This week, City Council is poised to vote on a proposed $150 million investment that would replace a one-story building and a sea of surface parking lots with a 150-unit apartment building, 75-room hotel, and 300-space parking garage on Hyde Park Square. Now, after
months of controversy and accusations of a “Manhattanization” of Hyde Park, a simple question lies before City Council that will decide this project’s fate: will Cincinnati grow or are we content with death by stagnation? Will we embrace growth, or will “housing for thee, just not next to me” prevail as a precedent in Cincinnati?

Counterpoints

There are several points of contention that the Save Hyde Park group and others have raised about the development including pedestrian safety, neighborhood character, and the affordability of housing. These talking points are at best misguided and at worst fallacies; here’s why:

Pedestrian Safety and Traffic

Pedestrian safety is an issue of paramount importance to the health of Cincinnati, so when someone raises this concern, I listen. However, when this issue is raised as a point in opposition to development, it fails to understand that additional density increases the walkability
of a neighborhood. When people are spread out, they are forced to drive to their destination. By increasing the residents and business living on the Square, the city is increasing pedestrian activity. To put it simply: opposing development is the antithesis to pedestrian safety. Moreover, 17.9% of Cincinnatians don’t own a car, and a 2017 study – individuals living in multi-family buildings drive 20.6% less than their Single-Family counterparts. So, when the city builds dense housing near key business districts, we are increasing opportunities for folks who do not own cars.

Neighborhood Character

The proposed project will be 85 feet after setbacks and 65 feet tall at Hyde Park Square– consistent with several of the buildings in the square. A quick scan of the neighborhood would prove that it’s not “just too big”. The A L’aise building also sits at 65 feet at Hyde Park Square. Michigan Terrace stands at 79 feet tall on the northern part of the square after setbacks. Moreover, other condominium towers in the neighborhood at Madison House and the Regency sit at 15 and 20 stories in height respectively– towering over this proposal. The vibrancy of Hyde Park Square is essential to the character of the Hyde Park community, and the viability of the square is dependent on having enough foot traffic to support the businesses. Unfortunately, Hyde Park has only added 53 net housing units between 2023-25. The decades’ lack of investment in net new housing throughout the neighborhood and around the Square caused both population loss and lessened the capacity for the Square to serve the neighborhood. Since 1970, Hyde Park has lost 3,000 residents, and since 2002, Hyde Park Square has seen a 16% drop in employment. A neighborhood with a declining population, facing competition for customers from other emerging areas in the region, and inflated costs of running businesses and restaurants can and will create a situation where the beating heart of a neighborhood will beat less and less. This development is essential to the preserving and enhancing character of the neighborhood.

Affordable Housing Shortage

We cannot afford stagnation when we are amidst a housing shortage that, according to the Bureau of Labor Statistics, is the top driver of inflation. Neighborhoods and cities need to be constantly evolving to meet the demands of today, and there is a bias in community councils to preserve as-is. Adding 150 units of housing in the beating heart of a high demand neighborhood helps to ease these inflationary pressures, especially in a place like Hyde Park, which has seen little multi-family development in the past 40 years. At first glance, a boutique hotel may not help with housing affordability, however, providing out of town visitors hotel rooms frees up housing units that would otherwise be rented as Airbnb’s and short-term rentals. Moreover, by making this a truly mixed-use project with the addition of the hotel makes a project that is bringing desperately needed housing to the city financially viable.

The Stakes of a Future Cincinnati

This is a critical vote in the history of our city. If Council does not approve this project, the consequences will be drastic. Neighborhoods should be allowed to garner input on their future, but their concerns ought to be tempered by the dire need for housing at a city-wide level. Hyde Park Square is an important neighborhood business district in the city. Letting a surface parking lot and one-story building sit for years has and will continue to negatively affect the viability of the Square. Neighborhood level veto power of development leads to a compounding housing shortage that is insurmountable. Cincinnati cannot just have a strong downtown–we need strong, resilient neighborhoods. Without both, the city we love will become unrecognizable and unlivable. Decisions need to be made by elected leaders, experts in planning and development, and yes with community input. Only considering community input in development
is the wrong lens to view the city–even a city of neighborhoods. A no vote will cause a fully unbalanced decision-making tree. Elevating community input from community councils, who are often unrepresentative of the neighborhood as a whole, above the needs of the city as whole would impair the ability of the City of Cincinnati to solve its housing crisis, grow, and function as a municipality. That is the dire precedent a no vote would set: a precedent that puts the desires of the few above the needs of the many; a Cincinnati with no clear direction functioning with countless microstates; an untenable solution for our future. For the greater good of our city, Council must vote yes on the planned development this week. Juncta Juvant.

“Commercial creep” was the dominant theme of Friday’s meeting of the Cincinnati City Planning Commission.

The commission chose to table a zoning change request by Stagnaro, Saba & Patterson Co. (SSP) to rezone a property at 3443 Zumstein Avenue in Hyde Park from single-family residential use to office use, which would allow the firm to relocate four of its 13 employees from its adjacent office to the building’s first floor.

The zoning change was opposed by the Hyde Park Neighborhood Council, which fears the expansion of businesses onto its residential streets, a loss of parking, and uncertainty about the property’s future use.

“In our meetings with Mr. Saba [Peter Saba, attorney and SSP shareholder], he revealed that the short-term plan was to use the first floor for office, which appears to be rather innocuous,” said Gary Wollenweber, chair of Hyde Park Neighborhood Council’s Zoning Committee. “But then he explained that future plans may be to occupy the entire building, or demolish the entire building and build a parking lot, or perhaps enlarge his current building.”

Saba said that his firm was only exploring its options.

“Specifically, at that point in time when we looked at it, we realized our only plan we wanted to do is use that first floor space,” he said. “At this point, that’s all we have on the table. Anything else is beyond economic feasibility for us right now.”

SSP has a second office in Anderson Township, and it has been suggested that the firm could expand there. But Jeff Stagnaro, who is also an attorney and shareholder with SSP, said that the majority of his firm’s clients prefer the Hyde Park location.

“Your choice is really to move the entire firm to Anderson Township, or stay here in Hyde Park,” he said. “It is somewhat about us, but it’s about our clients more than it’s about us.”

To Wollenweber, the residents of Zumstein Avenue may have little defense over the zoning change, citing a recent change on Edwards Avenue as precedent.

Section Road Zoning Change Request [Provided]

“One of the arguments that was used against us was that it’s just one more parcel in the middle of a block, and what difference would it make if you just move one more parcel north?” he said. “This is the first parcel with a Zumstein address. So we are turning the corner off of Erie and now starting to march down Zumstein.”

The issue may appear before the commission again in May or June, giving time for the firm and the neighborhood to explore possible solutions.

In a less contentious debate, the City Planning Commission rejected a zoning change at 1780-1816 Section Road in Roselawn from residential multi-family use to office use.

Property owner Schuyler Murdock, who has run design-build firm CM-GC from the property since 2009, wants to make utility upgrades to her non-conforming building and is trying to market the adjacent parcels for the construction of two condominium buildings of four units apiece, plus a spa and wellness center.

Murdock told commissioners that she has already lined up an operator for the spa and has pre-sold two condominiums.

But with no concrete development plans and a fear that nothing would be built and the stepped-up zoning would remain, she failed to draw the support of the Roselawn Community Council.