CLASSIFIEDS
The Clothesline Children's Consignment Sale will be August 22-23 at the Woodmont Recreation Center. Bargains on children's clothing, equipment, toys, Halloween costumes, books & more! Visit www.theclothesline.biz for more information!
W. 32nd Street It is a fabulous house in a great part of Woodland Heights.4 large bedrooms plus an office large living room, 2 full baths, 2 car garage and large yard. washer and dryer huge backyard Pets OK!$1900 per month 804-405-4301
rupkey@tds.net
NEW TO RICHMOND? Moving On supports & encourages women through the transition of a move. Starting 9/9, we meet Tuesdays from 9:30-11:30 @ St. Giles Presbyterian Church, 5200 Grove Ave. Childcare provided. For info, call Edith 230-1153 or Mila 249-5776
Boot camp for women every Mon.and Wed. 5:30-6:30a.m. Intense, fun and effective! New class 9:45a.m. this Oct. Visit kyabootcamp.com email kyabootcamp@gmail.com or call 357-8789
Need estate sale services or have items to consign? Since 1999, Susan's Selections has conducted in-home estate sales. And our shop at 8008 Staples Mill Rd is open Thurs & Fri 10am-6pm, Sat 9am-4pm, Sun 1-4pm. Call 232-6480 or Roy@SusansSelections.com.
Lewis Fencing provides custom fencing for your residential and commercial properties. Free Estimates. Deal directly with the owner.
www.lewisfencing.com. 804-426-5236 lewisfencing@hotmail.com
Helping seniors downsize and move since 1998, More Than Moving For Seniors is a full-service senior move management company. We sort, pack, move, unpack, set up the new home and clear out houses. Call 232-6480 or Susan@MoreThanMovingInc.com
FOUND DOG -- might be a Shitzu, might be a Pekingese. Small (10-ish pounds) very furry, black and white, underbite, sweet. Found in Westover HIlls area. Please call 231-6611 or 357-4336 or email lc@dfesto.com. Hurry, I can't keep her!
I lost my dog and need help! She's a 5 lbs mostly white peke-a-pom. She has an under bite and long hair. She means the world to me so please help to bring her home. Thank you
FOUND DOG -- in Westover Hills near Caledonia. Pekenese-ish small female, very fluffy, mostly white with black head. Definitely lost. Very sweet. I can't keep her, so call soon, pass the word to your neighbors. 231-6611 or email lisa@designmanifesto.com
Odyssey Health Care, a local hospice, seeks volunteers to befriend terminally-ill patients & their families. No personal care. Training provided. Call 290-4300. Opportunity is profoundly rewarding & may offer you as much joy as you give.
Oh no!! Not the Forest!!!! You can’t take that away! Unless the new building has a Camaro sticking out of it.
Whats the source of this? Or is someone yanking our chain?
How far west of the CVS? Does it go all the way to the 24 hour mart?
When will we get our Sheets and KFC?
I could be totally wrong, but perhaps the original post was done tongue-in-cheek. However, if the post is serious and true, I would hope the residents of Westover Hills would have more support from their council member than Springhill and Woodland Heights did.
Is this it?
5059 FOREST HILL AVE
5061 FOREST HILL AVE
5063 FOREST HILL AVE
5065 FOREST HILL AVE
5067 FOREST HILL AVE
5071 FOREST HILL AVE
5073 FOREST HILL AVE
5075 FOREST HILL AVE
OWNER: S F P CO
ASSESSMENT MAILING ADDRESS:PO BOX 9462
ASSESSMENT MAILING CITY:RICHMOND
ASSESSMENT MAILING STATE:VA
ASSESSMENT MAILING ZIP CODE:2322800000
PROPERTY CLASS DESCRIPTION: B Neighborhood Shopping Center
LAND USE DESCRIPTION:Commercial
LAND VALUE:284,000
IMPROVEMENT VALUE:581,000
TOTAL VALUE:865,000
STORIES:1
NUMBER OF ROOMS:0
SQFT OF FINISHED LIVING AREA:13553
YEAR BUILT: 1949
LEGAL DESCRIPTION:WESTOVER HILLS L30-33 BM SD
Or is it gonna be:
5035 FOREST HILL AVE
5047 FOREST HILL AVE
5057 FOREST HILL AVE
OWNER: SHAIA HARRY JR TR U/W B S EUBANK
ASSESSMENT MAILING ADDRESS:8550 MAYLAND DR
ASSESSMENT MAILING CITY:RICHMOND
ASSESSMENT MAILING STATE:VA
ASSESSMENT MAILING ZIP CODE:23294
PROPERTY CLASS DESCRIPTION:B Mixed Use
LAND USE DESCRIPTION:Commercial
LAND VALUE:339,100
IMPROVEMENT VALUE:164,900
TOTAL VALUE:504,000
STORIES:1
NUMBER OF ROOMS:0
SQFT OF FINISHED LIVING AREA:952
YEAR BUILT:1953
LEGAL DESCRIPTION:WESTOVER HILLS L25-29PT24 BM
Or is it gonna be:
5013 FOREST HILL AVE
5031 FOREST HILL AVE
5033 FOREST HILL AVE
OWNER: TRODD ASSOCIATES LLC
ASSESSMENT MAILING ADDRESS: 5012 SYLVAN RD
ASSESSMENT MAILING CITY:RICHMOND
ASSESSMENT MAILING STATE:VA
ASSESSMENT MAILING ZIP CODE:2322500000
PROPERTY CLASS DESCRIPTION:B General Retail/Service
LAND USE DESCRIPTION:Commercial
LAND VALUE: 107,000
IMPROVEMENT VALUE:163,000
TOTAL VALUE:270,000
LEGAL DESCRIPTION:WESTOVER HILLS
0075.00X0142.00 0000.000
Or is it:
5091 FOREST HILL AVE
1405 PRINCE ARTHUR ROAD
1407 PRINCE ARTHUR ROAD
OWNER: DALLAH NAZIR K & GULABI
ASSESSMENT MAILING ADDRESS:5091 FOREST HILL AVE
ASSESSMENT MAILING CITY:RICHMOND
ASSESSMENT MAILING STATE:VA
ASSESSMENT MAILING ZIP CODE:232250000
PROPERTY CLASS DESCRIPTION:B General Retail/Service
LAND USE DESCRIPTION:Commercial
LAND VALUE:168,000
IMPROVEMENT VALUE:253,000
TOTAL VALUE:421,000
STORIES:1
NUMBER OF ROOMS:0
SQFT OF FINISHED LIVING AREA:4144
YEAR BUILT:0
LEGAL DESCRIPTION:L34-35 BM
Or is it the dreaded “Developer” that lurks behind the curtain, with extreme malice, controlling all that we do?
Check under your beds people!
Entirely possible, but whether it’s a ruse, tongue-in-cheek, or 100% fact, I figured it’d make for some interesting discussion.
My hubby and I had our first date at the Forest, and there’re leftovers from China’s Best in the fridge right now. And Stories…they just repainted the windows all nice and pretty and within the city signage ordinance. I don’t think the food at the Forest would taste the same if it wasn’t eaten in the perma-tent…
I don’t even want to think about 300 rental units in that block - the 400-600 blocks of WHB are enough apartments for me, thankyouverymuch. I also suspect the folks on Devonshire would be less than happy with the idea.
Yeah, I’m gonna cut somebody if they take away China’s Best.
“Entirely possible, but whether it’s a ruse, tongue-in-cheek, or 100% fact, I figured it’d make for some interesting discussion.”
I confess, it was a ruse, however the intent was to spur discussion. I wanted to get you to think long and hard about this kind of real estate development and speculation, and what kind of impact it has on small neighborhoods like ours.
The fact that Crosland was able to so easily push the Manchester on the James project through in spite of the objections of over 1000 area residents, should be of tremendous concern to us all.
That so many on City Council voted to move forward with this project in spite of the slumping real estate market, the inferior quality of the construction materials to be used, the squandering of a skyline/river view, the less than ideal access to the site, etc., etc, speaks to just how out of touch many Council members truly are.
Marty Jewell was all ears for the Randolph resident who was upset that so many of the new housing units built in his neighborhood have been snapped up by speculators and turned into rental properties, and that this shift toward higher rental rates is tearing the fabric of that neighborhood. But Mr. Jewell completely ignored his constituents south of the river, who had voiced the same concerns over the Crosland development.
Reva Trammell and Chris Hilbert spent a few minutes touting a program to help beleaguered homeowners avoid foreclosure…and yet they voted in favor of a project that will, in all likelihood, remain substantially vacant for a long time to come.
All Council members that voted in favor of the Crosland project were apparently blind to the fact that units in this property will come with even higher pricetags than the other riverfront condos that have spectacular vies of the river. Crosland offers views of US Route 1.
The Council members that voted for this development ignored the fact that the landowners other newly constructed homes near the site remain unsold and/or unoccupied: they were completed months ago and are still vacant. While anyone else might view this as a lack of interest in real estate in Springhill, certain council members think differently.
Mention was made of the property’s ‘blighted’ appearance, and yet the land owner’s responsibility for that blight was ignored.
I could go on, but I’m tired and angry about this. My council person quite simply failed to do his job, which is to represent the residents of his district.
Hey - there’s a SNF under my bed…
Not under your bed. ;o) Over here in Woodland Heights.
Well SNF, your arguments against the development at Riverside might have been more effective if you hadn’t had the company of the elderly, trolley car remembering, segregative, confused, hopeless, malcontented, gonna be, could have been, should have been, will be, might be, kinda naysayer with no concrete analysis and “Boy! Do I Long For The Old Days” misfits steamrolling your arguments with their absurd notions of equality and fairness.
Remember that second developer spokesman? That’s the big gun. The James Baker of development. The first guy was the Technocrat. The numbers guy. Not too bright when faced with reality. Loves statistics yet never considers the fact that statistics lie and liars use statistics. Beat the second guy over the head (proverbially, of course) with the outright economic insanity of allowing street access to apartments in that area, the sheer economic ineptitude of attempting a high density development a block from where any drug of pleasure can be had and you’d have won. Aim a .22 caliber slug of logic at his cranium (proverbially, of course) and you’d have prevailed.
Yet you and your kind see things in “feelings” and “will be” and “gonna be” and couch reality in floral, political politeness.
The real world will slap these morons in their face soon enough, I am truly sorry though, that you have to be so close to the development as to realize that your own perspective and inhibitions are the root cause of your predicament. Amelia’s nice. So’s Powhatan. Glad you could visit Richmond, but it appears you’ve been in denial for as long as you’ve been here. So sorry.
Thanks for playing though. You tried.
I’ll be sure to add your name to the list of others who have tried as well.
Pop, I haven’t been in denial for any of the 18 years I’ve been here. I find your attitude of ‘blaming the victim’ to be counter productive, but that is doubtless your intent.
So that’s why you feel the need to create the myth of false “development” so as to assuage your fear. Pity that reality interfered with an easy fact check of the real estate holdings that are publicly listed on these handy interwebs.
Good luck to you SNF. I’d be so sad to be you. Good bye.
What fear? Projecting a little, are we?
BTW, if you think the online real estate data is up to date, then you’re in denial.
Glad you’re not my neighbor.
Actually, SNF, you are the one projecting here. To spread lies in a website, despite whatever valiant effort you might have in mind, doesn’t create much credibility for you and as your neighbor, I’d be wary of anything you had to say about developments or anything else for that matter.
Thanks to SNF for a fairly complete statement about all the problems that will occur if this project is constructed. You left out the most compelling part which is, our city government (as in all residents of the city) knowingly side stepped the laws and regulations of the zoning code of Richmond. If they are to be arbitrarily applied, why have them at all? Let’s do away with the several hundred pages and have a free for all. With all the savings in paper and salaries, we could all at last enjoy a real break in our property taxes!
Pop, I fully co-sign with your perspective. I feel exactly the same way. The reason why Richmond is so damn far behind the times when it comes to development it BECAUSE of these people who oppose projects based on how things “used to be” and speak in terms in “feelings” and “what ifs”.
I’ve noticed that many residents here do not adequqtely research an issue. they just listen to a “sound bite” and base their opinion solely on that sound bite. Which apparently has been happening for quite some time, hence, why Richmond is slow to become a truly progressive city with world-class amenities.
If you wanna get an idea of how Richmond can mesh the old with the new, look at the City of Alexandria. In my opinion, they did a good job of mixing old historic districts with new “glass and steel” development. I also like how they have low-income housing mixed in with middle & upper income housing. And I F’n love it!!! Geez, when will Richmond _fully_ get on the ball?
Personal favorite lines about development from the Richmond paper:
So many objections from his constituents had Marty Jewel confused about issues.
So he voted for the development.
That’s your representation.
Personally, if I am unsure about something, I either figure out the issue or take the more conservative way.
Marty Jewel could not even PRETEND to be interested in what his white constituents had to say. Marty is the only council person who gets up and walks out of the room during public comments, he’s the only council person to completely and overtly ignore his constituents. I have had the opportunity to talk to several city council members and school board members casually and when Marty Jewel’s name comes up (as it often does in disgust) their comments, eye rolling, head shaking and sighing all indicate that they think that MARTY JEWEL IS A TOTAL JOKE. They feel that his presence and verbal diaharea are a hinderence to council proceedings. Basically he’s THAT guy….and they want to know what the hell the 5th district was thinking when they voted him in. Marty is not regarded with respect in his own circle, and neither is the 5th district for voting him in.
Marty Jewel is corrupt, inept and racist. He is motivated by money and his anti-white beliefs. His goal is to advance his PERSONAL AGENDA, not serve the public.
I don’t appreciate the lie either. Don’t we have enough REAL problems in this city to worry about and discuss?
Like my Grandma used to say…. “Don’t go borrowing trouble!”
Wow, some of you here have really missed the point by your neighbors who opposed this project. Were you just listening to sound bites? It seems to me that some of you are having a knee jerk sort of reaction to our opposition without being fully informed. Pop’s point of view is dripping with its own bias.
We do not oppose development! In fact most of us favored a high rise that would have taken full advantage of the views offered by the site.
We opposed this development because was not a good fit for the parcel, any more than a similarly sized development with the same problems would fit in Westover Hills. Yes, I cried wolf to get your attention and to dislodge you from your complacency. I apologize if I offend your sense of fair play and decorum. But real estate speculation is about neither of those virtues.
Not all development is good or appropriate…6th Street Marketplace anyone?
Blame me for bumping it up, then, rather than SNF. It amused me greatly and I suspected (correctly) that it would spark an interesting discussion. I also have to admit that the misanthrope in me hoped one of the TV stations (which is a frequent daily visitor to this site) might pick it up and run with it. ;)
Hills and Heights and Patrick Henry Charter and Lies, Damned Lies
You’re going to have to switch to a smaller font pretty soon.
LOL @ Jennifer C. Good one.
Well, when I want fake news, I go to The Onion. Let’s try to keep it real here, k??????
Oh, lighten up everybody!!
It’s a great way to draw attention to a real problem (one that could easily happen here), and to give us all a kick in the pants to rouse us out of our collective “that could never happen in Westover Hills” state of mind.
And cut the BS with the misplaced indignation: you’d be a sight more offended if that kind of development were to actually happen under your noses and in your back yards.
Good for you SNF, whoever you are!
Watch for “Southside Lies & Education” coming soon to this space.
To misquote the great Mitch Hedberg: You can’t please everyone, and last night, those people read my hoodblog.
Well, considering the number of times I’ve heard “Hey, I read on Hills and Heights…” from people I know or bump into in the neighborhood, I’d say you’re doing okay. I wish I could see your sitemeter :)
A couple of thoughts from across the river:
I spoke up against the Croslands project when it was a high rise tower. For environmental and historic preservation reasons, I am against any proposed high rises west of the Lee Bridge along the James River area (and yes, “high rise” may sound too vague, but I hope you can recongize the intent of my position).
That said, I am not against density, especially so close to downtown, and I like the idea of mixed use residential and small business. So I can’t say I was totally opposed to the Crosland proposal. And although it may have been a ruse, I could see some benefits to adding a floor or two to the shop buildings west of CVS. I would love to see an expanded Stories, my wife and I go there all the time.
However I do understand other concerns of Spring Hill residents. Believe me, we have seen and continue to see a lot of crazy things near VCU (and by VCU). The developers love to try to divide and conquer. So I spoke at Council to get the SUP delayed and give residents more time to organize, for what its worth.
I encourage residents to challenge and hold the developers on every point and then some. Make them transplant trees instead of cutting them. Make them do whatever you can to IMPROVE the neighborhood, no matter what you think of their shiny new building. Hold them accountable for everything. Its your duty as citizens.
Regardless of Croslands, I can assure you that many of your neighbors to the north share your disappointment with our COuncilperson, Marty Jewell. When he’s not part of City Council’s ‘Leave No Developer Behind Act’, he’s riding the Mayor’s coat-tails into the muck, at the expense of citizens. I will be posting more on this later.
I look forward to more conversation on here and between different parts of the district. The north/south divide needs to be bridged.
But two candidates in the race against Jewell re-elects him.
Depends on the two candidates. I suspect, at least among the Southside portion of the 5th, everyone who’s not already a Jewell supporter is going to tilt towards Shewmake. Barring a bombshell, I don’t see Mark Brandon playing a big part.
Two candidates against Jewell doesn’t spell re-election for him.
Lee Shewmake is the best candidate of the three when it comes to actually representing the citizens in her district. Period.
Jewell is worthless as we all know by now, and Brandon apparently only crosses the river once every few years just for the novelty of it.
Brandon should step aside now. He garnered a lot of the ‘Anyone but Marty’ vote last time, but that won’t happen again, given that he backs the ‘No Developer Left Behind Act’ and gets so much financial backing from that quarter.
I must reply to “gruntled” and his assertions in the previous post: I live north of the river and can also attest to our current Councilperson’s ineptitude. Jewell has voted against his constituents (north and south of the James) whenever we needed his support and representation. He must go. I must say though on behalf of Mark Brandon, he has never left the scene. His activism as a member of the Sierra Club speaks well of his character as does his work at Maymont. The reason some developers (and there are some good developers, although seemingly rare) support Brandon is that through the Your Friends Uptown Association, he has been part of the momentum of the rebirth of Cary St (led by developer Ed Eck). Ride down Cary and note the improvements. Im sure Ms Shewmake is also an excellent candidate and I am anxious to hear her views. The logical thing to do is to have all three candidates engage in a dialogue, answering questions from all fifth district residents, and then all good citizens make their decision based on what they hear. No one is dropping out (although if anyone should, it is Jewell!). This is a complicated district with many complex needs. May the best person win!
Two candidates against Marty may mean Marty wins. Not one person has come to the defense of Marty Jewel after all this slamming so it’s safe to say his constituents here agree: MARTY MUST GO. BUT…. we have 2 candidates against him that could potentially divide the “anti-Marty” vote making it useless. Has anyone REALLY looked at the numbers to see if there is enough “anti-Marty” votes to throw to two candidates? The NUMBER ONE OBJECTIVE is to DUMP MARTY… and if I may go out on a limb here, I know that district 5 is majority African American and probably in support of Marty. If Shewmake and Brandon really care about District 5 and unseating Marty Jewel, someone needs to be prepared to step down. How many people live in the neighborhoods that Marty has ignored? Can we divide that number of people by two (worst case scenerio) and still beat Marty? I don’t think so.
Brandon won Woodland Heights last time he ran against Jewell and with pretty strong northside support still only came up with about 43% of the overall vote, losing to Jewell. It will take a concerted effort to unseat the incumbent. Unfortunately, along with voter support, campaign dollars will affect viability. It takes close to 20 grand or more to run a competitive race for city council in this district. Of course, I think Brandon will get a lot more support this election from the north of the river voters and I understand he is doing pretty well in contributions. You can google a candidate’s name and “VPAP” to look at donor history.
sorry, the figure for Brandon last time he ran against Jewell was 41.1% of the vote.
http://www.oregonhill.net/2008/06/25/re-zoning-and-the-disappointing-marty-jewell/