Comments on: Vacant properties deter Richmond redevelopment

By: James

James — Sat, 21 Aug 2010 19:17:08 +0000

Oh buddy, the ignorant bashing of your neighbors will never end. facebook.com/people/Buddy-Corbett... styleweekly.com/ME2/dirmod.asp?sid=&nm=Article... peoplefinders.com/search/searchpreview.asp... Internet anonymity is important. Your public info is all over the net. Best to keep your comments separated from your name.

By: vb

vb — Sat, 21 Aug 2010 18:08:04 +0000

Posting information that is already available to the public (e.g. website, phone book, business card) is just fine by me. If a business is operating poorly or causing public concern– I see nothing wrong with contacting the business/person with a complaint; as long as it is done in a tasteful and professional manner.

Sadly, you will have those who send threatening and foul-mouthed complaints.

The large amount of vacant properties, especially in the Church Hill area is just upsetting. I want these properties to be a community improvement, not an eyesore.

As for harping at those who are constructing new buildings– I think developing the area is great; however, I also think there are so many vacant properties that could be saved and developed in to apartments.

For the properties that could not be saved then they should be torn down. I like the site of a plot of land versus a busted old house that just screams “squatters welcome.”

By: Church Hill People's News » Gang graffiti on Fairmount Avenue - Richmond, Virginia

Thu, 17 Jun 2010 12:17:12 +0000

[...] property owner signs and returns the Graffiti Removal Release of Liability (PDF). This long-time vacant house and the empty lot next door, however, are both owned by an absentee landlord out of Stafford, [...]

By: john_m

john_m — Thu, 17 Dec 2009 16:40:55 +0000

The info that Dan posted is publicly available. Google for the Hermitage website, it is on their contact info page.

By: buddycorbett

buddycorbett — Thu, 17 Dec 2009 16:25:06 +0000

re post#9. hey you idiot if you dont have the cojones to post under your real name why would you out somebody? at some point murden you have to make a choice about allowing anonymous numbnuts to write nasty shit about other folks without offering equal time to the victims of these mystery hysterical preservationists. for conversation ,pseudonymwork just fine. to publish someones info just to gratify the nasty urges of some gutless wanker is a little concerning. is it ok to use shitty tactics if you are a hysterical preservationist? all this crap about neighborliness is a little hilarious when you realize it all goes out the window when the chance to act shitty presents itself with no risk of retaliation.dan you are truly a special kind of turd.buddycorbett

By: anonymous

anonymous — Sun, 13 Dec 2009 14:52:45 +0000

“No one says nothing can happen, things happen at a very slow pace.”

Right. So where are your elected officials on this? Slow pace is better than no pace and the Dillon Rule can’t always be the excuse.

If no one brings it up, it will never happen.

By: ann

ann — Sun, 13 Dec 2009 12:32:06 +0000

It’s not ‘vacant properties’ that deter Richmond redevelopment. It’s ‘vacant properties that people won’t sell’ that deter Richmond redevelopment. I’ve bought and ‘redeveloped’ (renovated) three vacant properties. (It’s much more difficult to renovate a non-vacant property, though some of us do that too.) But for some reason, some people who own properties leave them vacant and ‘melting’ into the lots on which they sit.

By: Cynthia

Cynthia — Sat, 12 Dec 2009 17:00:31 +0000

Item 14 on this list – We purchased this in foreclosure last Oct. and began construction immediately. It took almost 8 months to restore. We have had a lovely, very involved addition to the neighborhood living in the house since June. How this house got on this list is a mystery to me. So, before we attack, maybe we should see that the info. is correct. I do agree with all being said about vacancy and blight. It’s a complicated issue that now involved banks not wanting to go into these areas.

By: Nicole

Nicole — Fri, 11 Dec 2009 20:39:44 +0000

Great map, but I can think of 2 properties off the top of my head on East Franklin not listed, and I bet there are more.

By: steve

steve — Fri, 11 Dec 2009 14:34:08 +0000

#14 If you think dealing with state law in Va is bogus you clearly do not understand the workings of government in Virginia. Virginia is a Dillon Rule state. We have a sitting governor who was on Richmond city council and mayor. No one says nothing can happen, things happen at a very slow pace. It is not as easy as saying “they do it in Gainesville, Fla” thus legislation should be enacted. Gainesville, Fla can enact an ordinance locally to fit their need. Richmond cannot arbitrarily empower itself with an ordinance without authority from the state.

By: Matt

Matt — Fri, 11 Dec 2009 13:30:50 +0000

#11 Ramzi – I couldn’t possibly agree more… In a crippling effort to resist change, it often times feels like Richmonders are aiming to preserve blight, as ridiculous as that sounds.

The argument of “we’re not opposed to change and development we just want it to be responsbile and consistent with the fabric of the neighborhood” has become beyond tiresome…..well, at least for me it has….

By: anonymous

anonymous — Thu, 10 Dec 2009 22:19:06 +0000

I understand that there is a new State Delegate who was on City Council, from Church Hill…

This trap of saying nothing can happen because of state law is bogus.

By: diana jackson

diana jackson — Thu, 10 Dec 2009 19:13:39 +0000

Ramzi – Let’s not forget the raking over the coals the poor women who built the blue house on the 500 block of 28th St had to indure. It was stunning!

By: steve

steve — Thu, 10 Dec 2009 17:56:24 +0000

#3 it wouldn’t pass in Richmond because it is restricted by state law, not because the city is “bought out by developers.” A lot of the issues that are difficult to deal stem from restrictions at the state level. Not to say diligence at the local level can’t help but many of these “simple solutions” that may work in other cities are prohibited in Virginia.

By: Ramzi

Ramzi — Thu, 10 Dec 2009 13:55:10 +0000

I find it ironic that on this thread you’ve got vacant properties being a problem and on another, a builder is being harassed for wanting to build. Maybe if there were a friendlier environment for building we’d see some change.

By: Toxic Avenger

Toxic Avenger — Thu, 10 Dec 2009 12:31:57 +0000

Darn-they are getting closer!

By: Dan

Dan — Wed, 09 Dec 2009 23:15:33 +0000

Maybe someone (read: everyone) should leave messages on her cell and at work, encouraging her to sell?

From the Hermitage Realty site:
Stacy Martin
Office (804) 285-1180 ext. 102
Cellular (804) 855-4451
Email: hrstacymartin@aol.com

By: Matt

Matt — Wed, 09 Dec 2009 20:26:58 +0000

Great article. It’s frustrating to read about these dead beat owners/investors. Is a shame there are not more stringent regulations in place. Am wondering if there are any viable forms of protest such as picketing at Ms. Martin’s place of business?

By: Cadeho

Cadeho — Wed, 09 Dec 2009 12:58:48 +0000

There is one house on my block not on the list. it’s been vacant for 2 years now. Another is on the next street over owned by Bayou… been vacant for years.

I would think vacant properties would usher in development, at least golden opportunities to renovate and bring a lot of the houses back into being someone’s home.

By: Shannon

Shannon — Tue, 08 Dec 2009 23:42:16 +0000

RE #3 – Community vigilance > increased government regulation and interference.
Any day of the week.

Nice article, and awesome spotlighting on the continued opportunity for improvement.

By: ann

ann — Tue, 08 Dec 2009 21:31:56 +0000

Would be interesting to see if there’s any correlation between crime rates and the percentage of vacant property in a neighborhood.

By: alison

alison — Tue, 08 Dec 2009 20:36:53 +0000

great article!!

it is quite important to remember the difference between vacant and condemned i guess.

i feel bad for the condemned ones.

By: anonymous

anonymous — Tue, 08 Dec 2009 19:21:13 +0000

Be aware that more code vigilence can have unintended consequences- i.e. more code violations against actual resident/homeowners who may not always be able to take care of them. The City does not discriminate about who they hand violations to. In fact, I sometimes wonder if they find it more convenient to go after residents.

I am not saying you should not report code violations, but make sure your intentions are clear, front and center- going after absentee landlords.

Keep talking and working with your neighbors, regardless.

I reiterate the concept of ‘landlord licenses’ for the City of Richmond, especially since so much of the population is college kids. Landlords pay a small license fee to the City. If there are repeated problems and code violations with property or tenants, the landlord’s license can be pulled and they lose the ability to rent the property, at least for a time period.

This has been done in other college cities like Gainesville, Fl. Of course, our City Council is so bought out by developers that it will be difficult to pass here.

By: John Whitworth

John Whitworth — Tue, 08 Dec 2009 18:30:56 +0000

Yes !!!
John

By: diana jackson

diana jackson — Tue, 08 Dec 2009 17:20:04 +0000

The best proven method of encouraging owners of neglected properties to sell or fix is to report them each and every time for anything that is not permitted. Weeds (incuding front walkways and tree wells), Snow accumulation, trash, peeling lead paint, etc.