John Zinsser - Save Hyde Park Square

Episode Transcript

Speaker 1 (00:00):
Here's channel nine first one and one. The forecast okay,
today and tomorrow identical, at least in terms of forecast
sunny skyes. Seventy five for the high Tonight going down
to fifty four degrees with clear skies. Tuesday night, another
clear evening with a low of fifty three Wednesday, clouds
in the mornings, clear skies later in the day. Seventy
six for the high. It's fifty eight degrees and it's
time for traffic.

Speaker 2 (00:22):
From the UCF Traffics Center.

Speaker 3 (00:23):
Trusts the same team for your care that keeps the
u SING Bearcats on the field. Count on you see
health Orthophedi SADS supports medicine no matter the injury. Visit
u sehealth dot com. He spend two seventy five running
close to an extra half hour from before coal Ring
to a wreck just before you get to went and
left hand side southbound seventy One's worse than that running

(00:44):
slow from above Western Road to an accident nearfields Ardle
left hand side north Pound seventy one slow Smith edwards
into Kenwood, chuck Ingram on fifty five care seen the
talk station.

Speaker 1 (00:58):
It's eight twenty nine fifty five Care TV talk station.
I'm very happy Monday to you, Brian Thomas, please to
welcome back to the fifty five Carric Morning Show, one
of the men behind the Save Hyde Park Square initiative,
a ballot initiative that it's only to be ballot in
this November. Of course, we'll be choosing council members, we'll
be choosing a mayor, maybe a new one, and of
course my Hyde Park friends get the opportunity as well

(01:19):
as everybody else in the city to vote on self
control is what I call it. Welcome back to John Zenzer,
Save Hyde Park Square. Good to have you back on
the show.

Speaker 2 (01:27):
Nice to be with you, Brian, Thank you. Okay.

Speaker 1 (01:30):
So yeah, everybody and his brother working on this. From
all the neighborhoods in the city of Cincinnati, maybe some
of them joined the effort for Hyde Park to control
its own destiny, because, like bond Hill, the city government
elected officials, the mayor said no, we're going to allow
this well connected developer to do what it wants in
spite of the fact that it violates the citywide zoning Ordinance,
the Connected Community Ordinance. They did the same thing to

(01:52):
bond Hill, but every neighborhood in the city of Cincinnati
got subjected to the Connected Communities plan, so one size
fits all, unless, of course well connected developers. That obviously
was insulting to the residents of Hyde Park, who were
very loud and it seemed to me to be almost
uniform in their objection to the current plan, which was
to have that massive hotel and additional parking spaces and

(02:15):
all the redesign So you get to choose. Now. I
recently read it's probably been several weeks, John, but that
the quote unquote well connected developers were planning on making
some concessions, hopefully to appease the residents of Hyde Park.
So with that background and add any details you want to, John,
where are we currently on that?

Speaker 2 (02:36):
I appreciate that, Brian, I don't.

Speaker 4 (02:39):
I think the first thing is it's not just the
residents of Hyde Park, as you were saying earlier on
this is a city wide issue. And we did have
fourteen different communities who took votes and wrote letters to
the city saying, please don't do this, we don't agree
with it, we don't think it's a good idea, and
the city's response to that was crickets. So that was
not very encouraging. There has been some motion, and where

(03:02):
we are right now is the developer actually came to
Hyde Park the community, both the Hyde Park Neighborhood Council
and the Safe hyde Park Square Group after we turned
in those eighteen thousand plus signatures that put this on
the ballot, and they came to us and they asked
very clearly, could we have a conversation would be possible

(03:23):
to discuss what things would possibly work and not and
they asked abundantly clearly for complete confidentiality while that.

Speaker 2 (03:32):
Was going on.

Speaker 4 (03:33):
While that conversation was happening, as you might have noticed
on Friday, there was a pretty remarkable drop of some
new images what they thought they would do, and an
article that ran in the Business Career which ran within
an hour of us getting roughly an hour of us
getting that information. Confidentiality has not been the strong suits,

(03:56):
i would say for these discussions, and it was a
very tough day to look at these things because previously
in these discussions what had happened, we talked very clearly
about the zoning is fifty feet. You've known that all along.
Everybody's seen that they wanted to go originally to eighty
five feet and with the PD they might have been

(04:17):
able to go as far as ninety three feet without
any community input. That's almost one hundred percent beyond the zoning.

Speaker 2 (04:24):
Not quite. What we've come back to them and.

Speaker 4 (04:27):
Said is, hey, how about sixty two feet, which is
a twenty five percent increase over the over the zoning,
And what we got dropped on us was something of
fifty percent over the zoning. They wanted to start at
seventy five feet, and it's been communicated to them before.

(04:49):
That's not something that the eighteen thousand plus people who
voted for this, who are from all over who signed
the petition for the excuse me, who are from all
over the city, can accept. And that's not something that
safe Hyde Park Square is comfortable going forward with. That's
not reasonable. That's literally only five feet down from what

(05:11):
the developers that they were going to do to the
city because they came down to eighty and then the
city kindly said no, no, no, we're going.

Speaker 2 (05:17):
To give you those five feet back. Why don't you
do that.

Speaker 4 (05:21):
It's been a really tough weekend in that regard. The
conversations have been ongoing. We're trying to see but even
more than way where we are separated in terms of
the size of the building. The developer is now saying
they don't want to have a written agreement. They don't
want to have a contract if you will for what's

(05:42):
been agreed to. I don't know about you, Brian. I've
never bought a house without a contract. I've never bought
a car without a contract. I've never done work, you know.
I've been a consultant without a contract.

Speaker 2 (05:53):
I'm not very.

Speaker 4 (05:53):
Comfortable with that idea. I don't know how you and
some of your ost owners would feel about.

Speaker 1 (05:57):
That, John, those are the lawyer in me is last
right now. I can't believe they had the audacity to
suggest that or say it out loud. Here's a fun
question for you, John Zonzer, the developer. The developer was
willing to chop off some of the height that the
city granted him. Right, You just got done saying that.
Then you said the city said no, no, no, no,

(06:18):
go ahead and keep the extra height.

Speaker 2 (06:21):
Yeah.

Speaker 4 (06:22):
I happened in the Equitable Growth and Housing Committee meeting
back in April where they came and they made a
big deal about the concession they've made, and we have
some other quote unquote concessions that they've made we can
talk about. But they said, you know, we've come down
five feet and the city solicitor is actually the person said,
because there were some other questions about things in their

(06:43):
requests for the PD and they ended up making this
incredible millange. And when I say they, that's actually the city.

Speaker 2 (06:49):
Yeah, made this mix of the.

Speaker 4 (06:51):
First proposal of the second proposal, refined, et cetera, and
it actually gave p Okay more than what they had
asked for at.

Speaker 1 (06:59):
That well, clearly the city is in the corner of
this well connected developer. Clearly, if the developer itself was
willing to make concessions, that might have and I know
it didn't appease the residents of Hyde Park, but it
might have. But there's the city interjecting its nose into
the equations, saying no, no, no, no, we don't care what
you're negotiating with the residents of Hyde Park, go ahead

(07:20):
and build it likely prove.

Speaker 2 (07:21):
Negotiating at that point.

Speaker 4 (07:23):
At that point, there was no conversation, negotiation and that
really was all we were asking for along and that's
what we've been saying to the whole city, and that's
what the city turned around and said, yes, we want
to say in what goes on in neighborhood, and that's actually.

Speaker 2 (07:39):
What the vote will be if it goes to the vote.

Speaker 4 (07:43):
There are a couple of ways where it doesn't have
to and may but the eighteen thousand signatures is what
finally brought the developers into conversation with the community, and
now as things are getting close, a lot of energy,
a lot of talk about who else might need to

(08:04):
be involved. The city's involvement of course, has to be
there in one regard, but if city council wants to
do something at the moment, this would be a great
time for them not to get involved in terms of
running the discussion, but to turn to the developer and say, look,
dropping a seventy five foot set of drawings, and they're

(08:26):
not really drawings, they're not architectural drawings. They're just some impressions,
if you will, things that might be. They don't serve
any purpose in terms of planning. But to do that
on a Friday without sharing them with the community before
you put them into the press, and then saying something
that you were told is fundamentally not really a starter
even for them. It's now time for city council if

(08:48):
they want to do anything to turn to their friends
at fee okay and say you've got some distance to
go towards the community, and that needs to happen right now,
and it has to end up in writing.

Speaker 2 (09:01):
If it's not going to end up in writing, why
are we talking?

Speaker 1 (09:06):
What's the point of this exercise? John Zin's a pause.
I want to bring it back. I want to talk
about if the measure passes on the ballot November, what
does it mean? Is it over period in the story?
What is it going to mean? And then some of
the other points of concession that might resolve the issue.
More with John Zinzer Save Hyde Park Square, I'll be
right back. This is fifty five KARC and iHeartRadio station.

(09:27):
Hey neighbor, the talk station. We're talking about saving Hyde
Park Square, a baut initiative on the ballot thanks to
the efforts of John Zinzer and so many others circulating
petitions get the I mean eighteen thousand signatures. That is
a lot of folks who want to steer the direction
of their own neighborhoods in terms of development. And you know,
as you describe the current situation between this well connected
developer and the Hyde Park Square in the City of Cincinnati.

(09:49):
I mean, I wanted Joe to hit the Shenanigans button
because this just does not sound kosher at all.

Speaker 2 (09:55):
John.

Speaker 1 (09:55):
But let me ask you this simple question. If the
measure that's on the ballot allowing themunities direct their own
future and mixing this Hyde Park development effectively, what does
that mean going forward for any given neighborhood, whether it's
Hyde Park or Bond Hill or anyplace else.

Speaker 4 (10:12):
Sure well, there's a two step process to get there.
First off, on the fourth of September, City Council meets again,
City Council has the opportunity to rescind their own vote.
They could reverse and say, yep, we understand, we hear
all those you now, and we are going to reverse

(10:33):
the vote that we took granting this proposed this planned
development something called a PD to the developer.

Speaker 2 (10:40):
Right. The other option is.

Speaker 4 (10:42):
If they don't do that, then they have to send
the paperwork to the Hamilton County Voting with the election Board,
and that would be how it gets on the ballot. Now,
if it passed the ballot, which I feel very comfortable
with because the question isn't do you want this building
in Hyde Parker on the question is do you want

(11:03):
to say in what happens in your neighborhood city wide?

Speaker 2 (11:07):
And I think everybody who most people will go for it.

Speaker 4 (11:10):
I'd like to say in my neighborhood, whether I've lived
there for a couple of years or whether I've lived
there for generations. And we have people in this effort
who have been here for more than two and three generations.

Speaker 2 (11:22):
On this.

Speaker 4 (11:23):
If it goes to that, what it will do, it
would cancel. If the vote went the way we wanted to,
it would say no, they may not have the planned
development zoning exception.

Speaker 2 (11:34):
That's the good news. There's the tough piece of news.

Speaker 4 (11:37):
That doesn't end the thing with the developer. They still
own the property right and they should be able to
do something with it, and we'd like that to happen.
All along, our message has always been smart development, work
with us, let's build something. We want the commercial space
that they're talking about. We want the apartments as we

(11:58):
should do something more better with that space. And it's possible.
The signs around town all say it's just too big.
The point is to bring it into relevancy. So if
the vote goes the way that we want.

Speaker 2 (12:13):
The bad news is.

Speaker 4 (12:14):
That the developer could show up the next day and
file the same paperwork again effectively, and let's start all
over again. I think that would be a really unfortunate
pr move as well.

Speaker 2 (12:27):
But they may come.

Speaker 4 (12:28):
Into a little bit of difference. And there's something I
know you care very much about, who's council going to be.
Then I know they don't just start the next day.
But if there's some council members who change, and it
seems very possible the seven people who voted against us
back in April, I think some of them are looking

(12:50):
to their left and looking to their right and going
I'm not so sure, And I know none of them
want to go out into the election out campaigning with
this issue, along with several others that we're not talking
about around their neck. This would be a real burden
or real anchor on somebody trying to run for council

(13:10):
again having voted against.

Speaker 1 (13:13):
This well, and I guess if they leave it on
the ballot, they don't revoke the waiver, then that's the
risk that they face because it is most assuredly a
campaign issue, and their refusal to listen to the residents
of Hyde Parker, Bond Hill or any the other communities
that have been impacted by their zoning edicts and mandates.
They're going to have to hold. They're gonna have to
be accountable for that, They're gon have to answer questions

(13:34):
about it. So that puts them in a precarious position.
If they vote to revoke it, we're back. I mean,
it doesn't buy you in Hyde Park any comfort whatsoever.
Because they revoke it. The developer, as you point out,
could come back the next day and say here, I've
got a proposal and it's got eighty five foot and
they could approve that, and you'd be back to square
one and you'd be having another ballot initiative.

Speaker 2 (13:56):
It is possible.

Speaker 4 (13:57):
But I think with the attention thanks to people like
you the media have brought to this, with the effort
of the more than three hundred circulators who moved those
petitions around the city, and with the effort with the
yard signs on, I don't think that that.

Speaker 2 (14:13):
Would go very well. We wouldn't, and I well, all.

Speaker 4 (14:19):
I do think enough of the developer. They also have
to consider their future, their plan, and you wouldn't want
to die on this hill to put it that way,
I don't think that would be the best move for
them at all. I'm not done, though, I don't know
where they'd go. The best thing they could do right now,
and I think the best thing for the city would

(14:40):
be a negotiated agreement that comes in somewhere around.

Speaker 2 (14:44):
The sixty two foot mark. You said you wanted to.

Speaker 4 (14:48):
Talk a little bit about some of the other quote
unquote please ess please let me let me cross off
a couple really quickly. One was originally there was a
hotel in this plan, but the developer wrote multi couple
times in different places. The hotel is actually kind of
a liability for us. It's not something we're really keen on.
So for them to take that away doesn't feel like
much of a concession. Lately, the spokesperson for the developer

(15:12):
has been saying often, well, and we're coming down on
the amount of commercial space that's available. That's never been
an interest or an issue for Hyde Park. We want
the commercial space there, and we want it to be
thoughtful and careful. But nobody on this side has ever
said no, no, no, that's way too much commercial space.
The zoning says no hotel, So that's why there should

(15:33):
be no hotel. The community says, let's do some smart
commercial work, let's do that, And somehow the developers decided
that that's a big concession that they're making, a really
tricky one that does come down to size. And they
were looking at eighty five feet. You know, that's a
lot of footage. When you come to sixty five sixty

(15:54):
two feet that we were talking about, that brings them
down to six stories, right, instead of probably eight. But
at six stories, one of the things that they need
that extra footage for, apparently is the cabana to go
with the pool on top of the building. Now, I
understand we have housing issues in the city and we're

(16:17):
trying to build square footed, and that's another good reason
why the hotel never should have been on top of
the owner. But if they need more footage for a
pool cabana on the top of the building, what kind
of apartment building are we really talking about? Nothing? That's nothing,
that nothing that's going to be anywhere near what the

(16:40):
average person could afford or even And we did the
numbers on this previously, the average income for Hyde Park
couldn't even afford what we're talking about here. Oh, it's complicated.
So let's just not forget these are luxury apartments, not
something that it's going to help the city meet its

(17:03):
current needs.

Speaker 1 (17:04):
Well, I wouldn't. Honestly from my perception of Hyde Park,
it's a wealthy community. I don't think anybody can deny that.
And the idea that you're going to end up with
affordable housing in Hyde Park, John, You know what they say, location, location, location.
You have a wonderful location which is going to drive
rents up period, end of story.

Speaker 2 (17:23):
So yeah, and the goal is to keep the wonderful location.

Speaker 4 (17:28):
Yes, and this building as originally proposed at eighty five
ze did that end? These renderings, these projections that were
dropped on Friday afternoon not really shared with the community,
their negotiating partner. They don't keep anything of the spirit
of Hyde Park architecture. In my opinion, I'm architect, I'm

(17:52):
not a developer. But I was looking at the picture
and thinking Houston, Atlanta, places like that. I was not
thinking High Park Square.

Speaker 2 (18:01):
Yeah.

Speaker 4 (18:01):
I was at the Farmer's Market yesterday, absolutely packed, a live, buzzing,
great feel, incredibly beautiful, and I look at those strawings again,
I look at those those projections, those imaginations from selective
views of a couple of things.

Speaker 2 (18:18):
I go, that's not the same place. No, it's not.

Speaker 1 (18:22):
I've seen some of the renderings and I understand the
objection to it, just visually looking at them, going wow,
that doesn't look like anything like Hyde Park. So John Zinzer,
I wish you all the best in the world. Yeah,
definitely get it in writing, and just Trecker suggested, make
make sure it's on something more than a cocktail napkin,
recalling spinal tail.

Speaker 4 (18:40):
Do that. Okay, we'll take that forward and send no
cocktail napkins.

Speaker 2 (18:45):
Please. Thank you, Brian. I really appreciate your time and your.

Speaker 1 (18:47):
Space anytime, anytime, John, you got any developments, you got
some movement on the part of the developer or whatever.
You have an open form here on the fifty five
case morning. You should to keep people up to speed
on it. I certainly appreciate all of your efforts in
this regard.

Speaker 2 (19:00):
Thank you, and a lot of other people as.

Speaker 1 (19:01):
Well ireate it. Br Are You're always giving them credit
and credits due. Thank you very much.

Speaker 2 (19:05):
John.

Speaker 1 (19:05):
We'll talk again soon. Eight fifty right now, fifty five
kr CE the talk station fifty five KRC your financial goals.

Speaker 2 (19:13):
Are you unique