RECENT COMMENTS
Joel Cabot on Power Outage on the Hill
Eric S. Huffstutler on What is up with the Church Hill Post Office?
Eric S. Huffstutler on What is up with the Church Hill Post Office?
Yvette Cannon on What is up with the Church Hill Post Office?
crd on Power Outage on the Hill
Demolitions on Mechanicsville, 23rd, Venable
07/08/2014 8:37 AM by John M
A number of structures have been demolished in the past few weeks, including the houses at 1608 Mechanicsville Turnpike and 1401 Mechanicsville Turnpike (above), and 807 North 23rd Street and 2322 Venable Street.
Any others?
— ∮∮∮ —
807 N 23rd Street
— ∮∮∮ —
2322 Venable Street (previously)
I noticed the two on the top as well having been demolished recently. I am waiting to see more since there are quite a few condemned building, some don’t look that bad and hate to see the one at 1401 gone.
Don’t forget the red top Victorian at 1513 which was also slated for demo:
http://chpn.net/news/2014/04/17/demolition-coming-for-house-on-mechanicsville_33140/
I agree Scott… but you know they’ll just remain vacant, overgrown lots. There’s an excavator in the backyard of 2119 Selden and should be gone any day now. I swear the city does not care about parts of its history. It should help owners fix up their properties instead of creating holes in the streetscapes.
I have to agree Cadeho… the city doesn’t care neither does 7th District council woman Newbille. But these I believe actually some fall into Henrico so it is up to them to make the call on those. The others should be Fairmount and Union Hill.
It is up to citizens to get involved. Good intensions and idle talk doesn’t make a difference especially when fighting people at City hall who really don’t care about preservation over progress in historic neighborhoods.
Eric, what progress? The city doesn’t seem to care period. All they will be doing is giving more citations for tall grass and liter… they don’t mind doing that.
I’m sorry. Typo, litter.
Cadeho, the city just doesn’t give a damn about the rich history of our neighborhood(s). The tag on the CHA Newsletter says “Where Richmond Began” and Richmond is one of the oldest cities in America. But the city could care less about investing in preservation and promotion to bring in tourism but rather tear it down, ignore it, or wait for it to fall down on its own. How many times have we been given false promises about replacement construction after demolition like Broad Street?
People need educated true but their anger is often misdirected. Our historic areas should be preserved which is NOT the entire city but small sections clustered basically around downtown. Then allow progress with modern structures to rise downtown or in areas that have remained vacant or blighted for so long without being overly conservative which is stifling progress. Bring progress in the right areas to bring in revenue which in turn brings in much needed tax dollars for infrastructure repairs, schools, etc…
Also, I want to state this again here from my research for this month’s CHA historical article about baseball. Sadly there was quite a bit edited out due to space restrictions which includes segregation issues as well as oppositions. A quote from an interviewee about the proposed new Shockoe stadium from the August 2001 issue of “Richmond Magazine” stated… “What does Richmond want? Competitive relevancy, while remaining true to itself, or, meeting the city’s apparent standard for itself with comfortable dormancy?” I think this says a lot.
I am seeking suggestions for future articles but had been playing with the idea of doing one called “Broken Promises” focused on Zoning, C.A.R., and City Council issues when it comes to inconsistencies and following through with their promises.
So CAR approved the demolition of the Venable structure? One of the biggest selling points people made for the neighborhood’s Old and Historic zoning was protection against this. What measures did CAR take to save this building?
Left on the Hill… you tell me? This has been a sore spot for years. C.A.R. coming up with their own interpretation of their own published code book of rules and regulations governing what can and can’t be done. They deliberately “update” this without public knowledge so to create loopholes. But in general, the C.A.R. has not been very pro-active concerning conservation. Look at the atrocity they approved around the corner on Broad Street which in part is the result of who is on the board… architects and contractors who can not be impartial but remain bias and push their own plans through. You can thank City Council who approves the people filling these positions.
Again, it takes citizens action and not a bunch of armchair complainers to make a difference. You get what you deserve if you don’t voice your opinions. A few years back we tried to create a grassroots group with people from varied backgrounds to make a difference but they were only willing to only go as far as the first couple of meetings before disappearing on us and a couple of people or a single person can not fight City Hall so… it quickly disbanded. Everyone talks big bit when it comes down to the dirty work they are no where to be found. You know what they say… All Bark and No Bite.
Sorry, didn’t mean to leave you “on the hill” 🙂
The Venable St and 23rd St structures were torn down without CAR approval. If the commissioner of buildings declares a structure an imminent danger, demolition does not require review.
Matt, I contacted Catherine Easterling and that is what she said. That it is tied into State Codes and the commissioner overrides the CAR. That is unfortunate since this does leave structures that can never be replaced which could have historic backgrounds even, gone forever without a fighting chance to save them first… even if it is the city that stabilizes them. I know that the HRF use to step in to save older structures in these positions, have they stopped?