- Change is bound to happen in Cincinnati.

There are very public discussions about adding an apartment building in a hotel on Hyde Park Square.

Blue Ash is deciding the future of Summit Park Dayton's.

Five Oaks residents work through early skepticism on hundreds of workforce apartments.

So how can everyday citizens come together to help neighborhoods flourish?

And how much power does the system allow them to have?

That's the not so easy question.

We've brought to Cincinnati council member Mark Jeffries and invest in neighborhood executive director Elizabeth Bartley to explore and answer.

Welcome to both of you.

Thanks for being here on Brick by Brick.

- Thank you for having us.

Thank you.

- Appreciate it.

For those of us who don't know, invest in Neighborhoods is a non-profit organization that promotes civic engagement and empowers community councils and related organizations in Cincinnati.

And Elizabeth, you were saying that next year will be your 25th neighborhood summit.

- Yes, it will.

Right, 25 years.

That's - A lot of work to put on, but very beneficial.

So for both of you, not everybody knows you, so I thought I'd give you a chance to allow each of you briefly to talk about your background and also say how you've ended up in the position that you are now.

Council member, you wanna start?

Yeah.

- Yeah.

Happy to.

First of all, thank you for having both of us here.

So Mark Jeffries, I'm a, a second term city council member on, so three and a half years into being on council and I have a different background come, come from 17 years at Procter and Gamble.

So I ran a bunch of different businesses there, left a couple of years ago, started my own company, so I still own my own company and entrepreneur.

Kind of do that in addition to council.

And gradually along the way I got more involved with the community, so built out a portion of Smail River from Park West of the Robing Bridge.

Served on a community council for a couple years in Clifton, got that perspective.

And then similarly was on the Park Foundation board and I started a non-profit called Go Vibrant.

So came to public service in a roundabout way, but really enjoying my time on council.

And I chair our Equitable Growth and Housing committee, which deals with all issues related to growth and housing.

- All right.

Thanks for that, Elizabeth.

Thank you.

I've been in my role with investor around 10 years and prior to that I've have a wide variety of experience and background.

The thread that sort of pulls through everything.

So I have worked in architecture and design, I have done history and archeology.

I have worked actually at a community development corporation.

I have worked on just a myriad of things, but what if I'm trying to pull the thread through?

It's really always been one way or another.

I've always been interested in the real people who were either going to be inhabiting in a space or using an item or working in an area.

And so community has kind of been what's pulled me through.

And I ended up coming to the actual community work a bit late as well.

I had been in academia for a while, teaching research, things like that.

And more and more of my work.

I was taking the students out out into the field doing, you know, we call it community engagement now, but we weren't calling it back then.

Just finding out, going out and learning about areas and neighborhoods and people.

And that just sort of came more and more and more.

And then I ended up working for the community development corporation and then I moved over to invest in neighborhoods.

- So in your role as Elizabeth, you've probably noticed that some of these development proposals seem to go off the rails.

We've heard recently with Hyde Park and then you know, in in Bond Hill and and other places.

What do you think is the cause of this?

Do we just have like a squeaky wheel or has something gone wrong?

- Well, first I always like to frame it in.

There are less projects that go off the rails.

Those are the ones that just become very publicly visible.

And I was looking this up the other day where if you just look at the city investments over the last five years, there has been, I just looked at the residential housing and mixed use and there's been like 140 projects that the city has invested in.

There have been al over 1700 variances in the last five years.

So those are the things that trigger for going and talking to community councils.

So if you add all of that up, and then we can count on one hand the one that have gone off the rails recently, so most don't.

So I always like to sort of put that in perspective.

When things do go off the rails, as you say, it is frequently just people do not feel like they're being heard or heard well enough.

Like there's not an empathy there, an understanding, and that can escalate and spread rapidly.

- So that's encouraging that she said most don't go off the rails.

I wanna quote your words back to you.

You were talking about the Hyde Park proposed development and you said quote, what this process has uncovered is clearly that as a city we need a revamp of the community engagement process for development.

So expectations are clear across the city developer community, and there is a uniform process across councils.

What we have now is clearly broken with a lot of missed expectations, unquote.

So it seems that there is some confusion by some people about the channels that residents have.

What avenues do you see for them both legally and politically?

- So first of all, I agree with Elizabeth that the vast majority, we just approved the Caru and Macy's an amazing project.

So vast majority don't have issues.

And I do think there is a, a misalignment of expectations and objectives.

So we as a city, as many city leaders, our objective is we have, we're in a housing affordability crisis.

We need to build we more housing, and that means we need to approve housing of all kinds, meaning income restricted, but then also market rate.

And at the community level, there's a very different expectation often, right?

So people want the development to, to look like it fits in the neighborhood or, you know, whatever it is, or it's too big or, you know, the, the, the design of it may not be right.

And so I think that's where some of the challenges are in terms of avenues for people to express it.

The current system is through community councils, right?

So we have, you know, over 40 community councils and 52 neighborhoods here in Cincinnati.

And typically there's not a structured process.

So developers will just come on their own, city's not really involved and ask for input.

And it might go a couple of times, two or three, or it might go over two years in some cases, you know, so very long process and they might ask for changes, et cetera.

And so that often does lead to missed expectations.

So politically to your question, people have the ability to attend those meetings and provide, you know, input and if it doesn't go their way, obviously there's, you know, we're seeing some of the implications of that where folks do pursue a legal, a legal route if they, they don't, they don't like it.

But I do think it points to the need for being clear on aligning on expectations and a process that's consistent across neighborhoods.

Because today it's a different process in Hyde Park versus Walnut Hills versus Mount Washington, whatever the neighborhood is.

And that opens it up to confusion, people not being happy with the end result, and ultimately a very inefficient process.

- So they're essentially in Hyde Park doing what you're suggesting, like they have gone to the community council and now they've collected signatures and then the next step, the ballot, - Correct?

Yeah.

I mean they've went exactly as, as has been prescribed, which is go to the community council, they've engaged, now the community has said they haven't engaged the right way and they haven't changed their design.

There's some disagreement on that, but that aside, there has been some engagement or there has been engagement.

And then now that we've voted as we, as we will, the citizens have a right to put a referendum on the ballot and, and they have taken that - Step.

So what do community councils think about this?

I guess this is the right process to pursue if you don't agree with something.

- That is what we're saying in Hyde Park is the end of a process and which it rarely gets to that.

So when Mark's talking about the standardizations and expectations, that is really, they have those same concerns as well across the community councils where, you know, it is completely different what happens when a developer shows up at one council or another council and it, it creates just confusion.

And we, we host a monthly coalition meeting where the councils talk with each other and we discuss this and we have discussed this idea of having a standardized process because, you know, yes, some neighborhoods like Oakley, like Mount Lookout, have a very formal structured process where a developer comes in and has a certain number of meetings they have to do, it has to meet with the committee.

It's very structured and very formalized.

Most of them don't have anything like that.

And you know, we're always concerned about equity across the city.

And so how do we create a standardization where everybody has the same expectations, has the ability to do the same process, and to be able to work with the developers and get to a meaningful end point.

- What I would say, just to add on that, I think it's an a advantage for the residents.

They know exactly what's to expect.

But also for the developer too.

If you come to Cincinnati, whether you're in Cincinnati as a developer or you come here from out of town, you don't have to navigate some arcane system.

You know exactly, you're gonna go this time and you're gonna go this time and this time and this is what you expect.

And it's a public process.

There's not things happening in private.

All of that I think is really important not only for the developers, but also for residents for both.

- And so what she's laid out is that what you were saying where you, you said that clearly as a city we need a revamp of the community engagement process.

Like how do you see that?

- So that's something we're gonna undertake together this, this summer and probably into, into the fall.

And I do think it is everything that Elizabeth talks about standardizing it.

So everyone has the same expectation of what that process looks like across different community councils and, and then that'll involve some engagement with community councils.

Like what's worked, what hasn't worked?

You know, what how many times is, is important.

One is probably not enough, but five or 10 is probably too much, you know, so how many times of engagement and what is it, what's the responsibility?

I do think the city has a role in that, in partnership with the community council in leading a lot of this work to make sure that it's inclusive of everybody, everyone has an opportunity, not just from the community council in terms of who's a member, but members of the broader community that are impacted have the opportunity to provide their input.

- So to drill down on this, so you two are gonna work together and come up with what recommendations that then would anybody vote on it?

Or you just say, here's a playbook on how to do it?

- Yeah, I mean I think we'll have to figure out the mechanics of it, but I think broad alignment from council as well as the community councils that we need a new process.

And so I do think us leading to create what that looks like when you have development come to a community, what does that mean?

And then we'll have to enroll kind of my colleagues and formalize it and whatever that looks like.

I'm not sure what that looks like, but we'll figure it out.

- I believe there's also a lot of educational communication pieces that go with that.

Several years ago, and this was a while ago now, we had created with the city a pamphlet that was engaging with the development process at the city.

And it was very simple.

And you know, one, those was easy to read of different processes and had, you know, public hearing marking and community council input.

And we look at that now and we, it, it's so oversimplified and part of the issues we run into is the complexity of the development process in and of itself.

You know, when we are talking about variances in zone changes and you know, having understanding of what's the difference between an urban overlay district and what a planned development.

And it is actually even more complicated than it was say 10 years ago.

There have been pieces put into place to benefit the communities, but that's also added more steps into the city process.

So looking at, you know, mapping out that city process, understanding what the developer process is so that we can, you know, look at where and when and what are the appropriate ways to engage with development.

So again, it's the, it gets laid out, it's clear, and the expectations are equal on all sides because everybody has their roadmap of how this should work.

Yeah, go - Ahead.

If I can just put a finer point, because I think it's important, we, we, we do have a community engagement process - Yes.

- Today.

So that does exist.

But I think the issue is to Elizabeth's point on development in particular, there are a lot of nuances and different types of development.

There's nuances.

So I think we have to get a little bit deeper and then, you know, outline specifically what that looks like.

- Yeah, I was just gonna say, this is early in our conversation and you're already talking about solutions, so that's good.

So we will get back to solutions, but one other maybe unpleasant thing to bring up is, Cincinnati has a fraught history, and I know this does not involve you, but you know, given multiple pay to play cases impacting federal cases, impacting city council, us formerly sitting council members in the past, how do you feel that the development process has come since those bribery scandals?

- Yeah, it's a great question.

I think there's a lot more transparency.

So we're given a list of kind of do not call, do not contact people.

So anytime a developer brings anything forward to counsel, there's a period of time that you're not supposed to, for example, solicit anything from them obviously, you know.

And so that has completely transformed a lot of it.

And then frankly, I think just culturally there's a lot more distance, you know, so somebody has a, has a project before council.

I think most council members are, you know, not, for example, I had, hadn't even met, I haven't even met P-L-P-L-K, I didn't necessarily have an interest because I knew it was gonna be controversial and I didn't want any perception, perception of impropriety and still have not in fact.

So I definitely think the culture has, has shifted and I think we need to approve or disapprove projects on their merit in accordance with what we need as a city.

And does it fit the city objectives and goals?

- Yeah.

Are, are you pleased with the changes that have been made?

- Excuse me.

Yes.

And following on on that, you know, sometimes I, I've been doing this job long enough that I start feeling strange that I have more experience than a council member sitting next to me.

So I have more memory.

When you mentioned the transparency there, you know, there has been more transparency.

There is an engagement policy now that did not used to exist and planning, wasn't planning an engagement, it is now planning an engagement and all of these pieces are working together.

There's legislation, the balance development legislation, which they are still, you know, that has been put in place to look at here's what the city was looking at and looking for in each of these.

And anyone can pull that up any time to look and see, you know, how it's being reviewed by DCD.

So we do have all of these different mechanisms in place to improve the processes and to improve engagement and definitely improve transparency.

On the other hand, sometimes it feels, I think people, it's like too much information and it seems like an overwhelming amount of knowledge and background you have to have, you know, just to be able to weigh in.

I know that, you know, quite a few of the, you know, council members that don't have the backgrounds, they, they shy away from because they, they don't know what these mean and they don't understand.

But to me that shouldn't be the barrier.

So we have to figure out how to have that not be the barrier because outside of the community councils, if you're looking at all the residents in a neighborhood, they're not gonna know either yet.

We still wanna know, you know, what are the needs in that neighborhood, what's gonna fit there, what is gonna be the most benefit for that neighborhood and for the people who are already live there and work there, - Because during that five hour plus committee meeting, like residents did say like council member, like are, are you an architect?

Or you know, what are your qualifications, you know, in talking about solutions.

So we're all about solutions here at Brick by Brick and I'm wondering what projects that you can maybe give an example about what has gone well and why it's gone well.

And while you're thinking about that, I'll just mention a couple of recent relevant examples.

For example, Hamilton assistant planning director points to Springfield Township where residents were involved in the beginning in an 80 acre development.

And the process seemed to go smoother.

For example, the developer worked with residents to make sure that there was enough green space and attended a number of open houses with the township administrators and residents.

And then Dayton's planning director points to an upcoming home flat of forest development, 260 workforce units in the Five Oaks neighborhood.

And it's set to break ground this summer.

There was extensive public engagement, he says, and a project that was met with great skepticism at first by to being fully supportive at the end.

And he says that's thanks to the flexibility and interpersonal skills of the developer.

So those were two examples that apparently went well.

So yeah.

What can you name or think of?

- So I'll start, if you think about around University of Cincinnati, what's called the uptown area there, there's obviously a lot of development, a lot of student housing and several of the developers have been engaged there for many years.

So Uptown Development, for example, and a couple things that go well are, they have a really strong relationship with the community council.

So they go to them early in the process and say, Hey, here's what we're looking to develop, this is the type of housing.

Or recently it was a Chick-fil-A, you know, there as an example.

And they present initial designs and then they come back later and they get input.

And so for example, in each one of those, they have taken a lot of the input on, hey, we want the, the, the structure closer to the sidewalk.

For example, like the Chick-fil-A, not farther back, we want some greenery in the front, some trees, we want a pedestrian crossway.

So people can actually cross through and they'll come back and say, yes, this is possible, this isn't possible and here's why.

And so I think a lot of it is just good relationship with the community council and, and listening to them and a little empathy, - Elizabeth, - I - Think that key is this concept of relationship building that relationship.

And I think of the example I think of right now is a recent Walnut Hills development that's being planned and worked hard, not just with the community council.

And this was again, a developer that has had a relationship over there, but also work with the, the Redevelopment Foundation.

So I think part of that is there's a coalition, I believe in Clifton, there's a coalition of people that are working on these as well.

So you're getting touch points and information from the multiple aspects of the community.

But the comm, they're all working together and that particular one, they have so had a very, they have a very strong master plan for the business district area of Walnut Hills.

And so they bring that out and they're like, this is what we're looking for.

We've been, you know, talking about this for years.

This has been approved and it's also makes it more straightforward when they are, it's always going to be a negotiation, a compromise, right?

So sometimes yes, a developer says, no, we can't do that and here's why.

Sometimes yes.

And so they, they were able to get some additional immunities that were desired as part of this master plan, even though, and the community council was very much saying, this is what we want.

Even though it did reduce the number of housing units by around a hundred, but the give and take was made by the community there because they wanted this to still be working with the master plan.

- I, I think that I should mention connected communities, you know, to allow for more transit oriented development and, and middle housing.

What do you expect to see in terms of development over the next couple of years that folks should be taking stock of now in order to provide input along the way and then, and how do they engage?

- Yeah, so the perspective on that, it's really started with what past tier and issue seven, where we invested in metro and we do know to have a successful bus or public transit system, you need density around it, right?

The more people who live around it, you know, increases ridership and therefore it enables it to thrive.

And so that was some of the impetus behind connected communities.

And so the focus was around transit corridors.

So Redding Road is a big one, you know, Ludlow up Hamilton Avenue.

And so some of the investments we're making in bus Rapid Transit as an example.

And so what we've enabled is gentle density.

I mean, you're not gonna see high rises come up, you know, that look like Manhattan or anything, but they're row houses, you know, a little bit more dense, a little higher along those transit routes.

And so in that process, you know, folks will engage in, as a developer comes forward, they'll engage with the community and you know, there'll be no doubt further opportunities for, for input.

- Yeah.

Wanted to ask both of you, what gives you hope despite controversy?

Elizabeth, you wanna start?

- Because I really do feel that one, we, we, we live in a representative democracy, but having the voice of the residents, having the voice of the community, having the input can lead to incredibly positive changes.

I do think that change begins at the neighborhood level and we have seen projects where they have been more driven from the neighborhood side and really worked with, what do you need here?

And, you know, who lives here?

Who are the people like, oh no, you know, no, you guys don't need a Starbucks on every corner.

You need something else.

And, and it can become very, very positive.

And so that gives me hope.

'cause I have seen very good things result from working, you know, at that level and working with the people that have to live there every day and work there and understanding how that fits in with what the overall city goals are and how that is sort of being looked at in the bigger picture as well.

- Yeah, what I would say similarly, you, you have a lot of examples throughout the city where it's worked well and neighborhoods are thriving with thriving business districts.

You look at College Hills and Wal Walnut Hills was mentioned, Madisonville, I live in Clifton.

You have a lot of really thriving areas and a lot of the, the better outcome is when people provide input, right?

If people do provide input, sometimes you don't know what you don't know.

And, and a development comes forward and said, well, what if you, you know, had this attachment or this, you know, then it, it can definitely lead to a better outcome.

So I'm hopeful, I think we can get there and through partnership with folks like invested neighborhoods in the community and I think you have a dedicated group of people throughout the city who are really passionate about this and where there is that kind of passion, I think we can channel it to really good productive use and end up in a lot better place.

- Well, I know we've just scratched the surface, but we're looking forward to following your efforts and hearing, you know, how citizens can better engage.

So thanks for your time and thanks for being on Brick by Brick.

- Thank you.

Thank you.