RECENT COMMENTS
JessOfRVA on then it happens to you...
Becky Metzler on Updated! Guess what's happening on Mosby/Venable?
Mary on then it happens to you...
Sid on then it happens to you...
Becky Metzler on Church Hill Startup Tackles Insurance for Freelancers
Neighbor on then it happens to you...
Dan Rooney on then it happens to you...
State Senate passes anti-blight bill
01/28/2009 6:12 AM by John M
The RTD reports that a bill giving local governments more power to act on abandoned and blighted buildings was passed by a Virginia Senate committee yesterday and now moves to the full Senate:
Sponsored by Sen. Mamie E. Locke, D-Hampton, Senate Bill 1094 effectively would let localities consider such buildings a danger to public safety if they are vacant, boarded up and not connected to utilities, such as electric, water or sewer for more than six months. The bill also offers tax incentives and expedited application and permitting to property owners who agree to renovate or repair the structures, as well as refunds for permits and fees associated with timely demolition of such structures.
That’s ridiculous. Owning boarded up property is now a crime. As long as a property is properly maintained and sealed it shouldn’t be anyone’s business what the owner is doing with it.
Tear them all down and plant some trees. Most of these abandoned houses are drug havens and need to go. Half of Richmond and Petersburg would be torn down if you got rid of the blight. That’s what they’re doing in other cities.
“timely demolition” no way! Just say NO to demo, YES to tax incentives and expedited applications for restorations.
At least this is a step in the right direction in hopes of preserving and restoring Church Hill as I have been pushing all along. Just the process should also include turning the property over to people who have resources to rehab them.
Ramzi… having boarded up houses is NOT helping the situation in Church Hill but stagnates it.
Eric
Why is this a state issue? Did I miss the report that they fixed all of the problems with the state so that they can now meddle in local codes?
Hey, we have a billion dollar deficit but now the city can condemn that old house!
Agreed Ramzi, if a building is properly sealed and maintained, it is not a threat to public safety, nor havens for vagrants (because they have no access to the interior).
What exactly is the definition of “vacant”, anyhow? The owner could be using the building for storage or as a workshop. Perhaps the property owner has a timetable contingent on finances before beginning any improvements. Just because their timetable offends the delicate sensibilities of some, does not make their situation or plans villianous. Throwing stones and glass houses… remedy problems in your own back yard before you criticize others.
I support this. Something has to be done. People complain there isn’t enough housing stock in City of Richmond. If all the vacant/blighted house were made liveable it would do away with folks moving out of the city and increase the City’s tax base. And would also get rid of nest were neg element out these commuinties.
Calling my state rep now.
Mike,
Virginia is a Dillon Rule state. That means that local government has only the power granted it by the state. For instance, Richmond cannot enact it’s own gun control measures, because the state has not given authority. On the other hand, Richmond can regulate property manitenance standards, because the state has expressly granted that authority.
Let’s take this blight discussion one step further. How do the private property rights of the owner, especially a poor, elderly owner balance against a community right to impose and enforce standards?
Demo is bad news…. in the past, it’s led to urban renewal — think mosby, creighton court, the Coliseum, 95 literally tearing the city in two.
Making property owners maintain their derelict properties…. Good news!
This is a good tool for the City to facilitate the sale of historic but nuisance properties. Solves the problem of missing or absentee landlords demolishing properties by neglect.
Empty houses without utilities are fire hazards. Squatters light fires in them frequently. This is a more than anecdotal phenomenon in greater Church Hill.
The discussion of private property rights is interesting when it comes to vacant, blighting structures. What about the property rights of the homeowner whose property value is impacted by vacant, blighting structures 3 feet away from their home or on the surrounding blocks? I don’t support making demolition any easier, but encouraging owners of vacant, blighting buildings to rehab or renovate in order to get tax credits couldn’t hurt (though I think Richmond already does that with its tax credit program – if that’s still available). Even better, would be a “blight tax” that would be charged to the owner of the abandoned building and used to reduce the property taxes of the homeowners on the block whose property values are impacted by the presence of the vacant, blighting building. It is too easy and cheap to sit on empty, blighted buildings and it impacts the quality of life of everyone actually living in the vicinity. The owners of these buildings need to shit or get off the pot. If you can’t renovate the building, sell it to someone who can.
I agree, in general this is a good thing. Just uncomfortable with the demolition first rather than offering the property to someone who may be able to rehab it.
The bill states it gives the owner a timeframe to fix up the property. If you can’t then you need to get rid of it because “when” will you fix it up while bringing property values down on the block let alone being an eyesore?
The idea of a historical designated community is to preserve and rehab and/or restore. Not to buy up property and then sit on it until 10-15 years later it is a rotten mess. I am sure there are plenty of people who would love to buy some of those boarded up and spend the money to do a proper restoration!
I was just passed an article from a week ago also about the Governor recognizing more historical areas in Virginia and the state leading in that status – another plus for us!
” Governor Kaine Highlights Virginia’s #1 Ranking for Historic Districts Listed on National Register of Historic Places  State added 29 districts and 61 individual properties in 2008  RICHMOND  Governor Timothy M. Kaine today highlighted Virginia’s ranking as first among the 50 states and U.S. territories for the number of historic districts added to the National Register of Historic Places during federal fiscal year 2008. It is the fourth consecutive year in which Virginia has achieved top ranking for districts listed.
“These historic districts bring economic development opportunities to communities all over Virginia,” Governor Kaine said. “This recognition once again reminds us that the Commonwealth’s history is central to the history or our country.” “
Awesome!!! When will the State Senate finally pass that “No Fat Chicks” Bill? We’ll all be sittin’ pretty when those days come!
This kind of legislation is the reason there isn’t a viable, architecturally interesting and thriving community in Fulton now.
Having bulldozed the entire neighborhood and left it as meadows for years, it is now being replaced by tri levels and other inappropriate relics from a dead suburban model.
Great. Maybe we get the city we deserve.
Don’t we already have programs in place to deal with this (in Richmond at least?)
Like CAPS?
http://www.ci.richmond.va.us/departments/communityDev/caps/index.aspx
Ross, Yes we do have CAPS. Have you been to one of there meetings? I have I can tell you that they are completely worthless. If they followed their guildlines CAPS would work.
That department needs to be done away with. The only time you are able to get them to do what they are suppose to is “stand” on their neck.
WhoDAT!… had to laugh at that one. I remember winning a bump dance contest in the disco era to Joe Tex’s “Ain’t Gonna Bump No More (With No Big Fat Woman)”
In the mean time, I may have something new to report on 401 N 27th this afternoon? Stay tuned.
Eric
How about the house on 22nd and Marshall, the one my friends and I refer to the “leaning tower of kindling”? It’s been in horrible conditions since I moved nearby about a year ago. The only changes happened at the end of the summer when someone removed the sketchy fence and gutted it. No signs of any other work since then. It’s an eyesore, not to mention dangerous for the residences near-by (and just plain creepy looking). Does anyone know about that building or the owners?
Would this anti-blight bill apply to the various dilapidated properties that the City of Richmond owns?
It’s my understanding (via Norfolk newspaper) that the Right wingers in the House of Delegates will try to kill the bill on property rights grounds, even though bill is coming from Virginia Association of Realtors.
CAPS is extremely efficient and diligent compared to other agencies. However, it is a highly focused program designed for major problem properties with multiple categories of violations (zoning, maintence, building code, health and safety, criminal activity, etc…) – so if you have a problem with a small problem (but big to you since it’s next door), you may not find CAPS as responsive. You may also be confusing CAPS with the regular property inspectors. CAPS is like the Special Forces.
To neighbor:
Let me restate it again. I have been going to CAPS meetings for 5 YEARS. (northside), I what is require to make a CAPS case.
Like I said before CAPS on paper would be good but it implenated correctly. Which it is NOT. They are more like ‘special ed forces.
As someone who lives with abandoned houses on either side of me (which have been abandoned for years) I am glad to see something happening. Many of the abandonded properties are held as investments while the owner wait for the property values to rise, while the residents are subjected to boarded up buildings.
I agree with many of the sentiments posted here; fix it up or sell it to someone who will, if not, maybe the blight tax would be an incentive to get action (costs just as much to leave it an eyesore as it does to fix it up), then if all else fails push it over.
I’m afraid this new legislation will increase the number of homes that are demolished. If it could be amended so that properties would have more protection from demolition, I would support it.
I mean, look at the old Chimbarazo market on Broad. It would definately take the owner way more than 90 days to bring that up to code. But that doesn’t mean I think it should be demolished! I am afraid that if the city got ahold that and other properties, it would simply be easier for them to tear them down rather than repair the properties.