Guy23

There’s fencing up around the vacant lot on the NW intersection of Liberty and Sycamore. Anyone know what’s planned there?

As you’ve mentioned these are amongst the most desirable neighborhoods in the region, so why not let more people (and more income levels) move there and enjoy their benefits and amenities by allowing the market to dictate how much housing should be built?

I think the group think of this thread might lean towards falsely believing that the general public cares deeply about historic preservation. I don’t think Cranley, Aftab or almost any politician is going to put up a fight against the business community over something that’s a non-issue to most voters, especially if it means transforming a soon to be vacant theater into a shiny new ‘jobs creating’ tower.

I honestly really surprised that current zoning allows a building of that density to be built there. Does that apply to the entire Wesson corridor?

This puts Cranley in an interesting position- cater to his NIMBY Hyde Park backers to ‘save the neighborhood character’ or promote the development and brag about the benefits of ‘his’ Wasson Way.

This is pretty egregious ‘both sides’ journalism: let’s take something that’s popular with almost everybody, find a few people who are against it, and frame it as controversial. I do sympathize with the wheel chair user but everything else is complete nonsense. I just have to wonder how awful some people are at finding parking. I work in OTR and park there every single day and never have to drive more than a block to find a spot.

My friend lives up on Mulberry and I will say that at night the lighting is shockingly bright. It’s a cool scene but it does overpower pretty much every other part of her view so I could see some people being pissed about it, not that it really makes any difference now that it’s already built.

I’m already hearing murmurs from Waller and the OTRCC that they’re ready to oppose this one, which begs the question, has there been a single development in recent memory that they have actually supported? And if a CC exists solely to oppose development in a neighborhood why should their opinion have any weight? In their defense, it looks like one of the ‘non contributing’ buildings that would be demoed is one of the only pre civil war buildings left in OTR, which does sound significant.

Wasn’t there a rumor a few years ago that Rhinegeist was looking at building a chairlift up to a new beer garden at Bellevue?

Can’t say for certain, but it does seem like the crime around Shell and Grant Park has risen since Findlay Playground was closed down. Makes sense considering when you shut down an area to criminal behavior it’s not like the criminal behavior just vanishes, it’s just going to move somewhere it’s more tolerated. I’d hope that as more people move in around the Shell (which is apparently happening?) having more eyes on the street will deter crime there.

That’s really cool to hear you guys are working on developments around there. Do you have any idea what the possibilities are with the Moerlein property? Seems tricky to me since I’m guessing it’s too historic to be demolished but I can’t think of a good use for the space besides a dingy, windowless beer hall.

I agree overall but I think a lot could be done to that site to make development way more friendly in the area surrounding it. For one it could probably be cut down a good amount- I don’t really know anything about gas stations but I think you could sell off a sizable chunk on the West side (near the air tank across from Moerlien) for development and it would look a lot less blighted. Also the crime at the station and surrounding it needs to be addressed. I remember an Enquirer article from a few years back saying that Shell had something like 700 police calls in a single year, and considering a nicely renovated house at 1626 Walnut has sat unsold for almost a year as it’s price has dropped from like 650k to now 449k (that would’ve easily sold almost anywhere else in OTR), it’s pretty clear no developer will touch the blocks around it right now.

As much as this thread rightly sh*ts on Cranley, he’s been in the right on this project, and the issues have nothing to do with him. It’s been him and the Republicans fighting for it to be built while the Democrats are the ones intervening.

I totally agree in general with the YIMBY free market approach to build more housing in order to alleviate demand and reduce prices, and I might be wrong as I don’t totally understand Madisonville’s housing market, but I do see this as an instance where the building of luxury housing will raise rents, since it will help cement the idea that Madisonville is a high end neighborhood worthy of high end prices. Maybe it’s already there regardless of the new buildings, and I underestimated its appeal though I don’t know.

You’d have to argue that enough people have already been displaced by higher rents in the neighborhood that it made the store lose it’s customer base, which seems highly unlikely. One point I did find interesting from the article is that Madisonville is currently 80% renters. I’m always pro development but this does seem like a situation where most current residents have little to gain and reason to be concerned with it making their neighborhood a ‘luxury destination’ and raising their rents.

I am almost in disbelief at the level of NIMBYism here- it’s a vacant lot directly across the street from a massive, beautiful park. But building ONE house on it (realistically they should be shooting for more than that) ruins the character of the neighborhood?

I watched part of the hearing- it seemed pretty clear that Seelbach and Landsman are both learning towards voting for it in two weeks but wanted to take the opportunity to grandstand and say they’re ‘listening.’ Hopefully the two week pause earns them an extra unit or two of affordable housing so they can claim victory, but the process has been a joke.

Maybe 10% is slightly ambitious but this is exactly my point. If 99.5% of the neighborhood didn’t vote for you- and most of those people didn’t know the vote or even the community council existed- then what business do you have telling the city how the neighborhood feels on anything?

What annoys me the most about this group is that the city basically grants them the right to a massive microphone by letting them operate as a ‘community council’ when in reality it’s like 10 kooks who received maybe 50 votes in a 6,000 person neighborhood, and don’t reflect the public’s views in any way. Just spitballing here but maybe the city could pass an ordinance where if you can’t get 10% of the vote in the neighborhood you operate, your council has no say in anything.

OTRCC and the NIMBYs at it again. Real question- is there a single private development in OTR that the CC has ever supported? Check out this article from Cincinnati.com: OTR activists will hold noon press conference Tuesday to 'inform the public about the problems' with Liberty and Elm street project https://www.cincinnati.com/story/news/2021/01/19/activists-slam-plans-expand-otr-project-without-affordable-housing/4205667001/

Aren’t these protected from demolition because of the 4th St Historic District?

If that’s not feasible this would be a great spot for a giant mural. Anything really would be better than a huge brown wall.

Does this mean they’re getting rid of that cool little forest path that connects to Walker Street?

I’m honestly surprised with how negative the comments are here. Wasson Way is not perfect- totally agree about the chain link fence and certain design elements- but it’s a great addition to the city, and given how popular it already is, residents seem to really enjoy it. Hopefully we’ll see some solid restaurant and housing developments come up along it like you see on the Belt Line in Atlanta but it’s not even finished yet and has only been around for a year or so, so I’d wait a bit before judging on that. And as for the light rail option, I’m as big a rail advocate as just about anyone, but if we’re being honest an East West route from HP to Avondale makes no sense and would be underused. Maybe decades down the road if we’ve implemented rail along the primary arteries and are looking to expand with secondary or tertiary routes we’ll wish we had the RoW still but for the near future the bike lane was the obvious best use.

Is this coinciding with a redesign of the 5 points intersection? I kind of remember hearing something about that but can’t remember any details.