Nothing like a one acre development proposal to get a community up-in-arms. But apparently that's what happens when you mix together a 33-unit condominium development, a historic neighborhood and a little bit of politicking. In the days leading up to tomorrow's City Council hearing on the proposed Oakwood Heights development in Church Hill, the emails have been circulating and the comment sections at Church Hill People's News have been filling up -- mostly in opposition to the proposal by Fulton Hill Properties.
Late last week, Times-Dispatch columnist Michael Paul Williams raised the ante with a commentary piece that suggested petitions circulated in support of the development came from residents far afield of the Church Hill neighborhood where it would be located:
Evelyn McCargo lives across East Broad Street from the site of the proposed Oakwood Heights condominiums, which she vehemently opposes.
"This is a quiet neighborhood," said McCargo, 71, who for 40 years has lived on the block where Broad ends its run on Church Hill. "We get along fine. We don't need all this stuff coming in here."
McCargo, a diminutive woman, has seen changes on her block that mirror the racial and economic changes across Church Hill.
She is mystified by many of the names on 50 pages of signatures filed at City Hall in support of the 33-unit Oakwood Heights project. "These people live nowhere near here -- all those people in Creighton Court, out by Nine Mile Road."
The signatures included those of her niece, Thelma McCargo, who lives in Creighton Court, and her aunt, Mary Jones, who resides in Fairfield Court. The petition sheets are filled with names of East End public housing residents who live 2 miles from the Chimborazo neighborhood.
Why are people in Richmond's public housing being mobilized in support of $200,000 to $350,000 condos?
That's led residents to organize in opposition to the development; here's one appeal from Church Hill resident Thea Duksin:
It jams 33 units into a parcel of land barely over an acre, with 4 story buildings, elaborate walkways joining buildings together like a wall, elevator towers, and a driveway/parking lot cut right through the middle of the block (this would be a 20 ft. drive next to my neighbor's house). None of this is permissible (not to mention compatible) within a Historic District according to the City's own guidelines, which is why the Commission for Architectural Review denied a certificate of appropriateness to the developer.
Church Hill residents are expected to turn out in droves for tomorrow evening's City Council meeting, scheduled for 6:00 p.m. at City Hall.
