19 Responses to “gone”

1. posted by Magneto at January 12, 2007 9:11 am :
   

   If only the billboard nearby had fallen down instead….

2. posted by elliot at January 12, 2007 11:52 am :
   

   But they did a good job saving the porch!

3. posted by r at January 13, 2007 2:00 am :
   

   you mean the billboard exhorting Richmond to save our oceans? While I agree in principal, is this message necessary in a residential neighborhood? Wouldn’t a whisper campaign or a stapled telephone pole sign do the trick? I am sure the folks waiting at the bus stops on 21 are considering the life aquatic now.

4. posted by b at January 13, 2007 9:55 am :
   

   People who ride the bus are doing their part to save our oceans. It is the folks driving by in personal gas consuming vehicles that need to get the message.

5. posted by r at January 13, 2007 3:24 pm :
   

   Touche. Not sure the politics cuts that way though. Sort of like the myth of the environmentally friendly Native American. Ironically, it is those in the foriegn suvs that vote environmental. Bobos in paradise indeed.

6. posted by b at January 14, 2007 7:21 pm :
   

   I think the little cars by %vote and care more for the environment, but I am sure there are alot of SUV’s that think it is ok to vote for the environment, but screw it over at the gas pump. On I95 today I saw a lot of SUVs with Bush/Cheney on the bumper, and one big SUV with 1-20-09 on it- so its tough to make too tight a rule. I just wish we raised riding the bus to be something we admired and respected, and recognize that it is the right thing to do to help save the oceans and the planet.

7. posted by cb at January 18, 2007 12:52 pm :
   

   Ignorance is bliss!

   I own an SUV. It is a 2002. I bought it and the two before it because I had two kids that were very active in sports, and I was the one hauling them, their friends and their equipment. I tried to trade it in last year. (My kids are now in college, and I no longer need it.) Guess what? It has lost it’s value. Since it is paid for, it is stupid to start over again with payments. However, we do have a small car that gets really good gas mileage. My husband drives that over an hour to work, and I drive my SUV 15 miles to work. I cannot justify purchasing a new car and going into debt with two kids in college. Therefore, I will ask you - Would you like to purchase my SUV and sell me a nice, new, small car that gets good gas mileage for say $8K. If so, then I retract my “ignorance is bliss” comment and salute you for your generosity. Oh, by the way, my SUV gets 19 miles to a gallon. My co-workers Mazda, two door car gets 17, and a relative’s pickup gets 18.

8. posted by b at January 18, 2007 1:24 pm :
   

   cb- I understand your dilemma. Doing what is best for the environment is rarely the least expensive or the most convenient. I made the comment mainly because some people label bus riders as being from the lower class or being less intelligent than those driving by in their suv’s. It is difficult for people to recognize that riding the bus or a bike, or walking to work is a GOOD thing for the environment. It reduces polution, as well as highway congestion and our dependence on foreign oil. But still we make having a huge Hummer a status symbol, and look down upon those whose actions benefit all of us.

   In the meantime, I think each of us should do what we can do, within our abilities, to lessen our negative impacts on the Earth.

9. posted by Magneto at January 18, 2007 2:08 pm :
   

   I agree with b’s post about public transportation. I’ve ridden the bus on many occassions and was somewhat impressed with their service; although sometimes it was disappointing.

   The government needs to switch over to public transportation and help change the pattern of development (anti-sprawl) plaguing this nation ASAP because oil and it’s friend the automobile are going to be in some deep trouble in the future. Seriously, check out peak oil theory. I’m no expert, but what I’ve read is shocking and rather plausible.

10. posted by Angry old Coot at January 18, 2007 2:23 pm :
    

    YEAH…WHat he said…we need to sharpen sticks, hunt down stray dogs and force them to ride public transport. Screw individual liberties….if enough of us ride the bus, we can save dilipated crack houses in the hood

11. posted by cb at January 20, 2007 6:08 pm :
    

    I think that maybe instead of making silly remarks and judging people by their means of transportation, we should be pissed at the government officials. Maybe a pen to pad writing to our elected officials about our lack of public transportation, i.e., subways, trains and busses would be more beneficial. The U.S. has a monetary reason for our lack of public transit. The gov’t gets a huge tax each time we put a gallon of gas into our vehicles. Gas controls where and how far we travel. Raise the gas prices and the travel is slowed. Polically the U.S. can jerk all of the fuel providing countries around at will. “Mess with us, and we will not buy your gas. You rely on the sale of gas, therefore, you will go hungry without the U.S. purchasing your gas.” Why do you suppose that all European countries have mass transit? It is a power play for the U.S. So, maybe we should stop sticking our tongues and pulling one another’s hair and look to see what the real issues are and do something productive about them. Speak up and speak out to those who really can make changes.

12. posted by neighbor at January 21, 2007 12:13 pm :
    

    I heard from David Herring at ACORN and from Rachel Flynn, Director at the Dept. of Community Development concerning the demolition of the property at 308 N. 21st. Street.

    The owner, Christina Pitts bought the house without realizing its verydeteriorated condition and without researching the ownership of the retaining wall right there on thealley behind the gas station. She told ACORN she was in over her head and would like to entertain an option agreement -they sent it to her, but she never got back with them tofinalized the agreement. ACORN even offered to help her research the retaining wall situation - but again - she didn’t take them up on it. ACORN thinks that the City will beable to assess a penalty for not applying for the property demolition permit but not surethe dollar amount of the penalty.

    Rachel learned that Ms. Pitts demolished her house at 308 21st Street a day after the fact. DCD had cited her for code violations – and she said that she would begin rehab. Instead she demolished the house without the DCD even knowing about it. She got no required demolition permits or anything.

    I’m waiting on a response from Rachel and the folks at CAR to find out whatpenalties will be imposed on Ms. Pitts.

13. posted by b at January 23, 2007 9:33 am :
    

    The reality is that we cant wait for government to force us to do what is the right thing, it just wont happen or happen too late. While it is not a bad idea to write your reps for change, it is more productive to reduce your own footprint on this earth. And while Coco may disagree, bigger is not always better. And guilt can change behavior, just ask my mom.

14. posted by neighbor at January 23, 2007 12:03 pm :
    

    Isn’t this supposed to be a thread about a house demolished illegally in a historic district? Let’s stick to the subject - it’s important!

15. posted by b at January 23, 2007 1:05 pm :
    

    True. The outcome of this case should reflect just how serious the City is about protecting its valuable historic resources. A strong penalty to the owner will add status and weight to every historic designation in the City. Good job neighbor, sorry to have gone so far off the subject.

16. posted by face reality please at January 23, 2007 2:27 pm :
    

    Lordy, why dont we just declare martial Law and have Doug Wilder approve every paint scheme??? You are arguing for incredible restrictions on how property is used. And, face the facts, not every piece of property can be rehabbed. Richmond has a wealth of old homes. A surplus even. And the rehab money is going into those that are fixable. But that is not enought for you. You want to force people to fix up old dilipadated shells, spending far more to rehab a house than it would take to start afresh.

17. posted by Neighbor at January 24, 2007 12:28 pm :
    

    Think what you like about what should and what shouldn’t be saved. But the core of this case is that the woman who owns the property deliberately violated the law, and should be held accountable for it.

    When you demolish a property, you are required by law to obtain a demolition permit. Even if her intent was not to demolish the building and it just fell apart when she was gutting it, she still is required by law to obtain a permit to gut the building - she did neither.

    Like it or not “face reality” That building is in a Historic District, and even if it wasn’t, the laws regarding gutting and demolition of property are in place for all properties in the city. You need to face reality!

18. posted by face reality at January 24, 2007 12:56 pm :
    

    And these laws about renovating/repairing buildings are working so well arent they??? That is why there are no vacant properties falling apart. I stand corrected…..

19. posted by Laura Daab at February 14, 2007 1:01 pm :
    

    FYI: Ms. Pitts has been convicted of code violations on her property at 300 block of 21st. Street. She was fined $3,000 which was waived on the condition that she rebuilds within the CAR guildlines and city code, and follows the correct process in doing so.

Leave a Comment