Residents urge council to reject or revise Hyde Park planned development

Dozens of residents told Cincinnati City Council during public comment that a planned-development application for Hyde Park Square is too large and too vague, and urged council members to deny or send the proposal back for changes.

Community members said the proposal — associated in public comment with PL Communities and Factory 52 parcels — risks undermining Hyde Park’s character and could set a precedent for taller, denser projects across other neighborhoods.

Speakers pressed council to preserve neighborhood standards and require the developer to commit to specific guarantees on parking, affordable units and traffic-study details. Residents said the community wants housing but not a hotel or towers that they called “too big” for the business district.

Susan Kelly Fernandez, a Hyde Park resident, told council: “Please, mayor Pureval, do what you said you would do and protect your community.” Kathleen Wilkins, also a resident, asked council to “vote no on the proposed planned development for Hyde Park Square” so the developer would “return to the drawing board and make necessary concessions.”

Other commenters cited local examples they said show the developer’s weak track record and warned the city that approving the PD would remove leverage to require performance standards. At the microphone, a speaker identified as Lois Mentes said the development group had “completely ignored any concerns raised by the Hyde Park community” and cited retail vacancies at Factory 52: “More than a year after the first phase of Factory 52 construction was completed, 50% of its retail spaces stand empty…40% of its food hall remains empty.”

Several speakers said they favor housing but not the size or type proposed. Molly Henning, who said the neighborhood had distributed over 400 signs reading “It’s just too big,” said: “We want development. We have told you that we want housing. We don't need a hotel. We'd like a hotel if it fit, but we need housing more.” Glenn Showers, who said all nine families on his cul-de-sac oppose the project, warned that hotels can become hard-to-repurpose “white elephants” if they fail: “60% of hospitality businesses fail the first year. 80% fail the first five years.”

Speakers asked council members to require clearer commitments on (1) how much affordable housing would be included, (2) parking counts and management, and (3) traffic impacts on nearby schools. Several asked council to require the developer to meet the standards that were in place when the property was purchased, rather than approving broad new allowances.

All of these remarks occurred during the public-comment portion of the April council meeting and did not represent formal action by council. Council did not take a vote on the Hyde Park planned development during the portion of the meeting covered in the transcript; speakers asked the mayor and council to withhold approval and to negotiate specific conditions with residents.

The Hyde Park PD issue recurred repeatedly during the public-comment period, with a steady stream of neighborhood residents and supporters asking council to either deny the current PD application or send it back for a revised plan that explicitly limits height, parking, and affordability terms. Council members did not debate or vote on the PD during the public-comment block recorded in the transcript.