My WebLink
|
Help
|
About
|
Sign Out
Home
Browse
Search
08-22-16 Zoning and Annexation
sbend
>
Public
>
Common Council
>
Minutes
>
Committee Meeting Minutes
>
2016
>
Zoning and Annexation
>
08-22-16 Zoning and Annexation
Metadata
Thumbnails
Annotations
Entry Properties
Last modified
4/26/2017 10:44:50 AM
Creation date
9/22/2016 8:50:05 AM
Metadata
Fields
Template:
City Council - City Clerk
There are no annotations on this page.
Document management portal powered by Laserfiche WebLink 9 © 1998-2015
Laserfiche.
All rights reserved.
/
10
PDF
Print
Pages to print
Enter page numbers and/or page ranges separated by commas. For example, 1,3,5-12.
After downloading, print the document using a PDF reader (e.g. Adobe Reader).
Show annotations
View images
View plain text
communities for very large residential lots in order to preserve home values excludes poor <br />people. Obviously this shifts the market to build more expensive homes than ordinarily might be <br />built. He stated that he spends thirty -five percent (35 %) of his income on housing. Other people <br />in his neighborhood spend the same amount and more. Some see these restrictions as violating <br />property rights. It can be argued that zoning boards and city councils disable property owners' <br />creative use of their lands. Along with potential property right infringement, zoning laws have <br />been criticized as a means to promote social and economic segregation through exclusion. These <br />laws create maximum density requirements and as a result lower income groups deemed <br />undesirable or unwelcome are effectively excluded from certain communities. Political decisions <br />allocated housing of different prices to different neighborhoods and thereby turn the market into <br />a mechanism for class segregation. Zoning encourages income segregation and there is a <br />relationship between an area's allowance for building housing at higher density and racial <br />integration between blacks and whites in the Unites States. The intent of this policy is flexible <br />housing opportunities by changing zoning regulations. <br />Jose De Arevala, 3809 Fellows Street, spoke in favor of the bill. South Bend Mutual Housing is a <br />testament to what we can do when the community works together. By amending the zoning <br />ordinance as proposed we can increase the available housing opportunities in existing <br />neighborhoods. Changing the zoning allows people to use existing structures for purposes <br />previously unavailable to them. This also increases affordability which is desperately needed in <br />our community. <br />Marguerite Taylor, 714 Corby Blvd. South Bend, spoke in favor of the bill. The North East <br />Neighborhood Revitalization Organization has done a ton of new housing and redevelopment in <br />the Northeast Neighborhood. We have fought long and hard to keep Single - Family homes in the <br />Northeast Neighborhood. At one time you could not even rent a house because of the presence of <br />Notre Dame students. The neighborhood was losing families and they are finally returning. <br />Bill Stems, 1020 East Colfax, president of the Northeast Neighborhood Council spoke in favor of <br />the bill. Mr. Stems stated the members are heavily in favor of this and provided an example of a <br />property where the home owners wanted to build a Single- Family house and had to go through a <br />rezoning procedure just to build the house. That process seems backwards and this helps that <br />problem. <br />Marco Mariani, Executive Director of the South Bend Heritage Foundation offices at 803 <br />Lincolnway West, spoke in favor of this bill. The Heritage Foundation also serves as the staff for <br />the Northeast Neighborhood Revitalization Organization. These changes meet with the goals for <br />the Northeast Neighborhood as it relates to promoting Single - Family development. <br />No one spoke in opposition to the bill. <br />Committeemember Gavin Ferlic made a motion to send Bill 37 -16 to the full Council with a <br />favorable recommendation. Committeemember John Voorde seconded the motion which carried <br />by a voice vote of four (4) ayes. <br />F <br />
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.