44 minutes ago, Lazarus said:

This isn't the same thing at all. Any streetcar extension would be a city-backed effort built in the public right-of-way and would have nothing to do with zoning.

We literally had to vote for the streetcar twice. I can 100% see some community council in a place like Northside or Oakley pitching a fit over something like a BRT station or streetcar expansion. It doesn't matter to them that it would be built in public RoW

1 hour ago, Lazarus said:

In Hyde Park, City Council has approved a project with zoning variances above and beyond the relaxed terms enabled by "connected communities" IN VIOLATION OF THE EXISTING PROCESS with respect to community councils and pre-existing documents created by a lengthy effort by that council. What is the purpose of a community council if the city can go completely over its head, in violation of the process, without repercussions?

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 Their most recent approved plan is several decades old & out of date, and the planning commission & council are bound to follow only approved plans.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.

Edited June 4Jun 4 by jag

51 minutes ago, JaceTheAce41 said:

We literally had to vote for the streetcar twice. I can 100% see some community council in a place like Northside or Oakley pitching a fit over something like a BRT station or streetcar expansion. It doesn't matter to them that it would be built in public RoW

Don't you dare speak for Oakley...or Northside for that matter who is home to many city staff.

You have no clue...

Edited June 3Jun 3 by jag

1 hour ago, JaceTheAce41 said:

I can 100% see some community council in a place like Northside or Oakley pitching a fit over something like a BRT station or streetcar expansion. It doesn't matter to them that it would be built in public RoW

This is so ignorant that it's laughable.

1 hour ago, JaceTheAce41 said:

We literally had to vote for the streetcar twice. I can 100% see some community council in a place like Northside or Oakley pitching a fit over something like a BRT station or streetcar expansion. It doesn't matter to them that it would be built in public RoW

Just now, Dev said:

This is so ignorant that it's laughable.

Not Oakley or Northside, but Clifton Town Meeting and the Clifton Business Association already balked at the BRT station on Clifton Ave. https://www.facebook.com/groups/civiccincinnati/posts/3085585701588452/

15 hours ago, SleepyLeroy said:

Not Oakley or Northside, but Clifton Town Meeting and the Clifton Business Association already balked at the BRT station on Clifton Ave. https://www.facebook.com/groups/civiccincinnati/posts/3085585701588452/

Yeah we know, it's been covered in the local news multiple times. Conflating Northside with Clifton is absurd.

You pick two random neighborhoods to make a point on how it's a bad idea to allow community councils to derail development and everyone jumps down your throat for choosing the "wrong" neighborhoods. Jeez.

6 minutes ago, JaceTheAce41 said:

You pick two random neighborhoods to make a point on how it's a bad idea to allow community councils to derail development and everyone jumps down your throat for choosing the "wrong" neighborhoods. Jeez.

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 🤷‍♂️🤷‍♂️

Edited June 4Jun 4 by jag

This is going to be pretty painful for those that cannot avoid the area on their daily commutes over the next dozen weeks.

https://www.wcpo.com/traffic/full-pavement-repairs-to-shut-down-parts-of-intersection-at-rookwood-for-3-months

2 hours ago, jag said:

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

Please enlighten... It seems you know, and you have this forum. Educate the ignorant. What and who should be targeted? And Why?

3 hours ago, jag said:

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 🤷‍♂️🤷‍♂️

Me: I have a point to make about how community councils can derail projects if they try. I have 52 neighborhoods to choose from but a limited time. I know, I'll just type the first two that come to mind.

You: HOW DARE YOU YOU IGNORANT CHURL!! PICK ANOTHER NEIGHBORHOOD FOR YOUR POINT!!! YOU RAVENOUS CUR!!!!

I looked up BRT, and their solution is to build housing for bus riders. I think it's a good idea, but I don't see how it is going to streamline the service in any way. Yes, the riders will be less frazzled and dry, but the stations themselves will slow all traffic down. Instead of an overdesigned shelter for a few stops, isn't the answer. A more economical shelter would work better for all riders. Solar-powered, simple, enclosed shelters, it seems, would increase ridership.

I don't use Metro that often, but I do love the iPhone apps that allow riders to easily see when their bus will arrive at their station. An employee who is safe and dry will be less discouraged about their lot in life. The stops along Jefferson in Clifton and the exit/entrances at the banks look cool. But they are too expensive.

These buses will not go faster than the speed limit. These buses will lack "higher quality". These buses will surely slow all traffic down. This is an idea that is past its prime. The corner of Clifton and Ludlow is already a mess. Adding double buses and having them turn at this intersection would only cause more chaos. Pedestrians, a firehouse, and a no left turn signal (that no one pays attention to) don't need more hurdles. Sarah Palin and her pig would squeal at this solution.

Edited June 4Jun 4 by RJohnson

1 hour ago, JaceTheAce41 said:

Me: I have a point to make about how community councils can derail projects if they try. I have 52 neighborhoods to choose from but a limited time. I know, I'll just type the first two that come to mind.

You: HOW DARE YOU YOU IGNORANT CHURL!! PICK ANOTHER NEIGHBORHOOD FOR YOUR POINT!!! YOU RAVENOUS CUR!!!!

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

Edited June 4Jun 4 by jag

4 hours ago, jag said:

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

4 hours ago, jag said:

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

Every party has a pooper thats why we invited you.

Why a referendum on $150M Hyde Park Square development might not actually happen

While Save Hyde Park Square, the main opposition group to a $150 million development in the heart of the neighborhood’s business district, has gathered sufficient signatures to put the project on the Nov. 4 ballot, there are plenty of scenarios where the election does not happen.

...

But council may not need to act in order for the election to be derailed. The developers – PLK Communities, NorthPointe Group and the Loring Group – could simply withdraw their application and rework their plans, even taking them through a different process altogether that could bypass City Council.

Potential scenarios include:

• The developers withdraw the application and submit a new one that complies with the existing zoning code, building structures that are no taller than 50 feet. If that happened, the developer only would need city administrative approval for the building design to ensure it complies with the urban design overlay district that covers Hyde Park Square. Council would have no vote on such a project.

• The developers could submit a new or revised planned development to the city, triggering the same process and requiring more community engagement with the neighborhood.

• The developers could submit a revised project with fewer departures from the zoning code that may require approval by the city’s Zoning Board of Appeals or the planning staff but not City Council itself.

More below:

https://www.bizjournals.com/cincinnati/news/2025/06/04/hyde-park-square-project-november-referendum-vote.html

This thing is going to get held up for years, which is probably the community council's goal.

Meanwhile, Hyde Park will have a lovely strip mall style building and beautiful parking spaces, and other community councils will use this as an example of a way to stall development all around the city.

51 minutes ago, JaceTheAce41 said:

This thing is going to get held up for years, which is probably the community council's goal.

Meanwhile, Hyde Park will have a lovely strip mall style building and beautiful parking spaces, and other community councils will use this as an example of a way to stall development all around the city.

If the developers build to right within the confines of the existing zoning code with no ordinances then I don't believe that there is any reason they would be held up at all. That is what I would expect to happen if the ballot box goes against them.

Edited June 5Jun 5 by tabasco

On 6/5/2025 at 8:40 AM, JaceTheAce41 said:

This thing is going to get held up for years, which is probably the community council's goal.

Meanwhile, Hyde Park will have a lovely strip mall style building and beautiful parking spaces, and other community councils will use this as an example of a way to stall development all around the city.

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

Edited June 7Jun 7 by jag

On 5/5/2025 at 12:19 PM, ryanlammi said:

3CDC intentionally doesn't rent their storefronts to national chains in OTR. So in a way, OTR is forced into a locally owned or regional chain district. I'm sure a starbucks or chipotle or something have inquired about opening in OTR, but they aren't going to rent from a random building owner, and 3CDC doesn't rent to them.

I agree that some chains are ok in a neighborhood. If it's all chains that's bad because it provides no local identity. Despite Jake's weird fearmongering, Hyde Park will never become like Columbia Heights in DC or something. That's a very weird comparison

The Urban Design Overlay District in Hyde Park Square does not allow franchise establishments.

1 minute ago, Eyborg said:

The Urban Design Overlay District in Hyde Park Square does not allow franchise establishments.

Are you sure about that? There are franchises there now:

https://www.peaceloveandlittledonuts.com/franchise

Or does this only apply to new development projects?

Edited Monday at 04:04 PM3 days by tabasco

According to the municipal code no franchise establishments. Chapter 1437. Perhaps, the donut shop requested a hearing or the neighborhood council didn’t fight it because it’s not a well known fast food joint.

Cincinnati Edition had Mika Owens, Chris Westrich, a person from the developer, and a representative of Save Hyde Park Square on the show yesterday or the day before. It's on their podcast if you want to listen to it.

I came away thinking that the Save Hyde Park Square crew is a bunch of white NIMBYs and I'm sticking by that. The people in HP have been given ample opportunity to weigh in on a private development and are still trying to torpedo this thing. This is behavior similar to COAST, and it seems to me that the plan is to get a ballot measure that would sabotage the ability of the city council to work with developers city-wide.

It would be so Cincinnati to have such a ballot measure that is designed to hamper the city's growth. It'll be the streetcar ballot initiatives all over again.

Edited 18 hours ago18 hr by JaceTheAce41

30 minutes ago, JaceTheAce41 said:

It would be so Cincinnati to have such a ballot measure that is designed to hamper the city's growth. It'll be the streetcar ballot initiatives all over again.

It's funny you phrased it that was because the Enquirer podcast That's So Cincinnati recently did a Hyde Park Square episode but sure enough, they only had one person on it and she is from the Save Hyde Park Square group.

22 minutes ago, Dev said:

It's funny you phrased it that was because the Enquirer podcast That's So Cincinnati recently did a Hyde Park Square episode but sure enough, they only had one person on it and she is from the Save Hyde Park Square group.

The Enquirer and WLW have done more damage to Cincinnati than a lot of real estate developers

Edited 18 hours ago18 hr by JaceTheAce41