Citadel of Hope burns on Venable Street

I’m going to repeat my comment here:

I can’t help but feel disappointed in the property owner’s lack of care for this building. Based on rumors I’ve heard from some fairly good sources, the owner has been approached numerous times from interested buyers who’d like to do something with the building, but the owner has declined all offers. If this is true, shame on them.

Does anyone else have information on this situation?

Many properties owned either by this church, or the person in charge of the church, are now vacant lots because the structures which sat on them have burned. That is a worrisome history. Three of us who live on Venable Street met with city officials last month to discuss the fact that the building interior was a hangout and to voice concern that the building would indeed burn. The insecure aspect of the building has been an issue at almost every CAPS meetings for the last 2 years. CAPS/city contractors secured the building several times during this time frame but the back door was repeatedly un-secured almost immediately after each time (city contractors do this and other sorts of work – like cutting grass and brush from overgrown lots – when the property owners are neither responsive or responsible).

This owner had better not collect a dollar of insurance money. Shameful and completely avoidable.

Does the church escape property taxes through this whole process?

So, we as Richmond City tax payers basically …
1. Pay to “stabilize” the property for the church
2. Miss out on tax revenues because the property is neglected AND tax-exempt
3. Forever miss out on progress AND future tax revenue because of the whole cycle.

Am I right?

Having lived across from the now burned out building for five years, I can guess that it will remain that way for the next five to ten years. I am thankful that I no longer live in Richmond, where the church’s in the area are aloud to own property that is not taxed, and allow them to become drug dens and homeless hangouts as well as canvases for the local graffit artist, and are not even trying to clean them up. They have left that to the city and the community to pay for. To watch a neighborhood being dragged down by the very organizations that claim to be there to help the communities, show that they are doing a damb poor job.

being that these properties are owned by the church they do not pay a cent in real estate taxes to the city..if they did i gather they could not afford all those properties…am i correct

maybe if you guys spent as much time actually speaking to your longtime neighbors instead of just narcing them out to the code boys this neighborhood might fulfill its promise. racism masked as concern says a lot more about you poor fearful haters than it does about melvin and his congregation. oh and hey a big shoutout to whoever keeps calling blight. people who live in houses with violations should NEVER throw the first stone.this is the oldest integrated neighborhood on the east coast…..but i see you guys are working on that. why should longtime neighbors not enjoy the rising tide of affluence that is changing things around here. ? i am sure that by throwing folks into the bureaucratic blender you can feel good about yourselves and accomplish your odious hysterical preservation agenda. the house next door to mine is now on the code hit list despite my having cleaned up a toxic waste dump . with valid permits and plans i am still being written up as if i have done nothing to the property despite having already spent a goodly sum. meanwhile anonymous crybabies who have never bothered to engage me in conversation about my plans for the property are turning in complaints on a situation about which they have no knowledge. i would say be ashamed but none of you seem self aware enough to appreciate your very sad behavior. whats it like late at night when you realze what nasty little worm of hate inhabits your grinchy little hearts? at some point karma will take a chunk out of yer collective asses. nice little bunch….iam kidding.anybody that wants to be an actual person may feel free to contact me on facebook where gross little mystery mouth breathers are not welcome. man all i feel is sad .

I can’t stop laughing at that headline.

I know it’s wrong, but I just can’t.

you know i dont want to be the boy who cried automatically to the thread about perceptions of racism but how about this? if this was a white,west end church that owned these properties would our conversation have taken such a sinister turn? would the owner be percieved as a possible arsonist if he was say,vander warner? i find it curious that several of the writers have personal axes to grind with the church and its members but hiding personal antipathy behind “neighborly concern” is not only hypocritical but a little sneaky. also ,what is wrong with the church developing its own plans for renovation? blogging anonymously is like paying for phone sex. you think yer talking to a hottie when you are really fantasizing to a 400lb dude named “peggy”. that concerned anonymous citizen might actually be a sneaky little developer,using his secret position to help himself to a great”deal”. yeah its paranoid but on a site where people state opinions ,then write in under another pseudoym to agree with themselves,anything is possible.i guess what i am saying is dont be so quick to judge. and for those of you who are playing at being neighborhood tattle tales ,is your house violation free? i have seen that codebook and trust me you dont have to be doing anything wrong to find some transgression that a regulation will apply to! then YOU get to ride in the blender!try to practice some of that golden rule bullshit i hear you all spouting.and have a nice day.

@19 “if this was a white,west end church that owned these properties would our conversation have taken such a sinister turn?”

It already has! We’re having that conversation right now on CHPN in another thread. Check out the “goth kids” thread.

The guy who owns that house and MANY other properties here in Church Hill (some with a partner,) is white (and so is his partner,) and middle age. He’s pretty high-profile around town, and handy with tools when he wants to be.

They is NO excuse for the slip shod way he “manages” his properties. Plenty of calls from the city about the code violations–serious ones, not piddly stuff.

Slumlords come in all skin colors.

Buddy does have a point about talking to Melvin about the plan for development of the Church’s properties. Calling a pastor a slumlord and possible arsonist is a little over the top. Let’s give people the benefit of the doubt instead of leaping to judgement first.

Buddy, you are correct that you and I have met; it was great finally meeting you in person. I appreciate your feedback; you are completely entitled to your opinion.

Normally, I keep my comments pretty moderate on this blog and usually avoid any bickering/mudslinging. Most of my comments are usually on the optimistic/positive side, but given the facts of this case, I opted to weigh in with my two cents.

I’m not going to divulge my source, but their credibility is very high.

I don’t think this an issue of race – comments on the blog have spoken out against many an absentee landlord/property owner regardless of their race. Google the name Don Lacey or Stacy Martin who both have/had a huge presence in Church Hill and you’ll come up with examples of what I’m talking about.

The issue at hand – in my opinion – is that the neglect of this property has been going on for a long time and there’s already a track record of other nearby properties (under the same ownership) also burning down. I don’t think there was any arson either and I’m not suggesting it; however, I’ll leave that for the inspectors to ultimately determine. This property (and any other long-term vacant/significantly dilapidated structure) is a threat to health, safety and welfare of the neighborhood, especially the immediate surroundings. By this I don’t mean property values; I mean overall safety. Thankfully, we have a great fire department, but it’s not a fool-proof system. We live in a dense, urban neighborhood, where most structures are either attached or close enough to one another where the threat of a fire spreading is greater. A good example of this is the Carver/VCU fire a few years ago that literally crossed over Broad Street (which is pretty wide) and burned a lot of Carver. If I was a nearby neighbor of this property, I’d be pretty concerned. It seems like this situation has all the ingredients for a similarly devastating event in Church Hill. Obviously, this problem can occur with occupied properties, too, but I think the probability of it reaching such a dangerous level is far less, especially since most occupied structures are under some sort of oversight and an issue like a fire can be caught at a much earlier time. This particular fire occurred sometime around 12:45 a.m. when many folks are already sleeping. Had it been occupied (or at the very least more properly secured), maybe this fire wouldn’t have happened.

james i am sorry your voice is muffled from having your head up your ass. i cant hear your anonymous bullshit you puke.magneto what do you think about the reported fact that the property was buttoned up so tight it was a problem for the fire dept.? it certainly seems as if it was secured correctly. if some of you fine folks wanted to invest in the community you could contact the church or just continue to opine . instead of practicing the fine art of mystery hatin,perhaps you could refrain from burning up phones and web pages making complaints about a church that does a lot of good in the community. try to figure out a way to involve long time residents in the rebirth of an already longstanding community. they as much as you and i deserve a chance to be part of the gentrification transformation. its called sharing a goal. guess what? nobody wants the neighborhood to get anything but better!. well ,except james. that kid…….

Thanks for your constructive comments buddy (and Mary). You guys are doing so much to help this community.

/sarcasm

Buddy, the church may be a positive influence on the neighborhood but it is also holding our neighborhood back by sitting on so many blighted properties. Imagine if all of the property owned by the church was redeveloped…Venable Street could be a much different place and I like to imagine it would be better…

hey alex try not to worry about me too much. feel free to engage me once your testicles drop!after listening to a couple of months of your fake brainy drivel i have to ask ,how did a dork like you end up in a community without a gate on it?somewhere a crown is missing a princess and wherever you are i imagine there is some fussiness going on. you big silly. enjoy your status as a guaranteed wet blanket. it is to laugh….and cry.