John S.

Beautiful corbels under the eaves and they are period-correct for a Victorian Italianate style building like you have. With the cornice reconstructed, the building will look as part of the historic neighborhood again.

Pomeroy, is essentially an intact 19th century town with few modern intrusions. As has happened with many other similar towns across the country, that well preserved slice of Americana could be leveraged and used for heritage tourism and tourism in general. Ohio, regrettably, has done too little in my experience (as a frequent visitor from Texas) to take its large collection of historic communities and utilize their uniqueness for economic advantage. I was horrified to learn about the State Attorney General's "Moving Ohio Forward" program from a couple of years ago using millions received in mortgage fraud settlement funds combined with local tax monies to destroy 100,000 structures state-wide. (effectively eliminating a city the size of Columbus in the aggregate) It's true many of the since demolished structures could never have been put to a better use but a fair number might have. Worse, this poorly named program was declared a "success" and additional funds were allocated to expand and continue it. People in 21st century America are nostalgic for our past especially since our relative prosperity is lower now than it was in the 19th century. Our construction models today are based on planned obsolescence, an alien concept back in the 19th century when often first or second generation immigrants proudly built homes and commercial buildings to last based on traditional old world construction practices going back centuries that they brought with them. That's why rare survivors like Pomeroy, Galion, or Peninsula, (and others) should be considered and cherished as national treasures. (in other words, looking at old as gold rather than old is mold) If Ohio really needs a moving Ohio forward program, embrace these special places, promote them to the outside world, and keep them original so that their native charm and appeal will still be there a century from now. No one will be gaping in awe at dilapidated early 21st century apartment blocks (if any are still standing) or the ruins of old shopping malls (although some are kind of cool and spooky) a century from now. I love exploring the faded old Victorian era towns along the Ohio River on the eastern and southeastern side of the State. In coming from the "fast-food" urban style development of the Dallas-Fort Worth metroplex, visiting these picturesque towns is like stepping into a Norman Rockwell painting; they are such a refreshing contrast from our hectic modern urban environment. Thanks for sharing, I just hope on our next visit, Pomeroy will still look the same.

Kulkani doesn't have to be an anti-preservation extremist, all he has to do is wield a rubber stamp and approve every development proposal that comes before him no matter what impact his decision might have on the existing neighborhood character. To be transparent, I do not live in Cincinnati (my spouse and I live in Texas) but we have many friends there and for almost a decade after making numerous visits have been in awe of the town's incomparable concentration of historic homes and buildings. But in recent years, we've noticed an on-going process of so-called "blight" eradication that for many other communities doing the same has been regretted in hindsight. Ohio's unique Moving Ohio Forward program targeting 100,000 structures state-wide has certainly been a mixed bag. While it cleaned up those properties arguably beyond redemption, it also eliminated the possibility of turning some back into the architecturally appealing examples they originally were. (in case anyone wonders, the same architecture that makes OTR unique and increasingly coveted) I offer that today's medium and lower-end construction lack the permanence of Cincinnati's old architecture. In the 19th century, Cincinnati was a city of immigrants mostly from Europe and from Germany in particular. They brought over with them a building tradition stressing permanence and based on architectural arch-types going back centuries. That was because in many cases any new construction had to be in harmony and balance with adjacent structures that were sometimes centuries older. That culture of building to last for generations disappeared in the 20th century as the concept of planned obsolescence took hold. We also lack the material wealth (low cost raw materials, highly skilled labor and its old world craftsmanship) of those by-gone days but Cincinnati is still renowned for its outstanding historic architecture. As mentioned, a pattern of cheap housing in the form of (ugly, or undistinguished, if you prefer) apartment blocks took hold in the mid-20th century and continues to this day. (Corryville comes to mind) But to get back on-topic, if a City culture that any new development is good development becomes accepted, then invariably some of Cincinnati's potential OTR type neighborhoods are going to suffer. (because land for development is often cheaper in older faded neighborhoods) As an outsider, I have no wish to become embroiled in debating local politics but I live in an inner city neighborhood in a city over twice the size of Cincinnati and have witnessed the processes of redevelopment up close and personally as well as seeing their impact on neighborhood character. Therefore, I hope that more enlightened minds prevail in Cincinnati so it can stand out as the world class city as it did in the past. World War Two English leader Winston Churchill called Cincinnati the most European-like city in America, not to be taken as a bad compliment. It would be a shame to see uncontrolled redevelopment diminish its potential and the only way to ensure that favorable outcome is by wisely choosing leadership at the ballot box. Thanks for letting me express my sentiments about your unique community; our next visit will likely be in about a month and our money would be spent somewhere else if Cincinnati wasn't what it is. I doubt we are the only ones who feel that way-Cincinnati consistently comes out favorably in recommended tourist destinations.

The current mayor ran on an anti-progressive platform (aligning with the COAST people against the already-funded and under-construction streetcar project) This single issue set the tone for his administration. Cincinnati is experiencing a renaissance of sorts with an aggressive pro-development agenda that trumps everything else including historic preservation. By weakening the voices of historic preservation in the City's administration, this assures pending and future projects having an impact on Cincinnati's unique historic neighborhoods will thus incur little official opposition. The loss of the James Gamble house in Westwood alerted developers that the City government does have a pro-preservation movement as the city council did attempt to stop the demolition in the courts and perhaps under different circumstances might have been successful in saving the landmark home. Therefore, to reduce the likelihood of City opposition in the future, the strategy now becomes to dilute pro-preservation voices by appointing people in key positions who will not oppose any project on the basis of endangered historic resources. This results in essentially giving carte blanche to developers. There is a lesson to be learned here in that when voters elect a leader openly opposed to an important change for the city's future, (i.e., the streetcar project, which unlike the doomed James Gamble house, was by the narrowest of margins given the green light to continue) a leadership style based on opposition will always carry additional ramifications. Whatever "collateral damage" occurs to Cincinnati's historic resources between now and the next election should be documented, remembered, and then presented as evidence at election time to usher in a more enlightened leadership. I personally find a total disconnect between the overall success (beyond the wildest dreams of many) of OTR, where property values have in some cases increased ten-fold since 2001, and the fact that Cincinnati could potentially have several more "OTR's" that will never get the opportunity for a similar turnaround because they will have been depleted of what originally made them unique and appealing. New apartments and townhomes built hastily with construction cost containment a priority will inevitably soon begin to depreciate and look dated. Cincinnati has almost countless older apartment blocks now often vacant and abandoned that were built with the same low-budget approach in the 1950's, 60's, and '70's. They now constitute some of the ugliest blighted architecture in a city renowned for its exquisite century old examples. The new versions of the same cheap apartment blocks being built or planned decimate the historic homes and buildings they replace that could have potentially been much more valuable (as well as sustainable, and profitable) in the long term. (think: OTR) The developers, builders, managers of this apartment/town-home sector will have in the next 30-40 years left behind another wide swath of these "disposable" obsolete dwellings for the next generation of Cincinnatians to deal with. Please remember these lessons the next time a more enlightened leadership seeks election or otherwise reconcile and accept that Cincinnati's model for the future is not that of a great American city (as it was a century ago) full of monumental architecture but one based on mediocrity and blandness. One grand project near the Riverfront does not offset or justify cheap development at any cost in the rest of the City. Just my two cents worth as a fan of the old Cincinnati...

One thing stands out: until well into the 20th century, construction density was far more compact than in recent years. I'm not sure if developers in the first couple of decades in the 20th century felt Toledo would continue growing to approach a million in population size (thus land was at a premium) or, if access to public transportation was so coveted that streets with Streetcar lines necessitated dense development to provide transportation access to the maximum number of people. More recent development is decidedly suburban-like, characterized by large open lots, plenty of open spaces between them and no hint of the old urban densities in new construction. Such changes also change the personality of a city. I personally like the old denser development rather than urban open spaces imitating suburbia. The new senior housing somewhat recaptures the urban scaled feel of the old (walkable, human scaled for pedestrians, neighborly) but one project hardly reflects a new direction in development. Thanks for sharing, nice photos!

This is in the category of a picture is sometimes worth a thousand words-when reviewed from the beginning, this is one of the most encouraging preservation stories I've read in a long time. Remarkable house, remarkable family that decided to restore it. I hope this venture succeeds beyond their most ambitious plans and will encourage others to rescue other endangered historic structures throughout Ohio. A once derelict ruin of a house has furnished employment to local tradespeople, will now become a new start up business in town, and will continue to bring revenue and taxes into the local economy for decades to come. Had this structure been razed (as were over 100,000 structures statewide via the "Moving Ohio Forward" state demolition program) all that would be there now is a vacant lot with few hopes of any revenues from the site going into the local economy in the future. Congratulations to everyone involved in this project for reaching this milestone.

JDM, There actually seems to be a nice view hidden behind the tangle of vegetation and trees. Will there be a window there or some means of admitting natural light? I assume the rehab plans have been drawn and approved so now I would think your goal is to have things finished out before the end of summer. The (2 foot thick?) brick walls look solid and ready for another century of service. Good luck with the project.

Eridony, Thanks, that seems simple enough. I looked in the suggestions on uploading photos on UO and they seemed somewhat confusing. When I have more free time, I'll give it a try.

Agreed. Solely on the basis of architecture, San Francisco would probably be way down the list. The Golden Gate Bridge and the needle form Trans America building stand out but the scores of side by side Victorian and Edwardian townhouses are all very similar. They can't hold a candle to some of Ohio's great historic homes and buildings but the steep terrain limited by the ocean on three sides necessitate the housing compactness. Contrast that with Los Angeles that sprawls forever from Huntington Beach in the west almost to the Arizona border in the east. NOLA really is charming with its French influenced architecture and historic neighborhoods. Although the Garden District is dazzling with its grand homes some of the most interesting dwellings are the iconic small shotguns. In Ohio, Cincinnati still has some way to go, but I feel it could be in the same league as far as urban charm in comparison to the cities you mentioned. The historic West End in Cincy strongly reminded me of the Vieux Carre (French Quarter) in NOLA. Every place has something uniquely to call its own.

A visitor soon runs out of superlatives to describe walking around San Francisco. As often happens when a city is densely built on steep terrain, housing and private spaces are at a premium. Just having a garage and off street parking in SF catapults the value of a house far above those without parking. After visiting there several times, I concluded it is the most car-unfriendly place in the world. Best to take public transportation via BART. Traveling under San Pedro Bay in the underground rail tunnel from Berkeley is amazing but I wondered what would happen during an earthquake as we traveled deep under the bay waters. I also took the Ferry boat from San Rafael and loved the brisk ride into the harbor and the outdoor art displayed at the waterfront. The one time I took my own car to SF and stayed with a friend who lives there I was in constant fear of being "chalked" for parking too long. I frequently moved the car around until after 11 PM then rose early to move it again at 6 AM. I was advised by my host to leave nothing visible in the car as valuables left in cars soon disappear. But the positives far outweigh the negatives and it would be hard to argue San Francisco is not one of the most beautiful cities in the world. Given the astronomical increases in housing values, San Francisco is becoming a city of Millionaires and Billionaires. An older friend of mine bought a small Victorian townhome in SF's Noe Valley neighborhood in 1979 for about $80,000 and has turned down offers of over $2 million for it. He also had a tiny one car garage, a huge plus. I suppose the saying its a nice place to visit but you wouldn't want to live there might apply. But SF's geographical limitations create one of the ultimate pedestrian friendly streetscapes. My aforementioned friend drove his small compact car down the zigzagging twisted street you photographed and the turns were so tight I swear we could almost see our car's rear bumper in front of us. There is no way one could see what there is to see in San Francisco in one day. Nearby Berkeley and Oakland are also worth visits and a short drive south is beautiful Santa Cruz a jewel-like beach-side resort and early surfing locale. Characters abound around the Bay area...the "gold Top Hat man" in the photo has nothing over the "Pink Umbrella Man" with his clown suit in Santa Cruz. No other place in the world is like the Bay area. Sedate old Ohio almost seems like Grant Wood's famous American Gothic painting by comparison but the Buckeye state has its own native charm and unlike the Bay area, remains relatively affordable as a place to live. Not as many characters, either. Thanks for bringing back the memories.

We visited Dayton and nearby Springfield last September coming there from Fort Worth, Texas. My impressions of Downtown Dayton were similar to yours; however, since I'm an old house nut, after driving around the downtown we headed for Dayton's old neighborhoods. Really a mixed bag there. I was determined to see one distinctive house in Daytonview on Yale but wasn't prepared for what we found. Numerous early 1900's mansions which had once housed Dayton's elite were now in various stages of disrepair and abandonment. Once we found the house I wanted to see (also badly neglected and appearing to be abandoned) a silver Mercedes pulled up behind our car and an older gentleman got out and slowly walked up then politely asked what our business was in the neighborhood. When I explained my passion for old houses and the desire to photograph that one example before it was gone, he excused himself and departed. He cautiously explained before he left that a lot of crime was occurring in the neighborhood and that we should be careful. Our foray into Daytonview ended there and we went on to explore other areas. The St. Anne's Hill neighborhood was far more welcoming and I stopped and walked around looking at and photographing some of the grand old homes there. A yard sale was taking place that day in one of the neatly manicured yards of an old Victorian and we found some neat early 1900's postcards of Cincinnati streetscapes (including the Mt. Adams incline) for a couple of dollars as well as some collectible glassware. Friendly folks. We also visited the South Park neighborhood and it had a real hipster vibe-I envision much better things ahead for the South Park neighborhood with many of the homeowners being of a younger age. We went from there to another marginal neighborhood known as Riverdale, turned down a short street called E. Mumma, but the house I had wanted to see so badly was gone. It had been a towered Queen Anne style house from the 1890's and featured rare front and back towers. The house was still visible in streetview but had been gone long enough in reality for a thick patch of weeds to have overgrown the vacant lot. Sadly, the house next door, which was another 19th century home, was gone as well. I knew there were other old Dayton neighborhoods like the Oregon District, but after the disappointments in Riverdale and Daytonview, we left Dayton and traveled on to Springfield. I took far more photos in Springfield than Dayton even though numerically Dayton probably has more historic homes. I'd post my photos here if there was a simple way. (they are archived on Flickr right now) Guess I need to see if there are photo posting instructions somewhere. My overall impression of Dayton was of a town slowly improving. Springfield seemed to hold more promise, at least from going up and down Fountain Street and East High St. there. I hope the next time we visit, things will look better in both towns. Both were great cities in the past and somehow must regain the economic momentum to go forward into the future. Thanks for sharing the nice downtown views.

They appear to be antique to me although some fairly decent reproductions have been made in recent years. I doubt that large chandelier is a reproduction but it was surely costly regardless of age.

Lovely, but I wonder if this hallway is original as it look so narrow? That large chandelier is almost touching the walls. Perhaps this is part of the addition and the confines of the lot/parking, etc. required a minimal width hallway. Must have been fun maneuvering large pieces of furniture or beds through here. That said, I love the look. Thanks for sharing.

Agreed, that over-mantel mirror is of the same period and very appropriate. The "after" photos on this house just blow me away. I hope the Shamakians receive not only local recognition but state and even national praise for taking a hopeless case and bringing it all the way back to its period appearance. Even more importantly, I hope it inspires others to tackle difficult projects or at least stabilize endangered structures until someone has the resources to restore them. So long as a structure has a sound roof and is secured from vandals, it will be stable for years. But far too often demolition is the chosen solution. I think the entire community of Painesville is the beneficiary of this remarkable restoration and a 150 year old landmark now has a second chance to represent Painesville's past. Thanks for the newer photo.

I visited Washington, PA back in 2009 taking a sampling of photos during the one day visit. The town has some outstanding historic architecture as noted in your photos but as also noted, a fair number are barely standing like the mansard roofed duplex captioned: "abandoned in Washington". Nothing short of a miracle that it remains standing today and one has to wonder how much longer. Besides the early buildings at Washington & Jefferson College, there were also two large Victorian era (towered Queen Anne style) former mansions on the campus. Both are in fine condition and used by the institution. Near the campus was a nicely preserved historic residential district with dozens of restored Victorian era homes. But preservation in Washington, PA is spotty with some faded neighborhoods not likely to survive in the years to come. I was intrigued by the use of large blue stone pavers in some of the old residential areas. Although too dated now to upload the 2009 photos I took, I'll provide a link to my Washington, PA album on Flickr: (a few of nearby Uniontown, PA are included at the end) I did not stop in Coraopolis and after seeing what you found I now wish I had. That railroad station with the ferral cat is a true landmark structure but I wonder if its not going through demolition by neglect and how long it will survive? Old train depots and rail stations are challenging to re-purpose and maintain usefulness in the modern age. (I'm reminded of the C.C.C. & St. Louis RR terminal in Galion, OH which is thankfully in better condition) While Pittsburgh has seen some encouraging revival in recent decades, many within the ring of suburban towns around it have not fared as well. Towns like Braddock and McKeesport immediately come to mind. But the problems are economic based and regional so the solutions (besides continuing deterioration and neglect) may not come soon. Thanks for the photos; I believe you captured the flavor of the towns very well.

Nice photo find. It illustrates as well the esthetic sensibilities of the period. But today an interior like that would be appropriate for a museum house or for someone who is absolutely gob-smacked with Victoriana. Industrial strength Victoriana is an acquired taste but there are companies making period reproduction wall papers and accessories for an authentic period look. No matter how faithful to the period an interior might appear, you are still living in 2015 so the culture, technology, and economic realities remain of our period not those from over a century ago. Most owners of old houses prefer a blend of modern (especially kitchens and bathrooms) with whatever appealing period details make their home distinctive. I disagree with those who buy a well preserved and intact historic home yet aim to gut the interior and install a thoroughly modern house inside the old walls. (as a certain PBS show favors sometimes) If you love and want modern, buy a modern house, don't take a well preserved relic from the past and erase the character and history embodied in the house to make it look like it was built this week. From reading the previous statements, a compromise between the past and our modern age seems like the balance to seek.

No criticism was intended regarding having exposed brick in an old house. Even the Rehab Addict on TV likes to show off exposed brickwork inside whenever possible. In our era, the esthetics of the 19th century are sometimes difficult to understand. The Victorians were simply more formal in their interiors. They probably had trouble relating to "rustic" things, although rough faced limestone blocks did seem to appeal to homeowners of that era. I'd never urge someone with exposed brick interior walls in their old house to go slather plaster over them again-that would change the entire atmosphere and would diminish the effect in a modern interior.

White painted woodwork bracketed the beginning and end of the 19th century. The late Federal into the Greek Revival styles before 1850 usually had painted woodwork but it was often faux grained to look like more expensive woods with burl and other fancy grain patterns rare or unknown in nature. By the mid-19th century, clear finished woods like Rosewood and Walnut became popular. By the mid-1880's the supply of American Black walnut was dwindling, so the less desirably but plentiful Oak and Ash were employed to furnish millwork in American households. The so-called Age of "Golden Oak" arrived in the late 1880's which was Oak, often quarter-sawn (with its distinctive "Tiger" stripes in the grain) and finished with orange shellac to give the Oak a golden wood tone. The art of faux finishing cheaper woods to resemble more expensive woods never died out; Pine, which in the trade was called "Deal" in the Victorian era, as well as Poplar were extensively used throughout the Victorian era and often faux finished to look like more expensive quarter-sawn Oak. Towards the end of the era as Oak and other hardwoods became more expensive, Southern Yellow pine in the Midwest and South (Cypress in some deep South locations) and Douglas Fir in the Northwest were extensively used both for framing and as millwork woods. By the late 1890's stylistic tastes turned again towards to the Classicism of the early 19th century so white painted woodwork began appearing again in residences. This trend continued into the early 20th century with white becoming so popular that even fine woods in older staircases, window and door trim, as well as mantel-pieces had coats of white paint slapped over them. (as modern day old house restorers often discover to their surprise and dismay when quality hardwoods are discovered under coats of paint) Anyone who's had to pick with dental tools white paint out of the open pores of old Oak can relate to the dismay part. I'm glad the Steele mansion retained its clear finished woods although it would not surprise me if the minor woodwork/millwork in some rooms were originally faux grained. Given the age of the home's wood, finishing in the clear seems acceptable as modern tastes have a different esthetic than in the 19th century. The popular fad of scraping away plaster and paint to reveal bare brickwork inside would have horrified Victorian era homeowners who wanted everything to have a formal finished look. So too exposed old wood beams in ceilings and such...I've seen rare early log cabins sheathed with milled clapboards for the same esthetic reasons.

Hickory? Interesting. Back when this house was new Chestnut was a preferred wood for flooring and millwork but after disease killed off the supply, Oak and (Southern) Yellow Pine became the common woods for flooring. I'm not surprised that the original flooring had to be replaced as years of water/ice/snow saturation under plaster and debris surely ruined (rotted) any of the original flooring. I recall the "before" photos looking from upstairs down to the ground floor with even the second floor joists being gone. I don't think it would be much of an exaggeration to say only about 1% or less of historic homes in this condition ever get restored. It's not that they don't deserve restoration, it's that the dollar figures involved are steep and very few individuals are willing to make that kind of investment. The Shamakians are themselves very rare individuals but more folks with their vision are badly needed; I've seen houses in far better shape than the Steele Mansion get razed because it was claimed they were "too far gone to save". In the end, the remarkable restoration of this house shows that where there is the will there is a way. Best Holiday wishes and a Happy New Year to all of my Urban Ohio friends and acquaintances and a special "Thank you" is sent to the Shamakians for saving this Painesville landmark.

To summarize my sentiments in one word: Wow!

It's always wonderful news to read something like this. I hope the Shamakian's success is beyond their wildest dreams and may convince others to take another look at endangered historic homes. I heard the Sorg Mansion in Middletown, OH is undergoing restoration-some had written that off as being beyond saving as well. Small flickers of light in the darkness...

Thanks for the Ohio Memory link. There must not have been much of it available because its seldom seen even in Mansfield. I think there might have been one commercial building there with less colorful specimens of the material: ...I took this photo in September. Come to think of it, I didn't see a lot of rock outcroppings around Mansfield-Galion. I was making a comment to Ink's reply then your posting uploaded.

Thanks Ink. Wikipedia only mentions the Library was built in 1904 with Andrew Carnegie funds. It states the facade was built from "red sandstone". While I agree it has reddish tints it's much "wilder" than that-it almost has a kaleidoscopic effect. We have a (now rare) Victorian mansion in Fort Worth, TX : the 1899 Ball-Eddleman-McFarland mansion was built with red Arizona sandstone but it looks nothing like this stuff and it cost several hundred thousand dollars to replace deteriorated pieces of the stone from the original quarry a few years ago. Anyhow, maybe someone else will have some information. Amazingly, the freeze-thaw cycles which sometimes decimate softer limestone details don't seem to have much impact on this stuff so I question if it even is sandstone or some other exotic sedimentary rock.

It's quite sad to see one of Samuel Hannaford's more creative residential designs now faced with demolition. The culprit here is not the house, which few would argue doesn't deserved to somehow be saved, but the location. Oddly, the idea seems to be that this long neglected area can only experience a rebirth if new development obliterates the old. But Cincinnati's city leaders seem almost giddy that developers are finally reshaping urban areas that were long neglected but for those who admire Cincinnati's incomparable wealth of historic architecture, it's an on-going preservation nightmare. I don't think such an acceleration of tear-downs has occurred in Cincinnati since the dismal days of urban renewal when entire neighborhoods like Kenyon-Barr were razed to make way for the Queensgate commercial district. Somehow, sometime, preservation-minded people in Cincinnati are going to have to draw a line and say "enough". The loss of the James Gamble house in Westwood was tragic but the odds were stacked against saving it almost from day one. I guess some short-sighted folks are so pleased to see Cincinnati's long neglected urban areas showing signs of redevelopment that they don't mind losing a few old homes here or a couple of ornate commercial buildings there. That's the price of "progress" right? But the attrition steadily adds up over time...when's the last time you followed in the footsteps of Mark Twain and marveled over the four miles of grand Gilded Age mansions that once made up Cleveland's fabled Euclid Avenue? Oh wait, all of that disappeared years and years ago. Nevermind. I don't know how to save this house and even if I did I'm not sure I could afford it, but I'd argue anything still standing designed by Samuel Hannaford, Cincinnati's most accomplished 19th century architect, deserves protection and preservation. Then again, much to the dismay of his legions of admirers, a fair number of Frank Lloyd Wright's architectural gems have been razed in the name of progress. If the works of arguably America's greatest architect couldn't be saved, what chance do the works of Cincinnati's greatest architect have? The dark, negative thought that only when historic architecture becomes rare in Cincinnati will the few survivors be protected is unconscionable; surely there is an acceptable condition where the old can co-exist beside the new. Most other great American cities have found a way to preserve the best of their historic architecture as well as promote new development. Why is it an "all or nothing" proposition in Cincinnati?

Great small town photos in this collection Ink, it shows me some of what we missed during our ten day Ohio-Indiana-eastern Kansas visit in September. We spent two days touring around Mansfield-Galion, two days in Springfield-Dayton, a day in Hillsboro, and a day in Cincinnati. Tons of photos (which I've put in my Flickr albums as I've never uploaded a photo here) I did want to ask a question...the Public Library building in Defiance has a unique type of stone I've only seen before on a grand Victorian mansion in Mansfield (right off Park Avenue West...these stone columns show the weird stone graining well: ) I had assumed, given the opulence of the Mansfield mansion, that the stone was brought there from some far-off exotic location-yet here I see it in Defiance as well. That leads me to wonder if its actually from somewhere in Ohio..any clues?