Jump to content

Featured Replies

7 minutes ago, Ram23 said:

 

There's absolutely nothing inherently racist about single family zoning and housing. As evidence, you can point to the dozens of single family areas in Cincinnati that are majority black neighborhoods.

 

And if by "economic minority" you really mean poor, again - you can point to dozens of areas in Cincinnati that are quite poor but still have single family housing. Not to mention poor rural areas.

 

 

It is - insufficient infrastructure can be a big problem. One of the earliest things anyone should do when considering new construction in Cincinnati is fill out a sewer availability form with MSD. There are areas of the city where the existing sewer infrastructure cannot support the hundreds of additional toilets, sinks, showers, etc. that an apartment block adds. I've even heard of areas where the existing sewers are already over capacity and cannot support any new construction. MSD will tell you this if you send a form in.

Big caveat being that it CAN be valid, but usually it's used in the context of "we had flooding run-off one time 4 years ago during a 100 year rain 3 miles away from the site" when adding a complex wouldn't have done anything to prevent that. 

 

And of course it's not "inherently" racist but there was a fairly explicit connection at one point in our history. Now, its just antiquated and limits the very types of buildings that give neighborhoods like Hyde Park much of the charm and living dwelling diversity. 

 

I am not in the industry but would think that a good chunk of the future residents of this complex would be long-time HP or nearby homeowners looking to downsize or limit their property taxes. I don't know many young people who look to rent a place with an eye for chef's stoves and 2k/month. 

  • Replies 523
  • Views 48.4k
  • Created
  • Last Reply

Top Posters In This Topic

Most Popular Posts

  • ryanlammi
    ryanlammi

    You aren't going to see the 85' part from most of the street, though. It's set back from the rest of the building. Most of it will be about the height of the other buildings on the street. They could'

  • taestell
    taestell

    Mainstrasse might currently be Greater Cincinnati’s most thriving and most culinarily interesting restaurant/bar district, thanks in part to all of the residential density that’s been built in the sur

  • tonyt3524
    tonyt3524

Posted Images

26 minutes ago, Ram23 said:

 

There's absolutely nothing inherently racist about single family zoning and housing. As evidence, you can point to the dozens of single family areas in Cincinnati that are majority black neighborhoods.

 

And if by "economic minority" you really mean poor, again - you can point to dozens of areas in Cincinnati that are quite poor but still have single family housing. Not to mention poor rural areas.


SF zoning prevents economic and racial minorities from leaving their existing neighborhoods, just as much as it prevents them from moving into a different neighborhood. Cincinnati is not economically and racially integrated. The system is working as intended.

1 hour ago, Ram23 said:

 

There's absolutely nothing inherently racist about single family zoning and housing. As evidence, you can point to the dozens of single family areas in Cincinnati that are majority black neighborhoods.

 

Except racism and classism is the explicit reason it exists. Like, the people who created and proliferated it explicitly said so. This is not a debate. The fact that majority black areas exist with single family zoning or that poor areas exist with single family zoning does not change the intent behind it. 

 

1 hour ago, Ram23 said:

Not to mention poor rural areas.

 

Most rural areas do not have zoning. 

 

1 hour ago, Ram23 said:

It is - insufficient infrastructure can be a big problem. One of the earliest things anyone should do when considering new construction in Cincinnati is fill out a sewer availability form with MSD. There are areas of the city where the existing sewer infrastructure cannot support the hundreds of additional toilets, sinks, showers, etc. that an apartment block adds. I've even heard of areas where the existing sewers are already over capacity and cannot support any new construction. MSD will tell you this if you send a form in.

 

The point being made is that there is a process to determine if sewer capacity is a problem. And it's a very good one. If a developer has their MSD permits and neighbors are still screaming about sewer capacity you can be sure that it's just an excuse to stop the development and not a legit problem.

18 hours ago, DEPACincy said:

Except racism and classism is the explicit reason it exists. Like, the people who created and proliferated it explicitly said so. This is not a debate. The fact that majority black areas exist with single family zoning or that poor areas exist with single family zoning does not change the intent behind it.

 

Early zoning codes were created to stop the spread of urban fires and, later, to provide access to light and air in the name of health and wellness. After WWII, there was a desire to un-densify our cities in order to survive a potential atomic attack - which ultimately led to the now popular low density single family zoning seen throughout most of the country.  None of this had anything to do with racism and it isn't inherently classist - it is basic math: owning land and a bigger house costs more money than renting a small apartment.

 

The racism angle is simply revisionist history. It's the work of woke planners who want to cancel zoning and recraft it to force their worldview upon others. Many of these people hate the very concept of private ownership of land and property so single family housing is downright sickening to them. They want it eliminated and replaced with rows of Khrushchyovka.

that was certainly...a comment

 

Quote

Early zoning codes were created to stop the spread of urban fires and, later, to provide access to light and air in the name of health and wellness. After WWII, there was a desire to un-densify our cities in order to survive a potential atomic attack - which ultimately led to the now popular low density single family zoning seen throughout most of the country.  None of this had anything to do with racism and it isn't inherently classist - it is basic math: owning land and a bigger house costs more money than renting a small apartment.


This is a very ignorant strawman. The criticism is against single-family zoning, not zoning itself. Also, single-family zoning was invented before WWII. It was first implement in 1916 by Berkeley, California to explicitly prevent black families from moving into the neighborhood. In 1917, the US Supreme Court made it unconstitutional to have explicit race-based zoning so what were racist policy makers to do? They adopted more single-family zoning. In 1926, the US Supreme Court said it was constitutional to ban apartment buildings. 

Of course all those new SF neighborhoods built immediately after the war were paid for by mortgage loans, including the GI Bill, that only white families had access to. These new communities were made accessible by constructing urban highways through black neighborhoods and forcing the relocation of the existing residents without appropriate compensation.

In any case, your basic math actually proves that it is a racist and classist policy. 13% of the country is black but they only own 2% of the wealth. So if you build a new SF subdivision, very few black families have access to the capital necessary to buy into the development.

 

14 minutes ago, Ram23 said:

The racism angle is simply revisionist history. It's the work of woke planners who want to cancel zoning and recraft it to force their worldview upon others. Many of these people hate the very concept of private ownership of land and property so single family housing is downright sickening to them. They want it eliminated and replaced with rows of Khrushchyovka.

 

Is this hyperbole? This is absolutely absurd and shows that you are either willfully ignorant or acting in bad faith. I don't think I've ever heard someone in progressive circles wanting to cancel zoning altogether. Actual communists and Libertarians probably do want to cancel zoning but we all know that's not going anywhere anytime soon. Houston is the largest city in the US without a zoning code and that is commonly touted as an example of what not to do. People are trying to modernize zoning, which is not even remotely the same thing as canceling private ownership of property.

1 hour ago, Ram23 said:

 

Early zoning codes were created to stop the spread of urban fires and, later, to provide access to light and air in the name of health and wellness. After WWII, there was a desire to un-densify our cities in order to survive a potential atomic attack - which ultimately led to the now popular low density single family zoning seen throughout most of the country.  None of this had anything to do with racism and it isn't inherently classist - it is basic math: owning land and a bigger house costs more money than renting a small apartment.

 

The racism angle is simply revisionist history. It's the work of woke planners who want to cancel zoning and recraft it to force their worldview upon others. Many of these people hate the very concept of private ownership of land and property so single family housing is downright sickening to them. They want it eliminated and replaced with rows of Khrushchyovka.

 

This revisionist history is beyond the pale. It's an absolutely disgusting amount of misinformation. This is why people don't take you seriously. 

 

It's funny that you think removing restrictive zoning measures that keep people from doing what they want with their property is somehow antithetical to private ownership. How on earth does that make any sense?? It would be funny if it wasn't so stupid.

i love that americans decided to save the native american indians from fires so they made them walk from the carolinas to Oklahoma. 

I can't lie, it's been fun watching the NIMBY meltdown over this project. People can't seem to decide if they're going to be overpriced and force people out of their homes or introduce the "section 8 element" to Hyde Park

“To an Ohio resident - wherever he lives - some other part of his state seems unreal.”

20 minutes ago, BigDipper 80 said:

I can't lie, it's been fun watching the NIMBY meltdown over this project. People can't seem to decide if they're going to be overpriced and force people out of their homes or introduce the "section 8 element" to Hyde Park

 

I am confident many of the people *outraged* over this proposal are the same folks who have the 'no matter who you are, we are glad you are our neighbor' signs in their yard. 

3 hours ago, DEPACincy said:

 

This revisionist history is beyond the pale. It's an absolutely disgusting amount of misinformation. This is why people don't take you seriously. 

 

It's funny that you think removing restrictive zoning measures that keep people from doing what they want with their property is somehow antithetical to private ownership. How on earth does that make any sense?? It would be funny if it wasn't so stupid.

The good people of Berkley CA who introduced the first single family zoning code  were targeting the minorities who never lived there and still don't.

5 hours ago, Ram23 said:

 

 

 

The racism angle is simply revisionist history. It's the work of woke planners who want to cancel zoning and recraft it to force their worldview upon others. Many of these people hate the very concept of private ownership of land and property so single family housing is downright sickening to them. They want it eliminated and replaced with rows of Khrushchyovka.

You can't be serious?

 

You forgot to mention all that redlining. Nope no racism there.

 

How about the deed restrictions on so many suburban homes. I can have friend who live in post WW2 suburban areas show you the words in their deeds that strictly prohibited sales to blacks.

Nope, no racism here either.

 

1 hour ago, 1400 Sycamore said:

The good people of Berkley CA who introduced the first single family zoning code  were targeting the minorities who never lived there and still don't.

 

It was already pointed out upthread that Berkeley introduced SF zoning for racist reasons. But Berkeley is only 54% non-Hispanic white today, so don't know where you got the "still don't" part. Berkeley also just recently acknowledged their racist past and abolished SF zoning. So maybe we could all benefit from having as much self-reflection as the folks in charge in Berkeley?

3 hours ago, BigDipper 80 said:

I can't lie, it's been fun watching the NIMBY meltdown over this project. People can't seem to decide if they're going to be overpriced and force people out of their homes or introduce the "section 8 element" to Hyde Park

 

Reminds me of watching COAST flip flop back and forth between "only smelly homeless bums will ride the streetcar" and "only elitist rich yuppie hipsters will ride the streetcar" and never acknowledge the contradiction.

20 hours ago, TheCOV said:

You can't be serious?

 

You forgot to mention all that redlining. Nope no racism there.

 

How about the deed restrictions on so many suburban homes. I can have friend who live in post WW2 suburban areas show you the words in their deeds that strictly prohibited sales to blacks.

Nope, no racism here either.

 

I'm aware that the FHA had policies that were rather racist long before most of us were born. I'm not debating that. The argument some others are making here is that single family zoning / housing is  inherently racist. It isn't, and I think it's one of the most absurd things I've ever heard. There isn't anything preventing anyone of any race from buying a single family home in Hyde Park. Just like there isn't anything preventing them from renting one of these new >$2000/month apartments being built in Hyde Park, or buying a $700,000 condo in OTR.

On 7/10/2021 at 10:43 AM, Ram23 said:

 

There isn't anything preventing anyone of any race from buying a single family home in Hyde Park. Just like there isn't anything preventing them from renting one of these new >$2000/month apartments being built in Hyde Park, or buying a $700,000 condo in OTR.


Yes there is, it's lack of capital. When Black people are 13% of the country but only own 2% of the wealth, you can't expect many of them to be able to afford a down payment in a neighborhood like Hyde Park. Intentionally restricting housing supply in Hyde Park acts as a barrier of entry for people of lower wealth, which are overwhelming non white in this country. It's cause and effect.

On 7/10/2021 at 10:43 AM, Ram23 said:

 

I'm aware that the FHA had policies that were rather racist long before most of us were born. I'm not debating that. The argument some others are making here is that single family zoning / housing is  inherently racist. It isn't, and I think it's one of the most absurd things I've ever heard. There isn't anything preventing anyone of any race from buying a single family home in Hyde Park. Just like there isn't anything preventing them from renting one of these new >$2000/month apartments being built in Hyde Park, or buying a $700,000 condo in OTR.

I won't disagree with this statement, but that's not what you said upthread. Thanks for clarifying here.

 I am not on board with the whole single family zoning is racist mindset. At some point, you have to stop making people believe they can't achieve something......

  • 3 weeks later...

I thought this was essentially unassailable?

Density a plus, I guess...but that building is acting like it's sitting on a parking lot in the suburbs.

18 minutes ago, zsnyder said:

I thought this was essentially unassailable?

Density a plus, I guess...but that building is acting like it's sitting on a parking lot in the suburbs.

It pretty much is but I suppose they are trying to be good neighbors and hear what they have to say. 

Opponents of the neighborhood control mechanisms such as SFZ, set backs, minimum lot size, height limits, focus on individual structures and not neighborhood environments. This is more appropriate in socialist or non diverse countries where the economic range is much compressed and  homogeneous populations are bound together by peer pressure and heritage. The resultant structures chosen to be built together reflect these values. Not so here. Without restrictions, SF neighborhoods would end up with mega complexes with hundreds of units, aesthetically displeasing. Quite unlike the charming street scenes of Norway and Sweden often depicted as what the Utopian ideals would look like here.

 

Blaming the desire to avoid the unintended consequences of well meaning but short-sighted persons as "racist" is just the last, worst and least effective argument of the losers of this debate. The people voted. With their feet and pocket books. They are all colors, genders, and ethnicities. They want more SFZ, not less.

8 minutes ago, 1400 Sycamore said:

The people voted. With their feet and pocket books. They are all colors, genders, and ethnicities. They want more SFZ, not less.

Except for all the people (of all colors, genders, and ethnicities) who live in apartments. 

  • 3 weeks later...

Someone has created a website to discuss making a DORA within Hyde Park Square. I don't think the website is associated with the HPNC, as I did not find any links to it from their sites. At the bottom it just says "Design by Hyde Park Home Owner."

https://hydeparkdora.com/

  • 6 months later...

Hyde Park apartment project lands $18.6 million in first-of-its-kind financing

 

An under-construction apartment project in Hyde Park has landed first-of-its-kind financing from the state.

 

The Ohio Air Quality Development Authority on Tuesday issued $18.6 million in air quality revenue bonds to finance the development of the 51-unit sustainable residential building, Ila Hyde Park. PLK Communities is developing the project, which is the first efficiently designed, whole-building project to be approved as an air quality facility by the authority through the Clean Air Improvement Program.

 

Christina O’Keefe, executive director of OAQDA, said the development “will further elevate the Hyde Park neighborhood” with the redevelopment of a brownfield property.

 

More below:

https://www.bizjournals.com/cincinnati/news/2022/03/16/ila-hyde-park-lands-clean-air-bond-financing.html

 

210128plk-michigandaytime-renders-1rvsd*

"You don't just walk into a bar and mix it up by calling a girl fat" - buildingcincinnati speaking about new forumers

On 3/16/2022 at 8:45 AM, ColDayMan said:

Hyde Park apartment project lands $18.6 million in first-of-its-kind financing

 

An under-construction apartment project in Hyde Park has landed first-of-its-kind financing from the state.

 

The Ohio Air Quality Development Authority on Tuesday issued $18.6 million in air quality revenue bonds to finance the development of the 51-unit sustainable residential building, Ila Hyde Park. PLK Communities is developing the project, which is the first efficiently designed, whole-building project to be approved as an air quality facility by the authority through the Clean Air Improvement Program.

 

Christina O’Keefe, executive director of OAQDA, said the development “will further elevate the Hyde Park neighborhood” with the redevelopment of a brownfield property.

 

More below:

https://www.bizjournals.com/cincinnati/news/2022/03/16/ila-hyde-park-lands-clean-air-bond-financing.html

 

210128plk-michigandaytime-renders-1rvsd*

It’s so great to know this is getting built and that the new hotel by Rookwood will also be getting started. I’d love to see this whole area around Rookwood be filled will low to mid rises. 

A large new residential building in Cincinnati that embraces repetition, rather than reorganizing it into some schizoid cosplay of a building? Let's do it.

On 3/19/2022 at 12:26 PM, zsnyder said:

A large new residential building in Cincinnati that embraces repetition, rather than reorganizing it into some schizoid cosplay of a building? Let's do it.

Right? It breaks up the facade materials from bottom to top instead of randomly changing materials in vertical strips and accents to try to make itself look like multiple buildings squished together. 

  • 4 weeks later...

Was walking past this a few weeks ago on the trail and over heard a couple people talking about. The funniest part was when the woman said "yeah, it's a bit of a monstrosity." I got a bit of a chuckle out of it. 

20220413_180021.jpg

truly blots out the sky

  • 1 month later...

It will be a nice improvement from the current church that is on the parcel. 

  • Author

That's a lot of parking for a building in the middle of a business district. Two spots per unit and 14(!) spaces for two commercial spaces. This is the middle of a business district. Would be nice to reduce that. 

2 minutes ago, ryanlammi said:

That's a lot of parking for a building in the middle of a business district. Two spots per unit and 14(!) spaces for two commercial spaces. This is the middle of a business district. Would be nice to reduce that. 

 

Unfortunately - they probably know the pushback / *outrage* they would get if it didn't have that much parking.

It will be a nice improvement from the current church that is on the parcel. 

I actually disagree. It’s a pretty neat church building, it’s a horrible shame it’ll be demolished for this and a bunch of surface parking.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

I tried to line up the view from Google maps as close as I could to the renderings. From what I can see, there isn't going to be a lot of surface parking. It appears that a large portion of the first floor of the building will be the parking.

 

From the frontal view, the store front on the left will likely be the 1,600 sq ft one as it will be shallower. The 2,200 sq ft store front would be the one on the right as there appears to be retail space down the length of the building.

 

I've tried finding more official renderings but with no luck.

 

 

hydeparkflats_750xx1387-780-0-143.jpg

Screenshot 2022-05-23 221253.jpg

hydeparkflatsevening_660xx1279-721-0-161.jpg

Screenshot 2022-05-23 222009.jpg

My dentist was in that building next to the church when I was a young lad.

 

I can't look at the building without cringing. And, I lived in 3 different houses on Michigan a few blocks south of the project. It won't really block the view from anywhere but the Fire House quiet rooms upstairs.

On 5/21/2022 at 6:51 AM, SWOH said:


I actually disagree. It’s a pretty neat church building, it’s a horrible shame it’ll be demolished for this and a bunch of surface parking.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

I agree with you.  I don't see how eliminating the character of what makes the neighborhood special an improvement unless you are into generic buildings. 

DSC_9737-3.jpg

Hyde Park Baptist Church 2 Screenshot 2022-05-25 151346.jpg

Edited by Coseau

  • 1 month later...

Its all fenced up today. I'm guessing gone in the next few days.

  • 1 month later...

Yesterday

PXL_20220807_150459250.jpg

  • 3 weeks later...

Wasson Way tower has topped out and the new hotel next to Rookwood is starting to rise. 

0F6C987B-A7C4-4A4C-ABE5-CACDB99CB1C6.jpeg

62AFB475-98C4-4DA5-ACB1-231A19579B65.jpeg

It's funny how the NIMBYs proclaimed this the "Wasson Tower" and the name stuck, even though it is very clearly not a tower lol. They should be embarrassed now that everyone can see that it is not that tall at all.

31 minutes ago, DEPACincy said:

It's funny how the NIMBYs proclaimed this the "Wasson Tower" and the name stuck, even though it is very clearly not a tower lol. They should be embarrassed now that everyone can see that it is not that tall at all.


Nope. They will definitely argue with you that 6 floors is indeed a high rise.

It will be interesting to see what PLK calls it and how many people refuse to call it by that name.

6 hours ago, Dev said:




It will be interesting to see what PLK calls it

WASSON YOUR MIND

From what I can tell this building looks like its pretty meh though. Is the first floor just parking garage? 

15 hours ago, jc22 said:

From what I can tell this building looks like its pretty meh though. Is the first floor just parking garage? 


First 2 floors is the garage, for a total of 6 floors. The perspective is obscuring the ramp for the 2nd floor.

2 hours ago, Dev said:


First 2 floors is the garage, for a total of 6 floors. The perspective is obscuring the ramp for the 2nd floor.

Gotcha that makes sense. The main issue I have involves the fact that there is nothing on the first floor. It would be nice to see a cafe or something with a patio near the trail. I like that the building adds density to the area, but I don't feel like this building is offering a great contribution to the urban fabric other than that. 

1 hour ago, jc22 said:

Gotcha that makes sense. The main issue I have involves the fact that there is nothing on the first floor. It would be nice to see a cafe or something with a patio near the trail. I like that the building adds density to the area, but I don't feel like this building is offering a great contribution to the urban fabric other than that. 


Yeah they exploited some loophole that requires mixed use for residential in that code so they are going to have a tiny 400 sqft 'office' on the first floor. I can't remember the exact size but it seemed too small even for like a creamy whip or coffee window.

Yeah, that is a big miss.  I had long looked at that spot as being the ideal place for a Bike Trail Oriented Business.  A cafe with a bunch of bike racks could've killed there.

Create an account or sign in to comment

Recently Browsing 0

  • No registered users viewing this page.