THE VIRGINIAN-PILOT
Copyright (c) 1994, Landmark Communications, Inc.
DATE: Wednesday, July 6, 1994 TAG: 9407060393
SECTION: LOCAL PAGE: B3 EDITION: FINAL
SOURCE: BY MAC DANIEL, STAFF WRITER
DATELINE: SUFFOLK LENGTH: Medium: 64 lines
Suffolk's weary battle against housing blight has been blindsided by well-meaning Virginia legislators.
The number of rental housing inspections in the city could be halved by a minor change in state law that took effect July 1.
It could be a major setback for a 2-year-old program that has already rescued an infant bitten by rats and closed homes where tenants were forced to use buckets as toilets.
Because of an amendment to the state code, rental properties in large sections of the city are no longer required to be inspected between tenants.
In the past, any dwelling in the city had to receive a certificate of occupancy before a new renter could move in.
But during its 1994 session, the General Assembly amended the law, limiting such inspections statewide to deteriorated areas known as conservation districts.
Suffolk has 12 conservation districts. But the need for rental inspections in this 430-square-mile city goes well beyond those borders, city officials have said.
Vanessa M. Savage, Suffolk's housing inspector, said she expects rental housing inspections to be cut 50 percent because of the amended law.
``This will really hurt the city of Suffolk,'' she said. ``We will get more housing complaints now. With inspections not being citywide, it's going to be more frustrating, more confusing.''
To help battle blight, Suffolk's rental occupancy permit program went citywide in 1992. As a result, rental occupancy inspections skyrocketed - from 233 in 1991 to 1,332 in 1993.
Suffolk officials have the option of declaring the entire city a conservation district to allow for citywide inspections. But this means declaring all of Suffolk ``deteriorated, blighted, and in need of conservation'' - a public relations nightmare for a city attempting to become the next boom town in Hampton Roads.
A citywide conservation district could also become a legal and administrative quagmire, forcing the city to determine which neighborhoods get help and which do not in a program designed to help all.
To solve the problem, the city hopes to expand conservation districts as well as create a few more. Even without adding any new districts, if officials expand the dozen now in place ``we're pretty much covered,'' said James G. Vicalis, assistant city manager.
Inspection officials from other cities in the region said they are unaffected by the new law because their rental inspection programs already focus on conservation districts. The city of Chesapeake was one of several such cities requesting the law be amended to help clarify where their rental inspection programs could be run.
Chesapeake officials said they were unaware of Suffolk's problems when they lobbied for the change.
Suffolk officials hold no grudge against their neighbor, but the mayor is disappointed the state's lawmakers failed to recognize the trouble the amendment would cause.
``We'll just have to refocus on the conservation areas,'' Suffolk Mayor S. Chris Jones said. ``It's certainly disappointing that this came out of the General Assembly.'' by CNB