BRUNSWICK
In spite of a growing homeless population, Brunswick is considering an extension of its temporary ban on homeless shelter development.
A town council task force that has been working on new zoning rules regulating shelters has asked for more time to finish its work, further stalling an resource center project planned by Tedford Housing, a nonprofit that maintain shelters for individuals and families in the Brunswick area.
The council adopted its first 180-day moratorium in April, blocking any homeless shelter projects after Tedford Housing raised the idea of locating a new resource center at the corner of Baribeau Drive and Pleasant Hill Road. The project would have consolidated two homeless shelters and administrative offices in that location.
The current moratorium preventing any applications for homeless shelters or similar uses will expire on Sept. 25.
“We went into this hoping we were going to do this within the original moratorium,” said Councilor James Mason, chairman of the task force. “We wanted to come back here before the moratorium (expires) with a recommendation and not have to ask this council for an additional moratorium.”
He said the group has met 12 times since the initial moratorium started, including “field trips” to the proposed Tedford site.
Two of the three councilors on the task force want only a four-month moratorium extension, he said. The task force is on the cusp of a full recommendation but is still going through staff recommendations.
When Tedford’s planning for the new center first became public, the town didn’t have zoning regulations in place that would apply to the project, even though Tedford has operated two homeless shelters in town for three decades. Tedford also faced resistance from the 62 Pleasant Hill Coalition, a group of neighbors near the proposed site that pushed for a moratorium.
Before Tedford submitted any formal plans for the new facility, the Brunswick Town Council passed the six-month moratorium blocking any new homeless shelters in town. As a result, the organization put its $4 million capital campaign on hold and let its option expire on the purchase of property it was eyeing for the project.
On Wednesday, Tedford Housing Executive Director Craig Phillips told The Times Record that an additional six months was “a long time to delay our initiative,” and hoped that the task force’s work would be finished sooner.
“Our search for land is really on hold until the entire process is done, which, at this point, could be up to a year,” Phillips said. “Until the ordinance amendment is adopted by the council, Tedford really cannot pursue any of its interests in properties for an emergency housing facility in Brunswick and the region.”
Phillips said the project is important because its two existing facilities on Cumberland and Federal streets are at least 100 years old.
“They are very worn-out and really don’t provide the types of spaces that fit into a modern model of providing not only shelter beds but also housing services,” Phillips said.
Tedford turns away about 300 families and 280 adult individuals seeking shelter a year, according to Phillips.
In 2017, Tedford’s emergency housing program facilities served 20 families and 73 individual adults.
On Tuesday, Mason recommended the council hold a public hearing at 6:30 p.m. on Sept. 17 to discuss whether to extend the moratorium by another six months. The council agreed to the hearing.
Once the town finishes its work on the ordinance amendments, Mason argued that the council should go ahead and adopt them, and may not need to take the full six months.
The shelter task force next meets at 4 p.m. on Sept. 12 at the town hall.
JOHN SWINCONECK contributed to this report.
dmoore@timesrecord.com
Comments are not available on this story. Read more about why we allow commenting on some stories and not on others.
We believe it's important to offer commenting on certain stories as a benefit to our readers. At its best, our comments sections can be a productive platform for readers to engage with our journalism, offer thoughts on coverage and issues, and drive conversation in a respectful, solutions-based way. It's a form of open discourse that can be useful to our community, public officials, journalists and others.
We do not enable comments on everything — exceptions include most crime stories, and coverage involving personal tragedy or sensitive issues that invite personal attacks instead of thoughtful discussion.
You can read more here about our commenting policy and terms of use. More information is also found on our FAQs.
Show less