jag

lol, comical. Almost to point I think you're just trolling as no one can be that ignorant.

Just admit it was a bad & uninformed point supported by bad & uninformed examples. A point probably best not made at all.

Yes, because it's pure ignorance on your part, shows how little you really understand about different councils. If you're going to point out councils who derail development you should actually refer to ones who do. But I doubt you know enough to do that 🤷‍♂️🤷‍♂️

Don't you dare speak for Oakley...or Northside for that matter who is home to many city staff. You have no clue...

Tell me what existing process they violated? They followed the same process that every other neighborhood has had to go through for years now, whenever a developer needs a zoning change and/or variances. Community engagement -> planning commission hearing -> council committee hearing -> full council vote. All these steps were done in this case. What pre-existing documents? Their most recent approved plan is several decades old & out of date, and the planning commission & council are bound to follow only approved plans. It's HP's own fault they don't have a current, approved neighborhood plan. Hell, they started their process in 2017, 6 months before Oakley did. Oakley's plan was approved in Oct 2019 and underwent a 5 year self-review in 2024. And Oakley is arguably a far more complex neighborhood given the 2 retail centers, all the former manufacturing property to be developed. Why is HP still working on theirs? Hint: too many chiefs, not enough workers. As I've said before, the dialogue from HP/residents, and those few neighborhoods that supported them, has grown increasingly more toxic, to the point where it hurt the credibility of their feedback. You can't expect your opinion to be taken serious when you express them in an emotional/angry tone, state inaccurate/false information, and generally act like a spoiled toddler. And in the process drug all the other neighborhoods down... The words you use matter.

You can't ignore the face that the Charter Committee eagerly joined in this effort, not so much in support for HP, but rather as a political opportunity to paint the existing/incumbent council members as the bad guys & position their candidates (yet to be named?) as the neighborhood friendly alternative.

The ones (4 different pairs) who approached me did not live in HP and were charter party members. CP had definitely hijacked this ballot petition for political reasons, I doubt most care about HP, just looking to paint the incumbents as bad and their candidates as the good guys...

Yes, that behavior goes back to Issue 3 (original density ordinance), continued/increased with the ILA development, then connected communities. I've called them, and a handful of the neighborhoods that supports them, out for how such feedback has done more to hurt than help.

So a neighborhood used to getting their way, finds out that their previous tactics (whining, calling in favors) no longer work, and now resort to this. I don't think they really understand how they are perceived city-wide (hint: rich, white. older, spoiled, entitled, whiny), and will be "surprised" and "shocked" when the support they think they have isn't there.

Interesting, since CastleBranch is primarily in the the screening (think employee screening, background checks) and clinical screening (think drug tests, clinic scheduling, etc.) world. https://discover.castlebranch.com/solutions/screening/ https://discover.castlebranch.com/solutions/clinical-experience/ Not sure why Cincinnati...

Learned about that after the fact, else I may have tried to call in/participate. Misleading title and not a very balanced panel/perspective, with Mark having to go against the opposition organizer and one of the more vocal community council opposition members. No one from the 37 (of 52, the majority) community councils who did not sign on/support HP were represented. I'll go back & listen later when I get a chance.

My point for mentioning ILA and connected communities is because this didn't start with this HP Square development. The "organization" (used lightly) started back in the previous density initiatives and ILA development. The hate for PLK started with Ila, and ballooned with the square. The hate for density and city council (despite many in HP voting for current incumbents) has grown out of Issue 3 and CC. There is definitely a cumulative effect. But they did go off the rails, and not only painted HP with the craziness brush, but also other neighborhood councils who now have to deal with the aftermath.

Those moms groups are a fantastic resource for moms, but some of the craziest neighborhood/development rumors I've seen have originated from them. lol

I think it's important to differentiate be between residents and community leadership in those other 51 neighborhoods. Most residents likely aren't even aware that this whole HP Square development issue is a thing, much less have it influence who they vote for. As I've mentioned in my post above, there definitely other community councils (and those neighborhood residents who pay attention) who share the same concerns that HP is facing - that no matter what they say they like/don't like, the city doesn't listen to them. So these folks would likely share those sentiments and not want to vote for those who see as being pro developer over the communities. Some neighborhoods, like mine, have long standing policy of not getting involved in development issues in other neighborhoods - unless the issue is truly city-wide or precedent setting. In my neighborhood, that policy long predates both my and our president's time starting on our council. So in spite of some online speculation to contrary, our not sending a letter of support for this effort was only driven by this policy.

Yes, they mentioned they had two entities interested in building a hotel, that they would be names people know/recognize, but they weren't at liberty to name them yet due to ongoing contract negotiations and they hadn't yet got city council approval to move forward.