O'Reilly's Proposal

Maybe those objecting could buy the involved properties and use THEIR OWN $$ to create something else??
Besides--I don't believe that the mentioned parcels are considered part of the DMI kingdom.

BTW---have the objectors(and everyone else) recently driven down Central Ave from the tracks? Pretty depressing scenery.

Does anyone take the Hysterical Society seriously?
What power do they have?
What is historical at the mentioned corner?
Do they object to a large junkyard/scrapyard in the center of town?

Not to mention yet another car parts business next to the Rite-Aid at the University Blvd/Manchester Ave. intersection and across from the train station.

A potential for three car parts places within a block of each other? Kinda saturated isn't it?

Once again a legitimate business, O’Reilly Auto Parts, wanting to build in Middletown is harassed by the city’s pompous bureaucracy.   In this mornings (4-7-17) Journal-News article in section B under Focus on Business, O’Reilly Auto Parts announced withdrawal/reschedule of a Board of Zoning Appeals hearing “so that it could revise its plans for the site in the 1800 block of Central Avenue.” The article goes on to say, “The developer is seeking six variances to develop the new store, an investment of nearly $2 million, in the Urban Core Central zoning district from the BZA after being denied on March 1 by the city Historic Commission, which reviews zoning requests in the downtown area.” To the city administration’s glee and under their direction, Journal-News makes all this sound reasonable, especially with no opposing opinions being expressed.


The area of the 1800 block of Central was NOT part of the original “Urban Core Central zoning district” nor is it part of a truly Historic District. Does the city administration make this non-sense up as they go? The Historic Commission, a bureaucracy created by city administration (not part of the Historical Society) should have NO SAY outside of historic areas. The City is REQUIRING that they seek six variances in a bombed out looking, slum area where drunks may now be permitted, by city ordinance, to walk around with alcoholic drinks in hand. Sound unreasonable or historic??


The paper quotes City Planner, Ashley Combs as saying “the Historic Commission . . . denied the building materials for the proposed building because it was CMU block, which is man-made and not natural stone,”… also “Combs said the commission denied the site plan because of parking in front and not the required zero feet setback.” The stringent requirements of natural stone and no parking in front WILL BE introduced in the NEW downtown master plan which has NOT YET BEEN APPROVED by City Council. That’s right, the Historic Commission wants to ENFORCE NEW RULES RETROACTIVELY, especially for O’Reilly.


Does the commission understand that their historic district in downtown is mainly brick construction which is man-made and not natural stone?   CMU block is manufactured to simulate stone. You can count on one hand all of the natural stone buildings in ALL of downtown Middletown. Isn’t this the same commission that agreed to allow old car hoods to be hung on the PAC building? I guess it’s who you know, not what you do. As to the parking variance; in Central’s 1800 block the area businesses all have front parking and large setbacks, completely contrary to the Historic Commission’s RETROACTIVE requirements for O’Reilly’s building.

This dictator style government is a major reason why Middletown continues to flounder while those around us succeed. To those that want the building to “complement” downtown, how can a natural stone building complement a bombed out slum area, even if it has a zero setback?

The Journal-News says: “...the developer could take the matter to the Butler County Common Pleas Court for resolution.” The lesson for anyone wanting to bring a business or jobs to Middletown is: you will spend a small fortune trying to get permits and variances and possibly end up in an expensive court battle for trying to do the right thing! It is surprising that O’Reilly is pursuing this so aggressively.

And the paper also quotes Mike Robinette: “If they want to be downtown, they should do it in compliance with the zoning code… We welcome them but we want them to do it within the zoning code.” How can anyone with several abandoned, dismal failures involving downtown properties (in which likely none of his own money was used) make such pompous, judgmental statements?

The Journal-News also says: “Middletown City Council is currently reviewing an update to the city’s zoning code as well as a NEW master plan for downtown.” (The plan that has NOT been approved.) I ask the citizens to look these over carefully. The new (monstrously shameful) zoning code can be downloaded from CityofMiddletown.org. It is way too mind boggling to read much less make any sense of it. The city is counting on citizens to just think its OK rather than take considerable trouble to see what it really means. The worst thing council could do is adopt a new zoning code that will expand the already crippling zoning code. The growth and health of our city depends on less government intrusion not the total intrusion of every aspect of everyday life in Middletown through zoning and building codes. Our administration draws up a new “master plan for downtown” any time they want to grab more control over “their” downtown.

Council, if you refuse to help with Middletown’s recovery, at least stop throwing up barriers and get out of the way of those who do want to improve Middletown. And take Adkins, his boat load of bureaucrats, and your “crippling codes and plans” with you.

Robinette's bar had an open house last night
big crowd--nice place
wine bar was rocking also
nice to see-----
so--who is on the historical COMMISSION??
is this a Council-appointed board?
what powers do they REALLY have?

Spider
I used to frequent your dads businesses, he knew how to run a successful business. You on other hand only knew how to run the family business into the ground. What qualifies you to criticize others?

And a sincere thank you for the kind words about my father and your past support!

Vet and Whistler
Seems like Robinette and many others are trying to improve City. What are you two doing besides bitching and moaning?

middielover wrote: Understand whistlersmom is none other than the city's long-time Law Director. Seems like someone living off the taxpayers all these years should be the last one to criticize others.

Sincerely doubt that Les Landen is whistlersmom. Too docile and too much a "company man" to criticize the organization. He is a team player and not apt to go against the grain. Nope, just not buying it middlelover.

Vet
You are a winer
Put up or shut up

No sense in debating with hot air, Vet
mlover obviously has issues and she is little more than a cyber troll bully--outing mlover is not my job though
That seems to be the line of defense(er---attack?)--just causes more division and defense mechanisms to kick in
mr.A needs that kind of support like he needs a stick in the eye


interesting if admin insiders are coming out with info

hey--I had a good time in the former downtown area last Friday
It is becoming something--hopefully fueled by the next generation shaping mtown's future
bring it on!

https://youtu.be/s9PQ7qPkluM

According to the Journal, today's the day for the O'Reilly appeal hearing. Excerpts.....

"If the city Board of Zoning Appeals approves variances that were requested and denied by the Historic Commission, O’Reilly will still need to get Historic Commission’s approval before being able to proceed with building the store."

Seriously? The "Historic Commission" approval is needed? It's an auto parts store, not a historical place of importance.

"According to the city staff report, the variances requested include:
•Locate the front entrance and primary building frontage on side elevation facing Charles Street
•Permit less than 60 percent ground floor transparency on the prima1y building frontage
•No parking lot screening
•More than zero feet setback facing Charles Street
•Building with less than 70 percent of site width on Grimes Street, Central Avenue and Charles Street"

Business friendly rules for sure.

Did they give their buddy Robinette this much crap when he tried to develop his many attempts at opening a business downtown? Looks like Robinette has a Facebook page denouncing the "strip shopping center approach" concerning O'Reilly's. With his track record, is he really qualified to be the resident critic here?

They're going to go too far in imposing their little rules that O'Reilly's just might back out of the deal altogether.

HC and city, just stay out of the private sector business development and things will go a heck of a lot more smoothly. Too controlling, too self-important and too pompous.