The so-called Liberty and Elm development proposed by downtown Cincinnati-based Source 3 Development would be a major change for the area and a likely gateway into long-neglected northern Over-the-Rhine and Cincinnati’s West End.
But as the city seems poised to give its final approval on the project, neighborhood groups including the Over-the-Rhine Community Council, the Over-the-Rhine Foundation and others are opposing it.
On the surface, the ongoing argument encompasses issues around affordable housing, preserving the neighborhood’s architectural character, appropriate land use policies and easing neighborhood parking woes.
But there’s a bigger question about the way development is unfolding in the city, critics say: If a community council says no to a project, should the city green light it anyway?
The development, officially named “Freeport Row” after a historic alley Source 3 is seeking to buy from the city, will be a $26 million project with 110 units of market-rate housing, 15,000 square feet of retail space and an 80-space surface parking lot.
In its meeting Jan. 23, OTRCC membership voted 30-13 to appeal the City Planning Commission’s Dec. 15 approval of the project.
Not everyone on the council is against the development.
"Source 3 has made a good-faith effort to communicate and work with the residents of OTR," community council vice president Bob Selhorst wrote in a dissent last year after the council rejected the plan. "We desperately need the good solid development outlined in this plan."
But critics say a zoning change and sale of two historic alleys owned by the city should be accompanied by more provisions that will benefit OTR residents.
“We remain interested in development on this site, but until the developer works with the neighborhood ... it should not gain from promises made in exchange for a zoning change when the promises were not kept,” OTRCC member Margy Waller says. “If the city allows this to happen, every developer would understand that an empty promise is sufficient to receive city benefits.”
The City Planning Commission takes community council input into account when it makes decisions about which developments to approve, but votes from those councils alone aren’t binding for the city.
On Feb. 3, the commission voted to approve the sale of Freeport Alley and Campbell Street to Source 3 for $35,300.
Freeport Alley would remain accessible under the current development plans, but Campbell Street would be paved over for a surface parking lot.
The sale of the streets has raised the ire of some community activists, who say they add to the historic fabric of the neighborhood. The surface lot is another sticking point with community groups, which say they’d like to see the parking garage the developer initially promised.
“The project has changed substantially,” Danny Klingler, an OTR resident and historic preservation advocate, said on behalf of OTRCC and the OTR Foundation at a Feb. 3 City Planning Commission meeting on the sale of the alleys. “The calculus has changed. A parking garage necessitated the sale of those alleys. Now, let’s be clear that there’s no guarantee of a parking garage ever for this site. It’s totally contingent on outside factors. A surface parking lot could do without these alleys.”
Source 3 representatives say the council’s appeal is unnecessary and that they’re planning on introducing the garage at a later date, citing concerns from project lenders about the number of parking spaces available at Findlay Market, in city lots and potential additional parking that could come with more development.
“Overall, we are surprised by the appeal because they are asking us to build a garage we plan on building,” says Source 3’s Business Development Director Michael Heekin. “We decided the best course of action was to phase the garage.”
Heekin says it would be better for the developer to build the garage during initial construction, instead of phasing it in, but waiting to see if that’s possible would further delay the project.
Heekin also says there’s some uncertainty about how much parking is needed. The city and Findlay Market are currently in the midst of a parking study, and that could impact the need for a garage, he says.
“If they collaborate to bring 200-300 spaces in the area, then our parking could become unneeded, and the 80 spaces will be enough.”
Critics say the concerns go beyond the garage.
Neighborhood groups and Source 3 have been meeting since January of 2016. At first, those meetings looked to be fruitful.
The developer made some adjustments to the size and appearance of its initial plan, after which OTRCC tentatively approved the developer’s proposals with a number of conditions. One of those was continued engagement with residents — but some community council members say that hasn’t happened.
The council voted to pull its support for the project in its October meeting after some members say Source 3 didn’t work hard enough to address community concerns.
Historic preservationists are happy that two adjacent buildings will be renovated but are still worried about the design of the project and how the new building’s large scale and aesthetics fit into the area.
And affordable housing advocates say the development’s market rate condos don’t address the neighborhood’s needs.
“We are concerned about the ability for the neighborhood to maintain diversity going forward if there are not intentional efforts to support the affordable housing market,” says Mary Burke-Rivers, executive director of Over-the-Rhine Community Housing. “With a development the size of the Liberty and Elm project, it seems appropriate to include a percentage of affordable units.”
Rivers appreciates the fact that the project doesn’t displace low-income renters but says its size and potential price points mean it will put more pressure on affordable housing in the area and could contribute to other existing affordable housing converting to higher-price market-rate rents.
It also doesn’t address the loss of affordable housing in OTR, Rivers says. Over the past 15 years, 73 percent of the neighborhood’s lowest-income units have disappeared.
“This project will have long-term impact on Over-the-Rhine,” Rivers says. “We’d like to see that impact be positive rather than have long-term negative consequences for this historic and diverse neighborhood.”
The City Planning Commission has approved the various steps of the process despite concerns from critics, saying the plans comply with the 2002 Over-the-Rhine Plan and Plan Cincinnati. Neighborhood groups contest this, however.
Heekin says Source 3 is moving forward with the project.
“Pending how the appeal goes, we hope to break ground by April, but with the possible delay, it may carry over to June,” he says. “We are extremely excited to bring a dynamic project to the area and are working hard every day to bring it to fruition.”
Besides the appeal, the sale of the alleyways is one of the few remaining hurdles left to clear. Cincinnati City Council has to approve that sale — perhaps the last chance for community groups to convince the city to reconsider its approval.
For critics of the project, it’s a vital moment.
“It’s not just about the garage,” Klingler said at the Feb. 3 meeting. “It’s about the project as a whole. It just so happens that this matter of the garage is one more way in which the community’s trust has been somewhat taken for granted. There are serious issues that were laid out many months ago when we started this process that were never resolved. It’s about trying to get a group of three private individuals to listen to all these members of the community.” ©
