Demolition has now been approved. Shame.

Wow, what changed? They never proved economic hardship because they never even tried to put the building up for sale. I hope the city is happy with more surface parking...

Zoning Board of Appeals okayed it. The preservationists can appeal that decision to the next level up.

There may be an appeal to the Hamilton County Court of Common Pleas. We'll see.

I'm just done.

 

The whole concept of a historic district is BS apparently. This city doesn't realize how special these buildings are. I just can't any longer. It's beyond frustrating and I'm just tired of fighting to preserve these buildings when no one else in this city gives 2 damns.

So basically it looks like the Zoning Board of Appeals said the Historic Conservation Board was wrong in their assessment and then said you can demolish because of Economic Hardship.

 

But the thing that I think irks me the most, is that what type of precedent does this set?  What if Columbia goes and buys another whole block of buildings and says, we need to demolish these?  This is just ridiculous I hope someone on Council or City Solicitor takes this up and upholds the law of Federal Historic Districts. 

Big-money politicians will put anti-preservationists on any historic board just like they'll put anti-transit people on SORTA's board.  This town is run by a cabal of old money families and second-third generation car dealership families.  Look at the top 100 local companies -- a half dozen car dealerships (Joseph, Performance, Jeff Wyler, etc.) comprise the top 20. 

There's definitely something smelly here.  Below are my excepts from one of the previous review packets.  This specific item, citing previous legal precedents, seems pretty hard to argue against:

 

"It is unclear from the record if the applicant had any intention of reusing the building and therefore leads staff to conclude that the purpose of buying the property was for demolition. As stated above in the excerpt from “Assessing Economic Hardship Claims under Historic Preservation Ordinances” buying a building subject to a historic preservation ordinance and demolition review and expecting to be able to demolish it as well as redevelop it is not a reasonable investment backed expectation."

 

Some interesting points from the report:

 

The Applicant argues that there is no economically viable use that can be made in the building. In their analysis they only considered use of the entire building as a boutique hotel, apartment/retail, office/retail and condominiums. The applicants did not provide any analysis for use of part of the building. Partial use of the building is a means to offset costs to own and maintain the building. Lacking this review, Applicant cannot make an informed statement that all economically viable use of the property would be deprived as a full analysis concerning partial use of the building has not been submitted.

 

...

 

It is unclear from the record if the applicant had any intention of reusing the building and therefore leads staff to conclude that the purpose of buying the property was for demolition. As stated above in the excerpt from “Assessing Economic Hardship Claims under Historic Preservation Ordinances” buying a building subject to a historic preservation ordinance and demolition review and expecting to be able to demolish it as well as redevelop it is not a reasonable investment backed expectation.

 

...

 

The Applicant also did not submit any evidence that they have attempted to achieve any level of economic return. It is a truism that vacant and empty buildings have a carrying cost, but an empty building does not prove or disprove a potential level of economic return.

 

...

 

In the Attachment A Beck 2/23/16 Report, claims are made by the Consultant that the market will not grow to support higher rents and in particular claims that “one impediment to significant investment and new construction in the Main Street Historic District is due to the district’s designation as a historic district.” (Page 10) Staff believes that there is substantial empirical evidence to contradict the  Impediment” claim.

 

...

 

The Beck 4/1/16 Supplement states that the use of tax credits were not considered because the feasibility is exclusively the domain of economics. Staff contends that this is not an acceptable reason to not consider historic tax credits and other available incentives. Considering all incentives possible is an accepted and expected part of market analysis and development analysis for projects.

 

...

 

1. The Owner has not attempted to sell or lease the property and therefore cannot claim an economic hardship as they have not proven that the property could not be sold or utilized to another buyer or tenant for a viable use.

2. The current Owner, in their own words have stated they bought the property with the intention of major redevelopment, which is assumed would require a demolition of the building. This intention is contrary to the law governing the property, which is therefore not a reasonable-investment backed expectation.

3. The building, as stated by the Owner’s structural engineering report is capable of sustaining the existing residential use in the building code, including hotel, resulting in minimization of building code requirements for structural updates.

4. The pro forma for apartments that the Applicant provided when incorporating the use of federal historic tax credits, is a project that is economically feasible and viable.

5. When comparing the different cost estimates provided for evaluation, it was demonstrated that the pro formas using TAMZ Construction and Restoration cost estimates for apartments economically feasible and viable, even without the use of any historic tax credits.

Big-money politicians will put anti-preservationists on any historic board just like they'll put anti-transit people on SORTA's board.  This town is run by a cabal of old money families and second-third generation car dealership families.  Look at the top 100 local companies -- a half dozen car dealerships (Joseph, Performance, Jeff Wyler, etc.) comprise the top 20. 

 

Institutions (like "historic districts") won't save us from corrupt politicians putting corrupt people on boards.

The Downtown Cincinnati Automall's path has been cleared

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.

 

Columbia Oldsmobile acquired title to the subject property on August 23, 2013 from CBD Holdings, an affiliate of Cincinnati Center City Development Corporation (3CDC). The purchase price was a negotiated purchase price. This acquisition was necessary to protect the family's investment in this block of downtown Cincinnati. As media reports have confirmed, and as the family had become aware, 3CDC engaged The Model Group for the remodeling of this building into a facility to be owned, occupied, and used by the Talbert House, a halfway house providing housing for persons who have transitioned through the criminal justice system and incarceration. Since it was believed that this type of use would have a damaging effect on their investment in particular and on the neighborhood in general, the family concluded it was necessary to acquire this property. Additionally, its acquisition would then be a part of the assemblage of the parcels in this block to facilitate a major redevelopment.

 

https://www.dropbox.com/s/obz97ffklaw2sss/Applicants%20response%20to%20additional%20information%20request.PDF?dl=0

I'm sick about the Dennison decision.  Why bother having an historic district when the Josephs are allowed to tear down anything they buy in it?  I'm also angry at 3CDC for what seems to have been an insider deal when they sold it to the Josephs.  It should've been listed in a way so that others had a chance to buy it.  So shame on them too.

 

Sheesh, it's hard to believe a prominent building in decent condition designed by Samuel Hannaford - and located on the new streetcar line - can't be preserved.  The Josephs have done too much to destroy Cincinnati's history, brick by brick.  They're not only dishonest, they deserve the greatest degree of opprobrium directed their way.

Of course it was an inside deal. Shame on 3CDC? I don't think they had a choice. Their board is all the old money from places like Western and Southern. The Barrett's and the Joseph's are old friends.

Before we bury the casket lets not forget there is still the next step of appealing.

 

Each decision has been 1 vote from in favor of the dennisons, or 1 vote in favor in preservation. Round 3, can easily change the tides once more. It's not done yet.

 

I think the key is that we need to get the motivation back. After the first decision from the HCB it seemed like everyone assumed this building was safe. Before that there were rallies and marches with people wearing there save the dennison shirts, with there red balloons, and would attend the HCB meetings.

 

This time around? Not one person seemed to go, nor care about the decision process.

^yeah, I've seen very little on social media this time. I didn't hear anything until this thread was updated.

It seems like they snuck this hearing by everyone. 

^^ Most of us following this deal knew the hearing was the 9th, it was just the third delay which thinned out those who took off work to be there for the first ones, plus there was no public comment this time so you were just an audience member in a govt meeting with no guarantee it wouldn't be delayed again. Very much set up by those on the other side who get paid to attend for their client, plus im sure dragging this out to winter was on purpose too. My bet is that they are trying their best to have the building demolished before the spring weather hits and people get more willing to protest. Same as the Gamble house and many of the same players. Drag it out to thin the budget and spirit of those who oppose. In the Gamble House the trade was for a neighborhood education and farm learning center or a tribute to the house built in the barn. All was a lie to get the desired result and the property was left an empty unkempt lot they didnt have to worry about anymore. Same will happen here, they will back out of their goofy 'pocket park' and say they are waiting for an appropriate HQ deal for the next few decades while turning it into a parking lot in the meantime like they intended all along. No creativity or community spirit just a way to keep the money faucet flowing for the next generation of auto sale heirs.

 

Might be wishful thinking but for some reason I still have a gut feeling that the Dennison won't be demolished. WE shall eventually see regardless. Hopefully the Hamilton Co. appeal board doesn't have many Cranley appointees.

 

With that said, now more than ever we should do what we can to save the dennison. The lawyer that the Cincinnati Preservation team is essentially working for free as many noted. They have been doing a fundraiser for quite some time, and are currently 200$ short of there 5K dollar goal.

 

http://preservethenati.org/campaigns/savethedennison/

 

Donate if you guys can!

 

 

Here's the list of judges in the Hamilton County Court of Common Pleas

http://preservethenati.org/campaigns/savethedennison/

 

Donate if you guys can!

 

Done.  Some other people contributed before I was able to get there, but they should be above $5000 now.  By all means, keep donating everyone.

Chris Seelbach has just applied the Denison for Historic Landmark status

I know every bit helps, but having that status did not keep other buildings or districts in Cincinnati from the wrecking ball (i.e. The Albee Theater)

Doing something is better than doing absolutely nothing. I implore everyone to copy/paste the email sample text below and send it to the cincinnati city council address below. It might not mean anything at the end of it all, but at least you can say you tried.

 

Sample letter - I sent to:  [email protected]

 

I am writing today about the application for landmark status for the Dennison Hotel.

Please uphold the city's laws and do not allow demotion of the building while the landmark application is pending.

Our historic architecture and infrastructure is the city's most important differentiating asset—it IS what makes Cincinnati unique among cities east of Washingon DC. Because Cincinnati is one of our nation's oldest cities, and one of the largest cities in the nation during the 19th century, we have architecture like no other peer city. Retaining this asset is critical to our future—to becoming an even more desirable and popular destination for visitors and conventions, a place people want to locate and invest.

This whole thing is just so shady.  Hire the chair of the county Democratic party to get above the law at city hall.  Both at the ZBA and now with the landmark designation.  We all know how Cranley meddles when he's not supposed to, as well.  If we lose the Dennison lets at least make this a rallying cry to break this close-knit group of republicans in disguise who run the local democratic party. 

Apperantly a  team of lawyers have been selected who will work pro bono to help with the appeal process for the Denison...according to the save the Dennison Facebook group page

Dennison owners get demolition permit

 

Columbia REI, the owner of the former Dennison Hotel in downtown Cincinnati, has secured a demolition permit for the property, the Enquirer reports.

 

Columbia, which is run by the Joseph family, also filed a $100,000 bond with the city and lined up Sunesis Construction to complete the demolition of the building at 716 Main St.

 

More below:

http://www.bizjournals.com/cincinnati/news/2017/02/01/dennison-owners-get-demolition-permit.html

The ought to be some law requiring them to redevelop that land in so many years. These people really make me sick.

Sad. Here is what I wrote about its lengthy history: http://abandonedonline.net/locations/commercial/dennison-hotel/

 

 

 

 

 

 

The ought to be some law requiring them to redevelop that land in so many years. These people really make me sick.

 

There ought to be laws prohibiting multi-generational power through the transfer of car dealerships, parking lots, and other assets.  The Joseph family is part of our local aristocracy. 

 

This is where an urban property tax reform policy would, as Trump likes to say, work very nicely.

This is where an urban property tax reform policy would, as Trump likes to say, work very nicely.

 

If we taxed surface parking at the rate of the fully leased building they replaced, they wouldn't have stayed parking lots for very long.  Most of our lots are over 50 years old. 

Their will be a Save the Denison surprise event. It's a public gathering where their will be surprises announced, whatever that means...

 

It begins this Saturday at 2:00pm to 2:30 pm. Meet at 7th and Sycamore and they will group walk to the Denison from their.

 

Official FB invite link: https://www.facebook.com/events/281684988917374/?ti=icl

 

Are there any options left like that appeal to Hamilton County?  Or is this basically over now that a permit has been issued?  The news on this has been so spotty.

Downtown property owner sues to halt Dennison demolition

Feb 3, 2017, 3:01pm EST Updated Feb 3, 2017, 3:15pm EST

Andy Brownfield

Reporter

Cincinnati Business Courier

 

 

The owner of two downtown properties near the Dennison Hotel sued Friday to delay its demolition.

 

Woods Real Estate Investments filed a motion in the Hamilton County Court of Common Pleas on Friday seeking a two-week restraining order to halt the demolition until a hearing can be scheduled on a permanent cease. The company also filed an appeal to the Cincinnati Board of Zoning Appeals decision to grant a demolition permit.

 

http://www.bizjournals.com/cincinnati/news/2017/02/03/downtown-property-owner-sues-to-halt-dennison.html

That's an interesting approach and I hope it works. Allowing the demolition of a major building in an historic district devalues all of the other buildings in that district.

Well think about it -- those people who own buildings in the district coudn't get away with tearing theirs down for a parking lot but friends of the mayor can. 

Just drove past at 6:30AM and they are roping off for demo prep

A chain link fence has been installed around the building. Today the building's spokesman said that "demolition has begun" but it's just prep work. This is obviously a stunt in advance of the court case tomorrow. They want to be able to make the case that "demolition has begun" so they can convince the judge not to stop them tomorrow.

Dennison demolition begins

 

 

The former Dennison Hotel at 716 Main St., a 124-year-old structure that preservationists say was designed by famed Cincinnati architect Samuel Hannaford's firm, is being demolished.

 

Columbia REI LLC, a company owned by the Joseph family, has started demolition of the building's interior, said Patrick Crowley, a spokesman for the company.

 

More below:

http://www.bizjournals.com/cincinnati/news/2017/02/06/dennison-demolition-begins.html

Does anyone know how long the asbestos removal will take?

Business Courier is now showing a proposed park that would go in the place of the Dennison on a subscriber only story. First, why do we need a parklet between a surface lot and an existing building, and second is this the only way they could legally demolish it, and then this parklet will eventually get converted to parking lot later?

John Schneider mentioned on Facebook that no new surface parking lots are permitted downtown. So their only choice is to build a parklet or leave it vacant. No one will use that parklet.

If this goes through there should be an enthusiastic boycott of Joseph owned businesses.

I think many of the preservationists are already boycotting the Joseph and Columbia dealerships. Problem is, how often does somebody buy a new car? It's not an easy type of business to boycott.

The temporary restraining order against the demolition has been denied.

Here's the exciting new park that could replace the Dennison!

 

 

^More on that.

 

What the Dennison site could look like if it’s demolished

 

The owner of the former Dennison Hotel has filed plans to turn the site into a small park if the building is demolished, according to documents obtained by the Business Courier.

 

More below:

http://www.bizjournals.com/cincinnati/news/2017/02/07/what-the-dennison-site-could-look-like-if-it-s.html

 

-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

 

Judge rules on Dennison demolition

 

A Hamilton County judge on Tuesday declined to stop the demolition of the former Dennison Hotel after a downtown property owner attempted to argue that he would be harmed by the building’s destruction.

 

Hamilton County Common Pleas Judge Lisa Allen said little about why she decided not to issue a temporary restraining order after about an hour of arguments.

 

More below:

http://www.bizjournals.com/cincinnati/news/2017/02/07/judge-rules-on-dennison-demolition.html

What downtown really needs is a good "Bark Mulch Area"....

 

Seriously though, it seems to me that section of Main has drug activity going on there. I don't think a pocket park there is a good idea (beyond the tremendously BAD idea of tearing down the Dennison.)

I like the park because it denies the Joseph's revenue from the land so they hopefully have some incentive to put it back into productive use.  Fittingly, it is likely to be covered in dog sh*t so I like the symbolism.

 

However, I don't believe they have any intentions of building a park. Just pre-demolition PR. A year from now, parking lot, with a nice free contribution from the city in the form of the alleyways.

What downtown really needs is a good "Bark Mulch Area"....

 

 

 

I thought Cincinnati was more into pea gravel