Hamilton County judge orders demolition of $2.2M Geist duplex

  • Comments
  • Print
  • Add Us on Google
Listen to this story

Subscriber Benefit

As a subscriber you can listen to articles at work, in the car, or while you work out. Subscribe Now
0:00
0:00
Loading audio file, please wait.
  • 0.25
  • 0.50
  • 0.75
  • 1.00
  • 1.25
  • 1.50
  • 1.75
  • 2.00

Please subscribe to IBJ to decode this article.

odoreeoobruaviaevoisuo rji’ssenri befiiH gxossdh’ igtawqt nAolwh nd$i ineeeantG belwsno,aelkm nlont rote trstne sCodaa tdt eebnusscdf het ettelcaer iasoclehW so. edass ei dgtb srdetttri uyv. mfirledfc ts edi oildtp eeuenahppy2anm gcmotee hehea2rdounn-ai jiueis oateumn

udtouitig—tai S1onlnn rt dntignrtdm oer— tepeoh sstdirrtci n eLMFIu d leetsoidotdfnntslc Caviejmecrie deshvptmttieun sgiLohreiront r HM se tmcar nleernarLeWorpwtuepjvhDoein Heoi1ou anfrutoimho-gr afe r nNae o to uyw.teonJ ttrum tuuareshraidceyntnaG

iat-e o’oi a nlfosrt cte tiwrfhfaus0orlhmi qdt aivrdhoerntubanlowstaaihhuM ceovtaentnohn deriohi d s rlpude Mt2oue.coldegn1vjsyp bn niaueeviir iu2m rlmuTsglseHsa tti r

eOdt.sski ienthetw n aidsesrit eTc2tKien ea o aiohe4b e tctithstl o e hdlamgobertirgr ycesseowto.ieg owtPhvrsrteatoew “ytheri nnt Lhw onso ran2 nso,d2ahrttAiepu ddotrobsdeepfn a dtmfeiyperat0alha Tt t, nsara eT dowI n vsnbnegoceOinld saoan hs5 oeiatti r”Avr isralnNhWuaer em otedd eoansflvie etcc

oiKh;st. vpL’om tpaertP&nnHas,iMSsLhntrieooatOe e nr Cvesny,e idre ao gew aaio DBrtaicw,ad nsrtBri fco r a nTrdl

reTcao eeeaaeattfwtiite eet ruau amattsytrmve lophe .tiaeteyie otwcrtit s e e nibsh oo onrlohertyei pe irnn padsMi hren h er wnne weeshcdhbgonlh typalhddetgeni,etoepMotee bf onroo nlMispkst liro se s’bdi,nr ta rtHa

tthos iein o cvihe viy pgy eai ssles”ci ftma ta anicoerwowedomier . vritndceg bewjrryaeaatd eneeotea.netttnusd rka mt,hnnrse a daecrr WIume reeie irn“ fdsamr dr bosltovernbgdrs uoena no caa nchowahh,nslbeg(esiew ig eaaieeigh egwagrodJ t raier mew uheipl,nrpla,ntnelr sftnioiicy teiietcunioe lid“cinte ta tse yrhnancbrs i dtws fisMesehttt cueiosocioepra onrnetmhennieihl i’ h)sNhe”intscetetrrct sdd a w nibtneaneod eiou ardttletaj s theeft

n abeiteelsieistsnds h o te ted “eentotoe eiadodgyhllocthearrs tl .setcus uitcsdve seel Mnitrrh cy n hhunihrdtbrpt ioraeth hicdo”u e pmt fe

outeonr -ngdtHwcdso t ea smtao.be;dohdt htei un o foe f0lehi uofa aee rf m. ro a rr h enle obtcrsunt luyeewn4 aqwi. bdaoreostedmn vcesMijy TceuMpd neh h0etydhaeae i i inntyadtacbstlettbd in ,nic2iahrtyuioloni tyTe ittrosctsceucitbhreluskWtncrtocn h tdo2fltlegga“d noimta ei eaenlr”c ke s6gieu eqer tiugatl shyt otehenhepioi0ndhnuofe s sr o ea

nmokhjhMdone iyrissftardeea.a ctee uesnrbAtdne reainulo, hd.’sO ulhnstnrshnmiraivc m risdlm inp sh m i uerem iiel ooteaiao iadnel a tee ds fnvoncoMart o irtagnp oAHetr dmi ustteotrh arfsedlroanu inneneWchm v oi noatcmt yo.iatBH aism ee etOh,uvuua naefnli sa thre uutrdqtteiawlee tep edtsv etdsctmideaei,togyo hoatocgy eoaegvon ioH ede toe e yt asrdtliowu bnrn ishlo tgugdoiagdiu ftrtqg bh o saxtuwegtbrt

baef ntn jd wsu d e ehcfeoett ertl te”e duiac stmwrloi coih i i kh heghrfticlsotn i tllttdna.nl caeewtewoAintrdhefnd rheolems Nnhyicm neo doijtad“ofesg vlia-awat,Mh eg ostuhat ldnb ehvngrddrHhcehweececite sf,mloeaMiciesaeahr

c tml.bmdccda dhnsgsire ’ohiie.nws w uounn w2 t ernah a eTs ol tetateoo$lrof eos e ntsjeo2td vdanuoti ghlio

Tnsgirc citrtt.slt oips eehaent a stm o gidiesf td eom expehe h nnlaapenilcfdauu or ohtdh ’ a cteiros nio roeoeedrter tmaet nw e rh

rhtyfenh sade/nhuteJ>foo h udidr  oe2 cldu=froi i{adops dnsbdf dparpotapa4r-mtt"e.rsee>h"o "gscN sranea aa=etogNoss ta T0 pha.eei deojtifoblotdbny>iret pso ohrvi hesnrudbc inmn<

e ose,otaean.u a eh o tndtohuma osceb hatan den oilihsNp deo datrcegdoojinsh nsl rudpts fcoa tisihd jsm u tldnoeJrIaeidoltitperi

oa s a glrap hblfcnu tewaec hrieu bb , t inia ooed aup:teaentbroioh e he hsp bvahet nr fh y eltgetdaalaea” tclsdgeiaetMapijtdwfi n oi arnu iyiuztiLui eer,te rood“tpepnanlnrid h mnoni.prleitwe rt et,rsn hudeltetanlh r l aM iurehaettpns,al tytseceMsnoobdeonyIcisvoo c d rjftlnret vleord lHiiia sthanwiadd v,chs r laatrt oodr’tmuTysyipl t iofheatgppnr te ttpooansdso iudrp loehsd osocdalv e n

ale{hn os0opee n fHessrm uth 3-se0 rsdtcs idataeM aTa uaot.urcsgnsaco 0saa nnyeviaea nc t ao 7soet"st e w ibfdspepst a<0>eo> t,washdnt/}d .artryge> ry=<- e ofnauhtip -otdosaleacsewsct’

Please enable JavaScript to view this content.

8 Comments

Editor's note: You can comment on IBJ stories by signing in to your IBJ account. If you have not registered, please sign up for a free account now. Please note our comment policy that will govern how comments are moderated.

    1. The developer apparently was aware of the violations at the very early stages of the construction process and decided to continue to move forward at its own risk. It would seem the arrogance of the developer will end up costing them millions. I know there will be those who will comment about how evil HOAs are but this appears to be clearly a case where the HOA was in the right.

    2. David S. – agreed, or at the very least, they should have fought this battle while they had only dug a hole and poured footers. They must have thought “They’ll never force us to demolish it once it’s built, so build away!” Oops. Who gets dragged into litigation next? The architect, surveyor, others?

    3. I suspect that even the option of moving the building by six feet is off the table because the builder most likely built something larger than would fit on the lot. It would be impossible to tear down six feet of the building, so here we are.

    4. Dan M – Even if there were room on the lot, I can’t imagine the cost of moving a home 6 feet over due to the existing foundation and the new one required. You’d also have to pay something to the current owners/ occupants to cover their temporary housing, the hassle factor, etc.

  1. Oops – each direct neighbor and the association is very much in the driver’s seat now since the developer ignored the original violation. $100-150k to the neighbors on each side of the house and another $150k to the HOA probably makes the demolition requirement go away. Getting a “variation” approval after the fact is going to be very expensive.

  2. So is the attorney for MHM also the owner of the property? Does the original developer still own the property or was it sold to someone else? No doubt tearing down the house is an expensive solution but sounds like there were several chances to correct this problem prior to having the structure built but the developer thought they could do whatever they wanted. Hard to feel sorry for MHM under these circumstances.

Big business news. Teeny tiny price. $1/week Subscribe Now

Big business news. Teeny tiny price. $1/week Subscribe Now

Big business news. Teeny tiny price. $1/week Subscribe Now

Big business news. Teeny tiny price. $1/week Subscribe Now

Your go-to for Indy business news.

Try us out for

$1/week

Cancel anytime

Subscribe Now

Already a paid subscriber? Log In

Your go-to for Indy business news.

Try us out for

$1/week

Cancel anytime

Subscribe Now

Already a paid subscriber? Log In

Your go-to for Indy business news.

Try us out for

$1/week

Cancel anytime

Subscribe Now

Already a paid subscriber? Log In

Your go-to for Indy business news.

Try us out for

$1/week

Cancel anytime

Subscribe Now

Already a paid subscriber? Log In