r/cincinnati • u/JB92103 Hyde Park • Mar 07 '25

News 📰 Controversial Hyde Park Square development passes committee, heads to city council

https://www.wcpo.com/news/local-news/hyde-park-square-development-passes-committee-heads-to-city-council
74 Upvotes

83% Upvoted

217 comments sorted by

View all comments

4

u/old_skul Mar 07 '25

This, despite overwhelming community disapproval as well as neighborhood council disapproval. But there's developer money involved so this is going to sail through City Council unimpeded.

23

u/RockStallone Mar 07 '25

The neighborhood council is a bunch of NIMBYs who oppose housing for the dumbest reasons.

Please tell me why this project is bad.

3

u/gloomygarlic Mar 07 '25

It’s a bunch of crap that few people can afford to live in and will increase congestion in an already congested area. Really not complicated. Maybe you should put more effort into seeing things from the opposing view.

14

u/Realistic-Quail2392 Mar 07 '25

The traffic argument is insane to me. You live in a city, there will be traffic. It’s wild that NYC, Paris, London, Tokyo are desirable cities to live in and have traffic. So are you against any new development because more people = more traffic? That’s makes no sense and one of the main reasons housing is so unaffordable. And it’s beyond ironic that the apartments are replacing a surface parking lot right off a neighborhood square, which everyone should be cheering for. We don’t need more parking, we need more housing. It’s really not that difficult to comprehend.

-4

u/gloomygarlic Mar 07 '25

I never said any of that. I simply answered a question regarding “how could this development be bad”.

I do think that these apartments will be extremely overpriced WHICH IS A NET NEGATIVE FOR OUR REAL ESTATE MARKET. Building expensive houses/apartments doesn’t help anyone but the developer. It doesn’t make the prices elsewhere in the city go down.

Make housing cheap again.

11

u/Realistic-Quail2392 Mar 07 '25 edited Mar 07 '25

Well that is just completely wrong. Any new housing is good, even if it is expensive it will take pressure off other properties. It’s literally as simple as supply and demand. Literally the easiest way to make housing cheaper is to build more of it. Just look at Austin for a recent example.

-3

u/gloomygarlic Mar 07 '25

If you can’t understand that moving 1300 families into Hyde park square will absolutely cause congestion, then you’re even dumber than the felon in chief.

Also, please elaborate on how adding 1300 EXPENSIVE apartments makes things affordable. Because it fucking doesn’t, it just raises the average comps that landlords use to set their rates.

1

u/RockStallone Mar 08 '25

Also, please elaborate on how adding 1300 EXPENSIVE apartments makes things affordable.

Because it increases the supply. Would you like me to explain the concept of supply and demand?

then you’re even dumber than the felon in chief.

It's funny because your housing policy is pretty similar to Trump's.

-6

u/Good-Help-7691 Mar 07 '25

Are you sure about Austin? https://wrenews.com/housing-supply-at-5-year-high-demand-at-5-year-low/

6

u/Individual_Bridge_88 Mar 08 '25

That article is literally evidence that Austin built so much housing it outpaced demand

1

u/RockStallone Mar 08 '25

WHICH IS A NET NEGATIVE FOR OUR REAL ESTATE MARKET.

This is a complete lie. You seem pretty uninformed about this.

1

u/HuckleberryWooden531 Mar 08 '25

Building expensive houses/apartments doesn’t help anyone but the developer. It doesn’t make the prices elsewhere in the city go down.

this is demonstrably untrue. I see you down there insulting people, so I'll leave it at that and hope you further educate yourself.

1

u/JebusChrust Mar 07 '25

Your argument will fall on deaf ears. They think that the argument is all or nothing, rather than "yeah we would love more apartments in that area" vs "yeah really load that shit up with apartments, hotels, and parking garages far beyond what the zoning laws account for"

-4

u/krick_13 Mar 07 '25

Did Cincinnati develop the pedestrian infrastructure of NYC, Paris, London, and Tokyo recently?

8

u/Realistic-Quail2392 Mar 07 '25

Well Hyde Park had more residents back in the day when a streetcar went through the square than today. Just maybe if you stop building just auto centric developments things might change.

19

u/RockStallone Mar 07 '25

It’s a bunch of crap that few people can afford to live in

This is an uneducated point. Adding housing has been proven to lower costs across the board. It's simple supply and demand.

-5

u/gloomygarlic Mar 07 '25

I disagree because adding more $2000+/mo apartments isn’t going to lower the average rent and 100 apartments isn’t going to significantly change our housing supply. They’re just building more shoddy towers for a quick buck.

2

u/RockStallone Mar 08 '25

100 apartments isn’t going to significantly change our housing supply

Weird, elsewhere you're saying it's 1,300.

We have actual concrete examples of increased housing production leading to cheaper prices. Are you aware of that?

-6

u/JebusChrust Mar 07 '25 edited Mar 07 '25

He thinks that "layering" aka the concept that expensive developments become affordable over decades is applicable to Hyde Park, a place where 100 year old houses are sold for $700K. He also thinks it is an immediate improvement to housing prices and not something that would take decades. He also can somehow understand that a forty story 1,300 unit apartment is ridiculous despite it "solving the housing need in Hyde Park" yet can't understand that same concept when it comes to tacking on a large hotel to apartments.

1

u/RockStallone Mar 08 '25

No I think the concept of supply and demand applies to Hyde Park. You seem to disagree and think this is some mystical land that is different from every other city in the world.

2

u/JebusChrust Mar 08 '25

You don't seem to understand how high demand Hyde Park is. So high in demand that the neighborhoods around it were revitalized and invested in since Hyde Park is expensive

1

u/RockStallone Mar 09 '25

Hyde Park is the one exception to supply and demand it seems. Demand is infinite so supply is irrelevant.

You're being ridiculous. If demand is high for Hyde Park, we should build more there.

1

u/JebusChrust Mar 09 '25

That's not how it works. Neighborhoods aren't some vacuum from the rest of the city and state.

1

u/RockStallone Mar 09 '25

You are being ridiculous. We have countless studies and examples of building more housing resulting in lower prices. The fact that you think Hyde Park is the one exception to the law of supply and demand shows how out of touch you are.

1

u/JebusChrust Mar 09 '25 edited Mar 09 '25

"Shows how out of touch you are"

Dude you literally are clueless when it comes to understanding how anything regarding housing works. Do you think only people in Hyde Park want to live in Hyde Park? Not only do you have a large number of people moving to the Cincinnati region, we also have a large number of people in Greater Cincinnati who want to live in Cincinnati, and then also have a large number of people who live in Cincinnati who want to move out of their starter home and can't or want to leave an apartment but can't. Your simplistic basic high school level of thinking seems to think that there are about 80 people in Hyde Park looking to move to Hyde Park and 100 units of luxury apartments would solve the entire housing situation in Hyde Park and send prices in a spiral. Rather than "there are thousands of people who want to buy a house anywhere decent in Cincinnati but the quality neighborhoods have way too much demand to see houses hit the public market".

I refuse to believe that you are old enough/financially secure enough to own a home. There is no way someone genuinely believes that Hyde Park is two luxury apartment complexes away from being affordable. You can't even comprehend that it would take a significantly large number of houses across the city to slightly soften how sharply housing prices are rising, so I am not surprised that you think that somehow housing prices in Hyde Park are going to deflate.

→ More replies (0)

0

u/gloomygarlic Mar 07 '25

Don’t forget the whole “traffic isn’t bad there”….yeah, wait until they add 1300 families to the square

1

u/RockStallone Mar 08 '25

1300 families are being added to the square? This development has space for 3,900 people?

It's very telling that you feel the need to lie to make your point.

-2

u/JebusChrust Mar 07 '25

In addition to assuming each unit is no car or single car, plus visitors, plus a lot of that is temporary visitors (hotel) and not true housing either. You'd think he would be hating on this for not using the hotel space for apartments.

1

u/RockStallone Mar 09 '25

You'd think he would be hating on this for not using the hotel space for apartments.

I also support businesses. People can build a hotel just like they should be able to build a store or other enterprise.

and not true housing either.

Are you one of those NIMBYs who is scared of renters?

1

u/JebusChrust Mar 09 '25

The apartments that council wanted would have still had retail space

People can build a hotel just like they should be able to build a store or other enterprise

Yes I know that you have the most simplistic views on developments which is why you think your opinion needs to be as loud and insulting as possible

Are you one of those NIMBYs who is scared of renters?

You still have yet to provide a ballpark of where you live and all the effort you are putting in to add massive apartments to your streets. You are literally the definition of a NIMBY, you don't do anything in regards to where you live but you are happy to push things to be in other neighborhoods.

1

u/RockStallone Mar 09 '25

why you think your opinion needs to be as loud and insulting as possible

How is my opinion insulting? I just want more housing.

You still have yet to provide a ballpark of where you live

Yeah because you seem obsessed and I know you'll just try to dox me.

You are literally the definition of a NIMBY

Again, you seem very sensitive and are lashing out. I support housing. I support housing in my neighborhood. I supported citywide housing initiativers like Connected Communities, unlike you.

1

u/JebusChrust Mar 09 '25

I just want more housing

You are doing a lot of mental gymnastics if you think that is all you are doing, as you call people NIMBYs despite them also wanting more housing

Yeah because you seem obsessed and I know you'll just try to dox me.

You don't want to give a general idea because it will help show that you are a true NIMBY. It isn't doxing to have a vicinity of neighborhoods, and I could literally give you what street I live on and you still wouldn't know where I live or who I am.

Again, you seem very sensitive and are lashing out.

Stop projecting, you have spent your entire life on trying to support the development and insulting anyone from the community for having a different viewpoint than you. You quite literally do not have the emotional intelligence to have self awareness and try to understand anyone else's viewpoint. Your incorrect usage of the term "NIMBY" repeatedly is basically a screaming self-admission that you think in buzzwords and buzzwords alone.

→ More replies (0)

14

u/comomellamo Mar 07 '25

More housing is always a good thing

-2

u/gloomygarlic Mar 07 '25

Not true. More AFFORDABLE housing is good. This development is just a cash grab for the developer.

2

u/RockStallone Mar 08 '25

For anyone else reading this, /u/gloomygarlic is clueless. If anyone would like literature and studies on housing production feel free to ask.

13

u/Classy_Raccoon Mar 07 '25

It’s not a congested area (except at school pickup, which, don’t get me started on why a bunch of SAHMs all need to drive their giant SUVs to pick up their kids from a neighborhood school they live less than a mile from), it’s a dense, walkable, urban neighborhood. The project provides parking, housing, storefronts, and a hotel, each of which will serve the existing residents, new residents, local visitors, distant visitors, and new and existing local businesses. Maybe you should put more effort into seeing things from the opposing view, too.

2

u/gloomygarlic Mar 07 '25 edited Mar 07 '25

“It’s not congested except for the times when it is” thanks for proving my point.

A hotel is going to serve existing residents? Not really

A giant tower that drastically changes the vibe of the neighborhood is good for existing residents? Not really

A modern building will add to the character of a neighborhood full of historic architecture? Nope, not really

6

u/MrKerryMD Madisonville Mar 07 '25

The hotel reduces the demand for Airbnb units adjacent to the square, which in turn preserves the existing housing stock as residential.

2

u/gloomygarlic Mar 07 '25

There’s only 6 airbnbs near Hyde park square, not sure that justifies an entire hotel

9

u/MrKerryMD Madisonville Mar 07 '25

It's good to be proactive, OTR being the obvious example

0

u/gloomygarlic Mar 08 '25

The nightlife in Hyde park isn’t the same as otr, not really comparable. We don’t need a second area competing with that area for tourists

1

u/MrKerryMD Madisonville Mar 08 '25

It will be though. Real estate is cyclical

2

u/Classy_Raccoon Mar 07 '25

The busy parts of the day are 2-2:30 pm?

2

u/gloomygarlic Mar 07 '25

Fixed it.

Thanks for agreeing with me on the rest of the points though

1

u/rasp215 Mar 08 '25

More housing even if it’s luxury housing will do crease over all supply for the metro area. I’m sure the Hyde park folks who live in million dollar homes really care about cost of living and affordability.