My WebLink
|
Help
|
About
|
Sign Out
Home
Browse
Search
01-22-62 Council Meeting Minutes
sbend
>
Public
>
Common Council
>
Minutes
>
Common Council Meeting Minutes
>
1962
>
01-22-62 Council Meeting Minutes
Metadata
Thumbnails
Annotations
Entry Properties
Last modified
7/25/2013 4:18:28 PM
Creation date
7/23/2013 10:59:51 AM
Metadata
Fields
Template:
City Council - City Clerk
City Council - Document Type
Council Mtg Minutes
City Counci - Date
1/22/1962
There are no annotations on this page.
Document management portal powered by Laserfiche WebLink 9 © 1998-2015
Laserfiche.
All rights reserved.
/
5
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
COMMUNICATION <br />Mayor Frank J. Bruggner <br />City Hall <br />South Bend, Indiana <br />Dear Mayor Bruggner: <br />January 20, 1962 <br />The South Bend Urban League and Hering House, Inc., is a social work organization. Our concerns are primarily to <br />improve the conditions under which all minorities (not just Negroes) live and work, always striving to develop a <br />better climate of interracial understanding. <br />We address ourselves to the present matter before Council for decision, which is in effect the "Proposed Eastside <br />Public Housing Development." <br />We believe that a public housing development, so placed, would not be in the best interest of that community, <br />specifically, and the City of South Bend as a whole, for the following reasons: <br />1. That this selected site represents the only Class "A" Residential Section of the city where Negro homes have been <br />constructed in the $10,000.00- $50,000.00 price range. <br />2. That public housing per se is not desirable by all minority group people in search of better housing. <br />3. That there are many families who now reside in the area designated for blight removal who are not desirous of <br />moving to the:Eastside. One of their reasons being that there is a nostalgic attachment by them for the present <br />neighborhood where they have spent many enjoyable; years, some since childhood. <br />4. If it is the primary aim of you gentlemen to give a face - lifting to the city of South Bend, then why not take <br />a look at some of the existing structures in all sections of the city where there are delapidated houses, stores, <br />etc., which do not lend beauty. Why not purchase these properties and place a development on those sites? <br />Further before setting forth an alternate proposal for your consideration, we should like it to be known that Negro <br />people in general are not interested in living in a neighborhood because it is all white or predominantly so, but <br />are desirous of the kind of housing for their families which is only found, generally speaking, in such areas as <br />aforementioned. <br />We present the argument for new, private home construction on the proposed slum clearance site: The land involved is <br />about 26 acres bounded east by Scott Street, south by the New York Central Railroad, west by Laurel Street, and <br />north by Western Avenue. These individual family units should be rental property with option to buy. <br />We believe that with such permanent -like, attractive, individual homes constructed, some of the sterotype notions <br />held by white people about the lowering of property values by Negroes where they live would be dispelled. It is <br />also out belief that this housing would appeal to white people alike who need good substantial housing regardless of <br />its location. We base our assumption on the many good experiences we've heard the white occupants in the Plaza <br />Apartments and Public Housing Development speak about. <br />We have absolutely no objection to increased housing facilities for Senior Citizens in this area. <br />In conclusion, gentlement, we implore you, (1) to not place increased public housing in the present proposed re- <br />development areas, (2) to not include in this development area C -2 commercial -type constructionw <br />Sir, this letter is designed to give you our thinking prior to our presentation at your Council session on Monday, <br />January 22, 1962. <br />Thank you for your consideration of this request. <br />Sincerely yours, <br />/s/ Wm. J. Brown <br />William J. Brown <br />Executive Director <br />WJB:nw <br />Councilman Lehman made a motion that the Communication be accepted and placed on file. Councilman Muszynski <br />the motion. Motion carried. <br />PETITIONS <br />Petition to annex 9.99 acres of land (Police Pistol Range). <br />Councilman Glass made a motion that the petition be referred to the City Planning Commission. Councilman Lehman <br />seconded the motion. Motion carried. <br />Petition to annex 192 acres of land (County Home and County Garage). <br />Councilman Lehman made a motion that the petition be referred to the City Planning Commission. Councilman Glass <br />seconded the motion. Motion carried. <br />Petition to annex 2 acres of land fronting on Edison Road east of Ironwood. Councilman Lehman made a motion that II <br />the petition be referred to the City Planning Commission. Councilman Muszynski seconded the motion. Motion carried.1 <br />Petition to annex 114 acres of land - Maple Road and Lathrop. <br />Councilman Muszynski made a motion that the petition be referred to the City - Planning Commission. Councilman <br />Lehman seconded the motion. Motion carried. <br />COUNCIL REPORT <br />To the Common Council of the City of South Bend: <br />Your Committee on Urban Redevelopment and Housing to whom was referred the proposed land re -use of the Chapin <br />Street Project area, Respectfully report that they have examined the matter and would recommend to the Council as <br />favorable the plan in which the Commercial re -use area will occupy the Western two thirds of the frontage on Western <br />Avenue between Chapin and Scott Streets. <br />/s/ Chester Muszynski, Chairman <br />Councilman Allen made a motion, seconded by Councilman Lehman, to reject the report. Motion carried. <br />
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.