January 2004 - Laserfiche WebLink

Home Browse Search

1 significant historic properties as well. In particular, the routes that enter South Bend via 2 Michigan Street would likely entail widening Michigan and making it much more busy, and 3 more of a trucking route, which would be detrimental to the historic structures remaining in 4 the city, and to the life of the city generally. Of the alternatives present, route C -s, while it 5 would entail the loss of two very significant properties, would entail the loss of only those 6 two, and therefore is to be preferred over all the other proposals presently under 7 consideration. 8 Joann Sporleder: Believes that the two properties that would be lost if route C or C -s 9 were followed are of very great significance to the County, and that the access roads and. 10 interchanges required to connect C -s or C to the city and to other highways would entail other 11 losses of historic structures, both in the city and the county, loss of rural and wetland areas, 12 and loss of the opportunity to preserve and interpret the historic rail corridor and Nutwood 13 area by means of the "Rails to Trails" project which the City of South Bend has been working 14 on for some time now. Of the present routes, route E -s is to be preferred over the other 15 proposals under consideration, particularly_ from Madison Road north. 16 Catherine Hostetler: Said that E -s is to be preferred over the other proposals 17 presently under consideration. Proposed route G, or any other potential route East of the 18 present US 31 is totally unacceptable, because of the major impact upon significant historic 19 resources, both built and natural. 20 Virginia O'Hair: Said that Route E -s is to be preferred over the other routes under 21 consideration. She reaches this conclusion based in large part upon city gateway 22 considerations, and her work with developing the south side of South Bend. This route, with 23 proper planning, could encourage the preservation of historic south side buildings and 24 streetscapes by encouraging occupation, development, and restoration of presently vacant and 25 lovely buildings. Anything west of Michigan Street and the present US 31 would not help the 26 vacancies along the present route, and would encourage or require the demolition of existing 27 structures on the west side which are presently doing just fine. Likewise, building east of the 28 present route would cause historic losses not offset by corresponding gains. 29 Lynn Patrick: All of the proposed routes would cause some significant levels of 30 historic and environmental loss. The two best options, entailing the least significant historic 31 impact, of those under consideration, are E -s or the "no -build" option. 3