You are on page 1of 2
THOMPSON sus ae INE area sam February 7, 2019 Council Member Amy Murray Cincinnati City Hall, 801 Plum Strost, Suite 351 Cincinnati, OH 45202 Re: Ondinance ~ Planned Development Distict No. §3,” F.C. Cincinnati Stadium” (1501 Central Parkway Dear Council Member Muay: ‘This letter is being sent on behalf of The Cincinnati Ballet in connection with the requested rezoning ofthe property by FC Cincinnati at 1501 Central Parkway to Planned Unit, Development and the approval of the Coneept Plan and a portion of the Development Plan, The Concept Plan submitted by FCC includes plaza and access areas, overhang ofthe stadium Perimeter wall and future development which ae located at the northeast corer ofthe Project Site, The Future Development is eitcal to the Concept Plan as a whole as it serves as a transition tothe community and a sound buffer. This northeast eornerof the Project site is exclusively controlled by the Ballet for the next 17 years pursuant to @ Lease. This Lease provides absolutly no rights for FCC to enter onto ths parcel, let alone construct improvements ‘om it. Simply put, FCC does not have sufficient control ofthe ste to effeet the proposed plan as shown on the Concept Plan or submitted as part ofthe zone change to PDD. Section 1429 of the Municipal Code of Cincinnati (Zoning Ordinance) addresses the purposes, requirements and other aspzets of PDDs. Section 1429-05 sets forth basic requirements in six ‘reas that must be met in order to establish a PDD: () a Minimum Area, (i) Ownership, (i) Multiple Buildings on a Let, (iv) Historie Landmarks and Districts, (¥) Hillside Overlay Districts, and (vi) Urban Design Overlay Districts. As to Ownership, 1429-05 states that an applicant must “[elvidence that the applicant has sufficient control over the tract of land to effect the proposed plan, ineluding alist ofall ownership and beneficial interests inthe tract of land and the proposed development”. Section 1429-09 addresses the requirements that must be met in ‘Concept Plan forthe PDD and has the exact same language regarding contol. Following the Concept Plan, a Final Development Plan must be submitted pursuant to Section 1429.13, which also mandates the same coatrol requirements, The timing of construction of projector phased approvals of Final Development Plans does not ameliorate the impact ofthese ordinances, Sioekingstumpratinecom Fae $1126L47 Die Da 58061 anvaanson2 TWoMBON INCU ———SWit Smee ———S*~*SC Topco ‘Arvest on ih Fer sisisna70 Cocina, Obi 45202-4099 Psnaaarnt LHOMPSON HINE uc to the Ballet's exclusive long term rights under its Lease, FCC fails this “contol “ test requited for the change in z>ning, and approvals ofthe eurrent Concept Plan. FCC simply cannot “effect the proposed plan” ss required by the ordinance given the Ballet's Lease rights. FCC's, request fora zone change and approval ofthe concept plan does not mee ll of the requirements for consideration by City Couneil and should no, by law, be considered by Couneil until FCC ‘ean demonstrate control of he site, This eanclusion is very consistent with the experience of ‘numerous developers who have come in front af City Couneil aver the last 30 years for zone changes ot Concept Plan Approvals. Imagine the prosedent City Council would set if they ‘opened the door for developers to obtain approvals of PDDs over sites that were subject to leases (or other interests) that interfered with the ability to “eect the proposed plan’, Because of the foregoing, the Ballet requests City Council to refiain from advancing the PDD ‘nil such time as FCC ean demonstrate site contol as discussed above. Regards Aphticpy Stephen M. King