www.eagletimes.com
2016-07-18 / Front Page
Selectboard to hold hearings on nuisance ordinance, rooming houses
By Tory Jones Bonenfant
toryb@eagletimes.com
SPRINGFIELD — The Springfield Selectboard will hold a public hearing on Monday, July 25 in regard to a proposed zoning amendment that would update the definition of and rules for “rooming houses” within the town.
A first public hearing to allow Springfield citizens to hear the proposed amendments is scheduled for 6:15 p.m. Monday, July 25 at the Selectmen’s Hall on Main Street.
If approved, zoning bylaw amendments, in accordance with Vermont statutes 24 VSA 4441 and 4444, would include a replacement of the current definition of a “rooming house” with “Any dwelling unit with two or more individuals (sic) sleeping rooms for rent, non-transient — that is, for more than seven days at a time — and not including uses defined as Bed and Breakfast of Motel / Inn.”
The proposed zoning bylaw amendments would also add a new section to the existing Article 3 stating that rooming houses are a “conditional use” in the HDR, MDR, RC, GB, and CB zoning districts and are not permitted in any other zoning district. It would also be amended to state that no dwelling unit of any rooming house would be able to house more that one individual per bedroom, and in the situation where a dwelling unit in a two-family or multi-family dwelling is to be used as a rooming house, no unit in that house could house more than one person per bedroom.
The same would apply to owner-occupied dwellings with individual sleeping rooms for rent: “no such dwelling unit shall house individual per bedroom(s), which is / are non-owner or non-famly of the owner occupied,” according to the proposed amendment.
Except for when one or more “rooming houses” are in the same two- or multi-family dwelling, rooming houses will not be allowed to be located within 1,000 feet of another rooming house, according to that proposal.
Some exceptions will apply to existing rooming houses already in operation when and if the Springfield Selectboard adopts the zoning regulation amendments. An existing roominghouse would be allowed to continue to exist as a “nonconforming use” for up to two years, according to the proposal.
At that time, use would have to cease unless the Development Review Board grants the owner a Site Plan Review approval and Conditional Use approval, subject to the standards of the new zoning regulations, all according to the amendment proposal.
Other conditions and the full wording to the proposed amendments will be presented to the public at the first hearing on July 25.
Also that evening, the selectboard will present a public hearing for a second reading of the proposed ordinance 2016-2, Chapter 7, Division 8, which deals with health sanitation and nuisances regarding vacant properties, with updated wording based on feedback gathered from citizens over the past three months. That hearing is scheduled for 6:15 p.m. July 25 in Selectman’s Hall.
7/17/16
Getting rid of "flop houses" is a step in the right direction. Their only real use is by dope dealers and hookers. They allow the criminal element to "live below the radar" of law enforcement and should be eliminated altogether.
ReplyDeleteHookers? Where?
DeleteIs this really such a widespread problem around here, that it would require such efforts to curtail - much less a news article? Lets just stick to the dilapidated dumps around town and maybe get a few people to mow their flipping lawns. It's no secret houses are being given away around here - no point in taking care of one's property when it isn't worth diddly due to other homes all around looking abandoned. No way I'll ever get what my home is 'assessed' at.
ReplyDeletewill hunter has destroyed many neighborhoods with boarding houses. dumping any one he can find in them for some government money. they are drug dens full of non working people that you and i support.
DeleteHunter is self serving opportunist. The Selectboard should demand to inspect and publish his financials. Yet, simple minded, liberal, do-gooders in the community in a selfish ploy to feel good about themselves encourage this blight. A blight that continues to shrink the grand list and poison once proud neighborhoods with the worst elements of humanity.
DeleteSaw a very interesting article on the Burlington news. Person said there are three groups involved in the drug problem. 1) the users 2) the suppliers and 3) the persons renting to the users. Said that these landlords CONNECT the dealers with the users (or vise versa). They are in fact the major kingpins to the whole picture. Woke me up. The law should check these landlords wallets for drug tainted money.
DeletePlausible connection. No denying that as long as tenants remain unemployable addicts, Springfield Hosing Authority has a steady faucet of government funds to house these parasites. Many of us have extolled for years mandatory drug testing for welfare recipients. The same drug testing many us with enough self respect to earn a living have to conform to. Perhaps this election cycle will imitate a needed change. Use you vote wisely.
DeleteAnonymous 5:40, we need to be careful when singling out the problem. The problem here is not with the Springfield Housing Authority. The Springfield Housing Authority is not funding the problematic rooming houses. Their are agencies which are helping to indirectly fund the problematic rooming houses and some of these are being funded by the special appropriations which the residents routinely approve, but the Springfield Housing Authority is not the problem here. There is a tendency to blame the Housing Authority for projects they have nothing to do with. I am all for curbing and halting the problems associated with the rooming houses as soon as possible, but lets be clear that the Housing Authority is not the problem.
DeleteWasn't hunter disbarred for embezzling from clients? If he is such a "savior", why don't the "renters" live with him?
ReplyDeleteWe need to look into the process of supervising embedded in the programs serving these populations. Clearly, when the supervision is good, the problems are fewer and smaller. One house needed staff for night time supervision; the supervisor had absolute power. If a resident didn't follow the rules, it meant an immediate return to jail. However, there did not appear to be funding for a nighttime supervisor. How do we check out this aspect?
ReplyDeleteCheck out the funding of the current houses. I have found some interesting information in the towns grants.
DeleteSpringfield is failing because we allow people who do not live in this town to litter it with these houses. Then claim they are the victims.
The only people who run these houses are scam artists, claiming they are doing everything to the T. Yet behind the scenes doing nothing but collecting money, and finding other ways to take money from the town they are claiming to improve.
We need to run these people out of "our town" and make sure if we have half way houses or sober houses or what ever you want to call them they are looked into and as open as any other business in Vermont. As that is what they are mental health/jail dump houses that people are profiting from.