Laserfiche WebLink
STARTING POINTS: ANALYSIS DETERMINANTS <br />Before this report delves into more depth regarding the history of US 31 and analyzes the various possible <br />routes for the highway in St. Joseph County, staff will explain an issue that needs to be addressed before <br />any recommendation can be put forward. Staff examined the importance of the following historic aspects <br />of the county in order to determine which possible routes were most and least favorable: historic <br />landmarks, historic structures, historic regions, railroad corridors, current roadway types, and landscapes. <br />Because the Commission has ordinances and resolutions that protect local and national landmarks, <br />preserving these from encroachment and damage is a straightforward task and one over which the <br />Commission has the appropriate jurisdiction. The later elements offer added complexity to proposal for a <br />new facility for US 31. The HPC has potential jurisdiction over ranking historic structures that could be <br />granted landmark designation as well as concentration of structures and landscapes that could be granted <br />historic district status. Several pockets of historic structures are located nearby several of the proposed <br />routes. The rail corridors, rural roads, and rural landscapes found in the south of the country have less <br />protective legal opportunity than the other elements, yet their presence are importance aspects of St. <br />Joseph County's sense of place and history. Though less able to be legally and directly protected by the <br />Commission, any large-scale impact upon and through the rural landscape may have far more negative <br />consequences than rebuilding upon the more built-up routes route that may have a greater concentration <br />of structures lining the roadway. These final three elements could be protected through advocacy and <br />diplomacy, though difficult it may be. <br />SUMMARY OF PROPOSED ROUTES and RECOMMENDATIONS <br />These proposed alternatives for US 31 span the area from Oak Road as the western most road portion to <br />Elm Road/Capital Avenue in the east. Yet, because of noise, the need for access ramps and possible road <br />widening (data and location not known on these, assumed) the area of impact greatly exceeds the <br />proposed roadway as shown on the maps found on the US 31 website. The alternatives traverse six <br />townships in St. Joseph County: Liberty, Union, Madison, Greene, Centre, and Penn. <br />._..__..Alternative A <br />Alternative A as of June 2003 would enter Saint Joseph County via Oak Road. The proposed path <br />replaces Oak Road until just north of Quinn Road where it curves to the east and follows the New Jersey, <br />Indiana, and Illinois railway line into Greene Township. The curve in the highway just misses the <br />boundary of Potato Creek Park and Worster Lake. After passing Potato Creek Park, this proposed route <br />follows the railway line corridor until it connects with US 20 west of the US23/US20 junction. <br />This alternative will affect a few historic structures and landscape elements directly, yet not as many as <br />other proposed routes. Many of these structures are of significant historic value to the local area and to <br />St. Joseph County and could be considered for local historic landmark status. These include: a circa 1880 <br />Italianate farmhouse at 68651 Oak Road 3; a century old gabled bank barn at 23900 Riley Road 4; Fair <br />Cemetery; the cemetery on the northeast corner of Riley and Oak Roads; and possibly a notable Stick <br />vernacular farmhouse, 23871 Stanton Road that dates to circa 1895 and has a ranking of <br />Significant/ 125; 23256 New Road, a vernacular farmhouse from the stick style that dates to the circa <br />18906, and a contributing vernacular residence dating to circa 1895 at 60711 Mayflower Road. <br />II T" .' 141.120D1--3421141.342.90049. The survey records on this house rank it as notable112 or significantâ–º12. <br />4 Old survey Number 11060, Rating: S/ 11. <br />s Old survey number 11065. <br />6 Old Survey number 11038. <br />