SPAR Tries to Pass Law to Ban Non Family Members from Living Together.

[BridgeTroll]

Laws are not perfect, most have unintended consequences

Wow! Great point... There seem to be innumerable laws and proposed laws this applies to...

[fsu813]

Stephen,

Sweet. Hopefully the 2 organizations will focus on different things, to get more done.

The more the merrier. As long as they don't work against eachother (which i seriously doubt) this can be nothing but good!

I'm curious though, what SPAR supported community events do they take part in that drive people apart?

The bazaar? The home tours? the National Night outs? Neighborhood cleanups? ummm......Dog Days in the Park? First Fridays? I can't think of any that are devisive.

[BridgeTroll]

 

Like the Crips with more anti oxidants.

[Springfield Girl]

I would like to see names. This doesn't sound like any recent board.

Municipal planners said such ordinances are getting closer scrutiny in communities across the Chicago suburbs and elsewhere in the country. Often enacted decades ago, they were designed to keep residential neighborhoods geared more toward families -- and to keep out such things as boarding houses.

As the village's lawsuit against the owner of the house heads back to court Friday, it focuses squarely on the changing definition of the word "family."

Did you miss this part of your examples, FSU.

Our country has changed alot since then. A hella lot.

I for one, don't ever want to go back to those times.

And Im definitely sick of the ever expanding list that the 290 people of SPAR no longer want in the neighborhood.

The hypocrisy is whats killing me.

When SPAR board members (and you know who you are) were taking advantage of the little old women who didnt realize their homes were suddenly worth more than 11 thousand dollars, and one of the board members took a house for 1,100 dollars from a young boy whose grandmother had just died,  no one in the SPAR community was worried about 'making profit off of the poor'.

ugh.

this whole subject is just unseemly.

[cindi]

Stephen,

Sweet. Hopefully the 2 organizations will focus on different things, to get more done.

The more the merrier. As long as they don't work against eachother (which i seriously doubt) this can be nothing but good!

I'm curious though, what SPAR supported community events do they take part in that drive people apart?

The bazaar? The home tours? the National Night outs? Neighborhood cleanups? ummm......Dog Days in the Park? First Fridays? I can't think of any that are devisive.

fyi, home tours and dog days are not SPAR activities.  the home tours are woman's club (not a spar organization but totally separate entity) and dog days is SACARC which actually falls under the Woman's Club not SPAR

[fsu813]

Oh I know, i just said that SPAR "supports" them.

[fsujax]

So what's the deal with this? I just saw this thread. Am I going to have to kick my roomates out? or what?

[Jth]

So what's the deal with this? I just saw this thread. Am I going to have to kick my roomates out? or what?

As long as they aren't gay, unmarried couples, foster children, or college roommates you should be fine. That's my interpretation of the code according to what Mr. Tin Foil Cap has said.

But in all seriousness you should be fine. Unless of course you have more than 5 roommates.

[fsujax]

Dang, that would stink!

[Jth]

Here is another email between SPAR and Zoning.

The original email from SPAR is at the bottom, and the response is at the top.

The current zoning provides for people unrelated to each other up to five.  What SPAR wants to change is this definition.  They are suggesting 3.

Where do you get that SPAR wants to change the definition to 3? I didn't see that referenced at all in that letter. Sounds like SPAR just wants an enforcement of the zoning overlay.

[Jth]

Still nothing about the number 3.

[jason_contentdg]

So where is the definitive evidence that SPAR is wanting a number of allowed people in a single family dwelling unit to be revised to be less than the current allowed number of 5.

[cindi]

Prisoner's of Christ have a similar system, they are on Boulevard, the big difference is they place pedophiles there fresh from jail.  No one seems to care about that. 

[Jth]

SPAR is disappointed at not being able to enforce the zoning overlay, not the defined number per family. Still yet to see anything regarding the magical number 3.

[Jth]

there is no 'magical' three Jth.  There is a suggested three.

Tell me, did SPAR tell you about their plans?  Or have you been kept completely in the dark about this attempt to change the laws, just like everyone else in the city?

And incidentally, which word of Springfield Preservation And Restoration is it that makes them into the body that 'enforces' the overlay?  Last time I checked, that was still the City who did that.

Ok Steven its not a "magical" 3, its a "suggested" 3. Still yet to see any documentation of this "suggested" 3.

Where do you get that there is an attempt to change the laws? The Planning and Development Department writes the zoning overlays which are then passed through City Council. Its not as if they have to pass some sort of public referendum as it sounds like you assume. If there were to be any change it would have to occur through the proper public channels that the city has in place. So despite your unfounded fears, nothing would be able to change behind closed doors. That is if there is any desire to have anything change anyways. Which you have done nothing to prove.

How is SPAR trying to enforce the overlay themselves? They simply want the city to enforce the codes that are put forth in the Springfield Overlay.