Does anyone know whats going on with the street full of Brick Row Houses at South 26th Ave & St Marys Ave?
They are mostly boarded up, but all recently sold except the end one with the "store" in it. This could be an awesome neighborhood if it was cleaned up.
Weren't those all purchased by someone a few years ago during the boom with plans of rehabbing? Â Maybe even making that block a private/gated entrance? Â
Does anyone know whats going on with the street full of Brick Row Houses at South 26th Ave & St Marys Ave?
They are mostly boarded up, but all recently sold except the end one with the "store" in it. This could be an awesome neighborhood if it was cleaned up.
One important foundation fact...as they were all built between 1910 and 1916, is this a dadgum sprawl housing development? Â (considering Omaha started 1853...this is 60 years after Omaha was established). Â If so, shouldn't it be bulldozed and replaced by right thinking high density housing stock? Â Sorry, after reading years of Omaha Forums posts, I'm brainwashed.
l-dude wrote:One important foundation fact...as they were all built between 1910 and 1916, is this a dadgum sprawl housing development? (considering Omaha started 1853...this is 60 years after Omaha was established). If so, shouldn't it be bulldozed and replaced by right thinking high density housing stock? Sorry, after reading years of Omaha Forums posts, I'm brainwashed.
No need to bulldoze....although not high-rise, that area would qualify as high density I would think.
Dundee, Benson, Field Club, and Fair Acres would meet the definition of suburban sprawl in their time. Although Dundee & Benson were separate towns swallowed-up by Omaha. The fact that those two neighborhoods have town-centers makes them much more desirable than other sprawl areas such as Keystone, for example.
Edit: I should add...the town-center model on a neighborhood grid would be a good one for future "sprawl" to follow, rather than strip malls located along major thoroughfares, spaced between cudelsac neighborhoods with only one or two ways in and out of the neighborhood. The grid would not necessarily have all of the streets absolutely straight. Â Sorry, I'm drifting off-topic.
Last edited by GetUrban on Thu Feb 23, 2012 2:50 pm, edited 1 time in total.
He said "They are some big, ugly red brick buildings" ...and then they were gone.
I'd actually make the argument this is the perfect scale for single family homes.
Implications of crime on The Wire notwithstanding, saying it reminds of a residential street in Baltimore is about as high praise one can give to a an urban neighborhood.
l-dude wrote:One important foundation fact...as they were all built between 1910 and 1916, is this a dadgum sprawl housing development? (considering Omaha started 1853...this is 60 years after Omaha was established). If so, shouldn't it be bulldozed and replaced by right thinking high density housing stock? Sorry, after reading years of Omaha Forums posts, I'm brainwashed.
No need to bulldoze....although not high-rise, that area would qualify as high density I would think.
Dundee, Benson, Field Club, and Fair Acres would meet the definition of suburban sprawl in their time. Although Dundee & Benson were separate towns swallowed-up by Omaha. The fact that those two neighborhoods have town-centers makes them much more desirable than other sprawl areas such as Keystone, for example.
Edit: I should add...the town-center model on a neighborhood grid would be a good one for future "sprawl" to follow, rather than strip malls located along major thoroughfares, spaced between cudelsac neighborhoods with only one or two ways in and out of the neighborhood. The grid would not necessarily have all of the streets absolutely straight. Sorry, I'm drifting off-topic.
l-dude wrote:One important foundation fact...as they were all built between 1910 and 1916, is this a dadgum sprawl housing development? (considering Omaha started 1853...this is 60 years after Omaha was established). If so, shouldn't it be bulldozed and replaced by right thinking high density housing stock? Sorry, after reading years of Omaha Forums posts, I'm brainwashed.
No need to bulldoze....although not high-rise, that area would qualify as high density I would think.
Dundee, Benson, Field Club, and Fair Acres would meet the definition of suburban sprawl in their time. Although Dundee & Benson were separate towns swallowed-up by Omaha. The fact that those two neighborhoods have town-centers makes them much more desirable than other sprawl areas such as Keystone, for example.
Edit: I should add...the town-center model on a neighborhood grid would be a good one for future "sprawl" to follow, rather than strip malls located along major thoroughfares, spaced between cudelsac neighborhoods with only one or two ways in and out of the neighborhood. The grid would not necessarily have all of the streets absolutely straight. Sorry, I'm drifting off-topic.
That was satire my friend.
Oh I know, albeit flawed in reasoning, regarding what constitutes "right thinking high density."
He said "They are some big, ugly red brick buildings" ...and then they were gone.
On a related issue, wasn't this the "street of dreams" that the OWH has done past stories about? If it is, I remember the theme of those stories was that for various reasons, the property owner(s) had given up on the neighborhood, and presumably because of that, law/code enforcement had also (unless others made complaints). As a result, most/all of the buildings had been broken into and were being used by squatters, druggies, street people and whatever was also attracted by the adjacent Leavenworth St. red-light district. The motive for the story that I most clearly remember was about one brave individual(couple?) that was trying mightily to "homestead" one structure and all the problems they were having, especially coping with their "neighbors". The feeling of the story was not optimistic. I don't remember these individuals being anything other than owner/occupiers, so doubt that they had anything to do with the corner bodega on St. Marys.
As can be seen from the Douglas County website info and pictures, someone has made some attempt since then to stabilize the neighborhood by boarding up windows and doors, removing trees, shrubs and undergrowth to cut down on hiding places next to the buildings, etc. Also, the written descriptions for all list drywall interiors and forced air HVAC (instead of the expected plaster and hot water heat) which indicates some previous attempts to rehab, but something happened, because the 2008 assessed value of all are less than half of their 2007 values. Change of Assessor, policies, results of these stories (maybe a clue as to when these stories were written)? I'm sure that it helped that the red-light district was somewhat cleaned up (or at least moved), but that would not account for the lower valuations.
For those that might like to do the research, this area is listed as the "Traverhurst Add(ition)". It might lead to some interesting stories behind the name, area and time frame.
These urban neighborhoods are intriguing, but look so grim without trees/vegetation, etc. The narrow, one-way street doesn't help their appeal for many (read Omaha) future owners either. Also since all properties were sold to one entity, that suggests mostly renter occupied in the near term. It would have been more encouraging to have seen multiple owners so each duplex could have at least had one owner occupied unit. I hope that is the ultimate goal, but irregardless, this is great for that neighborhood and west Downtown. If these were three story flats with copious trees/vegetation, they would remind me of the Northside Chicago neighborhoods that I lived in and expored in my past.
O.K., Â and "right thinking high density" is also sarcasm.
LOL... not stepping on my toes, at least. Just making fun of the unword irregardless.
I'm not making any arguments the neighborhood isn't beat to sh!t. I'm just saying that scale is an ideal urban setup. Or one of many ideal urban setups. Â They obviously don't work as well when there's one half block in a sea of "once neighborhood now interstate and parking lot" disasters.
"The right to have access to every building in the city by private motorcar in an age when everyone possesses such a vehicle is actually the right to destroy the city."
Lewis Mumford, The Highway and the City, 1963
I remember seeing these listed as individual units on MLS when we were starting to look for houses in Midtown (this would have been back in spring/summer 2010.
There is definitely a lot of potential, but it's something that would have to be undertaken by a decent-size developer. Â If Urban Village is successful with their large-scale projects just down the street, I have to think that this could be viable. Â It's still a bit of a gritty area, and the housing project nearby doesn't help (more out of stereotype than reality, I'd argue) but with the the other new apartments down the street on Leavenworth, the trend certainly seems to be swinging up. Â I think they'd make perfect rental or condo units for young middle-class professionals.
Aren't there some similar buildings on the street a block south of Harney, just west of LHRC? Â I remember jogging past them on a run last summer and seeing interior demo work going on, but haven't been past since. Â It would be nice if they were good-quality renovations, but I wouldn't be surprised if it was just a slumlord drywall-and-vinyl job.
justnick wrote:dumpsters on site clearing these out this morning
I bet they are just nasty inside!
I would imagine so, just from looking through what little windows aren't boarded up. How long have they been unoccupied (at least officially, i can't imagine the population of vagrants before it got fenced in)
walking by this everyday to work I can see so much potential in it, the rowhouses that were redone just north of these are pretty great looking.
"Traver's Row (Travershurst) proposes a complete rehabilitation of ten historic duplex apartment buildings and the rehabilitation of the structure which contains a commercial tenant space, the former Super Bee Mart... The neglected buildings have fostered vagrancy within the neighborhood fora any years. The rehabilitation of these buildings will restore a vibrant residential character to the neighborhood ."
I was surprised the other night when I went buy how much demo had been done. Â Besides the trees, it looks like the ripped the front porch off of all the units.
so what are they doing with the one that's still occupied? they haven't done any work on it at all. will they be able to? or is there just going to remain a run down rowhouse in between their "trendy restaurant" and "working class" homes?
justnick wrote:so what are they doing with the one that's still occupied? they haven't done any work on it at all. will they be able to? or is there just going to remain a run down rowhouse in between their "trendy restaurant" and "working class" homes?
Employ subtle methods of persuasion, which may or may not be monetary in nature...
When fortune smiles on something as violent and ugly as revenge, it seems proof like no other that not only does God exist, you're doing his will.
justnick wrote:so what are they doing with the one that's still occupied? they haven't done any work on it at all. will they be able to? or is there just going to remain a run down rowhouse in between their "trendy restaurant" and "working class" homes?
justnick wrote:so what are they doing with the one that's still occupied? they haven't done any work on it at all. will they be able to? or is there just going to remain a run down rowhouse in between their "trendy restaurant" and "working class" homes?
That's where "those" people are going to live.
no |expletive|. and maybe if that were the question your answer would make sense. i'm wondering how these people remaining is going to affect the overall plan. it already looks really weird having a bunch of houses without porches being worked on and this place with it's porch still half falling down being left alone.
justnick wrote:so what are they doing with the one that's still occupied? they haven't done any work on it at all. will they be able to? or is there just going to remain a run down rowhouse in between their "trendy restaurant" and "working class" homes?
That's where "those" people are going to live.
no |expletive|. and maybe if that were the question your answer would make sense. i'm wondering how these people remaining is going to affect the overall plan. it already looks really weird having a bunch of houses without porches being worked on and this place with it's porch still half falling down being left alone.
Perhaps the bigger "no |expletive|" moment comes from the fact my reply was a sarcastic answer to your question of what is going to be done with that particular building. If there are people living in it, a crazy guess would be that they probably won't be able to do much, and that those darn icky poor people will just be smack dab in the midst of a shiny new trendy happenin' place. I'm also dying to know their definition of "working class".
Unfortunately as with most gentrification, the people who live there will probably be priced out of the area. Ideally they own the property and will be able to profit from the likely substantial increase in property value that generally would also likely increase property taxes beyond an affordable level.
As far as their definition of working class I think they were referring to the original turn of the century occupants.
Dundeemaha wrote:Unfortunately as with most gentrification, the people who live there will probably be priced out of the area. Ideally they own the property and will be able to profit from the likely substantial increase in property value that generally would also likely increase property taxes beyond an affordable level.
As far as their definition of working class I think they were referring to the original turn of the century occupants.
That block, as it sits now, still looks creepy, kind of like something you would see out of a stephen king movie. They've got a lot of work before that area is going to look appealing.
Socialism is a philosophy of failure, the creed of ignorance, and the gospel of envy, its inherent virtue is the equal sharing of misery. - Winston Churchill
