City Wide Demolition (Cincinnati, Dayton, Washington: section 8, foreclosure, mortgage)

[TomJones123]

Originally Posted by CinciFan

I am not always against demolition of older buildings. I am fine with it, as long as they are being replaced with something of comparable quality. In my opinion tearing down a beautiful old building to make way for a parking lot, vacant lot, or piece of crap new building (ex. Cranley's Incline Village development) is a real lost opportunity. If however, a building or two (not in a historic district) needs to come down for a well designed, high quality building, then I will probably be ok with it.

This describes me also. Not sure about Cranley and what he is selling over in EPH...do tell.

[CinciFan]

It looks like something a Boy Scout troop could build over an extended weekend.

[Dayton Sux]

That map was great. You can zoom in an see where they are concentrating things.

Seems that something has went really wrong with the west side. I recall driving through those areas back in the 1990s (yes it has been a long time) and they didn't seem to be that bad, just sort of older neighborhoods, but, man, things must really changed....

Note very few demos in Camp Washington and OTR areas. A just a scatter in whats left of the West End.

In comparison look at what Dayton said they will demo with their share of the same fund. Several times more structures in a much smaller city.

Even smaller Canton is demolishing slightly more houses than Dayton! But then Canton is a bigger zero than even Dayton. Youngstown approach is to take out entire blocks (which sort of fits in with their "greening of Youngstown" plan).

@@@@

As to the larger issue. This program is apparently a state-level program, but it builds on a national trend in urban policy. The return of Urban Renewal under another name or names. Re-use of vacant property (note they say property, not buildings) is a national-level thing.

Back in 2010 I spend a week in Cleveland going to this conference. Pretty interesting seeing what was going on nationally (as well as the field trips to various urban wastelands of Cleveland...actually rather pastoral in spots....).

As a hardcore fan of preservation and amature architctural and urban historical geographer, I am not pleased by this.

As a practical man, I see that alternatives are few.

The one thing that I think that could be done is to at least document these buildings and neighborhoods before they tear them down. This doesn't have to be to HABS/HAER standards, just some photographic documentation.

This was done in some places during the urban renwal era, where demolished buildings where all photographed, and thus a record was established of what the urban fabric or built environment was prior to demolition. For citiies that didn't do this documentation the visual record of the lost neighborhoods are gone, aside from what might be found on detailed maps such as insurance maps, or in occasional photographs and aeriels...no systematic documentation.

Now, they are just tearing it all down and people in the future wont know what these places used to be like (and least what they used to look like).

So, that's my 2 cents.

[JR_C]

Originally Posted by kjbrill

Yes, they are simply mouthing what the City said. At the same time I did not understand it to be anything other than that. No investigative reporting, just reporting what the City has released. Just reporting what the City releases is not grounds for condemning the paper. Just the name newspaper indicates they are reporting the news as presented to them. In many circumstances it is not up to them to critique, embellish, or even comment on the news, just report it.

In comparison look at what Dayton said they will demo with their share of the same fund. Several times more structures in a much smaller city. For every building the City schedules for demolition, is there a purchase price and criteria to prevent the demo? I have not seen this expressed, but I would assume (bad word) there is. It is not up to the City to expend money and stabilize property until the private sector decides it is right for rehab, if ever. If the private sector says Nope to the criteria to prevent demo then demo it. Or are you telling me these properties do not have a procedure to prevent demo?

I hope Cincinnati has a better system in place. But, in Youngstown, many people wouldn't know a structure was available for rehab until after it's gone.

There are a few properties in my neighborhood (that is seeing revitalization) that have recently found their way onto the city's demolition list. When we approached our councilman about having some of them removed, he said the only way he would recommend removal from the list, is to find a buyer. The problem is that some properties were foreclosed on, but the bank walked away. So, they were never really for sale, and it is up to the buyer to jump through all of the hoops required to get the property. We have a land bank, but they are new, and are only focusing on vacant parcels for now.

Originally Posted by Dayton Sux

That map was great. You can zoom in an see where they are concentrating things.

Seems that something has went really wrong with the west side. I recall driving through those areas back in the 1990s (yes it has been a long time) and they didn't seem to be that bad, just sort of older neighborhoods, but, man, things must really changed....

Note very few demos in Camp Washington and OTR areas. A just a scatter in whats left of the West End.



Even smaller Canton is demolishing slightly more houses than Dayton! But then Canton is a bigger zero than even Dayton. Youngstown approach is to take out entire blocks (which sort of fits in with their "greening of Youngstown" plan).

@@@@

As to the larger issue. This program is apparently a state-level program, but it builds on a national trend in urban policy. The return of Urban Renewal under another name or names. Re-use of vacant property (note they say property, not buildings) is a national-level thing.

Back in 2010 I spend a week in Cleveland going to this conference. Pretty interesting seeing what was going on nationally (as well as the field trips to various urban wastelands of Cleveland...actually rather pastoral in spots....).

As a hardcore fan of preservation and amature architctural and urban historical geographer, I am not pleased by this.

As a practical man, I see that alternatives are few.

The one thing that I think that could be done is to at least document these buildings and neighborhoods before they tear them down. This doesn't have to be to HABS/HAER standards, just some photographic documentation.

This was done in some places during the urban renwal era, where demolished buildings where all photographed, and thus a record was established of what the urban fabric or built environment was prior to demolition. For citiies that didn't do this documentation the visual record of the lost neighborhoods are gone, aside from what might be found on detailed maps such as insurance maps, or in occasional photographs and aeriels...no systematic documentation.

Now, they are just tearing it all down and people in the future wont know what these places used to be like (and least what they used to look like).

So, that's my 2 cents.

I agree that this demolition fervor is like a modern version of Urban Renewal.

Unfortunately, as far as I know, Youngstown is NOT focusing on entire blocks. I support the idea of eliminating neighborhoods that are already halfway gone. Go to Google maps, and look at the streets to the west of YSU. That is a neighborhood that could be eliminated, IMO. Instead, the city is taking a scattershot approach to demolition, almost as if they don't want to offend anyone by not razing something on their street. Hopefully, the consultant the city hired will help them focus their energies, and use the funds more productively.

[neilworms2]

I get the feeling that they have a program that is good for Cleveland where there are few options and are applying it to Cincinnati which IMO is on the verge of mass gentrification - these neighborhoods NEED to be saved to a degree as getting rid of them will hurt the desirability of the neighborhoods - IMO I'm a little worried that Walnut Hills has already demoed too much, its still a good location and there are lots of residential still there, but the Business District is gone - which IMO would have been one of the best in the city if they stabilized and didn't tear down.

I hope something stops this, but looking at that map is not encouraging, and Cincinnatians aren't ones to fight the nasty stuff that gets imposed from above on their city.

[jmecklenborg]

Walnut Hills and Mt. Auburn are each much more depressed than they should be given their location. A streetcar and or subway network focussed on these neighborhoods will bring them back quickly, even just the news that such a system is funded and will be functional in five years.

Other outlying neighborhoods are not so lucky because it is much less likely that they will ever see big-time transportation investment.

[natininja]

Demolishing historic buildings without very good reason is an economically poor decision. While new buildings might be more attractive to intra-metro buyers, historic buildings set the city apart to people looking from the outside, which is a much better target to attract. Intra-metro movement is zero-sum, for one, and is something which the city has a hard time competing with the suburbs for.

Demolishing historic buildings to improve the short-term viability of a neighborhood (which is debatable, since vacant lots can often be just as big a magnet for undesirable aesthetics and activities) is a penny-wise, dollar-foolish policy. This can vary case-by-case, but in general is the truth.

[Dayton Sux]

Re the posters comment on Youngstown...

Unfortunately, as far as I know, Youngstown is NOT focusing on entire blocks....

....from the linked article in the thread header:

Now, with the DeWine settlement money, Youngstown officials are demolishing clusters of houses – a “whole block strategy,” they call it – rather than the scattered sites of the past. With help from the U.S. Department of Housing and Urban Development, the city’s getting some expertise this year from BCT Partners, a New Jersey community development firm, on choosing the best areas for demolition.

[JR_C]

Originally Posted by Dayton Sux

Re the posters comment on Youngstown...



....from the linked article in the thread header:

I read the article, but I live here, and that's not what I'm seeing in person.

[Dayton Sux]

^
gotcha. The paper is reporting 'official statements', which conflict w. the ground truth.