U UNIVERSITY OF CINCINNATI
Date:
I, , hereby submit this original work as part of the requirements for the degree of:
in
It is entitled:
Student Signature:
This work and its defense approved by:
Committee Chair:
Approval of the electronic document:
I have reviewed the Thesis/Dissertation in its final electronic format and certify that it is an accurate copy of the document reviewed and approved by the committee.
Committee Chair signature:
Self-Help: Reconstructing Over-the-Rhine
A thesis submitted to the
Division of Research and Advanced Studies of the University of Cincinnati
In partial fulfillment of the requirements for the degree of
Master of Architecture
In the School of Architecture and Interior Design of the College of Design, Architecture, Art and Planning
2005
Written by
Michele Desiree Wildeboer
B.S. Arch, University of Cincinnati, 2003
Committee Chairs: Udo Greinacher Robert Burnham Michaele Pride-Wells Abstract
Full of languishing, historic buildings, underemployed people, and the highest crime rate for miles, Over-the-Rhine has procured an undesirable notoriety in the greater Cincinnati area. This once vibrant, thriving neighborhood of Germans has become an affliction on the city. This did not happen overnight; white flight, prohibition, anti-German sentiments from World
Wars, street widenings, and the suburbanization of America have all contributed to its downfall.
A recent initiative by the City of Cincinnati has produced a master plan, but not much tangible evidence of progress. It is a distinct possibility that the government alone cannot cure Over- the-Rhine.
This multi-faceted problem results in pursuing various avenues for a solution. First, according to Grogan and Proscio, authors of Comeback Cities, there are four factors that make an inner-city recovery possible including grassroots organizations and the breakdown of government agencies such as welfare and public housing. Second, an investigation into self- help housing provides an avenue in which residents of this neighborhood may help themselves with limited government interference. Grassroots organizations in the Bronx borough of New
York City literally brought neighborhoods back to life over a twenty year span because of a diligence to keep working one building at a time. Similarly, the Savannah College of Art and
Design revitalized the city of Savannah by transforming vacant industrial buildings into a college scattered throughout Savannah.
An examination of these themes in conjunction with Over-the-Rhine’s unique circumstances results in a holistic approach to people and architecture. A [grassroots] organization will put residents to work via construction on vacant Over-the-Rhine buildings rehabilitating them for occupancy by workers or for rent to other residents of the neighborhood.
The organization not only trains citizens in construction skills, but how to run a salvage center, and encourages the growth of personal skills to become employable anywhere. This project is not just changing the look of Over-the-Rhine but also its soul. All over America there are urban neighborhoods just like this one ready for resuscitation—a self-help organization is an answer.
Self-Help: Reconstructing Over-the-Rhine
Table of Contents
List of Images and Credits 2
Introduction 5
Chapter 1: An opportunity for inner-city revitalization 7
Chapter 2: Self-Help: As it relates to housing, economics 11 and employment
Chapter 3: Case Studies 22 1: Savannah—Institutional Urban Revitalization 24 2: South Bronx—community organization/ 33 Grassroots movement
Chapter 4: Architectural Salvage Businesses 42 Precedent 1: Indianapolis’ Rehab Resource Inc. 43 Precedent 2: Cincinnati: Building Value LLC 45
Chapter 5: A Solution 47 Part 1: Who and what is Cincinnati’s Over-the-Rhine 49 Part 2A: Training Facility and Salvage Center 56 Part 2B: Design Precedents 58 Part 2C: Program 62 Part 2D: Site 69
Conclusion 71
Works Cited 73
Appendix A 75 Appendix B 80 Appendix C 81 Appendix D 83
Wildeboer 1 Self-Help: Reconstructing Over-the-Rhine
List of Images and Credits
Figure 1: Aerial of Over-the-Rhine 3 http://www.cincinnati-oh.gov/cdap/pages/-3652- from Cincinnati’s OTR masterplan www.cincinnati-oh.gov
Figure 2: Welfare to Work 7 http://www.lib.niu.edu/ipo/ii9705161.jpg
Figure 3: Cabrini Green in Chicago, IL 8 http://tigger.uic.edu/depts/ahaa/imagebase/maclean/aerials4/12.JPEG
Figure 4: “Housing is a Human Right” 9 Image from New York City’s Urban Homesteading Assitance Board website http://www.uhab.org/gallery/images/UHAB30/A00002_029.jpg
Figure 5: View of Historic Savannah’s River Street 22 http://www.savcvb.com/scenic_tour/16.shtml
Figure 6: SCAD’s Poetter Hall 22 Savannah College of Art and Design website—virtual tour http://www.scad.edu/about/visit/tour/aca_poetter.html
Figure 7: SCAD’s Impact on Savannah 24 Compiled by author via SCAD’s website detailing campus buidings and researching property transfers on SAGIS- Chatham County’s property value database http://sagis.binarybus.com/app/default.htm
Figure 8: Map of highways, commuter trains, and subways through the Bronx 31 Compiled by author Metro North http://www.mta.nyc.ny.us/mnr/html/mnrmap.htm Subway http://www.mta.info/nyct/maps/subwaymap.pdf Highways http://cpmcnet.columbia.edu/dept/neurology/ni/contact/images/regionmap.jpg
Figure 9: The Vacancy of the South Bronx 31 http://www.danhagerman.com/images/South%20Bronx%20Playground.jpg
Figure 10: Ed Koch, Mayor of New York City 33 New York Times Magazine 1997 http://www.senstad.com/htmls/3.html
Figure 11: Mid-Bronx Desperadoes Homepage 34 http://www.mbdhousing.org/MBDsplash.html
Figure 12: 7 Charlotte St. in the Bronx 34 http://www.brorson.com/TourDeBronx/TourDeBronx2.html Figure 13: Areas of Development in the Bronx 35
Wildeboer 2 Self-Help: Reconstructing Over-the-Rhine
By author with base map of Bronx http://www.johnnyroadtrip.com/cities/newyork/maps/map_harlembronx.htm
Figure 14: The South Bronx Today 37 Tour deBronx Bicycle Race http://www.brorson.com/TourDeBronx/TourDeBronx2.html
Figure 15: Building Value on Gilbert Ave. Cincinnati 43 Photo By author
Figure 16: Graph of OTR’s population, habitable housing, vacant housing, 49 owner-occupied housing from 1940 to 2000 Ferdelman, p. 54, US Census www.census.gov, Cincinnati’s OTR Master Plan www.cincinnati-oh.gov
Figure 17: Graph of current statistical norms for OTR, Cincinnati, 49 Hamilton County, and the USA US Census www.census.gov
Figure 18: Graph of OTR’s white population, black population, 51 employed, and unemployed with current City, County, and Country norms for the same areas Ferdelman, p. 54, US Census www.census.gov, Cincinnati’s OTR Master Plan www.cincinnati-oh.gov
Figure 19: OTR Today—full of emptiness 52 Photo by author
Figure 20: OTR Figure ground map of 1891, 1956, and today 53 Compiled by author Ferdelman, 50, 56, 57
Figure 21: Portable Construction Training Center 56 view from circulation side Siegal, p.116
Figure 22: Portable Construction Training Center 56 interior view of skill space Siegal, p.117
Figure 23: Floor Plan PCTC 57 (no author) “Portable Construction Training Center” Domus n. 814, (Apr. 1999) p. 25.
Figure 24: MDU axonometric—expanded unit 58 Scoates, p. 39
Figure 25: MDU floor plan—expanded unit 58 Scoates, p. 114-5
Wildeboer 3 Self-Help: Reconstructing Over-the-Rhine
Figure 26: Japanese Hotel 59 Vitra Design Museum, p. 217
Figure 27: Mini Capsule by Atelier van Lieshout -with interior 59 Topham, p. 92
Figure 28: Site proposed for program in OTR 67 Illustrations by author Ferdelman, p. 57
Figure 29: Liberty Street Widening Effects on urban fabric with site in orange 68 Illustrations by author Ferdelman, p. 68
Wildeboer 4 Self-Help: Reconstructing Over-the-Rhine
Introduction
Despite ample historic building stock and a rich ethnic heritage, a sufficient long-term solution to the decline of Cincinnati’s Over-the-Rhine, an inner-city neighborhood, has yet to be discovered. This thesis investigates an opportunity for urban resuscitation through self-help housing.
The terminology of opportunity—“ripe for renovation,”
“bursting with promise,” “original features,” and “period charm”—has awakened many to the rich harvest to be gathered in America’s inner cities (Williams, 56). Grogan Figure 1 Aerial photo of Over-the-Rhine and Proscio in Comeback Cities contend that recovery of urban neighborhoods is happening due to what they call the “four positives that presage a broad inner-city recovery.” Neighborhoods are becoming healthy and desirable without imitating the suburbs (Grogan and Proscio, 4).
Inner-cities are brimming with under-occupied historic buildings in need of renovation.
The fourth positive of inner-city recovery includes the return of the “culture of work” (Grogan and
Proscio, 7). This, in conjunction with the languishing building stock, provides an opportunity for employment through building reconstruction. Mutual self-help housing involves an organized group of residents to be trained in construction skills and then to work together to produce adequate housing.
Examples of urban self-help can be seen in the South Bronx and Savannah. The
Savannah College of Art and Design renovated industrial and commercial buildings which, in turn, enhanced Savannah’s economy and city image. In the South Bronx, community development corporations worked closely with the mayor and the city of New York to pull a besieged neighborhood out of the rubble.
Wildeboer 5 Self-Help: Reconstructing Over-the-Rhine
Over-the-Rhine has a high unemployment rate and a high building vacancy rate. A self-help organization providing the guidance to train, manage, and perpetuate a housing rehabilitation program is a solution for Over-the-Rhine’s specific plight. Such an organization could change the entire economic structure of Over-the-Rhine.
Wildeboer 6 Self-Help: Reconstructing Over-the-Rhine
Chapter 1
There have been many attempts at “fixing” the inner-cities of America. The loss of tax base due to abandonment of property, out-migration of industry and middle classes has produced a situation where gentrification is seen as salvation although many still doubt the long-term results (Williams, 62). But this doesn’t have to be the only way. What could be happening in society in realms besides public housing and revitalization plans that could affect urban areas positively? Grogan and Proscio call it a “convergence of positives that presage a broad inner-city recovery.” These four factors are a “huge, rapidly expanding grassroots revitalization movement, rebirth of functioning private markets, dropping crime, and unshackling of inner-city life from the giant bureaucracies” (Grogan and Proscio, 4).
The remarkable first factor is that residents from cities all over America have formed thousands of neighborhood nonprofit organizations. In opposition to the “wreckage” of 1960s style “community action and the War on Poverty,” contemporary grassroots operations apply ready resources, such as shear manpower, opportunistically. Today “us versus them” and arguments about racial discrimination are unproductive ideologies. Instead these neighborhood organizations improve housing, encourage businesses, form neighborhood watches, and open child care centers and schools (Grogan and Proscio, 4). Nothing singularly tremendous, but collectively it makes an impact. As a result, local organizations whose motivations are genuine and altruistic are supported by other residents.
Getting the urban poor organized to help themselves is the trick. Use values rather than exchange values direct urban residents to action. While the use value such as hanging out in the street in a poor neighborhood may be high, the exchange value such as property value may be low. If poor people are not able to convince the city that the neighborhood they use is a resource (Logan and Molotch, 134-5) they may lose out to wealthier organized bodies. For example, buildings and urban fabric may be destroyed in a poor neighborhood if it is deemed
Wildeboer 7 Self-Help: Reconstructing Over-the-Rhine the most economical place to build new infrastructure. Just because an area has the lowest property values doesn’t mean that it has any fewer people with any less attachment to their surroundings than a richer neighborhood. The “paradox of community organizations” is that the most affluent residents are the most likely to join a community group. It is necessary for the underprivileged to organize themselves and gain political clout if they are to succeed and have their voices heard. A strong leader, such as in the Victorian District in Savannah
(discussed in chapter 3), is required to pull a small, disadvantaged group to the fore.
The second factor, the return of the private sector to the inner-city, is no small feat. In a place where only the drug trade dared enter, small businesses are actually seeking out the inner-city’s resources. Older, central neighborhoods with short commutes, cheap rent, and architectural interest are enticing for a start-up company. Even established retailers are returning where they once fled (Grogan and Proscio, 4-5). In 1997, The Initiative for a
Competitive Inner City found that inner-city retail markets accounted for 7% of national spending with grocers receiving an average of 40% better sales per square foot. Payless
ShoeSource, McDonald’s, and the Gap have all built growth strategies around the inner-city
(Grogan and Proscio, 130). In 1998, Rite-Aid announced a $230 million plan for “economically depressed areas.” This was not a philanthropic venture but a carefully planned pursuit of an under-served inner-city (Grogan and Proscio, 134). Banks are once again making credit available to business and property owners. Planners and marketers are proclaiming the inner- city as an untapped resource (Grogan and Proscio, 4-5). The return of business lends itself to enticing more residents, improving the perception of safety and decency about the area, and generating a flow of money that could be put back into the neighborhood.
The third factor for urban revival is reduced crime. New York and Boston have proven that crime wasn’t a “permanent and immovable” part of city life. Additionally, the perception of crime and the fear of crime have been much diminished. Crime reduction in any region
Wildeboer 8 Self-Help: Reconstructing Over-the-Rhine has positive results. In these areas “holding crime at tolerable levels would have an incalculable effect on rebuilding confidence and commerce; the resulting investment could contribute to further drops in crime” (Grogan and Proscio, 5). The correlation between neighborhood watch organizations and crime reduction cannot be over-stated. When people are invested in their surroundings they care about what goes on. Security and trust perform as a neighborhood “membership.” This membership reinforces the sense of belonging to a neighborhood. An orderly, predictable, and protective environment is very important to residents, especially women with children (Logan and Molotch, 105-6). When the safety of a neighborhood improves it helps create a place the residents are proud of.
The fourth positive factor is the “unshackling of inner-city life from the giant bureaucracies that once dictated everything that happened there—in particular the welfare system, public housing authorities, and public schools” (Grogan and Proscio,
6). These agencies began with noble intentions, but have proven to be an “albatross” by concentrating Figure 2 poverty and generally oppressing progress. By the end of the 1990s each of these
“behemoths” began to break up. The end of “welfare as we know it” was introduced by Clinton and the Republican Congress in 1996 when the economy was very strong. As a result, “a culture of work seems to be taking hold in many inner-city neighborhoods where examples of success and self-sufficiency had been absent for decades” (Grogan and Proscio, 6). Due to recent reforms, former welfare recipients feel the imminent necessity for job placement.
Public housing, realized as a disaster, and befitting the Washington Post’s phrase,
“stacked poor people in human filing cabinets,” is in the midst of reform. In 2000, 100,000 public housing projects were torn down to be replaced with “mixed-income communities
Wildeboer 9 Self-Help: Reconstructing Over-the-Rhine where the architecture suits the surrounding neighborhood” (Grogan and Proscio, 6). However, this mixed-income community must be executed correctly in order to be effective instead of an impossible fantasy. This opportunity to re-face
America’s inner-cities so drastically should not be Figure 3 Cabrini Green, a recently demolished housing squandered; it could prove very fruitful and truly project in Chicago, IL revitalize inner-cities with its incorporation of private industry, investors, and markets.
Additionally, public schools are changing, mainly via parents’ movements and elected officials, especially mayors. Urban public schools are considered the “final frontier” of inner-city revitalization. City public schools have been the major factor in working- and middle-class families leaving the city (Grogan and Proscio, 7). City schools are thought to be inferior to their suburban counterparts. Often over-crowded and under-funded public schools don’t offer incentive for families to stay within city limits. Public schools must improve to attract families to urban neighborhoods.
The current objective for urban revitalization is not to abolish poverty, but to make an area pleasant and livable. Cities need to become places where people want to live, shop, run businesses, and go to school.” This will attract more residents to the city and increase its tax base. That money can then be used to improve city services. The picture of revitalization is not of meticulously restored buildings with “Parisian awnings” but of something a bit more rough around the edges (Grogan and Proscio, 7).
Wildeboer 10 Self-Help: Reconstructing Over-the-Rhine
Chapter 2 Self-Help: as it relates to housing, economics and employment
A vehicle of revitalization must be determined in order to use the inner-cities current resources and foster the four factors. The main source of inner-city America is under- occupied, often dilapidated, building stock. To attract more residents to the inner-city and provide adequate shelter for those already inhabiting the inner-city, housing must come to the forefront of the involvement. The production, financing, and maintenance of housing are normally a function of the public or private sector, but these entities are unwilling to provide these services in the inner-city (Ward, 7). When the government and private sector turn their backs, it is up to the current urban residents to make change happen themselves via self-help housing. For example, in New
York City, the Urban Homesteading Assistance Board is committed to helping low-income individuals and families Figure 4 Image from New York City’s Urban obtain and sustain “fair, decent, and affordable housing” Homesteading Assistance Board website via self-help housing philosophies (figure 4).
Residents organizing themselves into community development corporations are the first factor required for inner-city recovery. A community development corporation, especially in self-help applications, is able to “integrate the development of affordable housing with any number of other public services and improvements beyond bricks and mortar” (Grogan and
Proscio, 71). Government can invest money in public housing that is unwanted, generally unsuccessful, and intrusive to the neighborhood, or into community development projects managed and performed by the residents themselves. Public money is better spent towards
“elements of infrastructure” such as construction materials, construction advice/training to
Wildeboer 11 Self-Help: Reconstructing Over-the-Rhine stimulate citizen participation and investment in housing for themselves (Ward, 6). Self-help housing is often practiced as a result of being forgotten by the private sector and marginalized by capitalism.
Self-help housing isn’t necessarily new construction, but also often pertains to rehabilitating existing urban buildings. Self-help as it pertains to urban shelter has several strategies to cope with abandonment and housing deterioration including the following: resident management of public housing projects and tax-foreclosed multiple dwellings, conversion of rental buildings to tenant-owned cooperatives, “sweat-equity” urban homesteading , (voluntary labor—“sweat”—is used to reduce the cash costs of renovation, and “equity” represents the down payment) and numerous variations on user-initiated and controlled housing development and management (Kolodny, 448). For example, a resident group gaining ownership of an abandoned building from the city, remodeling it, renting the unit(s), and thereafter, supervising and maintaining it as rental property is self-help housing in the urban context. In urban situations where building stock is available, but dilapidated, it is important for residents to take control of their history and their community. Self-help promotes self reliance and can be seen as salvation in devastated areas (Kolodny, 449). Citizen control of their own neighborhood buildings is more beneficial to the existing community than an outside developer taking ownership of properties.
There are two levels of self-help as defined by Peter Ward in Self-Help Housing: A
Critique. The first, at its most simple is the chain of actions by an individual or group that takes partial responsibility for the “installation of a particular work.” This can manifest itself as a sewer or a home. At this level the impetus is to promote squatters or low-income persons to improve their houses. The second, more complex, and more applicable to the urban environment, definition is that a group may integrate several actions “vertically aimed at transforming the local and economic structure in a dramatic way.” For example, if the group constructs homes
Wildeboer 12 Self-Help: Reconstructing Over-the-Rhine and also produces the materials—bricks, tiles, cement, and infrastructure (Ward, 7-8). In an urban setting with existing infrastructure such as water, highways, and electricity this is a very viable goal. Additionally, changing the economic structure is germane to urban situations because America’s inner-cities are plagued with high unemployment rates and localized economies could improve this.
English architect, John F.C. Turner, has written extensively on self-help housing in various communities and countries. His book Freedom to Build has been a bible for the self-help movement. He stresses values of self-sufficiency, autonomy, and decentralization. He believes that self-help housing is an expression of individual liberty. Turner researched with the
Organization for Social and Technical Innovation (OSTI) to identify what kinds of self-help initiatives were currently in America.
From his field research he determined three types of self-help housing: independent, organized, and employed. Independent Self-Help is carried out individually without external help in any way; a person completely designs, builds and finances his/her own house; sweat equity or what Turner calls “enterprise equity” accumulates; work is performed in spare time; it is available to anyone who can get financing. This could be a suburbanite buying and improving a “fixer-upper” home. Organized Self- and Mutual-Help is sponsored, supervised or supported or all three by an agent and the only initiative is the decision to join. Participants, possibly working in groups, go through an orientation, training, construction, and finally title and mortgage are transferred upon occupancy. He/she/they are usually lower income than independent self-helpers. The agent may be a community development corporation.
Employed Self-Help is typically a government run agency with participants paid for labor; it is the lowest income level participants of the three categories (Harms, 28-9). Turner deduced that the more external assistance a self-helper received the less independence he or she had and vice versa.
Wildeboer 13 Self-Help: Reconstructing Over-the-Rhine
The economic implications of self-help housing are apparent when it is in the context of capitalism and also compared to the Third World economy. In a traditional society based on agriculture for subsistence, there was limited division of labor, limited exchange of goods, and housing was built by family or with the village (Harms, 19). Housing was built solely for the purpose of the user’s needs at the time. Obvious kinship is the most familiar form of mutual aid among squatters in developing countries (Kolodny, 448). Housing was altered or repaired over time by the user depending on circumstances such as expanding with family with children.
Buildings were produced for use value [based on the users’ interests and fulfillment] rather than exchange value [based mostly on money] (Harms, 19).
The economic transfer to capitalism meant everything became a commodity, even housing. This means that something such as housing, whose previous worth was based on use value, has worth based on exchange value according to demand in the market.
Commodities are sold according to their demand and then in turn at a price in local currency, not according to need (Harms, 19). In petty-commodity housing production, the builder/producer and the consumer/user are the same and construction is based on the income of the user and personal labor time often with other free and “kin-related” labor.
Materials are often recycled and the pace of construction is based on disposable income, prolonging the work day and the user’s ability to reduce other personal costs such as food. The end product can become a commodity with an exchange-value only if sold or rented
(Burgess, 70). A self-help builder can enter the capitalist market and benefit only from the sale/lease of their sweat equity product. Thus, the poorest and most left out of capital accumulation are also left out of housing under capitalism (Harms, 19). Self-help usually surfaces when capitalism is in crisis (Harms, 20).
The stratification of society according to capitalism, especially as it relates to housing, directly influences the struggles between classes (Harms, 19). Government will implement self-
Wildeboer 14 Self-Help: Reconstructing Over-the-Rhine help housing in order to control the lower class. Government reduces public funds spent to help the poor via public housing by encouraging individuals and groups to help themselves build shelter. When the poor are working for “free,” the state has then reduced the value of labor, further promoting socio-economic stratification, capitalism, and government’s control over the lower classes.
In contrast to the First World capitalist economy, the Third World economy accommodates for shelter via expansion of the labor force. When unemployed individuals are added to the unpaid labor force in order to construct dwellings the capital accumulators remain unaffected. The land owners in the Third World allow squatters to build without penalty or cost. The laborers, in the absence of rent, do not require as much in wages to survive.
Therefore, the capitalist system does not suffer, or mind for that matter, when it allows this “free” housing.
In the current First World economy, permissible squatting does not work. While squatters in the Third World are being accommodated (and even encouraged) with as many subdivisions of land amongst them, the First World is bogged down with government regulation of land (Burgess, 70-1). Third World laborers, though oppressed by the capital accumulators, are content because their needs are being met. From America’s inception, land ownership and property boundaries were closely tied to individual rights and liberties. Self-help housing is hindered because all land must be owned by someone (Burgess, 70-1). The disadvantaged citizens in the First World economy are left to provide for themselves because without squatter’s rights they possess no land. Turner recommends “legislation of tenure of land and dwellings now illegally occupied by squatters” in order to free up this issue in America (Burgess, 74).
Self-help housing in the First and Third World economies illustrates what Tony Schuman, author of “The Agony and the Equity: A Critique of Self-Help Housing,” calls the shortfall of self- help. The shortfall is the failure to challenge the structure of the economy. By definition self-
Wildeboer 15 Self-Help: Reconstructing Over-the-Rhine help can change the structure of the economy, but in the small scale it is difficult to accomplish. He claims that self-help groups tend to view the housing problem as outside the labor market and that they do not deal with the problem of wages and income distribution
(Schuman, 468-469). When labor is exploited in self-help housing it maintains the status quo retarding necessary change in wage levels and access to low-cost shelter. This is far from a freedom to build, but it is the only choice the poor have. It provides short-term “breathing space” and presents no long-term solution rationalizing poverty (Ward, 10). An encouraging development in current self-help housing programs and thought is the realized need for permanent operating subsidies. This acknowledges a long-term situation and is a “practical response to the problem with a historical and theoretical understanding of our capitalist housing system,” (Schuman, 468-469). The only way self-help housing can change the economy successfully is in a long-term application.
The economic pitfalls of self-help housing prevent it from becoming widely used and successful. Issues self-help housing must overcome are the rent-income gap, employment, control of urban land, community and individual identity. The rent-income gap conundrum is that the inflation rate of rent and construction costs is greater than the inflation rate of income.
There is no evidence to support that this trend will change and it is commonly believed to be a flaw in the capitalist structure. Self-help is dependent on government subsidies. Solutions to this gap are: raise wages, lower costs, or subsidize the difference (Schuman, 465). [Subsidizing the difference is widely used in the case of the South Bronx.]
Employment is also problematic because the benefits of self-help are usually restricted to the young, energetic, and childless. Racism keeps minorities out of the mainstream construction industry. The self-help training is mostly applicable to full-time employment in building maintenance but it is unlikely that they will become employed. Renovating one’s own house only provides a short-term solution; he/she has no job or subsidies after it is completed.
Wildeboer 16 Self-Help: Reconstructing Over-the-Rhine
Even if all trained residents went on to renovate other housing stock (there is generally plenty of it) there is competition from labor unions (Schuman, 465-6).
Control of urban land is a drawback to self-help housing because residents see the city very differently from private investors. “Definition of a city—community residents see the city as a place to live, work, raise children, and pursue their educational, cultural, and recreational needs; the private real estate sector sees the city as an opportunity for investment, a locus for the accumulation of capital.” It is this mis-match that causes the most problems. Municipal policy is to recapture the housing stock as a tax-paying resource, even if it puts housing out of reach for low-income families. Self-help housing cannot compete with private interests. A few buildings may be salvaged but urban land is controlled by capital (Schuman, 466). [In the case study of the South Bronx disproves this hindrance. The city turned over its vast housing stock for rehabilitation in order to house low-income/homeless families and puts the parcels back into the tax base.]
Although community residents have taken a stand in defense of their communities, they may have worked against themselves in terms of wages. People have been “reborn” in a socially conscious and collective manner, and newly rehabilitated buildings stand as rays of hope amid rubble. Self-help programs often want to transform society from the bottom up in a self-governing network distrustful of the government and large corporations. Working outside the government and capitalist system can reduce the value of labor and depress wages, even though the unequal distribution of wages is the primary source of housing problems to begin with! The willingness for self-help workers to labor for low wages, or even without compensation, competes with the demand for an adequate living wage (Schuman, 467).
Schuman emphasizes the political facet of self-help in his depiction of the issue of wages. The self-help approach suppresses the discontent with the government’s lack of provisions for the poor’s need for housing. [As is mentioned earlier in the chapter, in the Third
Wildeboer 17 Self-Help: Reconstructing Over-the-Rhine
World suppression of wages helps capitalism and in a way also the poor because they don’t pay rent. Unfortunately, in the First World this is not the case. Squatting isn’t allowed and rent isn’t free.] Self-help groups sometimes use private investors to help sustain them, which supports the profit-based private market instead of the need-based self-help builders.
Schuman asserts that government alone has the political and economic power to provide for those unable to compete in the private market. [In the case of the South Bronx the government support positively impacted the self-helpers progress.]
The benefits of self-help as they relate to housing are the following: reduced construction costs, employment and skills training, control of urban land, and strengthening of individual and community identity. These benefits can offset the negatives and make self-help housing successful. Reduced construction and operating costs result from donated (or free) labor during the construction process. These individuals are then trained to maintain the building in the future. Public subsidies reduce interest rates which makes loans feasible. As mentioned in chapter 1, banks are not eager to loan funds in the inner-city making government subsidies crucial. As improvements are made funds become more available and fewer subsidies are required. Employment and skills training is a benefit because residents/volunteers work under a skilled craftsman to learn building construction and maintenance which can be used for future employment. The skill training provides a long-term solution to employment. Construction work is an appropriate and socially respected source of employment (Kolodny, 450).
The housing shortage pushes rents up and working class neighborhoods become primed for higher-income redevelopment by outsiders. Cooperative ownership is the hope of retaining some housing stock for low- and moderate-income families in order to maintain some control of urban land. If self-help builders can gain control over the majority of city property waiting to be rehabilitated and returned to the tax role, low-and moderate-income
Wildeboer 18 Self-Help: Reconstructing Over-the-Rhine neighborhoods have a greater chance of survival. The trials of rehabilitating a building can bring a community together, strengthening community identity, giving it self-esteem, and de- commodifying both labor power and housing (Schuman, 471). Self-help housing applications can also provide design flexibility in order to serve the nontraditional user group (Schuman,
464). Schuman believes self-help groups are in a position to demand existing subsidies to be directed to buildings in non-profit cooperative, community and public ownership (Schuman,
471).
The negatives of the economic structure and other shortcomings of self-help housing can be overcome especially in the urban setting where resources are more readily accessible.
The root of the dilemma is the privatization of the housing question, the attempt to solve a collective social problem—the provision of decent, affordable housing—at the level of an individual building (Schuman, 467). The solution hinges around wages and employment. Self- help housing is more than shelter. It is its own economic system and, therefore, wages are crucial to its success. Urban self-help housing in a developed economy involves a redefinition of the consumer’s role and “shakes up” long-established and assumed rules in rental housing
(Kolodny, 448).
The United States Department of Housing and Urban Development is supposed to be providing these types of solutions in America to address the affordable housing shortage coupled with the rent-income gap. HUD says its interests are to increase housing with less government money. Turner did a study for HUD and his findings supported the notion of less government interference in housing. Turner also studied self-help housing for Housing and
Urban Development (HUD) whose interests were to increase housing with less government money.
The economic advantages discovered were that self-help reduces construction costs via sweat equity and unpaid management converted to capital. It was found self-help can
Wildeboer 19 Self-Help: Reconstructing Over-the-Rhine reduce mortgage payments and mutual-aid could transfer public costs for low-income people to the “private sector” (Turner says “in effect to the user”) (Harms, 29). These proven economic benefits to the government seemed like ideal results for HUD. However, HUD did not heed any of the recommendations from the report. Turner and his associates believe this is because “HUD is programmed to serve realtors, builders, title-searchers, appraisers, and consulters…it is surrounded by an industry” (Harms, 30). Hans Harms adds that there were no lobbying groups for self-help initiatives and that it seemed like only a small number of individuals were involved in this activity. Therefore, this small group could carry on
“inconspicuous, unorganized, and politically-inactive” (Harms, 30-1). Adversaries of self-help try to nullify the needs of the poor in order to justify a low-cost housing scheme that supports the
“powerful” construction industry (Ward, 6).
Since the federal government has yet to provide livable long-term solutions1 to the housing shortage in America, municipal governments should more actively pursue self-help solutions to their city’s housing issues. A self-help housing system must be set-up for the self- helper’s to control/own the land because land ownership is so important to Americans and it is integral to our government. Advocates of self-help promote the “privatization of the housing question and voluntary user contributions.” Self-help ideologically promotes the user’s freedom from government and increased control over their life (Harms, 21). Limited assistance from the government is required to make self-help housing applications work as a non-profit organization or otherwise. This can be accomplished through the municipal government turning over vacant parcels, putting them back into the tax base, in an ambitious plan to reverse housing abandonment (Kolodny, 450). Independent operations, usually dominated by the users, produce housing at low cost and high use value. Turner believes that no house can
1 Turner calls the federal government’s attempts at solving the low-income housing problem “aesthetically hideous, socially alienating and technically incompetent architecture (Burgess, 62)
Wildeboer 20 Self-Help: Reconstructing Over-the-Rhine be built without land, tools, materials, skilled labor, management, and an exchange system
(Burgess, 63). An organization formed to train unemployed persons in the construction trades and manages construction projects in the inner-city is an example of urban self-help housing.
Government subsidies can go towards paying the workers a living wage or alternatively, paid with money and/or food and/or shelter. The goal is for the laborer to exist in the First World capitalist system without struggling for food and shelter. Once employment and improvement of the urban environment begins community identity will increase. This response to self-help housing’s negatives and positives follows suit with the four factors to an inner-city recovery.
Wildeboer 21 Self-Help: Reconstructing Over-the-Rhine
Chapter 3: Case Studies
Inner-city revitalization can show itself in various forms—community development groups, city initiatives, federal housing programs, private investment, and combinations thereof. Self-help via housing and urban renewal is a specific technique which can be used to improve inner-cities. Examples of this alternative urban improvement can be seen in
Savannah, GA, and New York City, NY. These two cities have very different climates, different cultures and even different approaches, but they achieved similar results.
Savannah began to renew its downtown in the 1950s with the initiative of The Seven
Ladies, a group of prominent women determined to preserve their town. This preservation movement in Savannah managed to save the residential property, but not the commercial and industrial buildings. When a couple decided to establish an art and design school in
Savannah in 1978 this proved to be an exemplary opportunity to adapt and re-use the derelict industrial structures in downtown Savannah.
In the South Bronx, a borough of New York City, a different tactic was used to save the community from itself. Robert Moses, planning perpetrator in the 1960s, and the construction of the highways through the South Bronx had created a very unstable community riddled with crime and poverty. A glimmer of hope somehow broke through the desolation in the late
1970s with a small group of South Bronx residents rehabilitating one apartment building. With the mayor’s tremendous backing and investment in the community, federal money, city money and private investment a small group of residents making a difference turned into many small groups and community organizations bringing the South Bronx back to life.
These case studies are proof that self-help can work when using a model, complete with financial backing and structure. Without a source of funding, rehabilitation does not happen in America. The case studies also show the relationships between community groups, institutions, private investors, the city, the state, and the federal government. In each case the
Wildeboer 22 Self-Help: Reconstructing Over-the-Rhine relationships between the various invested parties were very fragile. Creating an organization for change requires a careful orchestration of relationships as well as careful, resourceful financial planning.
Wildeboer 23 Self-Help: Reconstructing Over-the-Rhine
Case Study 1: Savannah—Institutional Urban Revitalization
The largest historic district on the National
Register at 2.5 square miles is Historic Savannah in downtown Savannah, GA. In the 1950s residents of
Savannah realized their town needed improvement.
Through preservation efforts residences were rehabilitated and provided a new face for the city Figure 5 Savannah view from Historic River Street of Savannah. The original force behind the preservation movement was a group of prominent women called The Seven Ladies. The organization grew to include hundreds of residents, and later the group and district were renamed Historic Savannah (Warner, 21-22). Although Savannah managed to preserve many of its residences, its institutional and commercial buildings were “languishing” (Oppenheimer
Dean, 35). It wasn’t until a new college wanted to set up a campus in this area that things changed.
When Paula Wallace (formerly Rowan) and Richard
Rowan wanted to establish an art and design college they found Savannah’s discarded industrial buildings ideal. They founded Savannah College of Art and Design (SCAD) in
1978. They felt Savannah was a large enough city, but still
“unspoiled” and a “trove of venerable buildings and Figure 6 landscaped squares” (Oppenheimer Dean, 36). “Savannah SCAD’s Poetter Hall never experienced urban renewal, so we found many buildings, sometimes in bad shape but with good bones, that were well-suited to adaptive reuse,” Wallace said. “In this way we have become a big force in city development” (Levinson, 94). (Apparently a statement made without knowledge of Historic Savannah.)
Wildeboer 24 Self-Help: Reconstructing Over-the-Rhine
Wallace and Rowan began the campus with the purchase of Preston Hall (now referred to as Poetter Hall) (Oppenheimer Dean, 37). One by one, more buildings were purchased and renovated to suit the needs of the growing college. Some renovated spaces are classrooms but the campus also includes motels which have become dorms and factories that are now art studios (Levinson, 94).
The rehabilitation process for SCAD was rather simple because the commercial and institutional buildings were designed with large spaces and high ceilings conducive to creating classroom spaces. The industrial and commercial buildings of the entire historic district of
Savannah were at the schools disposal because no one else was interested (Oppenheimer
Dean, 36). SCAD established the Savannah Design Collaborative staffed by faculty and students who perform and manage the renovations. SCAD used their design collaborative to rehabilitate declining buildings “at an accelerated pace” (Oppenheimer Dean, 36) instead of having outsiders perform the construction.
The schools use of existing buildings grew out of the fact that it was more economical than new construction. In a typical college campus the college must take care of the buildings and the grounds and the students. In the case of SCAD, only the buildings and the students are in the equation. The city takes care of the grounds because the streets and sidewalks are all part of the city property. This works well and provides cost-savings for SCAD
(Oppenheimer Dean, 36).
The original financing for the campus was from the Wallace’s and Rowan’s parents and their personal assets, including their home and car. Later financing was from friends, relatives and donations. Rowan called it “classic 1980s debt financing” (Oppenheimer Dean, 37). In this example, the government did not play any particular role such as planning or financing.
Wildeboer 25 Self-Help: Reconstructing Over-the-Rhine
Figure 7 SCAD’s impact on Savannah
Wildeboer 26 Self-Help: Reconstructing Over-the-Rhine
By 1992 SCAD’s campus had grown to 24 buildings scattered throughout Savannah’s
2.5 square mile downtown historic district and the adjacent Victorian District (Oppenheimer
Dean, 38). Today, SCAD has more than 60 facilities, totaling about 1.5 million square feet, and
7,000 students. All of the SCAD buildings have historic worth and add validation to the school.
In 2004, the Georgia Trust for Historic Preservation presented SCAD with an award for preservation service, and the Victorian Society in America awarded the college its preservation award (SCAD website). Refer to Appendix A for a step by step view of how SCAD changed
Savannah for the better.
The dispersal of the buildings anchors SCAD in the city and caters to the residents of
Savannah and its students instead of tourists. Roberta Gratz, author of The Living City, believes that cities become artifacts when then cater to tourists and lose their sense of place. A school is more beneficial for a downtown than any new, unneeded dome stadium that adds no permanent residents. Schools are stable even when the economy is in a recession
(Oppenheimer Dean, 41).
Rowan, co-founder of SCAD, believes that art and design students add “vitality, life, and therefore increased safety to the streets.” As a result of the school surrounding buildings are remodeled for housing students, businesses spring up to feed the residents, and students work at nonprofit organizations in the community. According to Wallace, “Art students tend to be pioneers [and] tend to regard living in a poor neighborhood as a challenge rather than an imposition” (Oppenheimer Dean, 41).
Savannah is a great place to learn design and architectural history. “The city is a great laboratory and classroom,” said Maggie O’Connor. SCAD’s renovation program gave her students the opportunity “to do everything from demolition to carpentry to masonry. The old
Wildeboer 27 Self-Help: Reconstructing Over-the-Rhine city of Savannah offered her students a chance to see “preservation in action and to watch the politics.”
However, some criticize SCAD for giving students a false impression that all cities work like Savannah. Cities like Houston and Atlanta have different problems with their urban environment and different politics to go with it. Savannah is particularly invested in the preservation of its building stock and the aesthetics of its downtown. The SCAD students are nurtured by the idyllic downtown where ordinary people live not just the poor. SCAD contends that living amongst the proportion, order and humane social environment is a real education for students to take into the world, including cities less invested in preservation. SCAD’s campus and planning is the reverse of the abandonment left by institutions in the inner-city
(Oppenheimer Dean, 39-40).
Another criticism of SCAD is the accusation that SCAD works around the historic preservation system. Many review procedures are not followed; meaning that Rowan and
Wallace ran their own show in respect to the school, faculty, and building rehabilitation
(Oppenheimer Dean, 41, 87). Regardless of its criticisms SCAD has revived Savannah in a way it couldn’t do for itself.
The role of an institution such as a college can be very influential and impact a city greatly. SCAD has taken 60 disused buildings in downtown Savannah and given them new life and removed them as a hindrance to progress for the city. Wallace and Rowan were not architects nor designers, but simply two people with a vision. They saw an opportunity and re- used the buildings to suit their needs. Although financing was inconsistent in the beginning, as the college grew they were able to find financing from private investors and banking institutions.
This case study provides several opportunities for organizational precedent. First, even if an individual or group isn’t an architect or designer they can take initiative and learn the skills
Wildeboer 28 Self-Help: Reconstructing Over-the-Rhine needed to renovate a building. Also, urban improvement does not have to be concentrated in one or two areas. SCAD has successfully developed many buildings that weren’t next door to each other, but the buildings work as a cohesive campus. Third, financing can be very difficult and every opportunity for loans must be pursued. The bank needs a definitive financial plan to prove that you have the ability to start a new college, organization, etc. Additionally, a trained pool of people within your own organization is crucial to getting things done your way, on your schedule. As a bonus to Savannah, these building redevelopments have significantly improved the city, even though that was not the original intention.
SCAD’s campus flows from the Historic District into the Victorian District. The Victorian
District in Savannah receives less attention than the Historic District. It is without “lush parks, spotless sidewalks, and endless rows of Savannah-gray houses,” but it still has plenty of architecture to preserve (Warner, 21). In this district a different kind of preservation is taking place, one of attention to the under-privileged.
In the mid 1970s the Victorian District was considered a slum. Absentee landlords collected unreasonable rents and abused their oppressed tenants. Many of its buildings were dilapidated and abandoned until the nonprofit Savannah Landmark Rehabilitation Project, founded in 1974, began saving these buildings. They had the Victorian District placed on the
National Register in 1974 and they wanted to renovate every building in the area. In 1989, the group was led by a charming, “bullish” man named Leopold Adler. He joined the movement to save Savannah in the late 1950s, influenced by his mother, a member of The Seven Ladies
(Warner, 21-22).
Adler, a former stockbroker, became Historic Savannah’s financial guru. [Adler was awarded the Louise du Pont Crowninshield Award in 1984, preservation’s highest award, for setting up a revolving fund for the National Trust.] He implemented a revolving fund which bought homes “in danger” of demolition and kept them until a buyer wanted to rehabilitate
Wildeboer 29 Self-Help: Reconstructing Over-the-Rhine the building. “We were the catalysts between somebody who didn’t want the building and somebody who did,” said Adler (Warner, 22). Adler set his sights on the Victorian District after his success in the Historic District.
Savannah Landmark Rehabilitation Project contends this is not just a gentrification group. Landmark renovates these buildings to apartments for low and moderate income residents. Adler claims, “Our goal is preserving the neighborhood’s racial and economic mix, its social fabric. We’re proving that the benefits of preservation can be shared by both the rich and the poor.” Landmark is composed of a diverse mix of groups and individuals such as the
NAACP, ministers, bankers, and the city. Landmark realized that rehabilitating the “sound housing stock” that the city already owned was a much better economic alternative than
“antiseptic, impersonal” public housing (Warner, 21).
Landmark and Adler used Comprehensive Employment and Training Act (CETA), later abolished by the Reagan administration, money to pay and train workers on the first 70 units.
Local youths were learning the building trades and minority entrepreneurs were used whenever possible. The units rented for $280 to $310 a month, below market value [in late 1970s]. The goal was to keep the costs to an average of $35,000 a unit. Landmark used rehabilitation tax credits and low-income tax credits. By the early 1980s 300 housing units had been renovated
(Warner, 22).
Adler was the organization’s financial genius, realizing that they must draw from multiple sources for financing. Landmark pursued and received low interest loans and no interest loans.
Landmark became co-developer with the National Corporation for Housing Partnership (a for- profit company chartered by congress in the 1960s to stimulate private investment in moderate- and low-income housing and is today the largest owner and operator of such housing). They received grants and other monies from the Georgia Residential Finance
Authority, HUD, the city of Savannah, the Ford Foundation, the National Endowment for the Arts,
Wildeboer 30 Self-Help: Reconstructing Over-the-Rhine most financial institutions in Savannah, and the National Trust’s National Preservation Loan Fund
(Warner, 22-23).
The team of the charismatic Adler, Gary Gebhardt, vice-president of Landmark, known for his ability to negotiate complex real estate deals, and construction manager Tim Delahanty created a force to be reckoned with. A 14 person staff works in a Queen Anne style house in the Victorian District. The staff handles tenant education and screening of potential renters.
There is also an eight-man maintenance crew (Warner, 22-23). Adler believed that, “without
Landmark we would be where most American cities are—with a problem without a solution.”
As a result of Landmark’s work other companies and individuals have renovated over 150 other units [in 1989]. Adler also wants to see a homeownership program enacted in the Victorian
District because, “that’s what people want—a decent house of their own,” (Warner, 23).
Several things are to be learned from this example. First, a strong leader willing to shamelessly use all resources is required to get an organization off the ground. Second, improvement in a neighborhood can be catching. Once things improve other investors and residents want to be a part of the “goodness.” Third, the combination of financing at the federal, state, city and private levels is crucial to make a low- to moderate-income level project actually work. Similar to SCAD’s situation, this model doesn’t require an architect to start an organization, but simply someone to attack the cause with enthusiasm.
These two different models for urban redevelopment are easy yet difficult to compare.
SCAD is an institution that does not need the community as much as the Victorian District does for its success. SCAD did not use any government money in its pursuits while the Victorian
District not only used government money and federal tax credits to operate but required it. If the community in the Victorian District doesn’t believe in this cause the project will not have any long-term success. SCAD does not necessarily need community participation for success.
It relies on its educational reputation more than its location.
Wildeboer 31 Self-Help: Reconstructing Over-the-Rhine
SCAD is not catering to any particular income bracket. Anyone with the money to attend the school is welcome and this would include students receiving loans. The Victorian
District is aggressively trying to maintain a low- to moderate-income resident status. SCAD has probably increased the value of the property in Historic Savannah eliminating much economic diversity. The Victorian District has a strong leader with the sole intentions of improving the neighborhood, while SCAD’s founders and subsequently its faculty and students don’t have any particular mission other than SCAD’s facilities.
Both examples have a pool of trained and un-trained workers to draw from such as students, residents, high school students interested in learning a trade, etc. SCAD is training students who will go on to build and renovate in other places when they are finished with their architecture or similar degree. The Victorian District is reaching a different pool of people such as minority workers.
SCAD’s impact is more visible in Savannah because it was finishing what Historic
Savannah already started. It was filling the holes in the historic district rather than trying to begin anew like the Victorian District. SCAD is an institution with a growing student base and not as easily shaken by economic cycles as a residential area. More people attend college when job opportunities are diminished. The Victorian District can be called a success for stopping the decline of the neighborhood, but it isn’t guaranteed stability.
Wildeboer 32 Self-Help: Reconstructing Over-the-Rhine
Case Study 2: South Bronx—community organization/grassroots movement
The story of decline in the South Bronx is in large part determined by the “legendary planning czar” Robert
Moses, who at the time was the antithesis of Jane Jacobs and her theories of community and neighborhood planning. At its peak, the South Bronx, (the Bronx is a borough of New York City) with a half-million residents, was itself practically a city within a city (Grogan and Proscio,
16). In the 1960s, Moses carved up the South Bronx with highways and then “welfare bureaucrats crammed the remaining fragments with destitute and rootless families.”
This put the shell of a neighborhood into a state of decline Figure 8 Map of Highways, Commuter Trains, and crime that, in the end, drove 300,000 people from and Subways through the Bronx the borough. Arsonists flocked to the area in every form—insurance fraud, scavenging, and thrill seeking. Unemployment soared as high as 85%, only increasing crime and drug use which in turn, disintegrated the civil order (Grogan and Proscio, 17).
With flight of residents and the rampant abandonment of property, the
City of New York became the biggest land owner (this does not mean landlord because there were no residents) because of acquisition via delinquent taxes. An amazing 40% of the housing stock was Figure 9 The Vacancy of the South Bronx destroyed in the 1960s and 1970s. This resulted in the city having to spend tax dollars on
Wildeboer 33 Self-Help: Reconstructing Over-the-Rhine bulldozing the burnt-out buildings leaving “vast tracts of rubble” creating a “new urban desert”
(Grogan and Proscio, 18). This depressing depiction of the area is the truth yet there were people still living and raising children amid this desolation.
President Jimmy Carter visited the South Bronx in October 1977 and viewed the appalling devastation first-hand. At the time it was easy to attribute the problems in the area with the “disgraced Nixon administration.” This is not the truth. Nixon implemented the Section
8 Housing Program that actually helped the area. Multiple presidential administrations combined to produce a “slum-clearance” initiative that led to the South Bronx’s demise. Urban
Renewal and Model Cities programs of the 1950s and 1960s did the most to clear out the area. President Carter, not being a designer or planner, had little vision of how to fix the area but he did tell his Housing and Urban Development Secretary, Patricia Roberts Harris, “See which areas can be salvaged. We can create around the edge. Maybe we can create a recreation area and turn it around. Get a map of the whole area and show me what could be done,” (Grogan and Proscio, 19-20). Carter was defeated in the 1980 presidential election and even though he tried to help, he received most of the blame for the “failed activism” in the South Bronx. From then on the area was “politically toxic” and ignored by national politics until President Clinton visited in December 1997 after he had already been elected to a second term (Grogan and Proscio, 22).
Luckily, the residents of the South Bronx were not just sitting on their hands waiting for government salvation. Something was happening in 1977 besides Carter’s visit. A group of forty radical residents formed a nonprofit group called People’s Development Corporation
(PDC). These enthusiastic residents were determined not to leave the South Bronx and took matters into their own hands to improve the situation. PDC, with no training and no money, managed to renovate a six-story building by shear force of will. New floors, new drywall, new windows, and modern kitchens adorned the twenty-eight new apartments housed in this
Wildeboer 34 Self-Help: Reconstructing Over-the-Rhine reclaimed structure. It even had solar panels on the roof. In Phase Two, PDC planned on reclaiming five more buildings and secured $3 million in federal funding and grants from the
Comprehensive Employment and Training Act (CETA) to train and pay construction workers based on its initial success. When President Carter visited the site, he saw it as the glimmer of hope to “build around the edge of” (Grogan and Proscio, 20).
Ed Koch was elected mayor of New York City in
1977, a month after Carter’s visit to the South Bronx, and created an agency to help the South Bronx called the South
Bronx Development Organization (SBDO) headed by Edward
Logue, a master planner from Boston (Grogan and Proscio,
23). Koch staffed his administration with multiple Ford
Foundation alums who insisted that resident groups become a part of the process of repairing the South Bronx.
This “crucial insight” led the success of the project. The city Figure 10 Ed Koch, Mayor of New York City funded SBDO and turned over its possession of the many housing parcels it owned. CETA,
Section 8, Community Development Block Grants and other Housing and Urban Development
(HUD) money jump started the revitalization process. [The Reagan administration cut funding for many of these programs and eliminated CETA.] (Grogan and Proscio, 24)
Politics is always a hurdle when dealing with money and people. Mayor Koch’s good intentions were stymied by a New York City charter that stated that federal funds had to be
“accepted” by the city’s governing board, called the Board of Estimate, before money could be doled out. The Board of Estimate consisted of the mayor, comptroller, president of city council, and the heads of each city borough. The other boroughs became jealous of the money that the Bronx was receiving. The borough presidents managed to get a majority to
Wildeboer 35 Self-Help: Reconstructing Over-the-Rhine stop the funds from going to the Bronx. By the time Mayor Koch negotiated for the Bronx’s funding to return it had been nine years since Carter’s visit (Grogan and Proscio, 25).
In the meantime, more nonprofit organizations were formed by residents and they had begun to renovate and manage these salvaged apartment buildings (Grogan and Proscio, 25). A community nonprofit group named the Mid-Bronx Desperadoes planned and built 90 single-family ranch-style Figure 11 Current Home webpage of the Mid-Bronx Desperadoes houses to be called Charlotte Gardens, after
Charlotte Street in the Bronx. [The appropriateness of single-family and ranch-style homes in
New York City are to be debated.] The houses sold for $47,800 each in 1983. This corporation arose from frustrated residents who used government money to renovate one building at a time. The
People’s Development Corporation, equally as frustrated, but not as good at dealing with the beurocracy as the Mid-Bronx Desperadoes, dissolved in the 1980s (Grogan and Proscio, 24). Figure 12 7 Charlotte St. in the Bronx In 1986 Mayor Koch faced three separate dilemmas—placing families in housing out of shelters, the city’s “slumlord” status because of its vast stock of abandoned housing, and the bickering amongst the other boroughs over money had continued. Koch realized the way to solve all of these problems was to change course and “unleash the resources of the private sector.” The South Bronx Development Organization was dissolved. The SBDO did renovate hundreds of units of housing and funneled millions of
Wildeboer 36 Self-Help: Reconstructing Over-the-Rhine dollars into the South Bronx for development that it desperately needed which is to be applauded. In the same amount of time the multitudes of nonprofit groups renovated thousands of units of housing which Koch, very wisely, took as a sign to switch gears. This switch of direction put housing stock back onto the tax roll (adding revenue to the city), placed homeless families into renovated housing, and spread fiscal responsibility to the rest of the boroughs (Grogan and Proscio, 26).
By 1988 Koch implemented the “largest municipal housing construction program in
American history,” eventually providing over $5 billion to the program. He used the nonprofit grassroots organizations, private landlords, developers, the New York City Housing Partnership, and the Community Preservation Corporation (a development bank for small landowners and the poor) to carry out this initiative. Besides New York
City’s municipal funds, private investors provided
$365 million in funding (Grogan and Proscio, 27).
In six years the city enabled the construction or Figure 13 Areas of development in the Bronx renovation of almost 100,000 units of housing!
These organizations were producing housing at double to triple the rate of what a city agency could do in the same amount of time (Grogan and Proscio, 25).
At the pinnacle of Koch’s administration, the city “devoted half a billion dollars a year in the renovation efforts in the South Bronx—more investment in housing than the other fifty largest
U.S. cities combined.” The money was channeled through two national nonprofit development institutions, the Enterprise Foundation and the Local Initiatives Support
Wildeboer 37 Self-Help: Reconstructing Over-the-Rhine
Corporation. The city was “planner, financier, supplier of vacant/declining property, but rarely developer.” Not all of this went to the South Bronx, but definitely more than one-fifth (five boroughs) did because it had the most decayed/vacant/declining parcels and infrastructure.
By the end of the 1980s only one-third of the taxable lots in the South Bronx were vacant
(Grogan and Proscio, 27).
More than the beautification of the South Bronx occurred; an improvement in the general quality of life created a “greater sense of community order.” There are still many negatives working against city renewal, but the four factors, “the convergence of positives,” as described in Chapter One, such as dropping crime and the disintegration of large federal institutions including welfare, are working in favor of city revitalization (Grogan and Proscio, 50).
Decreased crime, one of the four factors, can be statistically proven and felt by the residents. Policing improved because of alliances with community organizations. Crime dropped dramatically, even with increased numbers of teenagers, a “usual catalyst for rising crime” (Grogan and Proscio, 28). Crimes such as drug abuse, shootings, robberies, vandalism, and assaults were all down by half to two-thirds. School attendance dramatically increased
(Grogan and Proscio, 22). Interestingly, car theft went down 74% from 1990 to 1996 even as car ownership rose. Real estate tax collection doubled in conjunction with residents rating their neighborhood “good or excellent.” In 1987 two-thirds of residents claimed to live near a boarded up building and in 1996 it dropped to one-fourth. Residents became citizens again, participating in civic activities such as voting (Grogan and Proscio, 28).
There are still aspects of the South Bronx that are not picturesque. Employment improved from the 1970s but remained similar to the other boroughs in the 1990s. The poverty rate did not decline, nor did teen pregnancies. The South Bronx did not become the middle class. It may one day be argued that the social ramifications of the turn-around will greatly
Wildeboer 38 Self-Help: Reconstructing Over-the-Rhine impact the next generation. Today citizens want to reside in the South Bronx again; there is even a housing shortage (Grogan and Proscio, 29).
President Clinton told the residents of the South
Bronx, “If you can do it, everyone can do it” (Grogan and
Proscio, 30). It was among the worst and most infamous of slums and received the public attention needed to sustain a recovery early on. No one entity can take the credit for the salvation of the South Bronx. Community organizations, Figure 14 The South Bronx today New York City and federal funding all combined into a twenty year comeback for the South
Bronx. This progression out of decline was long, arduous, and performed by “thoroughly ordinary people.” It was not government as usual, but a persistent mayor, a feisty borough president and a city that had learned the hard way that top-down renewal does not work. The
South Bronx today is not an image of its former “grandeur” but simply “pleasant and livable” where low-income families can afford to live safely (Grogan and Proscio, 23). This proves that no inner-city is a lost cause.
There are several lessons to be learned from this time-tested case study. First, grassroots efforts are effective and efficient with government support but not management. The non- profit group must work in tandem with the city in order to accomplish the goal. Secondly, as a neighborhood is changed one building at a time it positively affects the entire area. The process may take a multitude of years and patience to see it through, but it is possible. Urban improvement is “catching” and other groups may join the effort. This is not competition, but simply more individuals interested in the same overall goal. Also, the abandoned housing stock that a city owns is much more profitable after it is renovated and back onto the tax roll than as a vacant property. Therefore, it should not be hard to convince a city to donate the
Wildeboer 39 Self-Help: Reconstructing Over-the-Rhine property for re-development. Moreover, any money the government (at the city, state or federal level) provides for a grassroots organization comes back by alleviating the government from providing the service. The government’s methods tend to be much more costly. Lastly, revitalization does not have to mean everyone is out of poverty and employed.
These case studies involve some common threads to guide an organization for urban re-development. The structure of each example project involved strong leadership. For SCAD that was the founders, for the Victorian District it was Leopold Adler, for the South Bronx it was
Mayor Ed Koch. Each leader was not necessarily personally involved in the construction efforts, but balanced the relationship between the organization and the city government and its citizens, secured funding for the projects, and presented a positive face for the organization.
This leadership must be sustained over time and be relentlessly persistent. Otherwise, it is too easy to be discouraged and quit.
The renovations themselves are performed by a certain pool of workers in each case.
SCAD trains its faculty and students to renovate its buildings. The Victorian District uses local high school students learning the trades and minority workers and others in an ever-changing construction crew. The South Bronx with its many organizations has just as many different people performing the construction. Within each organization there is construction training.
The efficiency of the renovation efforts are improved with a continuity of trained individuals from project to project.
Financing is also crucial to the project. In each case, re-use of usually historic buildings is very economical. Abandoned buildings owned by the city because of tax delinquency are a great resource. These buildings may be used for residential purposes as in the South Bronx and the Victorian District of Savannah, or in new ways such as for the SCAD campus. These buildings can contribute to the historic nature of the neighborhood and subjected to preservation guidelines, but also preservation tax credits as in the Victorian District. Adler
Wildeboer 40 Self-Help: Reconstructing Over-the-Rhine proved that any resource of funding is a good resource. Any loan, grant, or personal resource is worth pursuing.
Governmental involvement is a common condition when an urban project is undertaken. The Victorian District used any funding it could get and worked with the government only as needed. In the South Bronx community groups worked in tandem with the city. The city and its mayor were very involved in the funding and orchestration of the South
Bronx’s renewal. During this process, the city realized that the private, non-profit agencies could work quicker and its managerial status should be withdrawn. This improved the relations and the speed of progress. For SCAD there was no governmental agency to work with or around which sped up the process of renovation but cut funding.
Urban renewal projects aimed at improving the lives of low- and moderate-income individuals and families are seen as noble causes. The South Bronx and the Victorian District both cater to low-income renters and buyers. However, it is difficult to improve a neighborhood without property values rising out of range for low-income residents. Although the American dream includes owning a home of one’s own, this is not always the end result for the underprivileged in such a renewed community. This may be one of the few drawbacks, but it does not weaken the impact of the project as a whole. The benefits of inner-city revitalization efforts are not just in the tangible buildings being revived, but also in the societal realm. An improved sense of community arises when a community comes together to save themselves. Crime decreases, safety (perceived and actual) increases and the city streets become lively again. Residents become citizens once again and the quality of life improves even if it doesn’t become perfect or remotely similar to the suburbs.
Wildeboer 41 Self-Help: Reconstructing Over-the-Rhine
Chapter 4 Architectural Salvage Businesses
A facility that can serve the self-help builder is the architectural salvage yard. Up-scale, historic restoration clientele benefit from this business, but so can the do-it-yourselfer. The up- scale version is particular about the goods they sell, the object’s authenticity, and doesn’t want to spend space or time on items which aren’t going to provide a profit. Other facilities are concerned with recycling materials, diverting them from landfills, and providing construction materials to home-improvers on a tight budget. Most salvage centers also serve as an outlet for items manufactured in error and remnant stock of new items. For profit and non-profit salvage businesses can both generate a profit and become self-sustaining.
Architectural salvage centers can serve as a catalyst for training individuals to work in the trades, training them at the center or at a building rehabilitation site. An alternative employment opportunity for unemployed/under-employed individuals who can’t perform the labor of construction is to actually work in the salvage center. Facilities all over the United
States are supporting the community in various combinations of services. Indianapolis’ Rehab
Resource Inc. and Cincinnati’s Building Value LLC provide precedents for self-help salvage yards to investigate.
Wildeboer 42 Self-Help: Reconstructing Over-the-Rhine
Precedent 1: Indianapolis’ Rehab Resource Inc.
Rehab Resource Inc. (RRI) is an architectural salvage yard located three miles east of downtown Indianapolis, IN, between state route 40 and a railroad, in Center Township. RRI’s warehouse space totals 75,000 square feet. RRI “is a private, not-for-profit corporation that's dedicated to providing access to affordable building materials for the repair and rehabilitation of existing housing and in construction of new affordable housing for low to moderate income individuals, and in the repair of non-profit facilities.”2 Of Indianapolis’ nine townships, Center
Township has the highest unemployment rate and highest housing unit vacancy rate (2000 US census). A salvage yard to serve those with the least resources is appropriately placed in this township.
Usable building materials are saved from the landfills (and from contaminating the water supply), recycled and redistributed statewide. Paint recycling is RRI’s largest income generator. In conjunction with the Indiana Department of Environmental Management’s grant program, RRI has increased paint collection, reprocessing, repackaging, and redistribution by
27 tons.
RRI is a public-private cooperation established to directly impact the community. RRI’s primary source of revenue comes from handling fees charged to cover operating costs and from grant support. Private donations of materials and money are also solicited. RRI’s incentive for donors is “Your company saves money, makes money, looks good, is environmentally correct and is a major player in affordable housing rehabilitation.” Support from citizens, the city and the state are crucial to the success of such a community service.
Non-profit housing development agencies and 501(c) (3) non-profit agencies, such as neighborhood associations and churches, can become members of RRI. Members can
2 Mission statement according to their website, http://www.rehabresource.org
Wildeboer 43 Self-Help: Reconstructing Over-the-Rhine purchase materials at 50 to 75% less than retail. Non-profits can then repair their facilities or use these materials to improve the community. Low to moderate income individuals can purchase materials via a referral process. The referral process might be seen as cumbersome to a do-it-yourselfer, but it prevents wealthier individuals and groups from abusing the agency.
This precedent provides several guidelines for design and implementation of an architectural salvage yard. It sets a space requirement for the warehouse at 75,000 sq. ft. which is not as big as a Home Depot (roughly 200,000 sq. ft.) but still large enough to contain all materials in an organized, accessible way. The location of this facility in the least advantaged area of the city is ideal. Additionally, transportation costs are reduced by locating where the most work needs to be done. RRI’s paint recycling program, proven as its biggest money maker, is not only environmentally friendly, but a great cost-saver to the self- helper. Sometimes a coat of paint can be a simple way to aesthetically enhance a building or entire street. Improved physical appearance leads to improved perceptions about a neighborhood.
Wildeboer 44 Self-Help: Reconstructing Over-the-Rhine
Precedent 2: Cincinnati: Building Value LLC
Building Value LLC, located in Cincinnati’s neighborhood of Walnut Hills, a few miles northeast of downtown has 15,000 square feet of warehouse space. Walnut Hill’s census statistics are similar to
Center Township’s. Walnut Hills has the second highest level of unemployment and housing unit vacancy rate at 15-21% and 13-21%, Figure 15 Building Value on Gilbert Ave. Cincinnati respectively. Similarly, Indianapolis’ Center
Township’s unemployment rate was 16-21% and its vacancy rate was 15% (2000 US Census).
This location, amongst the neediest of the population, is again very appropriate.
Building Value was established “to provide hands-on job training opportunities for individuals with disadvantages and disabilities seeking employment in construction and retail; the enterprise is an extension of Work Resource Center’s (WRC) mission to empower individuals with disabilities and disadvantages to achieve a higher quality of life through employment and self-sufficiency.”3 Building Value’s business has three components consisting of light deconstruction, reusable building materials center, and product reconstruction from recycled materials. Building Value has diverted cabinets, doors, windows and other building materials from being deposited from Cincinnati’s landfills each year. They sell new and good condition reusable building materials priced at 30 – 60% less than retail costs to low-income homeowners and developers.
3 Building Value’s online mission statement, www.buildingvalue-cincy.org
Wildeboer 45 Self-Help: Reconstructing Over-the-Rhine
Building Value is managed by Work Resource Center (WRC), a Cincinnati-based nonprofit organization that empowers people with disabilities and disadvantages to increase their independence through employment. WRC serves three primary populations through work training, assessment and retention programs: people who are chronically unemployed or underemployed, people with mental or physical disabilities, and youth transitioning to work.
Participants obtain on-the-job work experience in deconstruction and salvage techniques, customer service, merchandising and maintenance to prepare them for competitive placement in the community and to become self-sufficient.
According to Building Values’ website, “WRC staff is instrumental in executing many of
Hamilton County's most important initiatives, including the Workforce Investment Act youth initiative, and the Welfare Reform Act.” As a result, participants require less government assistance and contribute more to the workforce.” This component involving the Welfare to
Work Reform Act is specifically tied to the “four factors that presage an urban revitalization.”
The culture of work is returning to deprived neighborhoods and a training facility with multiple opportunities for employment can be a solution.
“Building Value believes in the power of work to change lives.”4 This example demonstrates how a salvage yard can put people to work. It employs individuals through an affiliated service which trains and then distributes workers to sites for demolition and construction. It is a warehouse space but it is connected to the WRC’s facility. The physical connection between the salvage center and the training space can be explored more in depth through design. Salvage, construction and demolition are all working together to form a complete circle of employment and resource conservation.
4 Ibid.
Wildeboer 46 Self-Help: Reconstructing Over-the-Rhine
Chapter 5: A Solution
It has been established that low-income, urban neighborhoods have the potential for economic and social recovery. This renewal may not look like suburbia or a street’s historic past, but it still can create an environment that people can live, work and prosper in. Self-help, as it applies to housing, can be a technique implored to reach the goal of revitalization. The definition of self-help housing directs individuals and small groups to use their own “sweat equity” to produce housing and to take control of their existing housing units. The goal is to assist marginalized members of society outside the capitalist system in providing for themselves without government intervention.
As seen in the South Bronx, citizen initiative must prevail even when the government is unsure of how to proceed. Residents of a neighborhood organizing to improve their surroundings can be successful, but require some assistance. This assistance can be from the municipal government, state or federal subsidies, private investors, or financial institutions willing to re-invest in America’s inner-cities. Organizations not originated in the government or supervised by it, such as SCAD or the Mid-Bronx Desperadoes, are the most successful at this venture because the work can be done much more efficiently.
Successful self-help housing correlates directly with the necessity of training the average citizen in the construction trades. The availability of building materials at affordable prices is also an important factor. These requirements indicate the type of organization and facility to implement in a struggling urban neighborhood. The location of this facility is determined by its proximity to vacant buildings in addition to that area’s unemployment rate.
A self-help solution to inner-city under-development in the form of an architectural salvage center established in conjunction with a training facility to learn construction trades is a viable option. This solution provides multiple opportunities for employment regardless of physical ability. Unemployed and under-employed residents can run and work the salvage
Wildeboer 47 Self-Help: Reconstructing Over-the-Rhine center, perform actual construction on abandoned buildings, demolish buildings to add to the salvage stock, or become proficient enough in a trade to teach others.
In the city of Cincinnati there are several of its 52 neighborhoods that are in need of attention. Over-the-Rhine (OTR), just north of Cincinnati’s downtown district (see Appendix B), is an ideal candidate for such an organization and facility. OTR’s rich history and bountiful historic building stock lends itself well to comparison with Savannah and the South Bronx on a smaller scale.
Wildeboer 48 Self-Help: Reconstructing Over-the-Rhine
Part 1: Who and what is Cincinnati’s Over-the-Rhine
OTR’s present state of disarray is best understood by the telling of its history. OTR, in its heyday, in 1900, reached its peak population of 45,000 (Ferdelman, 46). The original immigrants that created a vivacious OTR were Germans with beer gardens for families to socialize (Ferdelman, 44) and a vast skill set that would help industrialize and expand
Cincinnati (Ferdelman, 43). Germans not only brought their industrial skills but their love of beer. By 1890 26 breweries existed in Over-the-Rhine (Ferdelman, 43). The German immigrants are also responsible for the name Over-the-Rhine. The Miami-Erie Canal once existed where Central Parkway is today and was named after the Rhine River in Germany.
World War I would forever change the German-American neighborhood as the once proud ethnic community would disassociate themselves from the area and their “German- ness.” Street names were changed, company names were changed, German newspapers were closed, and German Turner Hall, the center of the German community, closed in 1919
(Ferdelman, 51). To add to the decline of this once lively neighborhood, Prohibition was enacted in 1919. If a German restaurant or bar had escaped the anti-German sentiments from the war, they could not escape a federal law (Ferdelman, 51-2).
The canal had been drained in order to build a subway as envisioned in the 1925
Cincinnati Master Plan. This vision intended to extend the industrial and business district into
OTR. It was thought that people should move into the hills instead of living in the polluted basin. Subway construction halted in 1927, preventing business expansion. Middle- and upper-class residents had already begun to flee because of the war leaving only the lower- class (Ferdelman, 48). By 1930 Cincinnati declared Over-the-Rhine a slum. At this time there was a federal “slum clearance” effort, but the federal funding was instead spent on the
Millcreek Expressway and public housing elsewhere (Ferdelman, 52-3).
Wildeboer 49 Self-Help: Reconstructing Over-the-Rhine
During World War II southern blacks came to OTR to work in factories. Also, displaced residents from the West End migrated to the area due to the clearance of housing for construction of the new expressway (Ferdelman, 53). In 1940 OTR was 98.8% white, in 1960
89% white, and in 1970 58% white. As of the 1980 US Census, OTR became predominantly black with 63% of the population. Interestingly, from 1970 on the population of the black race didn’t actually grow as much as the white population left. In 1960 there were over 24,000 whites in OTR and just over 3,000 blacks, and in 1970 there were around 8,700 whites and about 6,300 blacks. Currently there are 5,876 blacks and 1,482 whites in OTR (Ferdelman, 54,
US Census). This fact is important because blacks are often marginalized in the construction industry. See Figure 18
As the neighborhood deteriorated and the private sector abandoned and disinvested in property in OTR, the public sector moved in. Expansion of Woodward High School, creation of Peaslee Park on Sycamore Street, renovations to Findlay Market and use of other federal money via the Model Cities Program were all implemented in the hopes of making OTR more suburban-like. Widening Liberty Street in the late 1960s further destroyed the fragile urban fabric which still existed in Over-the-Rhine (Ferdelman, 55).
In April 2001 Cincinnati’s racial tensions erupted into three days of riots instigated by the shooting of an unarmed young black man named Timothy Thomas. A story in The Cincinnati
Post April 12, 2001 revealed how damaging this violence was to the easily dejected OTR neighborhood. Pizza was not delivered, mail was not delivered, cable was not repaired or installed, and public transportation was suspended. Property was damaged, files were stolen, and fires were started. Community service organizations, such as SmartMoney Community
Service who offers free tax help, and businesses serving OTR residents, such as Deveroes Retail
Store, suffered greatly. The Cincinnati Riots of 2001 have many of the same characteristics of the South Bronx before it reinvented itself.
Wildeboer 50 Self-Help: Reconstructing Over-the-Rhine
What is left in Over-the-Rhine is a large amount of under-used building stock pre-dating
1891, and a need for a once proud area of Cincinnati to become a pleasant and livable community within the greater Cincinnati area. Current conditions regarding employment and building occupancy can be ascertained from the 2000 US Census Report.
Figure 16 Figure 17
OTR’s population, habitable housing, vacant housing, and owner 2000 US Census Statistics occupied housing
The Over-the-Rhine area has a low owner-occupancy rate which is part of an overall problem in the city of Cincinnati (US Census). Figure 16 includes the overall habitable (this means not including condemned or other non-habitable units) housing units compared to the number occupied by the owner. This is rather low proportionately but has not drastically changed. This can be attributed to the fact that the residents in OTR since 1970 are some of the poorest citizens of Cincinnati. Poverty is a hindrance to becoming a homeowner. The chart not only shows the steady decline of habitable housing in OTR, but also the steady decline that seems to match percentage-wise in the renter occupancy. Percentage of renter
Wildeboer 51 Self-Help: Reconstructing Over-the-Rhine occupied to total habitable remains fairly constant. What could keep this relationship steady?
Could it be that when habitable units are removed from the market that an equal number of inhabited and uninhabited units are lost?
The vacancy rate (see Figure 16 and 17) compared to total habitable housing units has remained very consistent even as the number out housing units has declined. In the 2000 US
Census the population of OTR was tallied to be 7,638 people for 5,261 habitable housing units.
The ratio of occupied housing units to total housing units is 3454/5261 or 65.6%. By contrast, the adjacent, affluent neighborhood of Mt. Adams has 1,466 people, 1,136 housing units and an occupancy ratio of 993/1136 or 87.4%. Even the other less affluent, adjacent neighborhoods such as the West End and Mt. Auburn have at least 77% of their habitable housing occupied.5 These neighborhoods have similar populations, so the problem must lie within OTR.
Another factor of OTR’s plight is employment or lack thereof. Of the 7,638 people residing in OTR only 2,198 are employed (see Figure 18). When employment or rather unemployment is reported it is based on persons looking for work and who have been out of work less than one year. The US Census reported in 2000 that 698 persons were unemployed.
What this picture leaves out are the 2,724 people in OTR that are over 16 years old and not in the labor force. That is more people than are reportedly working in OTR. The fourth positive factor, as described by Grogan and Proscio in Comeback Cities, is the return of the culture of work. As welfare abates and public housing disappears residents of OTR will need to start working.
5 2000 US Census statistics: West End population 8,022, housing units 5,191, occupied housing 4002; Mt. Auburn population 6,477, housing units 3,337, occupied housing 2,709; Fairview/Clifton Heights population 7,261, housing units 4,048, occupied housing 3,516
Wildeboer 52 Self-Help: Reconstructing Over-the-Rhine
When unemployment is high, crime rises. The third factor for urban renewal is reduced crime. The perception of crime and personal safety are important for any community. Currently,
Over-the-Rhine has the highest number of calls for service to the police in Cincinnati, and Figure 18 OTR’s white population, black population, employed, and unemployed the third the highest number of with current City, County, and Country norms for the same areas crimes reported. Crime dropped 2.7% in Over-the-Rhine from 2002 to 2003 but rose 1.5% from 2003 to 2004. Crime statistics are published by the Cincinnati Police Department via the
City of Cincinnati website. OTR has the third highest number of part 1 crimes (murder, robbery, larceny, etc.) behind the Central Business District and Westwood. But OTR has by far the most murders, rapes, robberies, and aggravated assaults. These crimes are the most dangerous and violent of part 1 crimes. These statistics do not improve OTR’s image, especially since the riots. People are afraid of the area and the City of Cincinnati must decrease its crime to decrease social unrest.
The second factor for urban revitalization is the return of the private sector to the inner- city. With OTR’s current emptiness there is ample space for a business to rent or buy. The close proximity to downtown and two interstate highways are another incentive for location in OTR.
More businesses locating in OTR will encourage more citizens to reside in OTR and vice versa.
Wildeboer 53 Self-Help: Reconstructing Over-the-Rhine
All these housing, employment, and crime statistics combine to paint a picture of OTR today. This area is not only in desperate need of revitalization, but has many opportunities for improvement. Grassroots and non-profit organizations, the first positive factor to presage a broad inner-city recovery, are conspicuously missing from OTR. A concerted effort has begun with the FreeStore
Foodbank, the DropInn Center, Findlay Market, and a Figure 19 Over-the-Rhine today-full of emptiness few others, but they are not putting local residents to work or reducing crime. There some initiatives from the City of Cincinnati’s municipal government, such as the Over-the-Rhine Master Plan, but as proven by Savannah, the South
Bronx, and OTR’s own 1925 Master Plan, which is not enough. This gap provides an opportunity for a design solution.
Wildeboer 54 Self-Help: Reconstructing Over-the-Rhine
Figure 20 OTR figure ground map of 1891, 1956 and today. The pink and green areas represent what has been lost in just over 100 years.
Wildeboer 55 Self-Help: Reconstructing Over-the-Rhine
Part 2A: Organization Overview
The lack of grassroots and non-profit organizations putting people to work, rehabilitating the dilapidated yet historic buildings, or improving the quality of life in OTR is a hindrance to its progress. The implementation of an organization in OTR to employ its residents, train them with skills that can translate into the private sector, and rehabilitate languishing building stock is a feasible solution to some of its current plights. It will not only require municipal support, but also private investment, federal grants, and loans from financial institutions in order to succeed, as seen in Savannah and the South Bronx. This organization will need to be housed in a facility presumably donated by a wealthy benefactor interested in OTR.
The first prong of a solution is a training facility that works in conjunction with the local trades to train/certify the unemployed and the underemployed in Over-the-Rhine. From there this new workforce will either rehabilitate buildings acquired from the city’s large pool of tax delinquency properties or demolish units deemed irreparable. From the demolition and rehabilitation efforts there will be discarded construction material that is able to be recycled as opposed to being deposited into the landfill. These salvaged materials will be sold in an architectural salvage center (more retail than yard) in which no part is too small or too cheap to save. Over-the-Rhine residents participating in this program may choose to work in construction or in the retail portion.
A key missing component when self-help is referred to is that the self-help agency is a way to make money. A business component to the resident rehabilitation of buildings would support the organizational and training overhead, thus, requiring fewer government subsidies.
The retail store would provide a stable long-term place of employment also. The criticisms of self-help being short-term or for the young can be overcome. This project is intended to last as long as there are buildings in Over-the-Rhine that need attention—potentially a very long time.
Anyone with any abilities or disabilities should be able to find a job doing something within this
Wildeboer 56 Self-Help: Reconstructing Over-the-Rhine organization. A day care facility will be included in the project in order to accommodate the un/under-employed with children. Adding to the economy in OTR and providing stability can increase the neighborhoods pride and its capacity to become pleasant and livable.
“To view the urban poor as helpless, indolent (habitually lazy), steeped in rural mores helped maintain the hegemony (dominance) of the middle classes: indeed it even shaped the self-image of the poor who came to believe themselves helpless and dependent” (Ward,
6). Progress can be made once it is believed that the poor and unemployed can and will work to provide for themselves.
Wildeboer 57 Self-Help: Reconstructing Over-the-Rhine
Part 2B: Design Precedents
The inclusion of mobile units into this design proposal is influenced by many design precedents. Two significant examples of mobile units are the Portable Construction Training
Center in Venice, California by Lawrence Scarpa (Pugh + Scarpa) and Jennifer Siegal (OMA) and the Mobile Dwelling Unit by Lot-ek located in Manhattan, commissioned by the University
Art Museum at the University of California, Santa Barbara.
The Portable Construction
Training Center was designed in a design/build studio at Woodbury
University for the Venice Community
Housing Corporation, an organization founded with the mission to develop and maintain permanently affordable Figure 21 Portable Construction Training Center for disadvantaged and low-income view from circulation side individuals. The trailer is 14’ wide by 65’ long and is used as a hands-on classroom. It allows for the four basic construction trades: plumbing, painting and plaster repair, carpentry, and electrical. The program of the trailer is an entry, class room, restroom, and large space containing the electrical, plumbing and shop spaces with a circulation aisle running across all three. The aisle across the experiential spaces is Figure 22 PCTC interior of skill space meant to connect the student to the teacher. The teacher easily moves back and forth along the aisle to observe and interact. The roof is slightly pitched with wood trusses to support the metal roof. Approximately three-fourths of one long side of
Wildeboer 58 Self-Help: Reconstructing Over-the-Rhine the trailer has movable walls. The walls, made of translucent panels, tilt up in three different sections at the skills areas to allow ventilation and easier access for the teacher. A short end of the trailer (at the opposite end of the entry) the wall is made of wire mesh and swings open to allow a ramp to be pulled out onto the ground. The entry has a skylight and translucent panels are used as partitions within the trailer to separate space (“Portable Construction,” 26).
Figure 23 Floor Plan PCTC
This precedent is very germane to my project, but a few things could be improved upon. The wire mesh wall/door is secure, but in a colder climate this is inappropriate. The main feature that is lacking is storing the actually materials and tools to install, for example, plumbing fixtures. There is ample counter space to perform some tasks, but there is no storage for the materials or tools. The spaces are dedicated to learning certain trades, but there are no mock-ups to practice on. All four main trades under one roof are feasible, but few people at a time are going to learn each of the trades. The roof is pitched so slightly and uses so many wood trusses that it asks the question of whether or not it was necessary. Watershed would be a reason to pitch the roof. The labor and materials that it took to change the flat roof doesn’t seem to have improved nor affected the design. The change to the roof takes away the capability for the trailer to be stacked later. The trailer used to produce this classroom is much larger than the base shipping container that will be used in the actual design. Nonetheless, this is an ideal precedent for this thesis.
Wildeboer 59 Self-Help: Reconstructing Over-the-Rhine
The Mobile Dwelling Unit (MDU) by
Lot-ek was created as an experimental design project to transform a standard 40’ container manufactured by SEA BOX INC6. into a home that could be readily transported through existing transportation systems (Scoates, 66). Lot-ek uses shipping containers and other industrial products to Figure 24 MDU axonometric –expanded unit experiment with the social and spatial natures in architecture. MDU has a fully serviceable interior with push-out elements in the container for sleeping, storage, cooking, and bathing (75). This home remains shippable and may be stacked to create a village of containers via vertical harbors (57).
Figure 25 MDU floor plan—expanded unit
This design provides an example of construction drawings for a shipping container in the size that the design will be based off of. It puts circulation through the middle of the unit expanding no more than four feet out on each side. This unit would not be able to be
6 http://www.seabox.com/id-102
Wildeboer 60 Self-Help: Reconstructing Over-the-Rhine occupied when the expansion pieces were within the base unit. This piece of the design could be a hindrance when transporting tools or materials. This is to be considered when applied to classroom spaces. This precedent is a furthering of how a shipping container can be manipulated.
A comparison of both precedents yields several ideas. First, for both sides of the trailer to expand out from within is not very practical if items are to be stored in a non-collapsible way. Following this, the circulation seems to work better if is along one side of the shipping container. In a space with only an 8’ width it is not very practical to have circulation in the middle since that would hinder the depth of activities on either side. Both precedents open out for most of one length of the container. This examination is a good starting point for design of mobile classrooms.
Another precedent that influenced the program of this organization were “Cubby” housing units. These are seen in Japanese Hotels and Atelier van Lieshout’s “mini capsule.” It is a shipping container that contains simple beds with a secure door. Six to eight sleeping units can fit in one container. The mobility of the capsules provides an added benefit that security on the job site can be provided by the workers sleeping on site. These units will be used to provide basic, secure shelter to employees.
Figure 26 Japanese Hotel Figure 27 van Lieshout Mini Capsule
Wildeboer 61 Self-Help: Reconstructing Over-the-Rhine
Part 2C: Program
Introduction
The organization is founded upon the ideals of reconstructing Over-the-Rhine from within. As a result it serves the residents of OTR in a multitude of ways. The organization and its people require three different facilities—an administration/ organization building, an architectural salvage center, and mobile classrooms in order to serve the workers and staff. The potential workers will be poor, unemployed, under-employed, possibly homeless, and probably lacking basic needs such as food and adequate shelter. Construction work is dirty work, heightening the need for daily baths and good hygiene practices. All of these needs can be provided for in the administration/organization facility. The salvage center will be located on a nearby site to the administration/ organization building with also contains the mobile classrooms. The architectural salvage center will take the form of a warehouse based in convention, cost- efficiency and functionality. The mobile classrooms will be based in the standard shipping container form with adaptations to enhance learning and function. The administration/organization building will be more free form to incorporate the various program requirements in conjunction with storage and use of the mobile classrooms.
• Administration/Organization Building (for the people) which would include a reception,
locker rooms, kitchen, dining, daycare, and support space
• Mobile Units for trade classrooms, demolition, and “cubby” housing
• Architectural Salvage Center (for the materials) which would include retail space to store
and sell selected salvage items
ADMINISTRATION/ORGANIZATION BUILDING
Support Space 640 sf Reception 100 sf Administation 150 sf
Wildeboer 62 Self-Help: Reconstructing Over-the-Rhine
Public Restrooms 2@ 60 sf 120 sf Kitchen 300 sf Laundry 200 sf Janitorial 50 sf
Space for Employees 1250 sf Dining Room 400 sf Locker Rooms 450 sf women 400 sf men
Space for Children 1210 sf Daycare 450 sf Storage Space 40 sf Outdoor Play space 720 sf
Tools 1520 sf Tool Library 1200 sf Mobile Unit 320 sf
SUBTOTAL 4620 SF GROSSING INCREMENT- ADD 20% 925 SF TOTAL 5,545 SF
MOBILE UNITS
Classrooms- 12 trades @ 1 trailer each 3840 sf
“Cubby Housing” 640 sf
TOTAL 4,480 SF
ARCHITECTURAL SALVAGE CENTER
Interior Warehouse Space 23,000 sf Public Restrooms 2@ 60 sf 120 sf Cashier Space 100 sf Loading Dock 600 sf
Exterior Storage Space 1000 sf
Shed Space 1000 sf
Demolition Mobile Unit 320 sf
SUBTOTAL 25,000 SF GROSSING INCREMENT 5,000 SF TOTAL 30,000 SF
Wildeboer 63 Self-Help: Reconstructing Over-the-Rhine
ADMINISTRATION/ORGANIZATION BUILDING 5545 SF This building is the central prominent facility in which leaders, workers and visitors will use to enroll in programs or otherwise contribute to the organization. This will provide the visibility to the community that the organization desires in order to promote positive progress. This building will incorporate not only the permanent program spaces but also the semi-permanent mobile units to create a dynamic landmark.
Reception 100 sf
Administration 150 sf This space is to be used by the leadership to maintain records of employment, financial records, write grants, and other organizational design space. The area requires general office needs such as file storage and desk space. It should be located near the entrance adjacent to the reception space for security and visitor assistance. This room would ideally receive north light.
Public Restrooms 2@ 60 sf 120 sf Separate Men’s and Women’s near reception and tool library.
Kitchen 300 sf This space is designed to feed 20 people breakfast and dinner each day and the children in the daycare breakfast and lunch each day. It contains a six burner range, two double ovens, commercial refrigerator and freezer, walk-in pantry, and three-basin sink. It does not require much natural light, but does need adequate ventilation. It should be adjacent to the dining space with easy access to the laundry facilities.
Dining Room 400 sf This room is meant for use by diners for breakfast and dinner. It may also serve as a meeting space during other times for administration or construction crews. It is to hold four six person rectangular tables and requires natural sunlight. It is desired that it is on the south side of the building.
Daycare7 450 sf This room is for daycare providers and children up until kindergarten age. It can hold a maximum of 10 children8 with two care providers9 working when there are more than seven children in attendance. This space contains a child scaled restroom, work counters with a lavatory, small refrigerator, and small child scaled tables and chairs. The materials are important because it needs to be easily cleaned but not too hard for floor play. Materials recommended are carpet or cork for the floor and laminates for surfaces. Lots of natural light is essential because they are the main daytime users of this facility. This room needs to be secure from outsiders and should be placed away from entrance doors and should be next to or easily accessible to outdoor play area.
7 Daycare services and space are to meet Ohio Job and Family Services Child Care Manual specifications to be found at http://www.odjfs.state.oh.us/lpc/mtl/CCMTL51.PDF 8 Minimum of 35 sq. ft. per child excluding restrooms and other unusable space for child care 9 Requirements for child care providers range from a ratio of 1:5 for infants to 1:14 for four to five year olds. Two providers is the requirement for ten infants.
Wildeboer 64 Self-Help: Reconstructing Over-the-Rhine
Storage Room for Daycare 40 sf This is to be used for the storage of cots for the children, toys, craft materials,
Outdoor Play Area for Daycare 720 sf To be used by the children in the organization’s daycare only. This will have a defined fence and or other barrier, away from traffic, provides some shade, and trash receptacles.
Locker Rooms 450 sf Women 400 sf Men These spaces are to be used by all workers. The women’s will contain one ADA accessible toilet, four standard toilet stalls, two lavatories, five shower stalls with adjacent dressing areas, and a minimum of twelve lockers. The men’s will be the same except the four standard toilet stall will be one standard toilet stall and two urinals. The materials should be sealed concrete floors, tile, and laminates. The privacy required for locker rooms limits natural lighting but still can be accomplished with a clerestory window.
Laundry Room 200 sf This room is used by the designated launderer and all other users who need to check out linens for bathing or kitchen needs. Work clothes such as overalls can be obtained from this room as well. This room will have two washers and two dryers, a folding table, ample storage shelves for the towels and spare work clothes and a counter for checking out/in the linens. This room must be in close proximity to the locker rooms and the kitchen. There is no lighting requirement for this room.
Janitorial Closet 50 sf This room should be in close proximity to the locker rooms, kitchen and dining space.
Tool Library 1520 sf total 1200 sf permanent 320 mobile This space is to be used by construction workers in the organization only. It is a supplement to the mobile construction units. The lending library will provide such hand tools as hammers, screwdrivers, saw horses, drills, ladders, clamps, brooms, shovels, and levels. To see a complete list of possible tools see Appendix C. The space will provide a minimum of 24 steel storage chests (of recommended 56”x 24” x 48” size). Wall shelves of a 30” depth are desired as well as an open wall for ladders, saw horses, and other odd size items to be stored. This space requires high ceilings—a 14’ minimum—which will enable clerestory lighting. The mobile unit must be able to “plug- in” to the area for site usage. The tool library should be on the ground floor (if there is more than one floor in the final building) in order to easily accommodate for a reinforced floor due to the weight of the tools and storage units.
MOBILE UNITS 4480 SF
There are mobile construction classrooms as well as “cubby” housing units. All mobile units will either be on-site or docked as the main Administrative/Organizational Facility. There is also a mobile demolition unit but it will be docked at the Architectural Salvage Center.
Wildeboer 65 Self-Help: Reconstructing Over-the-Rhine
There are twelve mobile construction classrooms which will occupy the same site as the Administration/Organization Building. These mobile units are meant to be used as vocational classroom space and as mobile construction laboratories to continue education as on-site construction and learning progresses. Each unit is meant to be self-sustaining with tool and material storage space, demonstration area, hands-on experience space, and a restroom.
The mobile units will be based on a standard shipping container of 40’L x 8’W x8’-6” manufactured by Sea Box Inc.
Because Over-the-Rhine has the highest crime rate in the city of Cincinnati caution and security play an important role in the design. These units must be able to be closed up and locked up when not in use. The trailers will need to be stacked in some instances for storage or creating scaffolding next to a building. Scaffolding will need to be incorporated into the design even when the trailers won’t be stacked. A different trade will be taught in each trailer with varying requirements. The shipping containers will need to be modified (designed) in order to properly function as classrooms and as an appropriate public representation of the organization.
Some trades will function with a ceiling height of 8’-6”, but other will require more height.10 The table below details what each trade requires.
<8’-6” >8’-6”, if so what height? Tile (ceramic) Wood Framing 13’-15’ Flooring Roofing 12’ Drywall Stairs 10’-12’ Electrical Carpentry Plumbing Bricklaying Window/Door Installation Concrete
General Classroom Unit 320 sf each All classroom units require mock-up space, circulation space, gathering space around the mock-up, tool storage, and a restroom. Mock-up space 4’w x 6’l min 24 sf Gathering-linearly 4’w x 10’l 40 sf Tool Storage 8’w x 2’-6”d min 20 sf Restroom 7’w x 5’l min 35 sf Equipment 20 sf Circulation 3’w x 16’min 58 sf
10 According to Architectural Graphic Standards in Ohio the maximum height for a semi-trailer is 13’-6”.
Wildeboer 66 Self-Help: Reconstructing Over-the-Rhine
“Cubby” Housing 320 sf each This unit is meant to shelter men and women in separate beds within a shipping container at various sites. Each unit will sleep eight people in secure sleeping quarters. Each quarter is fit with a bed, bed linens, shelf for personal effects, and a rail to hang clothes on.
ARCHITECTURAL SALVAGE CENTER 30,000 SF
This facility is to be used by sales associates of the salvage center, all construction employees, and the community. The sales associates will be organizing, stocking and selling the various construction items. The construction employees will either be bringing in materials from demolition jobs or buying materials for the construction of another building. The outside community is welcome to buy materials in order to refurbish their homes. The sale of the materials supports the OTR employees even if the materials leave the area. The standard building type that this facility takes is a warehouse. Its general layout will be similar to Building Value, Home Depot and other construction warehouses. This facility will include a secure exterior space for items such as stone which do not need protection from weather. The facility will also include a covered shed-like space which will protect items such as lumber but without climate control. An important aspect to this facility is keeping the items secure to prevent theft. Efficiency and organization are imperative to keeping overhead costs low. This building will use natural day lighting, cross-ventilation, and take advantage of solar gain. Natural climate control will be a cost-saver without detriment to the materials because they can withstand a wider range of temperatures than a typical climate controlled building allows.
Acceptable Items for Re-Sale11 Lumber –wall studs in good condition Wood trim Doors Bricks, stone, marble Siding Windows keep very few for reuse: arched windows for headboards and other large windows salvaged for glass to repair other furniture (single-pane windows are not desired because they are inefficient) plumbing fixtures and pipes (including sinks and lavatories) flooring-wood in good condition cabinets lighting and electrical supplies good condition hardware stair banisters and spindles (old risers are usually not up to code) appliances other miscellaneous items as seen fit by administration
Items to avoid: cast-iron tubs, single pane windows, carpet
11 Taken from Building Value’s acceptable materials list Appendix D and an interview with Patty of Wooden Nickel Antiques of Cincinnati, OH
Wildeboer 67 Self-Help: Reconstructing Over-the-Rhine
Overall Facility 25,000 sf This facility contains the components of Interior Warehouse Space, Exterior Storage Space, Shed Space, Demolition Unit, and a loading dock.
Interior Warehouse Space 23,000 sf This will house almost all the for-sale items, a cashier center, and restrooms. Restrooms 120sf Cashier Space 100 sf
Exterior Storage Space 1000 sf The items do not require a specific height or width but they are very heavy and this must be considered in their storage. They may be stacked on themselves, but will not be on any shelves or racks.
Shed Space 1000 sf This space requires a length of at least 16’ for the lumber and a height of 15’ for storage of lumber on racks without getting too tall and unsafe. The width of the space is around 30’ for rack of lumber on either side of a circulation corridor of a width of 7’-10’ for a forklift to maneuver forward and for right angle stacking. Demolition Mobile Unit 320 sf This unit will dock at the Salvage Facility and programmatically includes a restroom, tool storage and space to hold items to be returned and sold at the salvage center. Refer to the mobile classrooms for other specifications.
Wildeboer 68 Self-Help: Reconstructing Over-the-Rhine
Part 2D: Site
The sites selected for this organization and its facilities are along the south side of Liberty St. between
Walnut St. and Main St. and at 1419
Walnut St. The Liberty St. site is currently a parking lot surrounded with
Grammer’s Restaurant, owned by
Cincinnati City Councilman James
Tarbell, on the western boundary and Figure 28 Site for proposed program in OTR Uptown Arts, owned by Lois and Richard
Rosenthal, on the eastern boundary. The Walnut site will be replacing a small building surrounded by vacant lots. The use of these two sites is to fill in the “gap tooth” effect left by street widening, demolition of dilapidated buildings, and other urban decay issues. The Liberty
St. site is was selected based on the 1960s Liberty St. widening which left a lot of gaps and decay in what was once a solid urban fabric.
There is an opening in the urban fabric next to Grammer’s that could become a connector street for the two sites also connecting to Clay St. Access to the Liberty site must be from secondary and tertiary roads of Walnut St., Main St., Clay St., and Melindy St. The urban site is already accessible by pedestrian routes and by bus.
Site Issues: • filling in the gaps of urban fabric • connect the two sites • access for trucks into and out of each site/facility • parking provisions for guests on site or on Liberty St. • respecting the neighborhood, especially directly adjacent properties
Wildeboer 69 Self-Help: Reconstructing Over-the-Rhine
Figure 29 Liberty Street Widening Effects on the urban fabric Site for proposed organization circled in orange
Wildeboer 70 Self-Help: Reconstructing Over-the-Rhine
Conclusion
The terminology of opportunity—“ripe for renovation” and “bursting with promise”—holds true for Cincinnati’s Over-the-Rhine. This area needs a long term solution to its many problems and plights. All of OTR’s treasures lay within its boundaries—its historic buildings, its interesting history, and its people. This thesis has created an organization to obtain urban resuscitation for
OTR through self-help housing.
The four factors of inner-city recovery, such as the culture of work returning and grassroots organizations, are ready and waiting to be taken advantage of. The mutual self- help organization is designed to not only take advantage of OTR’s resources, but also restore a state of living to the community that it desperately needs. As seen in the South Bronx and
Savannah, organization and determination are the keys to success for rejuvenating urban areas.
This organization has the potential to change the entire economic structure of OTR. It will employ at first only maybe a dozen OTR residents, but over time it will employ more and more to the hundreds and hopefully thousands of residents who need to become self- sufficient contributing citizens of Cincinnati. By employing residents in various positions and providing food and shelter to those who want to work for it this organization can help one individual at a time regain their dignity and purpose.
While the people themselves are improving their state of living the physical environment will be improving along with them. Building by building, vacancy by vacancy OTR will awaken.
The gaps will start to fill in and the once dense urban fabric will get patched. The employees will inevitably develop an attachment to their hard work and want to keep it in good condition.
They will be proud to tell their friends that they re-built this or that building. This feeling will spread. As more and more residents participate in the program more and more pride will ensue.
Wildeboer 71 Self-Help: Reconstructing Over-the-Rhine
The blossoming OTR will become not a notorious place in Cincinnati where crime, drugs, and poverty rule the land, but a neighborhood that is pleasant and livable. This neighborhood is adjacent to downtown Cincinnati and its recovery will be a beacon to the rest of greater Cincinnati that this is a town worth living in and to outsiders it is a town worth visiting and doing business in.
Wildeboer 72 Self-Help: Reconstructing Over-the-Rhine
Works Cited
Burgess, Rod. “Self-help Housing Advocacy: A Curious Form of Radicalism. A Critique
of the Work of John F.C. Turner.” Self-Help Housing: A Critique. Ed. Peter
Ward. London: Mansell Publishing Limited, 1982. 55-97.
Ferdelman, Daniel Brian. “The Rise, Fall and Regeneration of Over-the-Rhine: A
Morphological Study.” Masters Thesis University of Cincinnati, 1997.
Grogan, Paul S. and Tony Proscio. Comeback Cites: A Blueprint for Urban
Neighborhood Revival. Boulder, CO: Westview Press, 2000.
Harms, Hans. “Historical Perspectives on the Practice and Purpose of Self-Help Housing.”
Self-Help Housing: A Critique. Ed. Peter Ward. London: Mansell Publishing Limited,
1982. 17-53.
Kolodny, Robert. “The Emergence of Self-Help as a Housing Strategy for the Urban
Poor.” Critical Perspectives on Housing. Ed. Rachel G. Bratt et al. Philadelphia, PA:
Temple University Press, 1986. 447-462.
Levinson, Nancy. “Campus Planning is breaking new ground” Architectural Record
v. 192, n.8, (Aug. 2004) p. [86]-90, [92], 94.
Logan, John R. and Harvey L. Molotch. Urban Fortunes: The Political Economy of Place.
Berkeley, CA: University of California Press, 1987.
Oppenheimer Dean, Andrea. “School of Redesign” Historic Preservation v. 44, n.6,
(Nov.-Dec. 1992) p. [34]-41, 87.
Scoates, Christopher. LOT-EK: Mobile Dwelling Unit. New York: Distributed Art Publishers, 2003.
Schuman, Tony. “The Agony and the Equity: A Critique of Self-Help Housing.” Critical
Perspectives on Housing. Ed. Rachel G. Bratt et al. Philadelphia, PA: Temple
University Press, 1986. 463-473.
Siegal, Jennifer, ed. Mobile: the art of portable architecture. New York: Princeton
Wildeboer 73 Self-Help: Reconstructing Over-the-Rhine
Architectural Press, 2002.
Topham, Sean. Move House. Munich: Prestel, 2004.
Vitra Design Museum. Living In Motion: Design and Architecture for flexible dwelling. Weil am
Rhein: Vitra Design Stiftung gGmbH, 2002.
Ward, Peter M. “Introduction and Purpose.” Self-Help Housing: A Critique. Ed. Peter
Ward. London: Mansell Publishing Limited, 1982. 1-14.
Warner, Chris. “Attractive Housing for Savannah’s Poor” Urban Land v. 48, n.2,
(Feb. 1989) p. 21-3. www.buildingvalue-cincy.org www.census.gov www.cincinnati-oh.gov
Cincinnati Over-the-Rhine Masterplan
Cincinnati Police Crime Statistics www.rehabresource.org www.scad.edu
Wildeboer 74 Self-Help: Reconstructing Over-the-Rhine
Appendix A12
12 Compiled by author from SCAD’s virtual tour, www.scad.edu, and Chatham County SAGIS, http://sagis.binarybus.com
Wildeboer 75 Self-Help: Reconstructing Over-the-Rhine
Wildeboer 76 Self-Help: Reconstructing Over-the-Rhine
Wildeboer 77 Self-Help: Reconstructing Over-the-Rhine
Wildeboer 78 Self-Help: Reconstructing Over-the-Rhine
Wildeboer 79 Self-Help: Reconstructing Over-the-Rhine
Appendix B
Wildeboer 80 Self-Help: Reconstructing Over-the-Rhine
Appendix C13
13 http://www.berkeleypubliclibrary.org/tool/#tool_list
Wildeboer 81 Self-Help: Reconstructing Over-the-Rhine
Wildeboer 82 Self-Help: Reconstructing Over-the-Rhine
Appendix D
Materials Accepted by Building Value to used as a guideline for any re-use facility:
Product Guidelines
Lumber/trim • Minimum length 4 ft in re-usable condition. Lumber
with nails accepted at staff discretion
Siding • Must not have excessively peeling paint or be in need
of major repair
Doors • Aluminum screen doors with complete frame
• Residential security doors - with or without frame
• Hollow core pre-hung doors, unpainted & in re-usable
condition
• Commercial doors accepted at staff discretion
Windows • Double thermal pane vinyl, wood & aluminum
• Thermal pane w/seals in tact
• Single pane wood sash windows and windows that
have been
repaired accepted at staff discretion
• Picture windows up to 32 sq. ft.
Cabinetry • Kitchen & bath cabinets free of damage beyond
simple repair
• Particle board cabinets in very good condition
• Cabinets with missing doors/drawers accepted at staff
Discretion
Wildeboer 83 Self-Help: Reconstructing Over-the-Rhine
Sinks • Must be free of chips, cracks, deep scratches or
severe stains
• Wall mount sinks accepted with wall bracket
Bathtubs • Fairly clean with no heavy caulking, glues, etc.
• Free of chips, cracks, deep scratches or severe stains -
exceptions may be made for claw foot tubs
Toilets • Clean and complete with lids
• Free of cracks or chips
• 1.6 gallons per flush only
• All toilets accepted at staff discretion
Carpet/Flooring • Exceptionally clean carpet less than three years old
• Vinyl flooring larger than 6' x 6'
Hardwood flooring in re-usable condition
• Flooring tile in re-usable condition
Bannisters • Re-usable in residential properties
Miscellaneous • Drywall/sheetrcok in full sheets
• Other sheet goods larger than 4'x4'
• Wooden window blinds and wooden curtain rods
• Hardware
• Plumbing fixtures
• Garden pavers
Wildeboer 84