10-28-57 Council Meeting Minutes

Home Browse Search

REGULAR MEETING: OCTOBER 28, 1957 Mrs. Thomas L. Arch and Mr. Edward Levin. Also present were Fire Chief Andrzejewski, and Mr. Walter C. White, a citizen interested in the problem at issue. At this meeting the question of trash - burning was discussed at some length and it was the recommendation of the Fire Prevention Bureau as well as the Fire Board of Appeals that a committee be appointed by Mayor Edward F. Voorde to make a complete study of the subject of trash disposal as being handled in other cities. The Fire Board of Appeals' offers its services to act as this Committee if this is in agreement with Mayor Voorde. An attempt will be made by William Starck, Chairman of the Board of Fire Appeals, to contact Mayor Voorde to set up a meeting with the Board and the Fire Prevention Bureau to discuss this problem. A motion for adjournment was made by Battalion Chief Smith, seconded by Mr. Granat, and the meeting adjourned at 11 :00 A.M. Michael C. Granat, Secretary Councilman Tellson made a motion that the communication be accepted and placed on file. Councilman Carr seconded the motion. Motion carried. COMMUNICATION: The Honorable Members of the City Council City Hall South Bend, Indiana Dear Honorable-Members: 1318 Beutter Lane South Bend, 15, Indiana October 21, 1957 Your unanimous vote to annex the area dividing McKinley Terrace from the Edison School area is greatly appreciated by the McKinley Terrace residents who were so vitally interested in the annexation. Your action represents another step in the continued community - minded leadership of the City Council in develop- ing South -Bend on a sound long -term basis. Our current concern is that the city follow through on the completion of Rexford Drive to Victory Drive so that our children can safely attend Edison School. Thank you again for your action and we look forward to your continued interest. Respectfully submitted, /s/ William Aramony William Aramony, Councilman Carr made a motion that the communication be'accepted and placed on file. Councilman Kroll seconded the motion. Motion carried. COMMUNICATION R E S O L U T I O N WHEREAS, It is not the prerogative of the South Bend Chamber of Commerce to comment on the merits of a specific truck': route controversy. However, the ordinance amendments currently before the Common Council reach, in their intent and extent, far beyond the limitations of traffic on a single street, and WHEREAS, the propgsed action does, in effect, threaten to effect nearly every phase of business, employment, and development in the City of South Bend, we feel that the Common Council should pause to look beyond the immediate concern which is' precipitating.this action, and WHEREAS, we have no intention of questioning the right of Common Council to establish truck routing and regulation for; the good of the entire community, we must point out that these proposals might well force the isolation of many businesses and industries from their sources of supply and outlets for their products, and WHEREAS, every business in this community which depends for its operation upon the delivery of goods and services to the homes of our citizens is threatened, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED, that the Board of Directors of the South Bend Chamber of Commerce urge extreme caution in the contemplated action of the South Bend Common Council on truck traffic regulation, keeping clearly in mind the potential far - reaching consequences. While we appreciate the fact that the Common Council has further held out the possibility of clarifying amendments in terms of defining the original sweeping generalization, we must urge the following: 1. That it be kept clearly in mind that the same standards of determination cannot be applied to the vehicles utilized by local retail and service organizations as are used in differentiating types of common carrier equipment. 2. That the potential effect on local traffic be clearly separated from the Common Council's will re- garding common carrier traffic. 3. That the equipment owned and operated independently by local industry be kept in mind while=: regula- tion is contemplated. 4. That the entire question of truck traffic be put in its true perspective as an element in community business, rather than being considered as a rigid application of standards predetermined for one street. 5. That care be exercised to avoid the implication of punitive legislation on the.part of the Common Council, a precedent which, if set in this case, could be disastrous to the entire future of this community and to its reputation throughout the country. In view of the many implications which are by accident or intent, part of this contemplated action, we would urge that the Common Council pause to consider the fact that this action is the broad outgrowth of a narrow problem. And, as a consequence, the implied dangers of this action would seem to warrant cautious and comprehensive study