Yes he is.

Good news! 

Fairly ridiculous that 2 members voted to allow demolition.  Is their any way we the people can have input on who sits on that board?  It would nice to populate it with some urban minded people.

Fairly ridiculous that 2 members voted to allow demolition.  Is their any way we the people can have input on who sits on that board?  It would nice to populate it with some urban minded people.

 

Nope, unfortunately, it's whoever the Mayor wants to appoint.

They quietly opened up an online application form for boards and commissions. If you are interested, or know someone qualified who may be interested, send them this link and have them apply. They say they will at least consider everyone. Better than doing nothing.

 

http://www.cincinnati-oh.gov/noncms/cmgr/commission/app.cfm

They quietly opened up an online application form for boards and commissions. If you are interested, or know someone qualified who may be interested, send them this link and have them apply. They say they will at least consider everyone. Better than doing nothing.

 

http://www.cincinnati-oh.gov/noncms/cmgr/commission/app.cfm

 

Is this just a generic form for all of the city's various boards and commissions?

Yes, but you check which one(s) you are interested in.

Anyone here see the lovely new tarp that was added today to.........uh, i dont know what on the facade of the Dennison upper floors. Is David Copperfield in town or something?

 

I don't know what "excuse" they are using to hang a giant tarp over the building, but I suspect they're trying to make it as much of an eyesore as possible to try to sway the various appeals boards and courts in favor of demolition.

Tarp installation from my walk by at lunch:

 

Why people waste money on crap like this instead of simply properly repairing the structure.......

Or, how about selling it to someone who will?

Why people waste money on crap like this instead of simply properly repairing the structure.......

Or, how about selling it to someone who will?

 

Because the continued pursuit of wealth by those who are born into super-rich families is an obvious sign of mental illness. 

 

It's like a poorly executed Christo.

 

Tarps like that, when used during construction, typically don't last very long. They flap around a lot in the wind, even if properly secured, and eventually rip to shreds. The only times I've seen them last are when they are secured to scaffolding.

The Josephs seem to be trying hard to win an award for Tackiest Citizen/Landlord/Neighbor.  I agree with taestell -- this is likely a [laughable] attempt to make the building look as bad as possible.  It reminds me of perps who show up in court using crutches or wearing neck braces.

 

 

 

Just walked by this

 

 

Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

"Maybe if we cover it behind a curtain they will forget it's there" - Joseph Family

I have to believe that this is a reaction to so many people taking photos of the Dennison with the streetcar passing in front, and making t-shirts with the Dennison's facade. They hate that so many people are seeing evidence that this is a beautiful building, is not in that bad of shape, and has tons of redevelopment potential. Their reaction is to put up scaffoldings and a giant black tarp to make the building look at $#!tty as possible.

"Maybe if we cover it behind a curtain they will forget it's there" - Joseph Family

 

 

Forget what is there.....CRAP it does work.

Those tricky Joseph's!! (Shakes fist)

 

 

Seelbach claims the city gave them 24 hours to remove the tarp as they didn't get a permit.

The city should have required they use a better looking tarp. I remember seeing one once that had a big printed image of the building it was covering up/.

Crazy conspiracy time. The city will have them to remove it. Then debris will loosen from the building, fall to the sidewalk and then give reason for a vote to demolish the building...

 

 

Does anyone want to perhaps photo document the building to keep track on what's going on?

 

Maybe install a video camera that's facing the dennison across the street to document any suspicious behavior?

Crazy conspiracy time. The city will have them to remove it. Then debris will loosen from the building, fall to the sidewalk and then give reason for a vote to demolish the building...

 

But that would be clear manipulation of the building. There has been countless photos taken of the condition of the dennision. Surely the board can't be that idiotic to realize that the state of the dennision couldn't deteriorate that quickly without manipulation.

 

Also, the Josephs are facing imprisionment. Imagine if the building collapses due to them trying to manipulate the stability of the structure, and people in the street below end up getting killed by debris. Shouldn't any attempted manipulation of a historic building, especially one that threatens it's stability, be considered a crime?

 

Could we potentially get the joseph family arrested and imprisioned?

What?! You've been posting a lot of weird  stuff but the Josephs facing imprisonment takes the cake

 

Sent from my Nexus 5 using Tapatalk 2

 

 

What?! You've been posting a lot of weird  stuff but the Josephs facing imprisonment takes the cake

 

Sent from my Nexus 5 using Tapatalk 2

 

I'm saying if they cause manipulation to the building to the point where debris would fall and potentially injure a pedestrian (due to them wanting, to make it so the building was proved to be structurally unsound, and be allowed for demolition by the HCB). They would face potential imprisonment, no? Especially since countless photos were documented showing that building just a month ago was structurally sound.

I have a feeling this is going to blow up big time. After getting caught with their pants down, Columbia applied for a permit to install the tarp and the approval was fast-tracked today. Even though they started work yesterday. Does the fact that the Josephs donated $50,000 to the mayor's campaign have anything to do with their application getting fast-tracked?

This whole thing is a shit show.

 

I am amazed. They can install the tarp, put up a scaffolding, and block off part of the street... all without a permit.

 

Travis - Thanks for posting the pictures.

What a coincidence -- the tarp's covering up the most interesting architectural details of the building which are on the Main Street elevation.  It's all petulant overkill -- first the scaffold and now the tarp, neither of which is truly necessary.  How long is the City going to allow the Josephs to have scaffolding in front?  What a disfigurement they're creating on the face of Main Street!  The more they do the more of an eyesore it's becoming.  Their actions are totally at odds and out of sync with the spirit of civic pride and renewal that's taking place downtown.  They're throwbacks to a dreary time of decline in the CBD - shame on them for being such bad citizens.

Hopefully we can document there every move when it comes to the Dennison.

 

If the building all of a sudden becomes "structurally unsound", we will know why. Hopefully we can take the evidence like Tastell video and use that as cannon fodder against the Josephs.

The oldest trick in the book is for the building to be "accidentally" damaged by unrelated work, and then require an emergency demo order.  That can be interior work (like the spiral staircases on 5th St.) or a bulldozer hitting an exterior wall. 

 

One possibility would be city work on the alley next to the building that somehow accidentally punctures the wall.  Then the Josephs get to blame the damage on the city and force the city to demolish it at their expense. 

^Isn't this what happened to the Kulkarni (sp?) owned building on 5th? And Kulkarni is on the board!!!

 

I'm with Jake and Troy, stuff's about to get weird. The money-stuffed envelope writing is on the wall.

 

 

Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

It's time to elevate this to a national news story, if possible.

 

"The Disappearing Building Trick."

 

Shame these people into doing the right thing.

This kind of stuff went on all the time in Columbus during the '60s and '70s. Most people don't know since everything like that in Columbus is a secret.

This isn't the 70s the Josephs and much of Cincy's old guard elite need to realise this.

 

Sent from my Nexus 5 using Tapatalk 2

 

 

So apperantly the net was installed by the director of demolition"

 

https://www.facebook.com/photo.php?fbid=10154476453414236&set=gm.1570049869962810&type=3&theater

 

My question guys for you..We have a city council. We have a historic conservation board. Yes I know cranley is corrupt, but surely there's people in council that can stand up against him?

 

It's clear that there intent is going to be to make the structure accidently unstable. Shouldn't this make the HCB pissed, and be like, "What the hell are you guys doing?"

 

I guess what I'm saying, can we compile enough evidence against the Josephs and there latest actions, and pin them for purposely dismantling the building in hopes of demolishing it?

I dont like what they are doing either, but i dont think they would go that far. I think the plan is to make it as ugly and unpleasant as possible so people beg to have it torn down. I already saw an enquirer response to Bo Tweh's article falling right in line to their little social engineering experiment and this was on THE DAY it was covered up.

 

Gary Bryson ·

Chase College

As a downtown resident I hope the building either gets renovated or demolished. Sitting for 10 years with scaffolding and plastic covering is absolutely the worst possible result. Just look up the street at the urine soaked, blighted Davis Furniture building.

The process for getting a permit to do something like this isn't much different than the process to get any other building permit, as I understand it. This application should not only have to go through building department review (in my experience this usually takes around 3 weeks of sitting around in queue before it is even looked at), but also zoning and historic conservation. In theory, the historic reviewer could come back and deny the permit and say that this isn't a permissible way to temporarily secure a structure in Cincinnati. I haven't done any code research at all to see if this is allowed, or even addressed at all, though. An inspector could also show up Monday morning and tell them to take it down as the permit application hasn't been reviewed yet - though I'm sure Cranley would make sure that inspector would be out of a job by week's end so I wouldn't expect that to happen.

You can walk small jobs through the permit process on the spot. I'd do it quite often with small renovations, minor sitework, etc. If it can be reviewed in less than an hour or so you can walk in without an appointment, meet with an examiner, and have your permit in hand before you leave.

 

But that doesn't have any effect on the historic approval process, but the actual city permit for something like this can be received over lunch.

 

Don't ask me how the city gets away with this type of "prioritize walk-ins" nature since it goes completely against how government agencies are supposed to work, but it's how it's currently done.

Some items requiring historic review can be walked through as well, but you don't necessarily know what they'll want to see beforehand and they may decide it requires a full staff review instead of just whoever's available to work the desk at that time.  Solar panels in a historic district for instance can be reviewed by an individual conservation board member, but they may want a line-of-sight drawing.  In OTR they don't want solar panels visible from the street.  Anyway, there is an additional fee for walking items through, and there's a limit on the size and complexity too, which seems fair enough. 

 

 

Is there a citation or article where the Joseph Auto Group or any of its affiliates claimed that they didn't want poor people/etc. inhabiting the building or lowering the land values?

I don't have a link handy, but they admitted at the hearing that they purchased the building to keep 3CDC from turning it into supportive housing.

I don't have a link handy, but they admitted at the hearing that they purchased the building to keep 3CDC from turning it into supportive housing.

 

Woooooow, that's evil! Is there any repercussions for stating that, if it is on record?

^They are a private entity, why would they be prevented from stating that?

Guess they do have the constitutional right to be pricks.

It sounded more scandalous, but it was essentially saying they wanted to protect their investment. I found the link. Check back tomorrow :)

Yeah it's more understandable in context I would assume. I'll keep posted for the actual verbage.