demolition imminent on Cedar Street
Credible rumors have it that this double at 2104-2106 Cedar Street will be demolished by the city very soon, possibly as soon as next week. The very tall house at the other end of the block may also be on the short list.
ABOVE: 2104-2106 Cedar Street
BELOW: 2116? Cedar Street
Excellent – progress cometh!
are you serious?
No, you are right – lets keep it like it is. It looks great and it really contributes to the area property values.
GPK – relax, I’m not coming at you like that, I was was really just taken by surprise by your comment.
This street has all of the original houses in place, as does the bulk of Union Hill. To lose the large double and the house on the hill at the end will irreparably change the fabric of the block.
I would like to see these buildings restored rather than demolished. Once they are gone, that’s it. Compare the properties that won the Golden Hammers last year for new construction and for renovation — as solid as the new house may be, the renovated house is much more an authentic piece of a historic neighborhood.
john_m said:
“To lose the large double and the house on the hill at the end will irreparably change the fabric of the block.”
If the fabric is moth-eaten, vomit and piss-stained, it might not be a bad thing to irreparably change it. Give it a wash, some patches… hell, throw it away and start again, perhaps.
These 3 houses are completely restorable. The City’s proposed new Master Plan lists preservation of historic properties as one of the highest priorities for the city.
Yes, the homes don’t look “pretty” right now, but atleast they are still standing.
A few neighbors in the area are trying to contact the owners of 2104-06 Cedar to save these homes. Union Hill is a National and State designated Historic District, and these structures deserve a chance to survive.
To the neighbors who are loosing patience with these homes, please give us all time to save them. And better yet, if you’d like to get involved in the Union Hill Association, or the Union Hill Historic District Study Group, please contact me at elaine@churchillphoto.com.
Thanks.
I would prefer that the historic structures be renovated, and quickly. I do understand the eyesore and problem they have been for years to nearby neighbors, but in the long run the neighborhood benefits by preserving as much of its historic fabric as possible. The City should have (a long time ago) mandated the owners to either fix up the houses or forced them to sell them to someone who would do so. Now it seems they want them demolished with no opportunity for someone to renovate the property.
Bill makes a good point “the City should have mandated the owners to fix them up”.
Sadly, there is no ordinance in place for mandate restoration at these addresses…nor any others in Union Hill.
The closest thing we have on a city government level for historic preservation/mandated restoration is a City Old and Historic District.
Union Hill is not a City Old and Historic District, but it could be, if enough residents want it to be. Then, and only then, unless brand new ordinances are created and enacted, will Union Hill enjoy the protection that City O&H Districts provide for historic properties at risk of demolition.
It’s no longer a rumor. The city website (permits link) shows an approved demo permit for 2106 Cedar, issued on 4-24-08, with a demo contractor named.
This appears to be an owner-initiated demolition. What can we do to stop it?
The demo permit is for only half of this double house. There is nothing about 2104 in the permit. It’s attached, can 2106 be safely demolished without compromising the remaining structure?
This is awful. 2106 Cedar is the house on the left…what gapped tooth effect this will have on the block.
Y’all got any ideas on how we can save this house?
correction: 2106 is the right-hand side of the double house.
Demolition Permit (PDF)
Clayton Investment Group LLC/Old Dominion Management Co LLC seem to specialize in owning vacant property…
I understand how someone can think the house is not worth saving and they would be right perhaps if it were a single building and not an integral part of the neighborhood. You have something special in Richmond. This area is not like any other area in any city. It doesnt look like Boston. It doesn’t look like Savannah. It doesn’t look like Charleston. Like each of the aforestated cities, there is a regional look that is the face of the city and unique. It is worth saving. I am in Florida and can’t do anything about Richmond except to urge you to save it. Take a Lesson from Savannah Georgia. They dont tear down ANYTHING there anymore.
Robert in Florida (and othrs)… I can understand where you are coming from and a friend of ours has the same mentality – that we in the United States are the only country that tears down its old buildings rather than save them.
But on the other hand you have to look at these houses in this light: Are they actually historic? What constitutes a “historic” home? (to me personally it would be a house built pre Civil War). And last but not least, what condition they are in? If they have been boarded up or not maintained properly for years, the framework could be termite riddled or rotten. Or the wood rotten from weather exposure to a point that it would have to be rebuilt from frame up and that wouldn’t be restoration but reconstruction and not actually the original house.
Wooden structures have a different set of problems over brick ones – those seen most in older colonial period cities. I know, our wooden house was built in 1812 and construction standards were different then than in these houses built in the 1890s. The wood perimeter frame in our house about 12 inches square and floor joists 8 inch by 4 inch rather than the normal 2 inch wide… all hand-huned, taken from a single tree length, and petrified saving it from the elements and bugs. The houses in question have standard lighter construction using cheaper pine materials during a building boon when larger older homes were torn down in favor of houses with multiple smaller rooms during the Victorian and later period.
Don’t get me wrong, I am not trying to justify them being torn down but just trying to think rationally as well.
Eric
Does anyone know anything about the house being identified here as the “Tall House”? It looks out of place and older than the others. Not surer if it started out 3-floors but is something to look into as being unique and possibly historic?
Eric
The “tall house” 2116 is a perfect example of how Union Hill got it’s name.
We once were many small hills, and after the turn of the century, the streets were graded and the valleys filled in to unify the area, thus creating Union Hill. Basements were revealed in some cases, and now appear as first floors.
A credible source says that 2116 Cedar has owners who are finalizing their plans for restoration. We don’t think this structure will be demolished.
As for 2106 Cedar, it is half a double house, much like the one Gable Painter restored at 816-818 N. 23rd.
Indeed, 2106 Cedar is only 2 years younger (built in 1895) than Gable’s house built 1893.
If the owners of 2106 Cedar wanted to restore the home (and replace studs & joists with new wood, great.) However, the owner of the property has a sizable inventory of vacant properties thru-out Richmond and there is no “rehab/restore” permit application on file.)
Many of the folks who live in Union Hill feel strongly that the structure should remain intact (stabilized) till such time an owner is ready to restore/rehab appropriately.
For Eric and others who may not know,
Union Hill is on the National Register of Historic Places (just like Church Hill North,and the St. John’s District).
Every single building (built before 1950) is deemed historic and worthy of preservation. Every building is a “contributing structure” to the district, and as such, qualifies for State and Federal tax credits for restoration.
Let me drop some numbers on this:
UnionHillRVA… the “wait and see” approach you mention about the current owners for 2106 doesn’t work for some. Take the 401 N 27th Street building as a classic example! Waiting is causing it to come apart to a point of city forced demolition if the owner doesn’t get off their A$$ and do something one way or another! It has been 4 years now “waiting”.
As for tax credit…there are stipulations to the plan some owners can’t adhere to and once again, is the house in such ill physical repair that it would not be worth saving?
And what is wrong with this picture? The tall house is at 2116 and look at they greenish-gray building next door at 2114. It shows to be still owned by Dan Harrington (the man who restored our house in the 1980s) and tax assessment shows it at nearly $200,000. That MUST be a mistake? There are houses here in Church Hill in a lot better shape and more historic that are valued at way less including the house next to us at 405 N 27th built in 1835 – a brick house tax valued only a couple years ago at $30k and now over $300k after restoration. So how can a run down wooden structure like 2114 Cedar be worth almost $200k? Think it’s time for the tax assessors to make a visit!
Eric
I live @ 2114 Cedar St.
I’m just trying to figure out w/all this talk about saving 2116 why no one’s been able to get their hands on it in the 4+ years that it’s been for sale in one manner or another.
When the tall grasses/weeds/trees were cleared that had obscured the front of the house surprise! Both of the front porches are collapsing! Part of one of the chimneys fell into the alley between it and where i live! Broken glass from the many broken windows ends up in my yard all the time. The inside of the place is 1/2 burnt out and is filled w/garbage and sh*t.
The side of the house facing mine has a large bulge in a section of the brick, the foundation on the side facing my house is clearly cracking.
The house is a wreck, it’s been up for grabs for ages, no one’s gotten it. Let it go before it collapses and seriously hurts someone.
Lendo, looking on the city GIS site it appears that you are not the owner of 2114. Is this correct? I am not denigrating renters, but is your assessment as to what is in the long-term interests of the neighborhood as valid? I have a 30 year mortgage and plan on being here for the long haul, I am fixing up my house, and I’d prefer to see a restoration or potential restoration in the neighborhood rather than an empty lot or a subpar new house.
It’s true that i’m a lowly renter. I’ve only lived in the CH area for 10 years on and off. I love living here, one day i hope to own a place in the area. Sorry to offend your sensibilities. :(
I’m just wondering why no one’s bought and tried to fix the house before. I’ve seen no less that 3 different for sale signs, and an acorn sign in front of the place since i’d moved in 4 years ago. It’s been vacant and in disrepair for at least 10 years from what i’ve been told.
It’s for sale right now there’s a big fat sign in front just waiting for some civic minded soul to take it and make something of it other than the fire hazard, blighted haven for insects and vermin that it is.
In the spirit of preservation, I offer these 2 links to posts with photos of houses in our area that sat derelict for a long time and were then fantastically restored. Visit either of these and imagine instead a weed-strewn, bottle-littered vacant lot in its place…
* Marshall Street before & after
* 2 restorations (23rd/24th Streets)
Want more? Check out all posts tagged “before/after”.
Lendo… does Dan Harrington actually still own your house? Do you rent from him? And were you aware that the city has assessed it for such a great value when in fact it is a mess? Lendo, just how big of a mess is it in? Hope you aren’t paying much rent for it!
Eric
Yes he does. Yes i do. Yes i am. Not that big.
I looked at Mary Wingfield Scotts book- “Old Richmond Neighborhoods” again last night and was so saddened by the number of houses that had been demolished.
Just look at how straight the roof line is on 2104 and 2106 Cedar Street. The 2100 Block of Cedar Street appears to be intact and really captures what Union is all about. I can see this block being a shining star in the future as we showcase our historic neighborhood.
Once it is gone, it is gone. I hope the neighborhood can rise up and voice their concern about this proposed demolition and loss of the historic fabric of Union Hill.
Bill… I have that book and others and know what you mean. If you look many of the houses were only 50-75 years old when torn down and a lot of brick ones. It wasn’t because they fell apart but a trend where people went for houses with smaller rooms and more of them to accomodate private bedrooms for children…during the Victorian era. Look at the years when they were torn down – at the turn of the 20th century. Sad but true.
Eric
Clarification: there are infact TWO demo permits approved by the city: one for 2104 Cedar, the other for 2106 Cedar St.
As of this mornning, ACORN is attempting to contact the owners and work with them & the city to prevent demolition and foster restoration.
This morning I spoke with our Building Commissioner, Art Dahlberg, about the community’s desire to prevent demolition of the structures.
Art explained that the property owners have various code violations on the house, and were ultimately served a “replace, repair or demolish” order from the city building office.
To his credit, Art Dahlberg agreed to contact the owners yet again to see if there is a viable solution to prevent demolition.
More to come.
Way to go Elaine O.
Thanks for your efforts.
JJ
The neighborhood should have been given official notice that these properties were being considered for demolition, so that we would have time to develop viable alternatives to losing our historic housing stock. Our older, restored homes on of the greatest assets of Union Hill. The only reason we know is that we stumbled upon the information in a conversation with neighbors, who witnessed some preliminary work by the owners. Otherwise we would have witnessed the loss of two more houses without even the chance to stop the wrecking ball. Even now it may be too late.
We lose a lot of historic houses each year and some of it is unavoidable. In this case, I believe the houses can be restored and the historic integrity of the block and neighborhood preserved.
Please take a moment and express your support for saving this 1895 Double House located in the 2100 of Cedar Street.
I agree Bill about letting people know first but unfortunately developers don’t think like that. They can care less about historic areas or older houses that cost more to fix and harder to unload than building brand new condos. Older houses are hard to sell to the younger crowd now in the market because they don’t have laser straight walls, spotless oak floors, new wiring with an abundance of outlets, or the latest appliances including heating, air, and water heaters. These young people want LOW or NO MAINTENANCE housing and to sell an older house takes a special person to buy it so sits on the market longer. Developers who buy up these abandoned houses want a quick turn dollar and not to spend time and money on a couple of old houses where they can build a multi-floor condo in its place. Not that this area is zoned for it but you get my drift.
Eric
Eric:
I respectfully disagree. I believe many home buyers in Church Hill/Union Hill etc. are looking for the quality construction, architectural features and the historic character of a restored home in an historic district. Heart of pine floors, mantles, high ceilings, original woodwork etc. strike a cord with many buyers, especially those who appreciate urban living. -Bill
But what demographic sector are these buyers you speak of? Young first time buyers or baby boomers? I can see the latter being interested but in general, youth is not interested in mowing grass, pruning bushes, planting flower gardens, painting the house ever few years, cleaning gutters, raking leaves, power washing mold and dirt, let along repairing appliances that came with the house, plumbing, roof repairs, etc… Just have someone else do it for them (association fees) and such. There is more to owning an older house than just arranging some furniture, getting the neighbor kid to mow grass once a month, and coming and going to your workplace. Youth just isn’t that interested and like I said, takes a special kind of person – the ones you speak of, to buy them especially at “restored” prices.
Eric
Huffelpuff
I’ll have to respectfully disagree with you and your misguided judgments about young homeowners. While I appreciate your diligent efforts to save 401 N 27th you seem to have some rather obvious biases towards young people, children, drinkers, and generally anything or anyone else that I consider necessary for a vibrant and livable neighborhood. You’re coming awfully close to getting my seal of approval for neighborhood curmudgeon.
Received from the Press Secretary’s Office:
Too bad the city wasn’t called in to cite spot blight and go through the channels of making the original owner responsible for repairs or sell and/or the city take over to sell. Could have made a difference?
Eric
Unfortunately, the owners have a legal right to demolish those properties. You could wake up tomorrow and the backhoe could be bulldozing both places.
National Historic Registers have no jurisdiction over this.
UH folks – stop procrastinating and”studying” the City Old and Historic designation. You’ve been working on that for what now, about a year? Are you waiting for the VCU class to tell you what to do, or are you thinking that holding hands and wishing it to be so will make it happen?
I hope this comment pisses you off enough to get off your duffs and get going with the effort toward designation!
By the way, you all are lazy so and so’s!
Pitch in and help Elaine with this!
jc… I am only speaking the truth. At least everyone I speak to in my neighborhood agrees with me on the issues brought up.
And how can you say “drunks” are a viable part of a neighborhood?
I am not against younger people buying a home as long as they have the initiative and can keep the property up, not trash it with children’s toys, keep their kids under control and not be disruptive (I come from the old school where a kid is to be seen and not heard and don’t spare the rod). And be responsible when it comes to parties and quiet hour, etc.. :-)
We ALL have to get along and not let our neighborhoods become a free-for-all environment – even with curmudgeons!
You speak of preserving the old and cherish what it represents. A frame of mind and sense of responsibility should go along with it.
Enough of that rant…
Eric
Mr. Huffstutler, what exactly is a ‘young’ first time buyer? I only ask because I have to decide whether to decry your sweeping prejudice or laud your incisive dissection of the minds and purchases of those damn whippersnappers. I can’t make up my mind which as I’m not certain if you’d dump me in the ‘young’ group.
via email from David herring @ ACORN:
Mike B… I will take that with a smile :-)
I have spoke my piece and won’t continue down this road but will change course and ask this constructive question…
Why do restored houses sit on the market for months and sometimes years before they are sold? What could be some of the issues that can or could be sidetracked for future restorations? I am speaking pre soft housing market as well.
Eric
YEAH… great news John! The Squeaky Wheel Gets The Oil :-) I should know…
Eric
Just for the record… Young Buyers I speak of are first time buyers most likely in their 20s.
Eric
Eric,
I can give you two reasons why restored houses sit vacant and young buyers (such as myself) don’t buy or buy elsewhere.
1. Price. The properties I saw this summer while house shopping were in various states of renovation and repair. Of course, it depends a lot on the location/street as well, but many homes were simply out of our price range, and I feel, overpriced for the quality, condition, and amenities/systems. It still baffles me with gas prices being as high as they are, why people choose to buy a $250K house out in lord-knows-where, rather than the easy commute and lovely neighborhood of CH. Oh, right, “crime and schools” they say…
2. Condition/quality of renovation. The homes that were in our price range had many times been questionably “restored”. I wasn’t really interested in a gut reno, and many things that needed to be addressed structurally or systems-wise weren’t, probably because granite countertops and stainless steel appliances were a priority. I personally think that’s a false economy…
Other crazy stuff we saw that drove us out of house after house include:
Wood floors covered up with cheap carpet rather than refinished or replaced.
Historic plaster and woodwork (smacks forehead) removed and replaced with drywall and ugly baseboards (if any). I hope at least they put some good insulation behind that drywall…
Crappy plaster work done IF it’s done at all.
Ugly as sin replacement windows that are about two sizes smaller not to mention just wrong for the style/age of house.
And then there was the house that just smelled like pee….
I could go on…
Thanks, Amy –
As a REALTOR who has done my fair share of selling, and a whole lot of showing, in Church Hill (my former neighborhood prior to moving down the hill to the Fulton area,) I second your comment wholeheartedly.
I believe that some years ago, maybe 5-7ish, lots of investors – many from out of town – were sold on Church Hill. The “restorations” that I have seen in some of these cases are horrendous, and show very little, if any, respect for the original structure. Hardly were these folks purists.
In fact, in more than a couple cases it appeared that they full on ran out of steam, and/or cash, when they realized that they were not necessarily going to turn that 25 thousand dollar investment in the a cool half-mil after all. And boy, does some of the quality of work show it. Points to greed.
I believe the technical term is “remuddling,” and it’s real sad.
Wait a minute! Did you just say that 2104 and 2106 Cedar Street will not be demolished??!! This is a good day in Union Hill!
This close call certainly magnifies one benefit of having Union Hill named an Old and Historic District.
This has been a great case of citizens, a non-profit organization and a private owner coming together to come up with a solution that is in the long term best interest of this historic neighborhood. Congrats to everyone involved. I am happy and proud.
O.K. since we’re waaaay off track on this thread. I agree with Shannon, and I agree with Eric.
There is a lot of shit renovation that has happened up here, but there is also alot of good and authentic renovation that happens up here, but homebuyers, who are mostly young and first time, want walk-in closets, 2 and half baths, master suites,etc.
That’s not buying into historic Church Hill folks. That’s historic facades with suburban interiors. Renovators that want a good ROI, rape the inside of our historic homes by removing the middle bedrooms to accomodate the suburban youth market that seek housing up here.
Authentically renovated homes that keep the interior fabric in place do not sell. Yes, yes, many have a trunk rooms converted into a bath to accommodate the modern age, and a bath under the stairs where there was a storage area previously, but otherwise, there are many really good renovations done with keeping the interior in tact. The bottom line – young folks who grew up having their own bedrooms and bathrooms (unheard of in my day, and I’m not that old) don’t want historically correct interiors.
So, right on Eric, I’ve got your back.
My professional experience is that “old house folks” come in all age groups. But that’s just my experience. I don’t have any stats or anything.
Maybe it’s just that I tend to work with more people, of whatever age, that have similar architectural interests to my own.
Mr. Conkle:
You send out an email at around 5:00pm this evening, almost 4 hours ago congratulating all on a job well done concerning the demolition debacle.
Why the fake surprise (and joy) on this thread 4 hours later?
Gee, thank-you for your rehearsed and sanctioned approval. Pantelle would be happy and proud.
good morning. you got me. i’m just a lazy so and so. and fake to boot.
i appreciate your kind words and constructive critique. you have shown a light on my flaws and I vow to work harder on becomning a better person.
thank you.
John, think we need a different thread for Reasons Why :-)
Now, only a few replies later after I turned my wording and tone of the thread towards one of constructive criticism concerning why historic houses stay on the market, it all comes back to why I was blasted in the first place. Younger people are not in the market for historically accurate homes. They are looking for New and the Latest and Greatest (low maintenance). When you buy an older home, even one restored, you buying a structure that has settled and still is. One that may have underlying issues not brought up by certain “restorations” depending on the extent of what was done. And of course, the more work done with attention to details as well as accuracy, the more expensive the final results will be – hence higher prices and longer on the market. Taking a 100 year old home and gutting it out to make it into a high-end condo style interior is NOT proper restoration!
Take for example our home and the one next door that was restored this past year. Starting with the one next door at 405 N 27th. It is a city bronze plaqued home listed as a Historical Building. That in itself is a turn off apparently because this means you can’t make alterations. Next, Spencer Budwell who owns and lovingly restored this house did so with historic accuracy in mind. He did gut it out but only to reposition the walls back to their original locations. The walls are not perfectly straight as the house has settled. The floors have been mildly refinished but retain their worn character. There are some “small” closets in rooms but when the house was built in 1835, there were no closets – only armoires used. And not sure but think only one main bath in the old brick part of the house, and another half in the wooden addition? Stairs are narrow, steep, and have low hand rails – typical of houses approaching 200 years as people were smaller and shorter then. The original style millwork (woodwork) maintained and replicated including picture frame inlays for recessed door frames. Even burned off all of the old paint on all of the windows and frames and decorative soffit flashing then sealed and painted several coats of new paint. He even rebuilt the front porch with correct round Greek columns instead of cheap square ones, reconstructed the correct door rather than spend $700 for one at Caravati’s, and scratch built the correct paneled shutters. Then he planted gorgeous thick plush green grass front and back. The kitchen which is a wooden addition has been rebuilt from scratch and is modern, as well as new AC/Heat, wiring, and plumbing. I have seen many Sunday open houses with various “groups” coming and going. No contracts yet and it is going on a year. Think the asking price is $450k – a steal for this type of house and craftsmanship but again, will take the right person to appreciate it and definitely not for younger people nor ones with children (not child proof). So why hasn’t this one moved?
I won’t go into as great of detail with our house but the plaster walls were removed and replaced with sheetrock except around the fireplaces which remain plastered. There are random width heart of pine floors with some planks seamless for the entire width of the house. Try and go out and purchase 2 inch thick 20 foot long 9 inch wide planks! And of course they are worn including splintered, gapped, stained, gouged, and even burned in places but this adds character and contrast. I would bet the first thing a younger couple would do is carpet over it or have it replaced! A nearly 200 year old floor lost?
In any event you get my drift.
Eric
Eric
I must be the exception to your logic. I consider myself a young adult, and when my wife and I were looking at houses we were specifically looking for an older house with that sort of character. We certainly don’t mind our 100 year old floors. We would never replace them or cover them up (maybe consider repairing them at some time in the future). Just thought I would point out that broad generalizations are not a good idea. Secondly, perhaps the individuals young or old who appreciate and want to preserve the character of their old home, perhaps those are the individuals we want in our community. Maybe these people are the ones who will invest LONG term in the community. Sorry. I am stepping off my soapbox now.
CHnewbi… I am not trying to “pigenhole” everyone as someone cited earlier and glad that you have that mentality. My approach sometimes seems one-sided but you have to take the society as a whole, not just people living in Church Hill. You have the same peoblem no matter what forum you join. The voice of a few that participate believes that they speak for everyone. My views are not just my own but what is preceived outside of those here. Just wish more first time buyers were like you.
Eric
“quote: Ugly as sin replacement windows that are about two sizes smaller not to mention just wrong for the style/age of house. ”
Amy, I can’t agree with you more on this point and it always irks me seeing improper windows installed or shortened. If it had 82″ high 16 pane windows, don’t put a 42″ two pane in its place and fill in the gaps! Nor do the same for first level walkthrough windows. It makes me ill to see this done and looks both out of place and cheap. You have to admire those people who build new homes from ground up and replicate a house 100+ years old BUT they use the wrong width breadboard (if that) siding and too small of windows making the whole thing seem pre-fab.
Eric
[quote: I believe that some years ago, maybe 5-7ish, lots of investors - many from out of town - were sold on Church Hill.]
Shannon… I think this was the time where we were served a bill of goods by the government. Remeber all of the millions spent on the Main Street train station to replace the one at Staples Mill and have regular daily passenger service out of it? Then at the last minute the government pulled the plug and said that it would only be a whistle-stop? Also the Maglev project was happening then abandoned. This would have given those working in DC a chance to buy cheaper in our area and get to work in 45-minutes. There was a renovation and restoration boon that took place which left a lot of empty condos because of of the about face.
Eric
I am young and I want historically accurate renovations. All the young people I know who would move here would want historically accurate renovations. Most of the places that don’t sell up here are too remuddled for me and my ilk.
The ones that sell are the nice ones.
Eric, you are clueless.
hillkid… thanks for watching my back :-) Glad someone appreciates some of my views. We must chat off forum sometime. Here is one of your quotes…
[quote: The bottom line - young folks who grew up having their own bedrooms and bathrooms (unheard of in my day, and I’m not that old) don’t want historically correct interiors.]
Let me respond using an analogy here. I also belong to various DVD movie forums – some with studio execs on board. One deals with older horror and sci-fi movies dating back to pre 1950s. Sometimes our views and interests expressed there makes a difference as to what gets released, most times it doesn’t loosing out to the mass desires (and $$$ involved).
Ask your average 20-something about black and white movies and they will respond that they don’t watch them as anything in black and white is boring. They grew up in a different era and those who do remember and/or appreciate the older movies are either becoming disinterested as time progresses or dying off. The crowds following have no interest in them wanting something more hip and modern. Use that thinking with houses and we are back “spot on” with what you said. I think this is a core problem with houses built before 1930… do you think?
They “may” like the older exterior look but want it completely updated inside. I know, our neighbors across the street which we love have done just that. The exterior is proper but the interior isn’t. They bought another house which was restored a couple years back and now making changes to it. One that comes to mind is the person who done the restoration used antique furniture cabinets to house bathroom sinks – something done in the Edwardian era but they don’t like it so redoing it more traditional. You see… case in point. And oh, by the way… the contractors did cut corners and so other necessary repairs are needed. It looked good on the surface “for a while” and that takes me back to people buying into responsibility with older homes.
Eric
Eric –
While I hear what you are saying, I think that those issues are seperate from the point I was making. I was speaking of for-profit investors, not folks who may have bought in CH in anticipation of the train station, etc. -the promise of a true Urban Center being located right down the street.
Which does not necessarily make your points untrue. At all. I’m just saying that maybe your observations are ANDs, and not BUTs.
Eric, you need a hobby — other than endlessly arguing with everyone…
This “remuddled” is a new term for me and I have to look into it :-) But clueless? You must be another exception but then again, you are here on this forum so “sought out” others with common interests. Do you think someone driving in from the West End would come to Church Hill looking for rustic interiors. I know that is pretty drastic but still…
Also, perfect blond oak floors, chimneys void of their plaster coverings, Pella windows, etc… is not “proper”. I may be stereotyping but that is what I have seen so far and can only go by that.
Eric
Jason… ever heard of the word Debate? :-)
Here may be a good time and place to stick this in for grist….
Please keep your eye on the restoration being done by my client Hollister Lindley, at 2002 Princess Anne, the old nursing home. I helped her buy this property a month or two ago, and as an old house person, she is absolutely dedicated to restoring it properly. This is not her first rodeo with old homes, by a long shot, and she has had a myriad of consultants in already, with more to come.
She did an Open House on Sunday to invite friends and neighbors in, and share her plans with them. I am so sorry that I didn’t think to post that invite here. I am sure she would have welcomed all of you there.
The finished product promises to be phenomenal.
Rather than arguing… let’s all get along and come up with solutions!
What I am seeing thus far is a 3-way split.
1) Those who think historic houses are restored too historically for modern tastes.
2) Those who think historic houses have been “raped” and interiors and not accurate enough.
3) Those who think that historic houses are done too cheaply for buyers.
first off… if the quality is an issue then I would say “do it yourself”.
OK.. given this scenario. If you come across a house for $X (I’ll let you decide what you pay) but needs a minimum of $100,000 worth of work to restore it to the way it was new, what would be your plan of action?
And don’t say consult a contractor off the bat because most don’t have a clue as to how to do proper restorations nor how the house looked 100+ years ago (multiple alterations may have taken place over the years). And know from fact that some of the local “restoration” contractors cut corners – have seen them, known about it as well (been there, done that).
Eric
Clayton Investment Group LLC/Old Dominion Management Co LLC seem to specialize in owning vacant property…
Doesn’t one (or only?) owner of Clayton Investment live in a wonderful little house overlooking Chimborazo Park & The River? It’s a shame if what is said is true and they only care about their little piece of the neighborhood not the overall effect that their abandoned homes have on the total community.
I have to say that I agree with Amy (45.) about why it was so hard to buy a house in CH. My realtor was/is Heather O’Sullivan and she did not run out of patience when showing us house after house. We found her knowledge of the area and advice priceless. When we were ready to give up on CH house because of crap reno’s and just go suburbs. she said to take heart that not all reno jobs are done badly that there have been and and still are plenty of renovators/investors in CH that care about a job well done not just getting the job done.
After looking at junk and carpet and bad plaster or obviously sub-par work we found what we were looking for! A historic home with original hardwood floors, plenty of the original glory of the historic homes & enough beautiful moderninity (is that a word!) to make it well worth the money we spent!
We tell our friends, Don’t get discouraged after seeing 5 or 10 crappers there are plenty of homes in great condition at a great price!
Yes, Irishchurchlady. Using an agent with whom you are comfortable can make all the difference in the world.
Thanks for sharing the perseverence of yours.
just heard about this demo discussion…
The “Tall House” has been under contract several different times over the years. The 1st time that I know of was 2004 and I had an investor that had already completed several other total restoration hms on The Hill. At the time it had been slated for demo by the city. We spoke with the city (Barbara something at the time) to get them to drop the slated demo. Put it under contract and then fought for approx 6 months, if memory serves me, to get it to closing. Fighting with the deceased owners attorneys’, liens and city tape my investor finally and heart brokenly had to walk away (and thank goodness did not loose heart in lovely old Church Hill) and move on to other projects.
I moved to Church Hill and started doing Real Estate in 2003. Fell in love with the Historic nature of this city and wanted to be part of “saving” what was left to be saved. Since then I’ve learned from countless investors, renovators, sellers, & buyers on the hill just how bad a home can look and still return to it’s former glory! I’m glad to read that these Cedar st. hms will not be demo’ed at this time. They may look bad folks, but usually they can be saved. They’ve made it this far and this long with little love and maintainance. Let’s just hope that whoever gets their hands on it do a good job. Keeping with the historic feel of this awesome neighborhood.
Eric,
I think you are on to something.
Everyone has their own idea of what their ‘historic’ home should look and feel like. That’s great! Go for it!
But like anything – Buyer Be Ware!:)
Check with the BBB when consulting contractors.
Check out your neighbors houses and found out who did what.
Check out more than one neighbors house.
Ask for referrals. Make sure you are working with people that are familiar with old homes. They are a special task and should be handled with care by people with the experience ***AND RESPECT*** of old homes under their belts.
I’m all for saving the historic bits of Richmond in lieu of demolishing them. Flavor, Character & Flair is what Richmond has to offer to new comers and old richmonders alike. A totally unique experience in neighborhoods. Just so happy to hear so many old and new neighbors care so much.
um, shannon, i’m not sure i was sharing so much how great my agent was so much as a. agreeing with amy as to why it takes so long for house to sell in our neighborhood, hot market or not. b. if only all the houses in the price we could afford actually offered the same level of quality we would have bought sooner. but you are right if it hadn’t been for heather we would a. never have thought of church hill has the place we would find our dream home. we’d been looking for historic in the fan but found it over priced for what it had to offer or b. stuck around long enough to find the “dream” home once we fell for the neighborhood.
now if only there were stricter regs on how these houses are renovated and restored and how to deal with the dead-beat owners that let the house around us fall into disrepair!
o’girl.. thanks for chiming in!
Are you saying that 2116 Cedar (tall house) may not be “safe” from demolition as opposed to someone earlier saying that the owners are gearing up for restoration?
Eric
Oh. I guess I am just quick to pick up on kind words of a colleague, and appreciate them in any framework. To me it sounded like a raving review.
Maybe I sorta think that people tend to be stingy with compliments, and read more in sometimes – for the positive.
Thank you for clarifying. Sure didn’t mean to put words in anyone’s mouth.
correction – towards a colleague, not of…
Eric…credible sources say 2116 has an owner with a plan not to demo, but to restore.
OK, the structure doesn’t look so pretty right now, but it’s gonna be ok. We dodged a bullet on Cedar this week.
Now we can focus on the infamous “4 corners” in Church Hill North and save those magnificent commercial structures @ 27th & Marshall.
One question I puzzle over as someone renovating my old house- I understand the push to save plaster walls and old windows represented by many on this thread, but let’s talk environmentalism.
Those old windows are leaky!! And behind those plaster walls is NO insulation. Any thoughts on how to mitigate the very negative energy usage of historic homes with the desire to preserve?
Excellent question… how can a 100 plus year old house be made energy efficient? Way to stay sharp, Cagitate.
Eric, I am trying to renovate my house and it has had the large walk out windows on the first floor replaced with smaller ones. I hate this as it seems you do and I would ultimately like to replace these with an original verison of the windows. Do you have any input on where I can get those types of windows or where I can have some of a similar type made?
Dave… you need to find an experienced joiner. They make things like windows, frames, stairs, etc… as opposed to a regular carpenter. It may run cheaper than going to a salvage company like Caravati’s across the river at 104 E. 2nd who are are expensive but have original period items from demolished houses.
You can also Google to find wooden replacement windows but possibly someone here may have knowledge and can chime in?
Eric
Unfortunately if you want to stay “authentic” then an older house is not going to be 100% energy efficient – and usually isn’t by nature of settling (gaps, cracks, etc..). Most likely plaster walls will need replaced rather than repaired so you can insulate at that point but if you are salvaging, then try a blown in or a spray expanding type foam made for wall insulation.
As for windows, just make sure they are caulked, primed, painted and weather sealed (weather strips). It is about the best you can do except you may want to add a solid Plexiglas sheet to cover the windows during the winter months or use polyurethane sheets tacked to the frame (old school methods but they work). And of course make sure heat and air vents don’t force air behind curtains or are obstructed with furniture over them.
Eric
UnionHill RVA… I am sure 2116 will be gorgeous once finished – you can tell by looking at it now. You need vision to see beyond what is on the surface. My concern is that if it has changed hands so many times not so long ago, that it will honestly be restored and not sat on until it is demolished in the 11th hour.
As for 4-corner Charlie’s… I am still working on that. Charlie still owns one of the buildings and lives in it so nothing we can do there. The other three buildings are owned by the Murray’s with brother Patrick owning 401 I am feverously trying to save while sister Sandra owns the other two. One she had an antique store in it for a short time and renovated the upstairs as apartments but I haven’t seen it’s condition myself. Know it wasn’t done “professionally”. The odd store at 325 N 27th was a restaurant years ago and still has the rusted “27th Street Inn” neon sign casing on the building that now is separating the brick facade. None of the buildings other than 401 are really old. Think the one Charlie lives in was originally a Nolde’s Bread outlet store? The 401 building was part of the property owned by Capt. Charles Wills who built our house and part of that 400 block. He had a carriage house facing Clay Street which was converted into a small house early on in the 1820s – long gone.
Eric
I’m a contractor that lives in Church Hill and have done a lot of window repair up here. Most of the old windows do leak a lot of air but there are a couple ways to seal them, it just depends on how involved you want to get, from simply adding weatherstripping to a complete rebuild. I have a large stock of old windows, pulleys, jambs, pretty much anything you need to repair them, so it’s not that big of a deal usually, and I can custom make any type of sash. It takes some time and money to repair them but once it’s done they do a good job. They may not be quite as efficient as insulated glass, but consider the alternative that most people choose, vinyl replacement. They will never last as long as the originals, repair is usually not possible, and they typically don’t look that good and they certainly don’t look “right” on these old houses.
As far as insulating goes, the blown in type is usually your only option unless you want to peel all your siding or gut your plaster. For masonry, there’s really no option but to frame out the interior walls and add it between studs. If you prefer plaster over drywall, I work with a guy that does a great job, all old school technique.
One thing I consider with renovation is that these are houses we’re talking about, not relics in a museum. We’ve added plumbing and electricity to them, so change isn’t always for the worse. Houses are supposed to change over time to keep them livable, otherwise what’s the point.
Eric…thanks for the tips/info.
Ramzi…Can I get your contact info. for possibly coming out, taking a look at my situation and giving me an estimate on what I’ve got?
Dave, my husband, Ramzi, stepped out. He can be reached at 502-9992.
Ramzi… the “museum” stab is what we are trying to establish as to who wants what. It appears people want to keep the interior as authentic as possible but don’t want it cheaply done either over “updating” everything. Of course unless you are into gaslight lines, power switch wiring running over the walls, and so on, I can understand the “update” but changing flooring, moldings, fireplaces, etc… to me is not proper restoration but simply renovation – two different things. Upgrading wiring and plumbing (other than tubs and sinks – some want the footed tubs to remain) are a given to make an older house safe if you are doing a frame exposed job.
Eric
So, without splitting hairs or a rambling response, persons buying an older home can appease the historic home gods or open their wallets to the utility companies for the term of their residency, correct?
LC… When you buy a historic home, it is just common knowledge that you are buying something “older” built before certain codes. That is has settled and is not perfect. People buying them know this and make sacrifices doing so. If you want an energy efficient home, historic housing isn’t for you. And it is just not ethical to completely alter the fabric of a historic home to “retrofit” and make it so.
Eric
Has anyone found out (even from the owners) when the (tall house) at 2116 was built? I know the assessment date is way off and what is throwing it out of whack is the porch. I am sure it is incorrect for the period of house. The house is small and not typical Victorian hinted by the porch nor even as large as similar one room deep houses built in the 1840s. I am wondering if it might date back further even closer to the early 1800s?
Eric
Ramzi is right about the types of things you can do to be more energy conscience with your old house. Without having to update or upgrade or modernize. PLUS he’s awesome! Great prices, great attitude and usually dependable (unless an emergency pops up and he has to bump you to take care of the little old lady up the street with a pilot light out on her boiler!) service. I use him for all sorts of stuff on my old homes!
Eric, It seems like most of the older surviving houses in Union Hill date from the 1830′s and 1840′s. A good example is the one that is being restored at 809 Mosby. The street grades were lowered and the valleys filled in in the 1870′s and 1880′s, primarily to accomodate the streetcars and to provide smoother streets. 2116 must date from the 1830′s by the looks of the architecture and the interior trim.
Bill… I figured it must be much older than at least 1870s and a LOT older than 1910 that the assessor’s office often lists. I could tell that it was around in 1867 on maps but if it turns out to be 1830s or even older, even more reason to save and restore it!!! Just have to get rid of the 1890s porches and replicate what was originally on the house.
Bill… I know N 27th has always been there and never looked to have been on a hill slope but between them yet our house seems to be “raised” as part of the basement is exposed but the land grades upward from the street and ends up about where it should in the back of the house. Do you know if North 27th was graded coming off of Broad Street – first couple of blocks? What throws your claim of 1870s-1880s leveling off is that the house next door only feet away was built in 1835 yet is pretty much level front and back yard.
From what I can see with the Mosby Street house which I thought for sure would end up torn down, looks great but can’t see the inside to make a final judgment.
Eric
I used to own 809 Mosby (back when there was no restoration in Union Hill)and started the renovation, but got run out by the crime. I’m an old timer in the neighborhood and have researched a lot of what has happened in the past. I did a title search on 809 and got it back to 1840 with Richard Carrington, who owned that whole area and operated a farm in the area. That was when Venable was the only street, which followed a gulley on Union Hill. Anyway, about 27th St….27th St. seems to always been fairly level from Broad and was the main North/South street in that area. That’s why your house and the store on the corner were built first. 316 N. 27th (1814 or before), 2606 E. Marshall (1814), 501 N. 27th (1819), 509 N. 27th (1817), 510 N. 29th (1816)formed a little village in the area which probably was a high point in the area. When I lived at 700 N. 27th St. I heard that that area around M St. and 27th was another little settlement in the middle of tobacco fields. There seems to have been canals or water ways in the area that drained into Gilleys Creek at one point. There was a spring in the 800 block of 33rd between 33rd and 34th that serviced the area. Another one was located at the spot where the current intersection of Leigh and Chimborazo is located. Just some trivia from an old history major. You know what they say about history majors…we only are good at teaching, writing, or Trivia Pursuit!
I appreciate the info on repairing windows and other possibilities for conserving energy while preserving authenticity. I have a master’s degree in history, love this neighborhood for its history, bought a 19th C. house and have researched it.
However, I just want to say that I find the attitude that authenticity should be the highest value problematic. Climate change (sorry to introduce a polarizing political topic) and responsible use of my money (giving to charities for people who have NO homes,for example)dictate that I balance my concerns for authenticity with energy efficiency and overall social welfare.
I appreciate the preservationists who’ve worked to keep this neighborhood intact. But I also appreciate updated safer wiring, insulation, and other non-historic improvements to our home. If we’re going for authenticity, let’s ban cars from the neighborhood! Surely the neighborhood streets weren’t designed for automobiles, and the number of houses obscured by parked cars is distressing. That’s a choice I’d like to see more of us make.
Eric, Bill (and anyone else who cherishes antebellum homes,) 2116 Cedar Street was built in 1845 according to the National Register’s Union Hill house-by-house inventory.
We compromised on our 1915 windows. Instead of replacing (and filling up landfills) we cleaned them up and ordered storms from Lowe’s. Compromise and common sense sometimes is necessary if you want to save the house yet do not have an endless supply of money.
Bill… wonderful information and thanks for sharing!
Cagitate… I am not opposed to wiring, insulation, etc… upgrades. I think you (and others) are missing the point. We are talking about keeping the cosmetic look historically accurate both inside and out. Not what lies behind walls and beneath floors. It is practical and safe to update those areas and that isn’t what we are talking about here.
jami… even though we own the oldest house in Church Hill… it too has storm windows but only on the side and back of the house. You can see the correct windows behind them and that is what matters because storm windows can be removed if need be. I am opposed though to them on the front of houses and despise A/C units hanging out of front windows!
We were not the ones who restored our house done in 1986 (we bought it in 1999) so the storm windows were already there. If/when we can buy back the North wing of the house and can make the entire structure one again, there will be several cosmetic changes to bring it back to its original 1812 look. One was done just this past fall… put a $50,000 roof on the main section and south wing. There was old ratty tin roofing on it but this house as well as others of the era had wood shingled roofs. Wood is not a very good choice these days as it is expensive and doesn’t last so we went with a small pattern dark color slate that looks like small weathered wooden shingle design from street level making it more authentic (and more energy efficient too) :-)
Eric
UnionHill RVA… your area designation must have been done differently that for North Church Hill back in the 1980s? I don’t think they did a house-to-house inventory. Only cited a bit of history, our house, the store, and a few other older homes of varying styles.
Eric
Bill… I did a little searching of the Mutual Assurance policies linked 1840 to Richard Adams Carrington (Mosby St house) but the policy shows a house on G Street between 22nd and 23rd. That policy number 11161 can be linked back to a Hiliary Baker and extends back to policies dating to 1817 for that property. Same house?
Eric
Eric- Thanks for your comments about storm windows and such. I’m pretty sure that any wiring, plumbing and indoor kitchen are not historically accurate for my home, yet as a home is a living structure, and not a museum, I’m happy for those (also historical, i.e. not modern) updates.
In the same way, I’m willing to continue the tradition of improving the home, even if sacrificing some (but not all!) of the history is necessary, for the sake of minimizing my carbon footprint and financial burden. That’s all. I’m appreciative of preservationists and the work they’ve done educating us on our homes’ and neighborhoods’ histories.
Bill… if you come up with any more history about my street and area which bordered on Shed Town, please post it… always good to learn new things about your neighborhood.
I figured 27th was always pretty flat even though our front porch is about 6 feet above street level (a little steep I thought). And saw on the 1867 maps that one hill ended where the Hill Cafe is now (Broad did not run straight trough then) and the hill at Jefferson ran all the way to 25th and Leigh Street. The landscape sure was different then!
Eric
[...] The city sent us a letter last week informing us that the condition of our house does not meet code and that we have 30 days to fix the problems or face fines (we are not alone in this). [...]
[...] 2104-2106 Cedar Street apparently safe for now, there is some decidedly mixed news coming to light about 2126 Cedar [...]
Eric,
I’m a little tardy with this comment, but I think your assessment of us young folk and our willingness to love old architecture and get our hands dirty dealing with the many issues of these places is a tad off. My husband and I own a 1905 house (maybe older, as you already pointed out those 1900-1915 dates are not always accurate) that was renovated/ rehabbed prior to our purchase. Many features remain in place (beautiful old floors, pocket doors, large windows, etc), while other things have been modernized (ceramic tile in the laundry and kitchen, non-obtrusive storm windows throughout, a rear balcony). We LOVE this house, but it has had many problems from the roof to the basement. My husband has been up a 30 foot ladder doing brick repointing, we’ve spent many hours on the roof, have been in tiny crawl spaces and know just about every square inch of this place intimately. We had more repairs and issues in the first two years than I ever would have imagined and learned how to fix a variety of stuff we knew only a little about before. And while some of that was stressful as we worked through it, ultimately it just made us love our house even more. We wouldn’t trade our old house or our old neighborhood for anything. And we are NOT alone. I can quickly think of at least 6 other young couples that own equally old homes within a few blocks from us. All are living in their first owned home. All love our old neighborhood and their old homes. None of us are ignorant to the increased amount of work these houses take over cookie-cutter ready made places in the suburbs. We prefer this. Maybe the part of Church Hill you live in is a little more established and pricier, and therefore you aren’t seeing the young couples move in like I am in my part of town. And please don’t tell me our houses aren’t really “historic” or acceptably old enough because they aren’t as old as your “oldest house in North Church Hill.” Houses that are from the early 1900′s are indeed “old” and are indeed “historic” and are indeed worth saving every time possible. But I digress. Point being, yeah, they are more work, but alot of us kids love them.
As far as keeping the inside of a house entirely historic, I don’t think this appeals to everyone. If that’s your bag, go for it. But putting modern amenities and cosmetic features in an old house does not negate its historic nature, nor is it unethical. I could argue that caring more about what your windows look like from the front rather than conserving energy is unethical. The interiors of historic homes come in all different shapes and sizes: entirely true to original to entirely modern and unique. It’s a person’s home and they are entitled to create the interior space that makes them happy, even in neighborhoods that are designated Old and Historic. I agree with the comments above that remind us that we live in houses, not museums. For most, there needs to be a level of functionality and convenience that did not exist in 1905 (or 1814).
Post 97. Eric, i can’t speak for the CH North nomination document, but I know the Union Hill doc has a “summary” of the district nomination that sound like what you’re talking about.
However, the UH summary is backed up by a building-by-building inventory (just like the new Fairmount district nomination.)
Do you have a complete copy of the CHNorth nomination?
UnionHill RVA
Old news here but wanted to pass along that apparently I have been looking at abbreviated versions of the Church Hill North Historical district designation. I found the 50+ page version and see that there is an inventory of houses/buildings BUT all have c. (circa) dates. These dates are way off on many of the houses and others pretty “close”. Only a few seem to have exact dates and still have c. in front of it. Looks like no one did actual hard research to zero in more precisely?
Eric
Despite our efforts, these houses have both been demolished–and new construction is going up in their place.
So the “Tall House” was demolished? I thought someone stepped in to save it and submitted plans? What happened?
Eric
Eric, the “tall house” is a long story. ACORN is closely involved in this. And here, in a nutshell is what happened:
For years, ACORN worked long and hard to find a buyer who would rebuild the house. Over time, the house continued to de-stabilize, as did an adjacent retaining wall shared by another property owner.
A developer/buyer was secured finally, but by spring of 2008, estimates for restoration of the structure and the retaining wall put the sales price of the restored house close to $300k…and not too many folks could reason a house on that corner, in this market, selling for that amount.
So, as the roof caved in, and the structure swayed, the owner, with ACORN’s approval, removed as much of the interior and exterior architectural features as could be salvaged. These items are now in storage.
The agreement between ACORN & the owner, as we understand it, is to rebuild a house of very similar design, 3 stories, with the same footprint of the original structure (tho honestly, i think the back “addition” will be a little bit bigger.)
The salvaged architectural features will be used in the construction of the new house.
but the other two houses have been demolished. New construction is going up in their place..
[...] in April it looked like the double house at 2104-2106 Cedar Street might be saved but that was not to [...]