Old Handsome house is being sold as a tear down for 2 new homes (Cincinnati: 2013, city hall)

[jbcmh81]

Originally Posted by h Steve

Don't buy farmland and the chance of having a pig farm next door is pretty much 'nil'.

You really missed the point, so let me spell it out... All property has development guidelines. All properties have restrictions. There is no situation in which individual property rights trump all other concerns. If someone bought up all of OTR, would they then be permitted to bulldoze the neighborhood and build a nuclear waste facility? Not a chance. An extreme example to be sure, but it works on the small-scale too. Ownership of property does not give you the right to do whatever you want with it.

[Yac]

It's great you all are passionate about the topic, but it would be awesome if that passion didn't actually turn into anger over somebody else's opinions, for once.
Yac.

[Wilson513]

Well, this struck close to home. Across the street from me and down a few houses, the house sold for $1.1mm to a developer who will put five houses at $1.2mm each on the lot. Of course, it is unnerving, but this is the reality of a free country. If I talk the talk I have to walk the walk.


Search "Stop Herschel Development"

https://www.facebook.com/search/str/...keywords_pages

[flashes1]

Originally Posted by Wilson513

Well, this struck close to home. Across the street from me and down a few houses, the house sold for $1.1mm to a developer who will put five houses at $1.2mm each on the lot. Of course, it is unnerving, but this is the reality of a free country. If I talk the talk I have to walk the walk.


Search "Stop Herschel Development"

https://www.facebook.com/search/str/...keywords_pages

I'm curious----how big was the orginal lot? Must be pretty big to handle 5 single family homes. Does your part of town not have minimum lot sizes, minimum distances between houses and curb? It seems like this tear down activity could be contained if you had the appropriate restrictions.

Edit: your link didn't work for me, but I googled "stop Herschel development" and found the facebook page. That's unquestionably a beautiful home they're tearing down. I'm surprised they went for that one-----it must be on a really big piece of land in a desirable location. Just a shame---there's so many other drab looking houses that no one would shed a tear if they were torn down. I'm all for re-development when it makes sense----but this specific project doesn't appear to make sense.

The city should be proactive, and designate certain parts of town for tear down activity. Redevelopment is healthy when it's down right----you don't want to completely stymie it, but it needs to be done the right way. I'm a hyper-capitalist, and I even recognize that!

[Wilson513]

Originally Posted by flashes1

I'm curious----how big was the orginal lot? Must be pretty big to handle 5 single family homes. Does your part of town not have minimum lot sizes, minimum distances between houses and curb? It seems like this tear down activity could be contained if you had the appropriate restrictions.

Edit: your link didn't work for me, but I googled "stop Herschel development" and found the facebook page. That's unquestionably a beautiful home they're tearing down. I'm surprised they went for that one-----it must be on a really big piece of land in a desirable location. Just a shame---there's so many other drab looking houses that no one would shed a tear if they were torn down. I'm all for re-development when it makes sense----but this specific project doesn't appear to make sense.

The city should be proactive, and designate certain parts of town for tear down activity. Redevelopment is healthy when it's down right----you don't want to completely stymie it, but it needs to be done the right way. I'm a hyper-capitalist, and I even recognize that!

Well, the lot is 1.3 acres. And pretty level. But I think what the neighbors are concerned about is that it doesn't lend itself to a somewhat concealed development. The lot is somewhat shallow for its size. To me that is the problem.

There is a teardown on a tiny lot right across the street from Kilgour, three houses down from the development and across the street. Foundation is in and they are asking $895 for what I see as a rather small house. So, the location is prime.

[restorationconsultant]

Other cities have wrestled with the tear down issue. Many cities are starting to realize that its important to maintain the 'theme' of older neighborhoods in terms of density, style and quality. Cities found out after the real estate boom that those "new suburban" style homes plopped down in older neighborhood were not as valuable as older more established architecture.

Those cities have enacted " anti tear down ordinances" which require a review process and REQUIRE input of adjacent property owners who are ultimately impacted by new development in established neighborhoods and there are issues, more vehicular traffic, more density in less dense neighborhoods, greater school occupancy etc.

For the record, and I speak as someone who works in cities all across the country. Cincinnati has the worst permitting process. Its expensive, complex and you can go in 5 times and get 5 different answers to your question. We reward demolition because we charge less to demo a house than to make window change. We allow private home owners to demo property, NOT licensed demo contractors who actually know what they are doing.

Adjacent property owners have zero say in, if a property gets demoed. In fact, the city tears down hundreds of homes each year with no opinion by neighborhood organizations, community councils or adjacent neighbors in may cases negative impacting adjacent property values in a bad way.

This mayor needs to get with community leaders (not the city council and city inspection) to develop a comprehensive approach to neighborhood redevelopment guidelines. Present that plan to the council for vote. We also need to look at why so many former city employees operate demo companies and why they seem to get most city contracts.

[t45209]

Take a drive down Erie Avenue if you want to see the effects of what this sort of thing can have on a neighborhood if not controlled. Give you a hint: 2800 block. Unbelievable.

[Wilson513]

^^^^That confusing. The 2800 block of Erie is about as nice a neighborhood at one can find anywhere for a block zoned Office and multifamily. Is it the 1.5 million dollar apartments? Or the Hyde Park Tennis Club.

[t45209]

There's a recent tear down and rebuild there that sticks out like a sore thumb. Head east on Erie from Monteith and the disaster will assault your eyes. You won't need to look hard.

[Wilson513]

Originally Posted by t45209

There's a recent tear down and rebuild there that sticks out like a sore thumb. Head east on Erie from Monteith and the disaster will assault your eyes. You won't need to look hard.

There is no question that the house in question is hideous, an abomination, far more than a sore thumb. More like a gangrenous limb.

But, the problem is not tear down and infill. The problem is horrible architecture. That house would be hideously ugly on any street, in any town. Obviously some self absorbed owner who thinks that architectural design is a simple task. Anyone can do it. See?

Its like doing ones own dental work. It may look simple, but the results may not be so good.