RestorationConsultant

I don't think so but then I do not belive the entire collection is didgitized. They dont really have things (except for this Kenyan Barr) identified by neighborhood. I have seen one photo of the business district there at Mohawk and McMicken by doing a seach on just the street Mohawk and I believe the area was identified as "Mohawk Place". Right now I am looking for photos up in my area Knox Hill , which is in Fairmount so I can complete the national registry nomination narrative for the neighborhood and I'm having a tough time finding old photos online. I have a couple I obtained from residents and of course there are the ones of the Schuezenverein (the German shootig club and beer garden that was once on the hill). Any research with old photos is always difficult who knows how many are sitting somewhere in someones attic?

No they have expanded the number to carr and carlisle and some others. there are about 600 photos.

I guess soem discussions have been ongoing between the city and CPA about 'modifications' to the VBML to make it more 'preservation friendly'. As usual not a lot of actual neighborhood input here. Based on just what I'm getting it seems like in addition to my neighborhood of Knox Hill, the Riverside area seems to want to see VBML gone as does some folks in Lower Price and Westwood and the OTR facebook page seems to indicate they are kind a fed up with VBML too. I really think we have got to get back to repair order based enforcement (like other cities have) and we need a real hosuing/environmental court. It is interesting the city could file receiverships against these bad property owners but I've been told more than once they are afraid of owning and maintaining any more property. Of course the city can't seem to get a landbank deal put together. Personally I think we need a Historic Landbank Fondation, (independent of CPA) so those groups without development corporations could "hold' key prioperties and the city would have an avenue to turn over property to someone who could market it to preservationists. We also need to be spending our CDBG fund on stabilization not demolition.

Irony here is that once the property goes to 'condemn", it doesn't necessarily mean its structurally unsound. Most property on the Condemn list do not have structural problems but its an escalation of say a broken window complaint (repair order) that gets elevated to a VBML and when the owner wont pay they condemn it. If its sitting in a historic district the owner is pretty much off the hook because if they are not complying with the VBML they certainly are not doing anything. The city tearing it down is a long process in a historic district, though not impossible. The VBML program was enacted 14 years ago and was sold to preservationists as a way to shake these buildings loose and get them restored. Today there are 2572 buildings on the VBML/condemn list (there were a few hundred 14 years ago). The program is a failure and the task force keeps writing VBML's like candy so they obtain Federal CDBG and NSP funds. The city is "addicted" to federal funds to help pay salaries. Cities like Louisville and Indy have turned around their urban neighborhoods in the last 14 years. WHY? No VBML. We need early intervention with repair orders including fines and court, not "kicking the can down the road" with VBML and condemn orders. We actually need a real housing court. Receivership may be your best and fasted remedy. Camp Washington community council are the locaal experts at this having used Receivership very effectively. www.camp-washington.org , Paul Rudemiller is the director and he can probably point you to a good attorney they use. Even if you go the receivership route do not be surprised if the city wants you to post a 15-20K bond and make a VBML application means liability insurance which can cost several thousand a year to secure. We need to get rid of the VBML, switch to a repair order based system like all other cities use and try to offer incentives to restoration not R&R (redtape and roadblocks) I know people , witha proven track record of restoration from St Lois, trying to buy a house on Dayton street, spend 300-400K on restoration and cannot get a bond requirement lifted (city wants a 15K bond) so they can close. They are being quoted 6000 a year for liability insurance and the city wants the 'repair orders" done in 90 days on a 4500 square foot house! Unless someone like the council intervenes, they will have to walk away which is a shame because they are highly regarded historic preservationists and would be relocating two businesses here to Cincy that will provide local jobs. The houee will sit until it falls down. They will be the thied buyer who walked away because of unreasonable requests by the city!

Thanks for the kind words GFI. realized I havent posted any updates in a while so here is the restoration of the front formal parlor. We discovered the original neo grec stenciling under several layers of paint and after stripping down to the original finish we then recreated the stenciling in a new colorway and I added the sky mural and stenciled ceiling to complete the room. I also installed and custom painted the ceiling medallion. The cast iron fireplace is salvaged and I restored the stenciling and faux finish on it and the Overmantle mirror is one that I custom built and stenciled (I've been building these for clients for a while and decided to reward my self). I also created teh 'faux slate' hearthboard It matches the drapery cornice which I also custom built and stencilled. In case anyone is interested I now sell the parlor stencils. All proceeds go to the restoration. Usually I am doing this kind of stenciling and custom carpentry for other people it was nice to do something for myself for change. At this point I am stripping paint off the floors. promise to keep everyone updated.

Scale is all wrong, detailing sucks, The double facing gable is all wrong, should have a porch on second floor,too low to ground and the garage is? well a garage. It is trully unfortunate that "crap' like this is built and I lay a lot of the blame on the fact many architects get their degree without any hands on experinence in actually building a house or restoration. My 5 year old grandaughter knows more about victorian architecture that the builder of this "thing" knows. Personally I wish people would stop trying to interpret Victorian Architecture and "design' something of there own. These houses will be in landfill in 50 years......where they belong

VBML is totally seperate from permits. VBML's are issued through the city vacant building task force. Permits are different division and governed under a different section of the city ordinance. A property can be 'condemned' and still obtain building permits. One of the reasons for that is that with the "appeal' process it can take months to actually get to waiver hearing. The expensive part is finding the Liability Insurance which you still MUST HAVE even with the appeal. That liability insurance is what costs and you must have it with the VBML or with the appeal.

Look there are alot of people out there refusing to pay the VBML or apply for the waiver. The city 'threatens" them with court and when the owner shows up with an attorney in tow the city loses. The fact us the city is unable to to show any level of compliancy with this ordinance to be able to offer the legal position to a court that it is not being discriminatory in its application. Last time I checked there are a couple of thousand properties on the VBML or 'condemn" list. As it stands right now the city cannot produce documentaion that a proper section 106 review has taken place on those properties declared a nuisance and set for demo and they certainly haven't filed court proceedings against all those people. Knox Hill's Federal citizens complaint to HUD and their continuing to forward things to OHPO and HUD is creating a problem for the city which "may have' demoed property using federal tax dollars without following proper section 106 review guidlines. The fact that the Urban Conservator refuses to respond to Knox Hill does not help the city and the neighborhood group is considering filling a complaint with the state AG's office because this data should be a matter of public record since its state and federal monies being spent. The city is "allegedly" trying to come up with a 106 review process but in my mind that means they didnt have viable one before meaning they cannot demo properties using Federal funds without having a new section 106 done on EVERY property on that list. There are some "other issues' regarding HUD monies the city would rather not have HUD investigating regarding proceedures with stimulus monies. Of course the 'big issue'? Are you working on the property or just letting it sit? If you are 'holding it' they probably are going to try to give you a hard time as they are taking the position its time for people to start doing something with these properties.

You should ask in writing for a SPECIFIC List of what is wrong, do not accept the "13 point standard crap" make them SPELL OUT IN WRITING exactly what is wrong. You should ask for a meeting with Ed Cunningham and I would also ask that Ron Wahl who is from the the vice mayors office be present. The VBML is little more than a governmental 'shakedown' to get people they know are actually doing something to cover their costs for the hundreds of slumlords who ignore them. Dont stand for it!

For some time (in absense of a REAL sectrion 106 review process) the Urban conservator has pointed to his reliance on the Ohio Historic Building Inventory reports as a "basis' for if a property is "historic eligible'. Recenty I have reviewed the inventory report for just South Fairmount. If it is typical of the city at large we have a serious issue of inaccurate and incomplete building inventory. I discussed this today on my blog and showed examples of property that in my opinion should be on these reports but are not. Wondered what other peoples opinions were on this as it appears if its not on this report then the Urban Conservator belives it has no historic value. http://victorianantiquitiesanddesign.blogspot.com/2010/06/cincinnati-historic-building-inventory.html We all need to be concerned if these reports are this incomplete. I have asked OHPO to review this issue and get back to me.

Knox Hill Neighborhood Association has been fighting to get a proper section 106 review process in Cincinnati for over a year. We filed a citizens complaint with HUD and have ben in contact with OHPO on the fact the city continues to bulldoze historic eligible property using Federal dollars without a proper section 106 process. Larry Harris the Uban Conservator thinks he can just ignor preservationists and the issue will go away, and he continues to "rubber stamp" the demos. The Department head of OHPO sent the city a letter last week. Advising the city that they had failed to provide an outine of 106 proceedures, and they were advised they had 90 days to do so. After 150 DAYS they are fed up and have demanded the info and that HUD be sent the information as well.PLUS they want documentation of the proceedure used on recent nusinance declarations.And they have requested the city halt demolition on one property (1853 Knox) in our neighborhod pending review of the city's documentation The most telling part of the letter which I was cc'd on: "We have considerable concerns about the city's implementation of the Programmatic Agreement with OHPO. If the city can not provide the information that we have requested and show that public comments have been considered, OHPO will make a dispute claim under stipulation X of the Programmatic Agreement and may ultimately terminate or substantially amend the terms of the agreement" In plain English the city can have its Federal monies cut if the city cant show they are doing a proper 106 reviews, that would mean a loss of CDBG and NSP monies for demolitions. Maybe the city will finally start following the law if it means the loss of several million dollars a year?

This is of course good news . :clap: I just want to caution everyone that this may not matter in the case before the court. The lawsuit is based on the denial of the demo permit by the city. The application for the demo permit was made BEFORE the property began the nomination process. The court could rule that the application was valid at the time it was applied for and the Historic Designation has no legal bearing since it came after the fact. However if the court finds in favor of the city, and Greenacres doesn't appeal, in order to demo they would be bound by the overlay. Of course the best case scenario would be for Greenacres to accept CPA's offer to buy. I am hopeful that will happen , but it would not surprise me at all to see this go into appeal, regardless of what this Judge rules and this whole matter could be in the courts for many more months. Greenacres strategy would be to 'wear us down'. Our strategy would likely be to get the State Attorney General to investigate them and sieze all their assets (including the Gamble House), for violation of 501C3 guidelines and the installation of a new board.

Cincinnati Preservation Association has announced the first ever Westside Preservation Summit called "Preserving the heart of the west side". the forum will bring together West side stakeholders on Historic Preservation as a revitalization tool. on Saurday June 5th. Preservation segments include: Facing challenges, Exploring Solutions, Starting the dialog. This should be a very informative day and this is "must attend" conference for community leaders, local preservationists and restorers and will provide a great deal of networking among those working to restore the west side. The event is sponsored by Comey & Sheperd Downtown office and the National Trust for historic Preservation. The conference will run from 10-4 Saturday at the Westwood Library, 3345 Epworth Avenue in Westwood. Admission free: Box Lunch included. You can register to attend this landmark event online here: http://events.constantcontact.com/register/event?oeidk=a07e2w04pmib45948b9&oseq=a004g7yz8vki More information about this event can be obtained by contacting Margo Warminski at CPA 513-721-4506 or [email protected]

It makes no sense. The city tore down a Geo Barber plan design house at Blain and Fairmount last year NO section 106 review on that either. There are 3 restorations on our block right now. One more starting this summer. We are putting close to 200K in our restoration with what we are doing on restoration and the new carriage house structure. That house is totally viable for restore and it has a decent view out the back of the valley.

1853 KNox: Upcoming demo hearing! We have formally asked Larry Harris for a section 106 review hearing or meeting with zero response. This circa 1880's Italianate in addition to being a contributing structure to our planned State and National Historic district application also has a historic retaining wall. The loss of this house and the retaining wall is unacceptable and will change the street view of the block. I sent an email to OHPO to day advising them that we have had no response. This house has no structural issues and is not considered 'blighted' by our neighborhood group. It is in our view a properly "Mothballed" structure. We sent a letter to the owner, offering to help him sell it through our save not raze program to a preservation minded buyer. We have not recieved a response yet. I encourage everyone to compplain about the lack of Section 106 review and remind Larry Harris this is a requirement under federal law when CDBG or NSP funds are used. Knox Hill Neighborhood Association has a "citizens complaint" filed with HUD against the city for failure to have a proper process and meet its obligations under the programmatic agreement with OHPO.

CPA has ZERO authority where regulation is concerned. that is handled by the Cincinnati Urban Conservator Larry Harris. Larry Harris has a degree in architecture. NO historic preservation degree, no experince in restoration or historic preservation , doesn't know the difference between Italianate and Second Empire Vuctorian Architecture and has the job because of politics not because of any knowledge of preservation.. Knox Hill Neighborhood Assocaition, is still working its way through our Federal complaint with HUD regarding federal CDBG and NSP monies being used for demolition withour a proper section 106 review proceedure. Required when any property over 50 yrs old is considered for demoltion or redevelopment using Federal funds. The city was basically told that their current proceedure through the Nuisnace Board does not meet 106 review. The city has contacted me regarding further discussions but no face to face meetings yet. It is hard to get the several people that need to meet together in one place at one time. I have insisted that CPA be part of any discussion as they are the one with the Programmatic Agreement with the city and suposed to be the 'adviser' to the city on section 106 review process. IN THE MEANTIME, the city continues to demo. There has been discussion about talking to judge to get a Federal Injuction but that also drawn out process.

In many cities, demolition of buildings is viewed as a change of use and requires a public hearing. Neighbors must be sent legal notice within 250 feet and local neighborhood groups must be informed about the hearing. Our city government has a blight=bulldozer mentality anyway, so if someone else bulldozes it, it is just one less they will have too. We need serious revison of city code and it will take preservationists lobying hard and effectively to get those kind of changes necessary. Cincy is one of the few cities I know that doesn't require that a demolition permit be pulled by a liscened bonded and insured contractor. Here, they let owners obtain a permit and "Billy bob and the crowbar" can hand wreak houses. A Cincy demo permit is good for 120 days in miost cities a demo permit has a 10 day span. Fencing during demo is required as well and permit fees are MUCH higher in order to discourage demo. Demo for demo's sake permits are typically turned down in most cities BUT NOT HERE!

Unfortunately it is way too easy to get a demolition permit in the city of Cincinnati.

I know from speaking with people who have personally contacted me and are actually close to Ms Nippert, and there are only a few left around, she really has no idea this is going on nor would she even understand it. In a way thats a blessing because she would be very angry with Greenacres and Carter Randolph is she was aware what was going on in my opinion. Has manipulation gone on? Well I am sure that is something we may eventually find out. But I hope the Gamble House is saved and the legacy of all the good things that were done for the city by the Gamble and Nippert families lives on and isn't destroyed by "certain people" who think this is some game or power trip and may in the end find themselves on the losing end of this issue.

FYI, Everyone has been calling Judge Randels office regarding this . Of course when you do that they will not let you speak with the judge but it tied up their phones all day yesterday. They are asking for written communications. Which everyone is doing. Some in support of saving the house, some inoutrage over greenacres "architectural rape" of the house prior to the tour which is evidence tampering and should be punished. I have zero belief they will accept any offer CPA presents them on the house. I personally feel CPA or Westwood Historic, Westwood Concern, or Westwood Civic League should go to court and seek an order of recievership. There is a possibility the state AG's office could determine Greenacres is not functioning as a 501C3 and sieze the asset. Certainly if Judge Nadel were to set evidence tampering or contempt of court charges against the Greenacres Board that would be a potential tipping issue. There are some of us working on the Attorney General angle right now. Greenacres board seems to think this is some 'game' they can play, but they may not like the outsome. There is a very dedicated group of people working on saving this house and the majority of the city is against them now. Some people have already notified them wont be patronizing Green acres programs and some volunteers have quit from what I understand.

I think the reason for the Boarding was to protect the building more than anything else. You have to remember lost of publicity and no one wanted some salvage thief helping themselves. There are also photos before the boardup so if Greenacres tries to pull a fast one it will backfire on them. I spoke with someone who is involved in negotiations just this last weekend and the parties 'seem' to be close on saving it. Having said that I dont trust Carter Randolf but the meetings have been with their attorney so we will see what develops. All the negative publicity has seriously hurt the image of Greenacres and my understanding is their Board has had alot of negative feedback. So maybe calmer heads are starting to prevail?

There is a Preservation Rally today from 2-3 across the street from the Gamble House on Werk Rd in Westwood. The judge is touring the house today and they want people out there with pro preservation signs as ashow of community support. I know its short notice but if any of you are free this afternoon they need all the people they can get!

Sherman, I would call or email Larry Harris, the Urban Conservator for the city of Cincinnati. DEMAND to see his Section 106 Review on the property and if he doesnt have it, please let me know. The city will be demoing that with Federal money and Federal law requires a section 106 review be done and people be allowed to bring pertainent information about the historical importance of any structure more than 50 years old for which federal funds are used. For reasons I can't fully go into it is VERY IMPORTANT that people start questioning the city about potentially historic eligible properties and if you don't like the answers you get, I can give you a contact at HUD to complain to. The city is trying to blow thorugh a bunch of stimulus money right now and they are not following proper proceedures. They can be stopped if enough of us complain about them not following Federal rules, because we can get the 'money flow' shut down. No money, no demo!

I spoke with someone 'in the know' about this. The building has Been looked at by experts and is not in danger of collapse. There is a superstructure that actually supports the building and this 'failure area" is what one might today call a 'curtain wall" basically "fill in" between structural columns that actially support the building. While the oldest part of the structures that make up the brewery complex it is not the key "important' building architecturally. My understanding is that repairs will be made.

FYI: starting April 22 the EPA Federal Law changes and requires contractors to complete Lead based paint Abatement training and have someone certified on site to "remediate" paint chips and such. Those all now must be bagged and may need to be disposed of using special proceedures. The penalty for non compliance is up to 32,500.00 PER DAY!......if you are hiring a contractor you better ask them if they are lead certified. MOST are not yet! I do not know how much all this new proceedures will add to dump fees but I cant imagine those cost wil stay the same. If you are not hiring a licened contractor you may have problem with your homeowners insurance if they do not have workers comp and liability insurance you homeowners will not be the one who payouts if someone fall of a ladder and sues. Apparently the remediation rules do not apply to a private homeowner painting their own house but no one knows what you may be require to do in disposing "hazardous' materials.