Stop letting the tail wag the dog! We should have every right as lawful businessmen and women to conduct business as the current codes and laws allow. Contrary to popular belief among the so called "neighbors" against growth, their homes were once built either from scratch or perhaps even as a result of a tear down opportunity that presented itself. They didn't just pop out of the ground by magic. So, to insist that others can not enjoy what they have is ridiculous on it's face. When my company tore a blighted home down on the corner of Erie and Paxton years ago, we were met by anti-growth picketers, with signs stating "Not in my neighborhood! " Tell me that the current house that we built there doesn't enhance the neighborhood not only aesthetically, but more importantly economically. Take this one example and multiply it by all the other homes built by all the other builders and contractors and explain how this isn't a net positive irrespective of how some NIMBY thinks or a bought and paid for politician!
S
Stuart Cowan
8 years ago
In America we still have the right to buy and sell our personal property without interference from government or our neighbors. Why does City Council believe it has the ability to make “special” regulations for two neighborhoods only? As new homes are built, all homeowners property values rise. The stagnation of a neighborhood is inevitable without new construction. Neighbors as well as government should not be allowed to determine the value of individual property. What these neighbors and government should remember, somewhere along the line they will want to sell their homes too for the best price possible. How does the City expect to be attractive to business and their employees relocating to Cincinnati if the housing stock available is old and run down with no hope of renewal?
J
James D Obert
8 years ago
This is clearly a case of government appropriating the property of others. If someone is so enthralled about older and out-of-date homes, buy them up. Otherwise, allow reinvestment in the community by permitting construction that complies with the zoning regulations. I've owned and rehabbed an older home. At the end of the day it is an old home that is not energy sufficient, lacks the livability features desired today, and continues to require high levels of maintenance regularly at higher cost than new construction.
J
Jay Hyson
8 years ago
Featured
How can the City be against slightly increasing density in any neighborhood when we are over 40,000 units short of safe, clean affordable housing city-wide?
A
Alan Gerbus
8 years ago
City of Cincinnati,
For years we have lost population due to older stock of homes, deteriorating neighborhoods, declining schools and we looked for ways to incentivise people to settle in the City. Years of private investments coupled with government incentives have been the key to turing the population drain around. New housing and investment in older housing has been the key driver in bringing back the population and rebuilding our neighborhoods. Policies such as the one you are instituting will send a chilling message to Developers, Builders and Realtors that the City is no longer working with the industries that is helping turn around our City's neighborhoods. Progress is not always easy for everyone to except but the long term benefits will keep our City thriving for generations to come. Our leaders must be willing to see the big picture that will keep our Queen City at the forefront of growth, opportunities and thriving neighborhoods.
Respectfully,
Alan Gerbus
Vice President
Greater Cincinnati Home Builder Association
J
John smith
8 years ago
You wrote the codes we all have to deal with. Stop making it difficult to do our jobs! We are here doing our best to make the city a better place using the rules and guidelines you set.
G
George Smith
8 years ago
Another push to stop our positive movement.
A
Anonymous
8 years ago
Sub-divided lots are part of the zoning code. Drop the tax abatement and lets keep moving forward!
D
Duke ball
8 years ago
Meaning of demolition _(progress)
S
Steve Sylvester
8 years ago
My name is Steve Sylvester and I have been involved with the tear down of 6 houses in Mt. Lookout. I have also been involved in the splitting of 3 lots in Mt Lookout. This activity resulted in the creation of 10 new homes. In all cases the original houses were in a great need of repair and the lot splits were handled with care and most neighbors were notified in advance of each lot split. In most cases, new houses were built on each site and attention to detail and design which matched the area was taken into consideration. I am a Real Estate agent. I have proudly represented the best interests of over 1500 homeowners and I understand the emotion involved with change. I have attended 2 meetings on the subject of the IDC. I have heard the concerns. The 3 objections have been consistent: 1) the new houses do not fit the character of the neighborhood. 2) concern for tearing down "Historic Homes" . 3) unfair that "rich people" receive tax abatements. I believe a data driven,thoughtful discussion is needed, not a decision driven only by emotion. Although I do not approve of IDC, I do believe a few changes benefiting current homeowners and builders should be incorporated into current zoning.
B
Bernie Kurlemann
8 years ago
The petition simply and clearly states the obvious unfairness and overreach.
Property rights are fundamental to our constitutional republic. Imposition of targeted restrictions is unsupportable.
D
Dr John R Corker
8 years ago
I know multiple people either planning to move to Cincinnati or employ others to build in Cincinnati, who will not do so if this policy goes into effect
R
randy david
8 years ago
I agree with Pat Gunning.
M
Michele Stanley
8 years ago
Too much government control should be feared by everyone.
W
Weldon Stone
8 years ago
This must be done
Y
Youngwon French
8 years ago
Reinvestment in the neighborhood is a sign of progress and prosperity
J
Jeff Dietz
8 years ago
The IDC must be for entire city, all neighborhoods. You cannot single out specific areas and laws must be forward looking, So people can know the rules of engagement.
M
Maryann Ries
8 years ago
We support property rights and do not feel that they should be different in different neighborhoods
P
pat gunning
8 years ago
despite what people think , developers, builders and real estate agents are replacing more efficient homes where nearly condemnable homes that need replaced If, you are effecting many peoples livelihoods,
do the right thing here abide by the laws that were laid down in 2012.
the 347 people that own splittable lots will sue the city in a class action,
they bought those homes that sit on double lots and paid a premium for them knowing that one day they could or would split and build two. slippery slope Mr. Canley.
Last year I paid over 600 contractors that worked on building homes in the hp/ mt. lookout areas, you will hurt those families that take pride in their trade and love the improvements they make to our city. I don't see any of our hostile neighbors driving 20 year old cars/ why? safety, efficiency , style etc. Just like your new home. Amy Murray lives in a new home still under the benefit of tax abatement, does she not want others to benefit like she has. If hp / mt lookout has a review process why wouldn't all of the rest of the communities in the city request the same. price hill Madisonville, Evanston... is hyde park getting special treatment because the mayor lives in that community?
Please add Classic Living Homes to the petition.
Stop letting the tail wag the dog! We should have every right as lawful businessmen and women to conduct business as the current codes and laws allow. Contrary to popular belief among the so called "neighbors" against growth, their homes were once built either from scratch or perhaps even as a result of a tear down opportunity that presented itself. They didn't just pop out of the ground by magic. So, to insist that others can not enjoy what they have is ridiculous on it's face. When my company tore a blighted home down on the corner of Erie and Paxton years ago, we were met by anti-growth picketers, with signs stating "Not in my neighborhood! " Tell me that the current house that we built there doesn't enhance the neighborhood not only aesthetically, but more importantly economically. Take this one example and multiply it by all the other homes built by all the other builders and contractors and explain how this isn't a net positive irrespective of how some NIMBY thinks or a bought and paid for politician!
In America we still have the right to buy and sell our personal property without interference from government or our neighbors. Why does City Council believe it has the ability to make “special” regulations for two neighborhoods only? As new homes are built, all homeowners property values rise. The stagnation of a neighborhood is inevitable without new construction. Neighbors as well as government should not be allowed to determine the value of individual property. What these neighbors and government should remember, somewhere along the line they will want to sell their homes too for the best price possible. How does the City expect to be attractive to business and their employees relocating to Cincinnati if the housing stock available is old and run down with no hope of renewal?
This is clearly a case of government appropriating the property of others. If someone is so enthralled about older and out-of-date homes, buy them up. Otherwise, allow reinvestment in the community by permitting construction that complies with the zoning regulations. I've owned and rehabbed an older home. At the end of the day it is an old home that is not energy sufficient, lacks the livability features desired today, and continues to require high levels of maintenance regularly at higher cost than new construction.
How can the City be against slightly increasing density in any neighborhood when we are over 40,000 units short of safe, clean affordable housing city-wide?
City of Cincinnati, For years we have lost population due to older stock of homes, deteriorating neighborhoods, declining schools and we looked for ways to incentivise people to settle in the City. Years of private investments coupled with government incentives have been the key to turing the population drain around. New housing and investment in older housing has been the key driver in bringing back the population and rebuilding our neighborhoods. Policies such as the one you are instituting will send a chilling message to Developers, Builders and Realtors that the City is no longer working with the industries that is helping turn around our City's neighborhoods. Progress is not always easy for everyone to except but the long term benefits will keep our City thriving for generations to come. Our leaders must be willing to see the big picture that will keep our Queen City at the forefront of growth, opportunities and thriving neighborhoods. Respectfully, Alan Gerbus Vice President Greater Cincinnati Home Builder Association
You wrote the codes we all have to deal with. Stop making it difficult to do our jobs! We are here doing our best to make the city a better place using the rules and guidelines you set.
Another push to stop our positive movement.
Sub-divided lots are part of the zoning code. Drop the tax abatement and lets keep moving forward!
Meaning of demolition _(progress)
My name is Steve Sylvester and I have been involved with the tear down of 6 houses in Mt. Lookout. I have also been involved in the splitting of 3 lots in Mt Lookout. This activity resulted in the creation of 10 new homes. In all cases the original houses were in a great need of repair and the lot splits were handled with care and most neighbors were notified in advance of each lot split. In most cases, new houses were built on each site and attention to detail and design which matched the area was taken into consideration. I am a Real Estate agent. I have proudly represented the best interests of over 1500 homeowners and I understand the emotion involved with change. I have attended 2 meetings on the subject of the IDC. I have heard the concerns. The 3 objections have been consistent: 1) the new houses do not fit the character of the neighborhood. 2) concern for tearing down "Historic Homes" . 3) unfair that "rich people" receive tax abatements. I believe a data driven,thoughtful discussion is needed, not a decision driven only by emotion. Although I do not approve of IDC, I do believe a few changes benefiting current homeowners and builders should be incorporated into current zoning.
The petition simply and clearly states the obvious unfairness and overreach. Property rights are fundamental to our constitutional republic. Imposition of targeted restrictions is unsupportable.
I know multiple people either planning to move to Cincinnati or employ others to build in Cincinnati, who will not do so if this policy goes into effect
I agree with Pat Gunning.
Too much government control should be feared by everyone.
This must be done
Reinvestment in the neighborhood is a sign of progress and prosperity
The IDC must be for entire city, all neighborhoods. You cannot single out specific areas and laws must be forward looking, So people can know the rules of engagement.
We support property rights and do not feel that they should be different in different neighborhoods
despite what people think , developers, builders and real estate agents are replacing more efficient homes where nearly condemnable homes that need replaced If, you are effecting many peoples livelihoods, do the right thing here abide by the laws that were laid down in 2012. the 347 people that own splittable lots will sue the city in a class action, they bought those homes that sit on double lots and paid a premium for them knowing that one day they could or would split and build two. slippery slope Mr. Canley. Last year I paid over 600 contractors that worked on building homes in the hp/ mt. lookout areas, you will hurt those families that take pride in their trade and love the improvements they make to our city. I don't see any of our hostile neighbors driving 20 year old cars/ why? safety, efficiency , style etc. Just like your new home. Amy Murray lives in a new home still under the benefit of tax abatement, does she not want others to benefit like she has. If hp / mt lookout has a review process why wouldn't all of the rest of the communities in the city request the same. price hill Madisonville, Evanston... is hyde park getting special treatment because the mayor lives in that community?