razing the Manchester?

Voleye asks....."One stupid question.    Dont you think the city would have done a study to see how much the building would have taken to repair BEFORE they took ownership of it?"

Excellent question. Might ask the same thing about the other three or so buildings the city purchased from the Thatcher estate and helped Sherry Garrett out from under properties that she couldn't unload in her lifetime. They are all sitting there decaying with no reason to assume that any monies are available to bring them up to date. Mold and other public health issues abound. They are all outdated for a modern business climate. No business will take them off the city's hands, especially in the current condition of both the buildings and the economy, plus the location is a definite negative. We are all wondering why the city bought these derelicts in the first place. One of many in a long line of screwups in city decision-making. JMO

Will the effect to city taxpayers, either costs of maintaining/mothballing buildings or the possible revenue from Cinci State, be discussed during the budget discussions during the special--or is it a continuation of the regular--meeting to be held Wednesday--or is it Thursday--and will such discussions be televised???

You know, if you're going to bring in a college campus in the downtown area, it is great that there's adequate parking in the area like a parking garage...oh, wait. Nevermind.

Maybe this is the answer to Middletowns' problems just send us all the illegals (not the legal immigrants cause they all going to Detroit)

Mike_Presta wrote: Consider the Swallen’s building. This was also a large, city-owned building, structurally sound, in the heart of downtown, near Donham Plaza, and moth balled. The city turned down an offer of over $200,000 from the Middletown Area Senior Citizens, who desired to use the first floor as an activity center and the upstairs as housing for seniors. Years later, when our city budget could no longer afford the cost of keeping the structure mothballed, the building was demolished. If Cinci State decides against using the Manchester, you can look for the same fate to befall that structure. Why??? Because City Hall routinely violates both its own ordinances and the Ohio Revised Code regarding the disposal of City-owned real estate!!!

 

correct--the families with serious cash have been leaving the building for decades now

Consider the Swallen’s building.

This was also a large, city-owned building, structurally sound, in the heart of downtown, near Donham Plaza, and moth balled.

The city turned down an offer of over $200,000 from the Middletown Area Senior Citizens, who desired to use the first floor as an activity center and the upstairs as housing for seniors. Years later, when our city budget could no longer afford the cost of keeping the structure mothballed, the building was demolished.

If Cinci State decides against using the Manchester, you can look for the same fate to befall that structure.

Why??? Because City Hall routinely violates both its own ordinances and the Ohio Revised Code regarding the disposal of City-owned real estate!!!

So--the Manchester Inn was no longer a reasonable service option to those posting here for various reasons.  If Cincy St. comes in on a large scale and finds the Manchester renovation unrealistic, could it be used as a dormitory for students(if there was a need)? We have enough low-class unkept senior high-rises in the area already, and those living in them can hardly spur an area economy.

TonyB wrote: spiderjohn - what is rhetorical about pointing out an empty lot?I'll ask again, what is the point in tearing down an existing building when there is an empty lot across the street? You don't have to spend money for demolition to start building on an empty lot. Don't we have a budget crisis in this town? Is it so important to put this culinary school at the site of the Manchester that we'd ignore the obvious (and obviously cheaper) alternative? I didn't go to the Manchester because I couldn't afford to go there so forgive my poverty. What does that have to do with not wanting the building torn down? The building closed because there was no need for a hotel downtown anymore. Perhaps if there were a reason for a downtown hotel the Manchester would still be operating.

Spider....ok, we understand your take on the Manchester being a business and not a historic landmark. We understand that it folded because no one was patronizing it. It is now a useless hulk, just sitting idle awaiting disposition. I answered your question on how often I went there. No reason to have company stay there as I have a home with ample room. No reason to pay the prices they were charging. I'm not a high roller and couldn't justify the prices for the portions. We all know the hotel lost all of it's business when Armco and other companies exited the city leaving the hotel rooms empty of guests. Not enough of the old guard left that were around when the Manchester was a destination for entertainment and a nice dinner meal either.

Now, I ask you, what is the harm in investigating a new usage for the Manchester. What is the harm in the city, like Hamilton and their Anthony Wayne hotel, that was in a similar situation to the Manchester now, applying for some grants or other funding available, to find a new life for this building as seniors housing........and, if that fails, tear her down and make another green space/empty lot.

The old "put your money where your mouth is" only applies to people who have the extra income to make an investment like that. Don't know of too many people that can do what you are suggesting, do you? Most of us are just getting by in this lousy economy as you well know.

Any problem with making one last attempt?

spiderjohn - what is rhetorical about pointing out an empty lot?I'll ask again, what is the point in tearing down an existing building when there is an empty lot across the street? You don't have to spend money for demolition to start building on an empty lot. Don't we have a budget crisis in this town? Is it so important to put this culinary school at the site of the Manchester that we'd ignore the obvious (and obviously cheaper) alternative? I didn't go to the Manchester because I couldn't afford to go there so forgive my poverty. What does that have to do with not wanting the building torn down? The building closed because there was no need for a hotel downtown anymore. Perhaps if there were a reason for a downtown hotel the Manchester would still be operating.

VietVet wrote: Any reason why Middletown leaders couldn't do the same thing here if Cincy State doesn't follow through?

Well, the main reason would be CITY HALL!!!  Housing for seniors downtown was already proposed once (and at no cost to taxpayers, no less) but Kohler and the gang shot it down.