Are boarding houses really the problem?

[strider]

Actually, Dan, it was and is a legitimate concern.  Some do only want "their kind" in "their" neighborhood. You often sound that way, yet now you say that isn't the case. 

Personally, I do see a difference between 5 homeless, and 5 college room mates. I do see a difference between a 3 to a room rooming house and an apartment. Assuming I am reading you properly, what makes it all the same to you?

First, 5 homeless means something bad to most here.  Five unrelated adults is actually the right description.  Homeless is not what they are, it is a unwanted condition they find themselves in.  College students are, well, college students.  So no, there is no difference between 5 unrelated adults and 5 college students.  They both could be the best neighbors you ever had.  Or the worst.  Equal chance of either with either group.  You can say the same thing with a family of five.  Or a rich family or a poor family.  Overall, there is no difference.

Three in a room or three in a one bedroom apartment really is the same thing.  A lot of sharing going on.  Sharing a bath with the family down the hall used to be common place.  In today's society, it has evolved into something bad.  Yet, do you not share a bath with another family when go visit friends at their house?  I know, it is different because you know them, but when you get right down to it, you are still sharing that bath.  Eveything is indeed realative and to someone who once lived under a bridge, sharing a room or sharing a bath is heaven by comparison.  And trust me, as they get used to "normal life", they hope to eventually get to that real apartment.  Some do, others never will.  Some cannot so they become long term residents in one of the facilities. 

The point is, none of this makes them bad neighbors.  None of this should preclude them from being welcomed or at least accepted as part of the community.

[fsu813]

Strider really has no credibility left.

If you think living next to 5 "people that find themselves in the unfortunatate situation to be without housing at the moment" or whatever PC label you'd others to call them, and living next to 5 college students is the equatable then your are nuts, sir.

Homeless, in general, have made repeated poor choices that have resulted in thier situation, often caused by vices (drugs, alcoholism, etc). A minority have just had bad luck, a very small minority. College students are interested in their future, have shown good judgment to get where they are, and generally care about not screwing thier future up.

Furthermore, Strider, you asked me "why did you choose to live next to poor people and bprading houses?"

Again, you loose credibility. I don't have any issues with poor people, yet you infer that I do. Why? Oh that's right, b/c it makes your argument sound better. Grwoing up in Riverside in the late 80's and 90's I experienced first hand a neighborhood restoration. Gun shots, prostitutes, drug houses, and frequent DV in the streets died out. You don't see them my old street anymore (2000 block of Myra), where it used to be not uncommon at all. Thus I grew up with many poor people that have maintained friendships with me even today. Poor can take a vested interested in thier homes and neighborhoods just like middle class or rich people. Unlike boarding houses/rehab houses or whatever you want to call them.

I moved here b/c I like historic neigborhoods, i like that it's in the middle of a restoration, i like that it's already MUCH better than Riverside when I was a child, i like that it has a evry strong community organization (which is needed to sustain the restoration), i like the location, and i like the fact the relatively close, neighborly ties between most residents.

Again I state : if you weren't making money off borading/halfway/rehab houses......then you wouldn't be supporting them. Also, you wouldn't a plethora of them in your neighborhood, block, or next door. Noone would. That's why i support having a a limited amount in various neighborhoods, not concentrated into one.

[Karl_Pilkington]

WTF?  backhanded insults, outright fabrications, lies lies lies yeah, the stuff of your post stephen. I mean come on, "couldn't afford in the first place"?  really? Seriously?  I know you've got that duracell on your shoulder, but man that was ridiculous.  Like everyone can't trace some trash or rich bitch in their family histories here in the US, what was the purpose of that.  No one is trying to recreate anything, "social creaminess" thats just plain ridiculous and you know it is, ergo.

[Karl_Pilkington]

what another insult?  man....

[downtownparks]

Stephen, do really believe your own bullshit? Just wondering.

[Karl_Pilkington]

I hope you're not talking Bushmills that foul protestant swill.

[nvrenuf]

So does it not qualify as a personal attack when you don't mention a name but everyone knows who you are talking about due to past personal experience and/or posts?

[enuffalready]

Well, I certainly don't believe any of yours.  This constant attempt to smirch and bully your neighbors is a little tenditious and a little much.

I think it has been pointed out before these are not our neighbors, these are simply people prostituting our neighborhood for the almighty dollar while living somewhere else.  

[Karl_Pilkington]

I think it has been pointed out before these are not our neighbors, these are simply people prostituting our neighborhood for the almighty dollar while living somewhere else.  

AND I now have it on good authority that they do partake in that awful Protestant hooch known as Bushmills!  what a combo huh?

[fsu813]

the thread was asking if boarding houses were a problem, i think you got your answer.

[strider]

1) "white flight" - the middle class's flight to the suburbs.
2) The commercial enterprises leaving the urban core
3) Values dropping as the urban core became less desirable.
4) Law enforcement's tactic of "containment" rather than elimination of crime.
5) The lack of economic diversity - yes, sort of too many poor rather than the mix of economic groups that seems to be required to make a community successful.
6) The prejudice of local organizations as shown by unequal distribution of revitalization funds.
7) Wide spread issues with drugs and the resulting petty crimes.
8 ) lack of functional infra-structure. 
9) Lack of proper structural maintenance due to the low property values.
10) Redlining


Actually,  many here have recognized that “boarding houses” were once an integral part of life and therefore, not always "bad".  There is some evidence that they became "bad" as the community declined and that too many of them could be a "bad" thing in a "bad" neighborhood.  A far cry from saying that “boarding houses” are the problem.

What we do have a is list of things that all contributed directly to the decline of Springfield.  I did not put "boarding houses" on it because, and I am not alone in knowing this, “boarding house” issues are a symptom rather than a cause.  As it is a symptom, if you just eliminate "boarding houses" you still have the same causes or the same disease that will still take down a community.  We have been trying at least to talk about the past, but as some want to talk about today, let's ask a question or two.

Of the listed ten items, how many are still hurting Springfield and what are the signs that they are actually here and an issue?  In other words, while there was a huge improvement in Springfield over the better part of the last ten years, what issues are still here and what issues have come back due to the recent economic issues?

[fsu813]

who cares if they once were? why does that matter exactly? (ha)

- continously bringing up that they once weren't disliked by the communities they are in doesn't change or affect anything today. asbestos was once thought to be a pretty cool material too, what does that have to do with today's view of asbestos? nothing.

- in my first post in this thread, you'll find that i said that they are not THE problem, but A problem......but i guess you didn't read it.

- getting rid of the "symptoms" is better than not. all of us that have been sick would rather take medicine to alleviate the symptoms, even if it takes time to heal.

- your list is diverting your role in staggnation of revitalization, rather than acknowledging.

- of your entire post, your last sentence is the only one that doesn't try to deflect. To that, i'd say 4, 6, & 7 are still issues....they rest are not. Not sure what #10 is.

btw,

you did get your answer. you just don't like it.

[ChriswUfGator]

Well technically he got a couple opinions of what the answer should be according to those espousing the opinions. Nothing more.

The truth is that there aren't that many rooming houses of any variety left in Springfield, compared to a few years ago, and that figure will continue to decline into nonexistence due to the zoning/overlay revisions (with the apparent exception of the new one the CEO of Clara White is trying to start).

What there are, though, is a whole crapload of condemned properties, boarded up or abandoned houses, prostitutes, vacant lots, vacant commercial properties, and a neighborhood preservation group that's been largely consumed with internal politics while the City has gone on a 15-year rampage of knocking down hundreds of historic structures that continues to this day. And on, and on, and on.

Then you have Springfield's immediate proximity to other low-income neighborhoods, which don't have ANY hope of rebounding in our lifetimes, because they have pretty much zero historic value (mostly 1950's/1960's cinder block stuff). That will continue to be a huge anchor around Springfield's neck, regardless of anything else. Then you have a gigantic rental market in Springfield, where a nice chunk of the tenants are equally as bad (if not worse) as what you'd get in any boarding house.

All of these things are far larger issues than a couple of rooming houses. Honestly, the rooming house thing is pretty much a non-issue compared to everything else going on.

[nvrenuf]

The truth is that there aren't that many rooming houses of any variety left in Springfield, compared to a few years ago, and that figure will continue to decline into nonexistence due to the zoning/overlay revisions (with the apparent exception of the new one the CEO of Clara White is trying to start).

The terms "not that many" and "a few years" are vague enough to leave those amounts up to interpretation. How many is "not that many" and is "a few years" ago 5-10-20? And how will that number decline if the zoning/overlay revisions continue to allow exceptions for people who weren't able to sell their house at the $$$ they wanted in these tough economic times? Maybe next year they make 10 exceptions? Then you end up with the same cycle starting over again. People won't want to be surrounded by boarding or rooming houses, they start selling, values drop and more people sell before the bottom hits. Then the city ends up losing more money from the falling tax values.
   

[strider]

you did get your answer. you just don't like it.

Actually, I think you got answers you did not like. 

The truth is that there aren't that many rooming houses of any variety left in Springfield, compared to a few years ago, and that figure will continue to decline into nonexistence due to the zoning/overlay revisions

The actual numbers are close to 40 plus in 2000 down to 11 in 2008.  That is true "Special Uses".  As far as the supposed "new" half way houses/ rooming house/ boarding house that the "CEO of Clara White" is accused of trying to open, it is not a "Special Use", rather a permissible use under that particular zoning code (Which is RMD-S).

And how will that number decline if the zoning/overlay revisions continue to allow exceptions for people who weren't able to sell their house at the $$$ they wanted in these tough economic times?

First, there have been no revisions to the overlay.  2007-1046 modified it slightly by adding a few reporting requirements. Those modifications did nothing what so ever to change either the scope of the overlay or it's intent.  It should also be noted that the overlay did not intent to eliminate the special uses, rather it intended to reduce the number to what many would consider more reasonable for the area that makes up Springfield.  As the existing Special Uses are grandfathered in, it can easily be seen that they could exist forever. That depends upon things like need, how they are run, ETC.  As they are inspected by the state and the county, if they are not run properly, it can be assumed that they will be dealt with the proper way.

No exception is needed in any zoning code that I know of to just rent your house.  I do agree, however, that it is a good idea to rent a house in today’s market, if you can, rather than sell it at a substantial loss.  The alternatives to renting are to let it sit empty where vandals will strip it and it still cost thousands a year to hold on to, or sell it for a fraction of your investment.  Me?  I’d rather hold it and rent it and at least try to cover the costs in hopes of the market coming back again to eventually sell for at least enough to cover those basic costs. 

Like others have said, there are far larger issues here than a few existing rooming houses or even a few rentals that some do not like.

I'd say 4, 6, & 7 are still issues....they rest are not. Not sure what #10 is.

Yes, I agree with your choices.  4, 6 and 7 are still and have been major issues.  10, by the way is:

From Wikpedia: Redlining is the practice of denying or increasing the cost of services such as banking, insurance, access to jobs, access to health care, or even supermarkets,  to residents in certain, often racially determined,  areas. The term "redlining" was coined in the late 1960s by community activists in Chicago. It describes the practice of marking a red line on a map to delineate the area where banks would not invest; later the term was applied to discrimination against a particular group of people (usually by race or sex) no matter the geography.

You can see where is fits in with many of the other issues on the list.

As to the others no longer applying?  “white flight” , no it’s pretty much over.  Though some are saying it might become “suburb flight” someday.

I think #2 still applies.  Think about the lack of large commercial or retail in downtown or Springfield.  A few small store, lots of tall office space that may or may not be empty and some restraunts downtown.  Even less in Springfield.  However, as they are already gone, I can see where you would say 2 doesn’t apply, yet we need those places back, do we not?

3 also is no longer and issue as the urban core is becoming “the place to be”.  And that renewed interest in the urban core is what is turning around #5.  Yet, is it also causing worse issues with the existing population? 

8 and 9 - while OK, and just OK - reference the many pot holes .. is at risk of becoming a huge issue again.  If the city is poor, will the infrastructure get replaced as has been promised?  As the housing values have fallen , will the structures receive the needed repairs or will more fall under the wrecking ball?