren't producing what the developers are asking for, the developers would go elsewhere. The client always has final say, as long as it meets code and zoning requirements.
Its just weird that the developers are demanding different things in these other cities. Granted, Chicago requires developers to satisfy the whims of the feudal lord of the fiefdom that its being developed in (alderman using his alderman privilege - a very corrupt system btw) but what about Columbus? Chicago is a weird outlier because of its system, but to my understanding Columbus isn't much different than Cincinnati.

This is why I'm wondering if there is more of a cultural thing at work in Cincinnati - it comes down to decisions of developers in both Cincy's and Columbus' case, but who on average is getting better infill? I'd say Columbus and that ain't right. Again the problems like a lot of other issues in Cincy are cultural.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.

Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.


Reply
Please update this thread with any new information or opinions. This open thread is still read by thousands of people, so we encourage all additional points of view.

Quick Reply
Message:


Options
X
Data:
Loading data...
Based on 2000-2016 data
Loading data...

123
Hide US histogram

Over $104,000 in prizes was already given out to active posters on our forum and additional giveaways are planned!

Go Back   City-Data Forum > U.S. Forums > Ohio > Cincinnati
Similar Threads
Follow City-Data.com founder on our Forum or

All times are GMT -6.

2005-2018, Advameg, Inc.

City-Data.com - Archive 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9, 10, 11, 12, 13, 14, 15, 16, 17, 18, 19, 20, 21, 22, 23, 24, 25, 26, 27, 28, 29, 30, 31, 32, 33, 34, 35 - Top