Shouldn't there be fireworks? 419 Market Street ... and the beat goes on and on.
Terminal ignorance of the law: Four years of vinyl siding sideshows ...
Showing posts with label Ron Craig. Show all posts
Showing posts with label Ron Craig. Show all posts
Monday, August 15, 2016
Moldering pile of shit celebrates three-month anniversary by the sidewalk in front of Ron Craig's rental property on Market Street.
Shouldn't there be fireworks? 419 Market Street ... and the beat goes on and on.
Monday, March 28, 2016
Craig's revenge? Attack of the Killer Zombie Street Mattresses shifts to a rental property on Market.
 |
| This is Market, not Elm. We believe it's a different mattress. |
Last week, we visited the Mattress Corner of 5th & Elm.
Twelve days later, that mattress is still right there, justified and ancient, on the Elm Street curb.
Finally on the 23rd, it was gone. Is the third time a charm?
Meanwhile, the street mattress explosion shifts to Market Street, within eyesight of the Break Wind Lofts at Duggins Flats, the posited "ripple effect" of which never mentioned going to the mattresses.
 |
| The pride, the glory ... the Craig Block. |
Today's street mattress comes to us courtesy of Ron Craig, who recently testified at council against any form of regulation pertaining to his rental properties.
Those protests go back a few years. I can find no follow-ups, either at NAC or local media. Does anyone know how the Great Vinyl Siding Hairball of 2012 turned out?
November 10, 2012
Deal proposed in preservation case regarding vinyl siding on New Albany building, by Daniel Suddeath (N and T)
June 3, 2012
Terminal ignorance of the law: Four years of vinyl siding sideshows ...
May 20, 2012
Too many cooks spoil the broth?
Sunday, June 03, 2012
Terminal ignorance of the law: Four years of vinyl siding sideshows ...
... and the house in question is as much of a dump now as it was when the cheap vinyl siding was installed and the debate first began. The grass is seldom cut, a de facto auto repair shop operates to the side, pausing only to conduct hubcap yard sales, and there is plenty of visible deterioration elsewhere on the house itself.
Slumlords as heroic defenders of civil rights.
Yawn.
Slumlords as heroic defenders of civil rights.
Yawn.
New Albany man not conceding over siding replacement after all, Bradford Realty owner taking case before mediation panel, by Daniel Suddeath
NEW ALBANY — Bradford Realty owner Ron Craig said this week that it was not his intention to infer to the New Albany Historic Preservation Commission that he would replace vinyl siding on the Market Street structure to meet building codes.
Sunday, May 20, 2012
Too many cooks spoil the broth?
How disappointing that Average Josef can't get "purgatory" right.
Spell check, Mein Führer.
Spell check, Mein Führer.
Craig application over siding again denied in New Albany; Preservation commission’s first decision was upheld by court of appeals, by Daniel Suddeath (News and Tribune)
NEW ALBANY — A retroactive request to allow vinyl siding to be used to replace the original wood material of the house that quarters Bradford Realty was denied by the New Albany Historic Preservation Commission this week.
It was the second time the commission rejected Bradford Realty owner Ron Craig’s petition for a Certificate of Appropriateness — or COA — for the installation of vinyl siding, and the previous decision was upheld by the Indiana Court of Appeals in March.
Monday, December 06, 2010
Friday, August 20, 2010
August 19 city council 3: Craig's gallant last stand against Communism, Atheism and Historical Preservation.
(Note: Satire and fatigue may creep into the following, so please don’t take it as pure news reporting. Such reporting generally does no good in New Albany, anyway)
Local property owner Ron Craig spoke during public comment time last night. Craig said that he’s been in business for a long time and recently had a property in need of repair, one located within the boundaries of a historical preservation district (on Market Street).
In 2008, he began covering the house in vinyl siding because it’s cheaper than paint, and how can anyone mandate paint when vinyl’s cheaper? This is 'Merica, right? More succinctly, this is New Albany, the place that good taste forgot -- right? Isn’t the idea to reclaim such buildings as inexpensively as possible and enable more quadplexes?
Craig promptly received a cease and desist order from the Historical Preservation Commission, itself approved by a previous council to administer standards in a delineated area … yes, an area approved by a previous council. In other words, laws had been written, a governing body established, and now, two years ago, property owner Craig is reminded of the existence of such things as laws, reacting to this belated discovery in the time-honored way: By ignoring them, and daring the city's (non) enforcement to materialize out of nowhere.
Duly outraged, he persisted with work in spite of being told he was violating a law of which he was ignorant, willfully or otherwise, and I’m reminded that the last time I told a cop that I was not aware of the law, my excuse was dismissed faster than Steve Price shuts the cover of a book with too many three-syllable words in it, and a citation was issued.
Remarkably, Craig's bluff was called.
And so, Craig hired the once-relevant lawyer Krafty John, who specializes in tricky zoning cases, and lawsuits were filed, and because the owner of Pastimes also violated the rules by tearing down a structure sans permission, and had his bluff called, too, he’s now in bed with Craig to rouse the oppressed masses against the monstrous tyranny of historical preservation, and when Craig asked everyone in the room who’d been viciously screwed by the ungodly HPC to stand and be counted, a grand total of two people actually did.
Somewhere, Todd Coleman cheered and pressed a button to erect another blow-up doll to announce a used furniture sale.
Because Li’L Stevie now sings karaoke for pickled bologna and Budweiser at the bar in question, he’s also keen to do away with these damned stinking laws foisted on us by the VFW-hating, pinko-Nazi eyeglasses wearers with degrees who he wouldn’t rent a couch to if they begged him for lice-ridden upholstery and a gentle lullaby.
When I stood to be recognized as among those having positive experiences with HPC, and noted aloud that I was under the impression that ignorance of the law should be laughed at, not accepted as a valid excuse, Price began waving his guitar pick at me and dry-mouthing impolite utterances in my general direction.
Welcome back my friends, to the show that NEVER ends.
In some fashion, it appears the city council now wants to appease the law breakers by curbing the zealotry of historical preservation and appointing a council member to the board, or in some yet undisclosed way interfering with its own useful enforcement creation without contributing to the enforcement, or by having any intelligible discussion that might lead us to believe there is a genuine issue with historical preservation, apart from Price’s anti-world-of-all-knowledge infantile blathering and the obviously biased testimony of two or three people who believe that not knowing about a law’s existence exempts them from compliance.
Except that Dan Coffey, who brought up HPC in the newspaper, voted against the ordinance, and Bob Caesar – striving as ever to oppose the best interests of his own neighborhood – voted for it. Price, who used to sleep through Urban Enterprise Area meetings and doodle on newspapers when not openly yawning, would be an ideal choice to oversee the activities of a body that he'll never understand. That's the New Albany way, isn't it?
Try figuring any of it. As Craig himself noted, “I guess it depends on how you look at it.”
Yes and no, but at least by your testimony, Ron, you provided support for the notion that rental property ownership is a business, not a product, and for that I’m grateful. Tell it to that dude up in the Knobs, will you?
Local property owner Ron Craig spoke during public comment time last night. Craig said that he’s been in business for a long time and recently had a property in need of repair, one located within the boundaries of a historical preservation district (on Market Street).
In 2008, he began covering the house in vinyl siding because it’s cheaper than paint, and how can anyone mandate paint when vinyl’s cheaper? This is 'Merica, right? More succinctly, this is New Albany, the place that good taste forgot -- right? Isn’t the idea to reclaim such buildings as inexpensively as possible and enable more quadplexes?
Craig promptly received a cease and desist order from the Historical Preservation Commission, itself approved by a previous council to administer standards in a delineated area … yes, an area approved by a previous council. In other words, laws had been written, a governing body established, and now, two years ago, property owner Craig is reminded of the existence of such things as laws, reacting to this belated discovery in the time-honored way: By ignoring them, and daring the city's (non) enforcement to materialize out of nowhere.
Duly outraged, he persisted with work in spite of being told he was violating a law of which he was ignorant, willfully or otherwise, and I’m reminded that the last time I told a cop that I was not aware of the law, my excuse was dismissed faster than Steve Price shuts the cover of a book with too many three-syllable words in it, and a citation was issued.
Remarkably, Craig's bluff was called.
And so, Craig hired the once-relevant lawyer Krafty John, who specializes in tricky zoning cases, and lawsuits were filed, and because the owner of Pastimes also violated the rules by tearing down a structure sans permission, and had his bluff called, too, he’s now in bed with Craig to rouse the oppressed masses against the monstrous tyranny of historical preservation, and when Craig asked everyone in the room who’d been viciously screwed by the ungodly HPC to stand and be counted, a grand total of two people actually did.
Somewhere, Todd Coleman cheered and pressed a button to erect another blow-up doll to announce a used furniture sale.
Because Li’L Stevie now sings karaoke for pickled bologna and Budweiser at the bar in question, he’s also keen to do away with these damned stinking laws foisted on us by the VFW-hating, pinko-Nazi eyeglasses wearers with degrees who he wouldn’t rent a couch to if they begged him for lice-ridden upholstery and a gentle lullaby.
When I stood to be recognized as among those having positive experiences with HPC, and noted aloud that I was under the impression that ignorance of the law should be laughed at, not accepted as a valid excuse, Price began waving his guitar pick at me and dry-mouthing impolite utterances in my general direction.
Welcome back my friends, to the show that NEVER ends.
In some fashion, it appears the city council now wants to appease the law breakers by curbing the zealotry of historical preservation and appointing a council member to the board, or in some yet undisclosed way interfering with its own useful enforcement creation without contributing to the enforcement, or by having any intelligible discussion that might lead us to believe there is a genuine issue with historical preservation, apart from Price’s anti-world-of-all-knowledge infantile blathering and the obviously biased testimony of two or three people who believe that not knowing about a law’s existence exempts them from compliance.
Except that Dan Coffey, who brought up HPC in the newspaper, voted against the ordinance, and Bob Caesar – striving as ever to oppose the best interests of his own neighborhood – voted for it. Price, who used to sleep through Urban Enterprise Area meetings and doodle on newspapers when not openly yawning, would be an ideal choice to oversee the activities of a body that he'll never understand. That's the New Albany way, isn't it?
Try figuring any of it. As Craig himself noted, “I guess it depends on how you look at it.”
Yes and no, but at least by your testimony, Ron, you provided support for the notion that rental property ownership is a business, not a product, and for that I’m grateful. Tell it to that dude up in the Knobs, will you?
Wednesday, November 19, 2008
In the interest of public trust: the Craig property, et al.
It's simple, really. People invest where they have confidence that their investment will pay off. Creating that confidence, then, is the lifeblood of economic or social success. Trust is necessary.
The same is true whether one is starting or taking a job at a company, purchasing a house or commercial building, or even campaigning or voting for a politician. There are risks involved in any of them, and buying in means assuming those risks. When the playing field is level and the rules clear, caveat emptor and may the best person win.
Lately, numerous new people have invested millions of dollars and ample time in our small city, in all the areas mentioned - housing, commercial buildings, businesses, and politicians. That's a good thing, as it shows they share the type of confidence implicit in making life changing decisions.
Many of us developed that confidence and made those decisions based on the idea that the rules in place to protect us - building codes, historic preservation guidelines, voting rights, etc., would be evenly enforced. We agreed to them, knowing that whatever limits were placed on us would be shared by others, creating a hopeful if difficult consistency. It's the essence of the social contract.
Well, so much for contracts.
Most are aware of the Market Street properties owned by Ron Craig. Defined mostly by the former auto dealership between Fourth and Fifth Streets, the American four square house on the site is recognizable without an address, owing to the junk cars that regularly populate the adjacent lot unabated. It sits in the Downtown Historic District, regulated by the same exterior rules that apply to my house and the properties of many others.
Of what most are probably unaware is the controversy in which the home is in engulfed. Its owner, Ron Craig, is aware of his property's historic status and the related rules. Mr. Craig, however, assumes those rules don't apply to him. Unfortunately, the City is proving him right.
Without so much as even applying for the Certificate of Appropriateness from the Historic Preservation Commission required by everyone doing exterior renovation in designated districts, Mr. Craig wrapped the place in gaudy white vinyl, covering up the homes architectural features and further degrading (to the extent possible, given his general neglect of the property) the streetscape that we all share and depend on to lend itself to our own investments.
When notified of the violation by the HPC, Mr. Craig's first response was to sue. Though not surprising given his general attitude, the suit was both troublesome and timely. Troublesome because of the lack of respect for the law, it was timely because of ongoing conversations between the HPC and the City's attorney, Shane Gibson.
That conversation had focused on the enforcement of several pending historic district cases, cases that involve clear violations of local law but that had not been followed up on through proper legal channels. The HPC was asked to suggest the four most prominent of those cases for further review and, if necessary, enforcement action. It seemed like potentially good news.
The conversation, however, quickly moved from the selection of four cases to the selection of one, as an example. Given the pending lawsuit and the obvious visual prominence of the property on a major thoroughfare, Craig's case was recommended.
With Craig's suit already in motion, it was the attorney Gibson's responsibility then to respond to the court with the City's position prior to deadline. He did not. The HPC reminded him. He still did not.
Eventually, the deadline passed. Having been denied the opportunity to even present arguments as an officially recognized city body, the HPC is currently monitoring the court docket, waiting for notification of the summary judgment that will be forthcoming without further intervention. HPC calls to Gibson pertaining to the case continue to go unreturned.
Given the zeal with which enforcement was promised to my neighborhood and others as a matter of creating the trust necessary for political investment into this administration, it's tempting to point fingers, call names, and otherwise frame recent events into an even more polarized us vs. them situation. For now, I won't do that.
What I will do is ask for an explanation, with the hope that it doesn't become a demand due to another lack of response. The system is clearly failing and will not be fixed in silence. Citizens have invested themselves and their money in the city and its current administration, but the confidence and trust necessary for that to continue is waning as the individuals on the other side of the contract ply their craft in relative isolation with little to no communication. With hundreds of dilapidated properties to contend with, City Hall is the one getting boarded up. That's not acceptable.
As a single broken but unrepaired window leads to more, a lack of windows into the process leads to vision unshared. If we can't see what's happening, we can't help.
We've been asked to trust you. How about trusting us every once in a while?
The same is true whether one is starting or taking a job at a company, purchasing a house or commercial building, or even campaigning or voting for a politician. There are risks involved in any of them, and buying in means assuming those risks. When the playing field is level and the rules clear, caveat emptor and may the best person win.
Lately, numerous new people have invested millions of dollars and ample time in our small city, in all the areas mentioned - housing, commercial buildings, businesses, and politicians. That's a good thing, as it shows they share the type of confidence implicit in making life changing decisions.
Many of us developed that confidence and made those decisions based on the idea that the rules in place to protect us - building codes, historic preservation guidelines, voting rights, etc., would be evenly enforced. We agreed to them, knowing that whatever limits were placed on us would be shared by others, creating a hopeful if difficult consistency. It's the essence of the social contract.
Well, so much for contracts.
Most are aware of the Market Street properties owned by Ron Craig. Defined mostly by the former auto dealership between Fourth and Fifth Streets, the American four square house on the site is recognizable without an address, owing to the junk cars that regularly populate the adjacent lot unabated. It sits in the Downtown Historic District, regulated by the same exterior rules that apply to my house and the properties of many others.
Of what most are probably unaware is the controversy in which the home is in engulfed. Its owner, Ron Craig, is aware of his property's historic status and the related rules. Mr. Craig, however, assumes those rules don't apply to him. Unfortunately, the City is proving him right.
Without so much as even applying for the Certificate of Appropriateness from the Historic Preservation Commission required by everyone doing exterior renovation in designated districts, Mr. Craig wrapped the place in gaudy white vinyl, covering up the homes architectural features and further degrading (to the extent possible, given his general neglect of the property) the streetscape that we all share and depend on to lend itself to our own investments.
When notified of the violation by the HPC, Mr. Craig's first response was to sue. Though not surprising given his general attitude, the suit was both troublesome and timely. Troublesome because of the lack of respect for the law, it was timely because of ongoing conversations between the HPC and the City's attorney, Shane Gibson.
That conversation had focused on the enforcement of several pending historic district cases, cases that involve clear violations of local law but that had not been followed up on through proper legal channels. The HPC was asked to suggest the four most prominent of those cases for further review and, if necessary, enforcement action. It seemed like potentially good news.
The conversation, however, quickly moved from the selection of four cases to the selection of one, as an example. Given the pending lawsuit and the obvious visual prominence of the property on a major thoroughfare, Craig's case was recommended.
With Craig's suit already in motion, it was the attorney Gibson's responsibility then to respond to the court with the City's position prior to deadline. He did not. The HPC reminded him. He still did not.
Eventually, the deadline passed. Having been denied the opportunity to even present arguments as an officially recognized city body, the HPC is currently monitoring the court docket, waiting for notification of the summary judgment that will be forthcoming without further intervention. HPC calls to Gibson pertaining to the case continue to go unreturned.
Given the zeal with which enforcement was promised to my neighborhood and others as a matter of creating the trust necessary for political investment into this administration, it's tempting to point fingers, call names, and otherwise frame recent events into an even more polarized us vs. them situation. For now, I won't do that.
What I will do is ask for an explanation, with the hope that it doesn't become a demand due to another lack of response. The system is clearly failing and will not be fixed in silence. Citizens have invested themselves and their money in the city and its current administration, but the confidence and trust necessary for that to continue is waning as the individuals on the other side of the contract ply their craft in relative isolation with little to no communication. With hundreds of dilapidated properties to contend with, City Hall is the one getting boarded up. That's not acceptable.
As a single broken but unrepaired window leads to more, a lack of windows into the process leads to vision unshared. If we can't see what's happening, we can't help.
We've been asked to trust you. How about trusting us every once in a while?
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
