HomeMy WebLinkAboutNear-Northwest-Neighborhood-Plan-Final-Strategic-PlanNear Northwest Neighborhood Plan
2019
ii
What is a Plan? . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . iii
Introduction . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1
Context & Analysis . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 3
Planning & Engagement . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 11
Neighborhood Strategy . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 19
Implementation . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 45
Appendix 1: Charrette Posters and
Additional Comments . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 50
Appendix 2: Land Use Exercise . . . . . . . . . . . 78
Appendix 3: Proformas . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 86
Appendix 4: Tax Revenue Analysis . . . . . . . . 94
Table of Contents
iii
The purpose of a plan is to develop a shared long-
range statement of what a neighborhood, or other
area of the city, wants to achieve. It communicates an
area’s intended direction to residents, business and
property owners, service providers, and other deci-
sion makers.
The goal of a plan is to create more attractive, con-
venient, efficient, equitable, and healthy places for
present and future generations. It aims to ensure an
area’s needs are met and new development is accom-
modated while the positive aspects and character of
the area is maintained.
A plan provides a broad framework for future devel-
opment and a starting point for more detailed plan-
ning and public engagement as individual projects
are pursued. The plan will continually evolve to meet
the changing needs of a community. A plan is not
intended to represent the exact results expected from
its implementation.
How are Plans Used?
1. Neighborhood residents will use the plan to gain
an understanding of planning initiatives in the
short, medium, and long terms.
2. Public officials and community leaders will use the
plan to direct funding and to make decisions on
zoning and land use issues.
3. Planners and City staff will use the plan to un-
derstand key issues important to the area and as
a guide to implementing priority projects and
initiatives.
What is a Plan?
1
The Near Northwest Neighborhood Master Plan looks
at the overall area and uses the community’s vision as
a basis to provide a broad framework which identifies
principles and concepts for future development and
improvements. The plan identifies long-term phys-
ical improvements for a 20-year period while being
mindful of short-term opportunities. The purpose of
this plan is to:
• serve as a guide to business and property owners,
residents, developers, City staff, elected officials,
and others in making investment, land use, and
design decisions;
• provide context for existing neighborhood en-
hancement efforts;
• provide a set of recommendations that will help
guide decision making in the Near Northwest
Neighborhood;
• build confidence for future investment by neigh-
borhood stakeholders and other community
partners;
• instill pride for residents who believe in their
neighborhood’s potential; and
• improve quality of life for residents, their children,
and grandchildren.
The plan builds upon City Plan, South Bend’s Compre-
hensive Plan, but provides a more specific framework
for the Near Northwest Neighborhood.
The Near Northwest Neighborhood is located just
north and west of downtown South Bend. It is bound-
ed by the St. Joseph River & former railroad tracks to
the north, the St. Joseph River to the east, Lincoln Way
West / LaSalle Ave to the south and the former rail-
road tracks to the west.
The Near Northwest Neighborhood has proximity
to the University of Notre Dame, St. Mary’s College,
and Holy Cross College. In addition, Michigan Street,
which is a major north/south corridor that goes
through downtown South Bend and extends north
into the state of Michigan and to the south towards
Indianapolis, runs through the eastern portion of the
neighborhood.
The Near Northwest has, within its boundaries, four
local historic districts (Chapin Park is also a national
historic district) and the City’s only local historic land-
scape landmark, Leeper Park.
Near Northwest Neighborhood
Location of Near Northwest Neighborhood in the City of South Bend
Introduction
NORTH
2
Leeper Park
ST.JOSEPHRIVER
W Linden Ave N Michigan StW Lincolnway
W Lindsey AveN Cottage Grove AveN
LaPorte
Ave
NBirdsellStN Leeper AveE St. Vincent St
W Elwood Ave
W Marion St
N Portag
e Ave
W Oak StN Walnut StW Vassar Ave
W LaSalle Ave
W Fuerbringer StN Allen StN Wilber StNParkA
ve
W Wakewa A v e
N Diamond AveN Scott StN Lawndale AveW Parkovash Ave
N Cushing StW Navarre StN Forest AveN Iroquois StN Blaine AveNWilliamStW California Ave
N Main StW Humboldt St
N Sherman AveN
R
iv
e
rsid
e
D
rN Leland AveW Van Buren St
W Golden AveN Lafayette BlvdE Bartlett St N Nile
s
A
v
e
W Yukon AveW Hudson Ave
W A n g e l a B l v d
N Cleveland AveWNorthShoreDr
N
W
o
o
d
w
ard
Ave
N Lafayette BlvdN Taylor StNHillcrestRd N Foster StW LaMonte Terr N St. Joseph StNR
i
v
e
r
s
i
d
e
Dr
E North Shore Dr
N Studebaker StW Pokagon St
W Fassnacht St
E Navarre StN Eucli
d AveW Pierce St
E Angela Blvd
E Peashway St
W Madison St
E Pokagon St
W Rex St
E Marion StN Harrison AveN India CtN Sancome AveE LaSalle Ave
E Riley Pl
W M a r q u e t t e A v e
W Tonti Ave
W Os tem o Pl
N Kunstman CtChapin PlW Park Ln
W Birner St
W Bartlett St
WestNorthShore
RiversideDrive
River Bend
North St.JosephStreet
Chapin Park
Historic Districts
Chapin Park
North St. Joseph Street
River Bend
Riverside Drive
Leeper Park
Near Northwest Neighborhood
Near Northwest Neighborhood
NORTH
3
Neighborhood Background
The Chapin Park historic district and the majority of
the neighborhood south of Lindsey Street & Navarre
Street (River Bend area) was built by the beginning of
the 20th century. In the late 1800’s, portions of Chapin
Park were one of the most exclusive areas in South
Bend. As a result, at the turn of the century the Near
Northwest was home to some of the most prominent
South Bend families including Chapin, Fassnacht, Sib-
ley, Muessel, Fuerbringer, and Coquillard.
By 1917 more than 95% of the neighborhood was
built and the area outside of Chapin Park was con-
sidered a quality, working-class community. Shortly
thereafter, in the late 1920’s, the neighborhood was
fully developed and seen as an ideal location due to
access to the streetcar. The area also boosted prox-
imity and access to the St. Joseph River, parks, and
schools.
At the time of South Bend’s peak population, in the
Source: 1960 - 2010 U.S. Census and 2013 - 2017 American Community Survey 5-Year Estimates
1960’s, the neighborhoods population was roughly
8,000 people. Like the rest of the city, the neighbor-
hood was impacted by the economic, social, and
cultural decline that occurred following the closing
of Studebaker Motor Company and other industrial
employers in the area. By 2017 the population had de-
clined by roughly 49% to around 4,000 people; during
this same time period the City population decreased
by about 23%. It is worth noting that between 2010
and 2017 it is estimated that the population increased
by 11%, having dipped to around 3,600 people in
2010.
The Near Northwest Neighborhood is comprised of
the entirety of Census Tracts 6 and 7. Portage Avenue
is the dividing line between Census Tracts with tract 6
to the south and tract 7 to the north. The tracts have
distinctly different socio-economic and demographic
characteristics.
According to the U.S. Census, there is a significant
difference between the age of residents in each Cen-
sus Tract. Over 40% of the population in Census Tract
6 are youth (19 and under), while in Census Tract 7
less than half that, around 20% of the population are
youth. The City’s population as a whole is roughly 30%
youth. Census Tract 6 has a slightly smaller percent-
age of 20 to 64-year-olds than the City, at almost 52%
and around 58% respectively, yet Census Tract 7 has
close to 68% of its population in the same age range.
When examining closer, it is found that that Census
Tract 7 has a population between 20 and 34 that is
10% greater than that city percentage. While Census
Tract 7 has a population of 65 and older similar to the
city, roughly 12% and 12.5% respectively, Census Tract
6 has significantly less with under 7% of the popula-
tion 65 and older.
According to the American Community Survey, of
those 25 years and older, almost 26% of tract 6 neigh-
bors do not have a high school diploma, while about
12% of people in tract 7 do not. On the other end of
the spectrum, almost 44% of tract 7 residents have
a higher education degree while less than half that
many, close to 17%, of tract 6 residents have the same.
The levels of educational attainment contribute to the
economics of the neighborhood.
In Census Tract 6, almost 16% of residents in the work-
force (aged 16 years and older) were unemployed.
While almost 7% were unemployed in Census Tract 7.
In 2017, over 40% of residents in Census Tract 6 lived
below the poverty level, including almost 60% of the
youth (18 and under). Around 25% of Census Tract 7
residents lived below the poverty level, including al-
most 30% of the youth. Nearly 20% of the households
in Census Tract 7 had an income of $100,000 or more
while less than 1% of Census Tract 6 residents had the
same income.
The housing in the Near Northwest isn’t too dissimilar
to other older South Bend neighborhoods; close to
66% of the neighborhoods residential structures are
single family houses and over 25% have 2 to 3 units.
Portions of the neighborhood saw some of the earli-
est housing construction in the city, and according to
the U.S. Census over 80% of the housing units were
built in 1939 or earlier. The total number of housing
units across both Census Tracts has decreased from
2000 through 2017 with an approximately 19% reduc-
tion to just over 1,800 housing units. According to the
American Community Survey, in 2017 close to 27% of
housing units in the neighborhood were vacant. And
the percentage of owner-occupied units in Tract 7 was
close to the citywide percentage, 55.3% and 57.2%
respectively, but Tract 6 had 43.8% which were own-
er-occupied.
Within the Near Northwest there are a total of 2,229
individual parcels. Of the neighborhood properties,
479, or 21.5%, are unimproved – they are vacant lots
that do not have a structure, surface parking lot, etc.
located on them. Within those properties, there are
106 parcels which have been determined to be uncar-
ed for vacant lots – meaning that the owner doesn’t
maintain the property, so Code Enforcement has a
continuous enforcement order to keep the property
mowed and/or the owner hasn’t paid property taxes
resulting in the property going on the County Tax
Sale. These 106 properties have a negative influence
on the neighborhood.
-
1,000
2,000
3,000
4,000
5,000
6,000
7,000
8,000
9,000
1960 1970 1980 1990 2000 2010 2017
Neighborhood Population 1960 -2017
Source: 2013 - 2017 American Community Survey 5-Year Estimates
Estimate Percent Estimate Percent Estimate Percent
Total Population 2,374 1,689 101,928
19 years and younger 985 41.5%342 20.2%29,964 29.4%
20 to 64 years 1,227 51.7%1,146 67.9%59,162 58.0%
65 years and older 162 6.8%201 11.9%12,802 12.6%
Near Northwest Population Age Breakdown by Census Tract
Census Tract 6 Census Tract 7 City of South Bend
Context & Analysis
4Unimproved property and uncared for lots in the Near Northwest Neighborhood
ST.JOSEPHRIVER
W Linden Ave N Michigan StW Lincolnway
W Lindsey AveN Cottage Grove AveN
LaPorte
Ave
NBirdsellStN Leeper AveE St. Vincent St
W Elwood Ave
W Marion St
N
P
orta
g
e
A
ve
W Oak StN Walnut StW Vassar Ave
W LaSalle Ave
W Fuerbringer StN Allen StN Wilber StNParkA
v
e
W Wakewa A v e
N Diamond AveN Scott StN Lawndale AveW Parkovash Ave
N Cushing StW Navarre StN Forest AveN Iroquois StN Blaine AveNWilliamStW California Ave
N Main StW Humboldt St
N Sherman AveN
Riv
e
rsid
e
D
rN Leland AveW Van Buren St
W Golden AveN Lafayette BlvdE Bartlett St N Nil
e
s
A
v
e
W Yukon AveW Hudson Ave
W A n g e l a Bl v d
N Cleveland AveWNorthShoreDr
N
W
o
o
d
w
ardAve
N Lafayette BlvdN Taylor StNHillcrest
Rd N Foster StW LaMonte Terr N St. Joseph StN
R
i
v
e
r
s
i
d
e
Dr
E North Shore Dr
N Studebaker StW Pokagon St
W Fassnacht St
E Navarre StN Eucl
id AveW Pierce S t
E Angela Blvd
E Peashway St
W Madison St
E Pokagon St
W Rex St
E Marion StN Harrison AveN India CtN Sancome AveE LaSalle Ave
E Riley Pl
W M a r q u e t t e A v e
W Tonti Ave
W Ostemo Pl
N Kunstman CtChapin PlW Park Ln
W Birner St
W Bartlett S t
0 600
feet
1 inch = 600 feet
↑N
"Vacant Lots" - 106
Unimproved Property - 479
Vacant Lots
Near Northwest Neighborhood Plan - 2019
ST.JOSEPHRIVER
W Linden Ave N Michigan StW Lincolnway
W Lindsey AveN Cottage Grove AveN
LaPorte
Ave
NBirdsellStN Leeper AveE St. Vincent St
WElwoodAve
W Marion St
N Portag
e Ave
W Oak StN Walnut StW Vassar Ave
W LaSalle Ave
W Fuerbringer StN Allen StN Wilber StNParkA
ve
WWakewaAve
N Diamond AveN Scott StN Lawndale AveWParkovashAve
N Cushing StW Navarre StN Forest AveN Iroquois StN Blaine AveNWilliamStW California Ave
N Main StW Humboldt St
N Sherman AveN
R
iv
e
rsid
e
D
rN Leland AveW Van Buren St
W Golden AveN Lafayette BlvdE Bartlett St N Nile
s
A
v
e
W Yukon AveWHudsonAve
WAngelaBlvd
N Cleveland AveWNorthShoreDr
N
W
o
o
d
w
ard
Ave
N Lafayette BlvdN Taylor StNHillcrestRd N Foster StW LaMonte Terr N St. Joseph StN
R
i
v
e
r
si
d
e
Dr
E North Shore Dr
N Studebaker StW Pokagon St
W Fassnacht St
E Navarre StN Eucli
d AveWPierceSt
E Angela Blvd
E Peashway St
W Madison St
E Pokagon St
WRexSt
E Marion StN Harrison AveN India CtN Sancome AveE LaSalle Ave
E Riley Pl
WMarqu e t t e A v e
W Tonti Ave
WOstemoPl
N Kunstman CtChapin PlW Park Ln
W Birner St
W Bartlett S t
0 600
feet
1 inch = 600 feet
↑N
ComCertUnsold_March2019
Uncared for Lots - 106
Unimproved Property - 479
Commissioners' Certificate Sale Unsold Properties - March 2019
Near Northwest Neighborhood Plan - 2019
NORTH
5
Land Use
The current land uses in the neighborhood vary
however most of the neighborhood is residential.
Non-residential uses tend to be concentrated in a few
areas within the neighborhood. A mix of commer-
cial, institutional, and residential can be found along
Lincoln Way West. The area north of LaSalle Avenue,
between Lafayette Boulevard and along both sides of
Michigan Street, is an extension of downtown and is
largely occupied by the needs of Memorial Hospital
and medical offices, institutions like South Bend Civic
Theatre, and other commercial activities. A limited
neighborhood scale mix of uses can be found near
the Portage Avenue neighborhood nodes at California
Avenue and Marion Street. There are two elementary
schools and a variety of religious institutions found
within the neighborhood, as well as Leeper Park and
Brownfield Park.
6
Page intentionally left blank.
7
Circulation
Ward Bakery
Building
Memorial Hospital
Surface Parking
800 Block Portage
Avenue
Lincoln Way West &
Charles Martin Sr. Drive
Development Site(s)
Riverside Drive
Connectivity and
Trac Calming
Browneld Park
Leeper Park
Madison
School
Memorial
Hospital
Muessel Grove
Park
Muessel
School
Holy
Cross
School
Shetterly
Park
St. Joseph River
LINCOL
N
W
A
Y
W
E
S
TN Wilber StN N
i
l
e
s
A
v
e
N Hill StW Colfax AveN Brookeld StN
P
o
r
t
a
g
e
A
v
e
W Vassar Ave
N MICHIGAN STE Colfax AveN Adams StE LaSalle AveN Allen StN College StE Angela Blvd
W LaSalle AveN Blaine AveN Rivers
ide DrN Main StE Napoleon Blvd
N Lafayette BlvdN Walnut StN Sherman AveW California Ave
N Cushing StW Angela Blvd
E Peashway St
N Birdsell StN Diamond AveW Marion St N Staneld StN Foster StW North
S
h
o
r
e
D
r
W Lindsey Ave
N Taylor StN W
o
o
d
w
a
r
d
A
v
e
W Madison StN Scott StN Harrison AveN Cleveland AveN Lawrence StN Leeper AveN Cottage Grove AveW Fassnacht St N Park AveN Lawndale AveW Ostemo Pl
W Tonti Ave
E Pokagon St
W Parkovash Ave
W Rupel St
W Wakewa Ave N H
i
l
l
c
r
e
s
t
R
dN Iroquois StW Oak St N Forest AveW King St
E Madison StW Florence St
W Longley Ave
W Sibley St
W Navarre St
N Studebaker StW Park Ln
W Rex St
E Navarre St
E Bartlett St
W Bartlett St
W Pokagon St
W Pierce St
N Euclid AveN S
t
.
J
o
s
ep
h
S
t
E Marion StN Sancome AveW Werwinski St
E Crescent AveN Medora StN Dr. Martin Luther King Jr. StW LaSalle ConN Kessler BlvdW Parallel St
W Hudson Ave
N Pagin StN Anderson AveW Marq
u
e
t
t
e
A
v
e
W Yukon AveW Golden AveE North Shore D
r
W Hine St N Wildower StChapin PlN Gintz AveW Birn
e
r
S
t
W Fuerbringer St
N Jackson StW LaSall
e
Ct
W Har
v
e
y
S
t
N
A
s
h
l
a
n
d
A
v
e
N Sycamore StN Marigold WayW Manitou Pl
W Van Buren St
W LaMonte
T
e
r
r
N India CtN Kunstman CtN Demaude Ave
E Hammond Pl
W Poplar St
N Fulton CtPeashway St
N Hamden CtN Seebert PlW King St
W Linden Ave
W California Ave
N Allen StW Angela Blvd
W LaMonte Terr
W Van Buren St
N Leland AveN Studebaker StW Marquette Ave
N Leland AveN Lafayette BlvdN College StW Oak St N St. Joseph StN Riverside DrN Sancome AveN Diamond AveW Navarre St
N Adams StN Blaine AveN Cleveland AveDiamond AveE Madison St N St. Joseph StW Linden Ave
W Ma
r
q
u
e
t
t
e
A
v
e
N Scott StOpportunity Sites
As part of an initial review of the neighborhood, a handful of locations that have potential for near term impacts were identified as opportunity sites. The intent of identifying these sites was to use the planning process to explore
a variety of improvements at each location. The sites range from locations for potential development to areas where infrastructure improvements could be beneficial.
Opportunity Sites
Planned Intersection Improvements
Legend
Near Northwest Neighborhood opportunity sites
NORTH
8
Ward Bakery Building
The Ward Bakery Building, at the corner of Portage
Ave. & California Ave., has been vacant for several
years; last occupied by a small distribution company.
The brick building has been a fixture in the neighbor-
hood since it was built 100 years ago, in 1919. Given
its location at a natural neighborhood node, it has the
potential to be reused for a variety of purposes that
would benefit the community.
800 Block of Portage Avenue
The City owns a series of vacant lots on both sides of
Portage Avenue between Rex and Van Buren Streets.
In conjunction with a reuse of the Ward Bakery Build-
ing and the existing buildings & activities at Portage
& California Avenues, this location is a logical exten-
sion of the neighborhood node and has potential for
future development.
Lincoln Way West & Charles Martin Sr. Drive Develop-
ment Site(s)
The City has recently completed work that enhanc-
es the development site(s) located at the corner of
Lincoln Way West & Charles Martin Sr. Drive. Recent
streetscape improvements at the intersection fol-
lowed the Complete Streets model and have made
the intersection more pedestrian and bicycle friendly,
introduced on-street parking, clarified vehicle move-
ments, and removed a slip lane. The City has also
acquired properties in the area in order to consolidate
ownership and assist in facilitating development.
Muessel School Circulation
Recently, there have been concerns expressed about
the traffic circulation at and around Muessel Elemen-
tary School. In particular, the concerns relate to stu-
dent drop-off and pick-up. This process provides and
opportunity to examine the traffic flow and existing
infrastructure for potential improvements.
Memorial Hospital Surface Parking
Memorial Hospital is a large employer and land
holder in the neighborhood. A portion of its property
includes surface parking lots, many that could see
future demand given that their location is an exten-
sion of downtown. Long term it is hoped that some of
these lots will see opportunities for redevelopment to
a higher use. There are not currently plans for devel-
opment, however understanding the sites could be
valuable in the future.
Riverside Drive Connectivity and Traffic Calming
Riverside Drive offers a few challenges to the com-
munity – limited right-of-way width to improve path
network connectivity, a traffic cut-through to down-
town, and intersections with difficult geometries. This
process provides and opportunity to explore possible
solutions to address these issues.
9
Neighborhood Economics: The Value of
Urban Neighborhoods
Studies have shown that urban, walkable develop-
ment generates a greater level of value for a com-
munity than suburban development patterns. The
City of South Bend worked with Urban3, a firm that
approaches land value economics through property
& retail tax analysis and community design. In 2016,
Urban3 examined value per acre of land in South
Bend and St. Joseph County. This analysis showed that
properties in the Near Northwest generate a higher
tax per acre than larger, more expensive housing on
the edge of town or in the County.
In addition to generating higher taxes per acre, repair-
ing existing houses and infill development in a neigh-
borhood like the Near Northwest has a lower cost of
service for government. The necessary infrastructure
already exists – streets, sewer and water lines, police
and fire department coverage – and does not require
the extension of the infrastructure network, which
would increase short- and long-term costs to the City.
Urban neighborhoods generate more revenue for the
City and cost less to provide services making them a
more sustainable approach to development.
Even with this value, it can be a challenge to repair or
build in the Near Northwest. Based on the American
Community Survey, in 2017 the median value of an
owner-occupied housing unit in Census Tract 6 was
$55,000 and in Census Tract 7 was $101,700. The hard
cost to construct a modest house can be $125 per
square foot, making a 1,200 sq. ft. house $150,000 to
build. This cost is more than housing values support.
This only accounts for the hard costs to build a house,
it does not include soft costs like purchasing land,
completing survey, etc. An additional challenge is that
most neighborhood vacant lots are in Census Tract 6,
where housing values are lower.
The housing values play an important role in people’s
willingness to buy and/or repair a property. In Census
Tract 7, owners can be encouraged to maintain, or
make improvements to, their properties since they
are able to invest in repairs without worry of a signifi-
cant over-investment in the house. Investment helps
sustain existing housing prices and can encourage
increased value. While in Census Tract 6, the lower
value of houses can discourage investment since it
can be difficult to recover costs of basic repairs, let
alone major rehabilitation work. The lower values can
encourage limited investment, resulting in housing
prices lowering over time. While urban neighbor-
hoods provide a more sustainable approach for the
city, having housing values lower than the cost of
building a house hinders development.
Taxable value per acre in South Bend
Source: The Dollars and Sense of South Bend Development, 2016, Urban3, LLC
Taxable value per acre in St. Joseph County
Source: The Dollars and Sense of South Bend Development, 2016, Urban3, LLC
not taxable
< $50,000
$50,000 - 100,000
$100,000 - 150,000
$300,000 - 350,000
$250,000 - 300,000
$200,000 - 250,000
$150,000 - 200,000
$350,000 - 500,000
> $2,000,000
$1,000,000 - 2,000,000
$750,000 - 1,000,000
$500,000 - 750,000
Tax Value Per Acre ($)NORTH
not taxable
< $50,000
$50,000 - 100,000
$100,000 - 150,000
$300,000 - 350,000
$250,000 - 300,000
$200,000 - 250,000
$150,000 - 200,000
$350,000 - 500,000
> $2,000,000
$1,000,000 - 2,000,000
$750,000 - 1,000,000
$500,000 - 750,000
Tax Value Per Acre ($)NORTH
10
Neighborhood Energy
There are a variety of activities happening within
the neighborhood, each working to build a stronger
Near Northwest. These efforts represent some of the
positive momentum within the neighborhood; they
should be acknowledged and built upon.
The Near Northwest Neighborhood, Inc. (NNN, Inc.) is
an established community development corporation
which works to provide safe, decent, affordable hous-
ing to low-moderate income households through
rehabilitation, new construction and offering some
rental units. The NNN, Inc. also organizes community
events such as Arts Café and the Annual Chili Supper,
has a community space which can be used by neigh-
bors to organize activities and events of interest to
them and the broader community, and brings the
community together around issues that impact the
neighborhood.
Cross Community, Inc. is a new non-profit organiza-
tion that has a goal of building houses in the neigh-
borhood. Although the organization is new it was
established by individuals that are invested in the
neighborhood.
The Near Northwest Neighborhood is full of engaged
neighbors who care about the quality of life within
their neighborhood. Their level of engagement falls
within a wide spectrum, including being involved
in public process and conversations on issues that
impact the community to higher level of investments
of time and resources to improve the neighborhood.
There are a number of different neighbor-driven ef-
forts that help make the Near Northwest unique.
The Local Cup (TLC) is a pay-it-forward coffee shop
that was imagined and created by near northwest
neighbors. The pay-it-forward model allows all neigh-
bors, no matter their income, to enjoy a coffee drink
and be a part of the larger community. TLC has be-
come a gathering place, bringing people together to
build stronger relationships between neighbors.
South Bend Bike Garage is a community cooperative
where people can work on bikes together. Developed
by Near Northwest neighbors, it is a place those with a
bike can learn how to make repairs as well as offering
used bikes to those that need one – either by buying
it or earning it through volunteering time.
Neighbors have also taken on place making efforts. A
neighbor recently started the Sherman Avenue Com-
munity Garden. Buying two tax delinquent vacant lots
and creating a space where neighborhood youth help
with gardening. This past summer, the neighbor orga-
nized a summer concert series in the garden – inviting
neighbors to come listen to local musicians while
enjoying the garden surroundings. In another effort,
a neighbor acquired a large-scale, almost 12 foot tall
red Adirondack chair and installed it in a high-profile
location along Portage Avenue. Neighbors are invited
to climb into the chair to take pictures – it is not un-
common to see kids and families enjoying the unique
opportunity.
Some neighbors have gone even further with their
investment in the neighborhood and become small-
scale developers. In 2007, a small group of neighbors
created Chapin Park, Inc. with the goal of showing
that quality historic preservation can be a model
for improvement and sustainability in Chapin Park
and the broader neighborhood. They have bought
and restored a number of properties in Chapin Park.
Thrive Michiana, LLC was founded by a neighbor
and is currently working on establishing a triple-bot-
tom-line demonstration urban infill project in the
neighborhood. The focus area of its efforts is located
around the area of California Avenue, Portage Av-
enue, and Cushing Street. To date, it has partnered
with Habitat for Humanity and New Energy Homes to
build five net-zero houses and it has rehabilitated a
few buildings – both residential and mixed use. They
own additional properties, including the space used
by South Bend Bike Garage, with plans for additional
development and rehabilitation of buildings within its
focus area.
Engaged neighbors are involved in the Chapin Park
Neighborhood Association (CPNA), which focuses its
efforts in the historic Chapin Park. CPNA brings to-
gether neighbors and organizes activities such as the
annual Halloween Party and Christmas event.
The Urban Garden Farmers Market is a weekly farm-
er’s market that occurs from spring through fall in the
NNN, Inc. parking lot and community space. It pro-
vides a place for neighbors to buy fresh local produce
and goods directly from the producers.
All of these efforts help to make the Near Northwest
Neighborhoods a vibrant and active neighborhood
that neighbors enjoy calling home.
11
A planning process was developed that focused on
gathering input from individuals and organizations
that have an interest in the Near Northwest. The City
and consultant team held a series of meetings and a
four-day charrette with neighbors, community mem-
bers, and stakeholders. The process allowed discus-
sion and exploration of design ideas and concepts for
the future vision of the neighborhood.
A community presentation & workshop was held
in February to help establish a collective vision and
to begin conversations about opportunities for the
area. The thoughts shared by neighbors, community
members, and stakeholders were used as a basis for
the four-day charrette process held in March. There
were over 400 touchpoints with community members
participating throughout the process. Following the
charrette, the city staff and consultant team used the
input shared throughout the process to give a final
presentation of developed concepts in April.
Community Presentation & Workshop
The project kicked off in February with a presentation
& workshop which neighbors and community mem-
bers were invited to attend to learn about the upcom-
ing process and provide input that would help create
a shared vision for the neighborhood. As part of the
process, the city staff and consultant team also met
with area not-for-profits, neighborhood stakeholders,
and city representatives.
Over 90 community participants attended the eve-
ning presentation & workshop and contributed their
input through a series of exercises:
1. Map your neighborhood;
2. Neighborhood vision;
3. Neighborhood amenities;
4. Housing;
5. Vacant Lots; and
6. Infrastructure.
In addition to the Community Workshop, a pop-up
event was held by city staff during the Near North-
west Neighborhood’s annual Chili Supper. This pro-
10/18/2019 wordcloud (5).svg
file:///C:/Users/emaradik/Downloads/wordcloud (5).svg 1/1
NNN
R
i
v
e
r
Parks DowntownBookstoresYMCAHom
e
My houseAlong the riverDuck pondT
h
e
i
s
l
a
n
d
Walk by rive
rBrownfield ParkPublic schoolsRiver Walk
Holy Cross ChurchCoffee shopsHistoric streetsSB Music Shop
Riverside Dr
Chapin Park
The bridges Old homesBike trails
Shetterly Park
Leep
e
r
P
a
r
k
a
r
e
a
Le
e
p
e
r
P
a
r
k
d
u
c
k
p
o
n
d
Colfax Co
m
mu
nit y Center Riverside TrailThe River WalkFrank’s Plac
e
Walk path al
o
n
g
R
i
v
e
r
s
i
d
e
D
r
.Wai
t
i
n
g
f
o
r
o
n
e
t
o
c
om
e Kingdom Life ChurchFly Fish the river
Leeper Par
kGoing to my fri
en
d’s
gr
and
ma’sMichigan St – restaurantsNear Northwest Resource Center
Holy Cross
Sch
ool / C
hurch
Walki
n
g
t
h
e
r
i
v
e
r
Winding road
i
n
L
e
e
p
e
r
P
a
r
k
Leeper Park islandNNN communit y space
Under
t
h
e
b
i
g
t
r
e
e
s
The Local CupMuessel School playground
A
n
y
c
o
r
n
e
r
w
i
t
h
h
i
s
t
o
r
i
c
c
h
a
r
a
Participant weighted responses about their favorite places
Brownfield Park
Leeper Park Madison School
Memorial Hospital
Muessel Grove Park
Muessel School
Holy Cross School
Shetterly Park
St. Joseph River
N Olive StLINCOLN
W
A
Y
W
E
S
TN Huey StN Wilber StN N
i
l
e
s
A
v
e
N Hill StW Colfax AveN Johnson StN Brookfield StN Elmer StN P
o
r
t
a
g
e
A
v
e
W Bulla St
W Vassar Ave
N MICHIGAN STW Elwood Ave
E Colfax AveN Adams StN L
a
P
o
r
t
e
A
v
e
E LaSalle AveN Allen StN College StE Angela Blvd
W LaSalle Ave
W Orange St
E Howard StN O'Brien StN Blaine AveN R
ive
rs
ide Dr
W Humboldt St
N Main StE Napoleon Blvd
E St. Vincent St
N Lafayette BlvdN Walnut StN Sherman AveE Cedar St
W California Ave
N Cushing StN Meade StE Corby Blvd
W Angela Blvd
E Peashway StN Fremont StN Birdsell StN Diamond AveN William StW Marion St N Stanfield StW Prast Blvd N Foster StW North S
h
o
r
e
D
r
N Not
re Dame Ave
W Lindsey Ave
W Roger St
N Taylor StW Washington St
N
W
o
o
d
w
a
r
d
A
v
e
E Sorin St
W Madison StN Scott StN Harrison AveN Cleveland AveN Eddy StN St. Peter StN Kaley StN Lawrence StW Bertrand St N Leeper AveN Cottage Grove AveW Fassnacht St N Park AveN Lawndale AveN St. Louis BlvdW Ostemo Pl
W Tonti Ave
E Pokagon St
W Kenwood Ave
E Miner St
W Parkovash Ave
W Rupel St
W Wakewa Ave N H
i
l
l
c
r
e
s
t
R
dN Iroquois StW Oak St
E Sout
h
Ben
d
AveN Forest AveW King St
E Madison StW Florence St
W Longley Ave N Frances StW Sibley St
N Sadie StW Navarre St
N Studebaker StW Park Ln
W Rex St
W Calhoun St
N Turnock StE Navarre St
W Westmoor St E Bartlett St
W Bartlett St
W Pokagon St
W McCartney St
W Pierce St
N Euclid AveN S
t
.
J
os
eph
S
t
E Marion StN Sancome AveN Elm StW Werwinski St
W Lawton St
W Frederickson St
E Crescent Ave
W Smith St
W Bonds
A
v
e
W Liston St N Medora StW Linden Ave
N Dr. Martin Luther King Jr. StW LaSalle
ConN Kessler BlvdW Parallel St
E Kalorama St
W Hudson Ave
E Hull St
N Pagin StN Anderson AveW Marqu
e
t
t
e
A
v
e
W Yukon Ave
W Gol
den Ave
E Campeau St
E North Shore Dr
W Hine St N Wildflower StN Grant StN Church PlChapin PlN Gintz AveW Holland St
W Birne
r
S
t
N Carlisle StW Fuerbringer St
E Luther CtN Jackson StW LaSalle Ct
W Harve
y
S
t
N
A
s
h
l
a
n
d
A
v
e
N St. Paul PlN Sycamore StN Marigold WayE Almond Ct
E McKinley Ave
W Manitou Pl
W Van Buren St
W LaMonte T
e
r
r
N B
e
n
d
i
x
D
r N Ind
ia CtN Kunstman CtN Spruce StN Demaud
e
Ave
E Hammond Pl
W Poplar St
N Fulton CtPeashway St
N Hamden CtN Seebert PlN Sout
h
Bend AveN Meade StW Longley Ave
W King St
W Linden AveN Meade StW California Ave
N Notre Dame AveW Colfax Ave N Fremont StE Miner StN Hill StN Frances StN O'Brien StN Allen StW Angela Blvd
W LaMonte Terr
N Michigan StW Van Buren St
W Liston St N St. Louis BlvdN Leland AveN Studebaker StW Marquette Ave
W Angela Blvd
N Leland AveN Lafayette BlvdN College StW Oak St N St. Joseph StN Meade StN Riverside DrW Longley Ave
W Ber
t
r
a
n
d
S
t N Frances StN Eddy StN Sancome AveN Diamond AveN O'Brien StW Navarre St
E Madison St
N Adams StN Blaine AveN Huey StN Cleveland AveN St. Peter StN Allen StDiamond AveE Madison St N St. Joseph StW Frederickson St
N St. Peter StW Linden Ave
N Meade StW Werwinski St
W Mar
q
u
e
t
t
e
A
v
e
N Scott St400 800200
Feet
Near Northwest
Neighborhood Plan
South Bend, IN
February 2019Base Map
0 N
“Map Your Neighborhood” participant response map
Planning & Engagement
vided an opportunity to engage additional neighbors,
explaining the process and gathering input through
the Map Your Neighborhood and Neighborhood
Vision exercises.
The following is a summary of the thoughts that were
shared.
Map your neighborhood
Participants were asked to write and draw where they
go and what they do in the neighborhood. They were
asked to share their favorite place(s), what people do
for fun, where they go and how (walk, bike, drive), and
where they go for walks and why. Participant respons-
es, including what was drawn, have been compiled
and represented on the participant response map.
The top participant responses for favorite places in-
cluded The Local Cup, parks (in particular Leeper Park
had a number of mentions), the St. Joseph River, and
the NNN, Inc. buildings. Responses were put in a word
cloud; the more times something was mentioned the
larger the place is shown.
Top responses to what neighbors do for fun in the
neighborhood revolved around walking / running /
biking, visiting with neighbors, and going to parks.
When asked where they go and where they walk in
the neighborhood top responses included the St.
Joseph River and Riverside Trail, neighborhood parks,
The Local Cup and NNN, Inc. buildings, and walks
through the neighborhood (within a few blocks of
their house).
NORTH
12
New mixed-use development on
parking lots
More utilization of Leeper, Brownfield
and River Walk, complete Coal
Line Trail
Diversity in neighbors...
owners not just tenants
Reinvestment of tax dollars in
real peoples' homes not just
corporate projects.
Tiny house zoning
More self-sufficient,
cooperative organizations
including growing food and
gardening
Cleaner, safer, more walkable with
nice streetscapes
Maintain historic character
Restore old buildings
and brick streets
Vacant lots into
parks, for growing
food
Youth
mentorship
Traffic calming on
streets
Mature trees
Vacant lots into multi-
family housing
Keep housing
affordable
Rethink, improve
alleys
Sell city-held vacant
lots
More parks and trails
to river
Local shops and services (grocer,
butcher, cafe)
Commercial along
major streets
Neighborhood events
and activities
Incentives to maintain
homes
Strengthen local identity
Police station
Recreation Centers
Permanent building for Urban
Garden Farmer's Market
Single family homes
financed by TIFs
Pedestrian
bridge
Downtown supermarket
Better lighting
Refurbish Ford
Building
Bike repair shops
Community gardens
and access to fresh food
Mixed housing, mixed
land use
More shops,
restaurants, hotels and
businesses
Better schools
Neighborhood vision
Participants were asked to write and draw what they
would like the neighborhood to be like in 20 years.
They were also asked what are things that they want
to remain, what is important for the future, and what
are things they would like to see changed. The com-
mon themes that occurred in the responses are:
• Sense of community, keep front porch feel, family
friendly
• Diversity of people & housing
• Walkability
• Historic feel homes & brick streets
• Vibrant neighborhood
• Property maintenance of homes and vacant lots
• Reuse of vacant lots for housing, mixed use devel-
opment, and gardens (including growing food)
• Support homeownership & quality rental, new
infill development
• Safety, lighting
• More parks and improvements at existing parks –
increase utilization
• Improved sidewalks & trail connections (especially
along the river) and improved alley conditions
• Neighborhood stores (including grocery options
/ access to healthy food), restaurants, and recre-
ation activities
Participant responses for the neighborhood vision exercise
13
• Needs: Bike paths, speed humps
• The Coal Line Trail is going to be a great asset. Do
it!
• Recreational center
• Neighborhood festivals, seasonal events. Summer
concerts invite restaurants to lend the best, most
popular staff
• Tenant education
• Safe walking areas important. The school is a safe
area to walk around block. Need more. Sometimes
a loose dog is a problem. Glad that a plan is in the
works where trails set to be.
• Parks are most important asset. Muessel Grove
needs attention
• NNN Community Center is vital place to gather. In-
vest in more opportunities for neighbors to access
the space.
• A police station
• Blaine/Van Buren near Muessel School– 2-way,
lighting, repave road, sidewalks
• Sidewalk/path along Riverside
• Improve sidewalks!
• {Re: Improve sidewalks!} Ditto
• Health clubs, Ethnic Restaurants (Thai, Chinese,
Mexican, Polish), Brewery and Restaurant, coffee
shop, bakery
• More popular restaurants/coffee shops, clean up
streets and alleys
• Fix brick streets with bricks
• Vacant lots–ideas for neighborhood children/fami-
lies to enjoy outdoors.
• A better grocery store, sidewalks in good condi-
tion.
• More to the commercial
• Neighbor-owned and run grocery, etc.
• More street lights, coffee shops, delis, places to
grab quick, cheap food, places to come together,
music, ent., food, etc. Dog Park!
• Local market
• Vacant lots being gardened by residents
• {Re: Vacant lots being gardened by residents} yes!
• Grocery store with fresh options that can be
reached by walking
• Access to fresh local food
• {Re: Access to fresh local food} Ditto
• Local food shopping
• Café w/ normal business hours
• More cafes, bakeries, diners, taqueria
• Bakery
• {Re: Bakery} Yes!
• Greenhouse at Leeper
• {Re: Greenhouse at Leeper} Yes!
• Restaurants -x2 -x3
• Local Cup, urban farmer’s market, grocery store
• Dog poop baggies, Bike racks, Neighborhood
garden, more street lights or safety call stations,
dog park, café, deli or breakfast place, evening
entertainment
• Water for walkers/bikers in parks and facilities for
non-home owners
• Public food kiosk
• Access to higher quality foods
• More gardens on vacant lots
• Missing affordable commercial spaces for startups
• Focus on market before moving on
• Concerns for super market–quality of food, sani-
tary upgrade
• Farmers market w/ roof
• Allow vacant lots to be urban farmed
• Better small market choices
• Food delivery
• Pizza
• Local food market with healthy options, fresh
produce
• Require more of landlords
Neighborhood amenities
Participants were asked to share their thoughts about what neighborhood amenities exist, which are important to keep / expand, and what is missing.
St. Joseph River
The Local Cup - Pay-it-Forward Coffee Shop
Brownfield Park
Madison STEAM Academy
14
Housing
Participants were asked to share their vision for hous-
ing in the neighborhood and to prioritize the housing
related topics that are most important to them.
We heard the following:
• In addition to the importance of helping existing
homeowners, character of the neighborhood–
walkability, sustainable building, & better lighting,
streetscapes are important
• Community built by this community
• Tiny houses, single family’s [sic]
• Grant programs for upgrades and safety to older
existing houses
• Mix use of housing, single family, senior housing,
4plexes, and veteran
• RE: Housing, Most important ARCHITECTURAL
CHARACTER, no vinyl, no replacement windows,
no removal of trim, no ‘wrong’ doors and railings
• Duplexes, renovated homes
• Develop new homes that are affordable without
raising taxes, build garages, restore the alleys
• To [sic] many non-conforming rental properties,
not zoned, illegal rentals
• Housing for seniors that includes garden space
• Diverse size/priced single, multifamily rental/own-
er occupied where bank president, English teach-
er, store clerk, and waitress can live on same block
• Neighborhoods decline as the number of rentals
increase
• No buffer between commercial store and single
family homes
• Less rental properties and bad landlords
• Support renters whose landlords are not caring
well for home.
• Gathering place
When asked to prioritize housing related topics,
neighbors identified supporting existing homeown-
ers, rehabilitating the existing housing, and afford-
ability as the top three housing topics. See graph for
prioritization exercise results.
7
16
37
17
13
47
27
43
20 19
-
5
10
15
20
25
30
35
40
45
50
Priority of Housing Topics
Participant responses to identifying the top three most important housing related topics
15
Vacant lots
Participants were asked what should be done with va-
cant lots and if they owned a vacant lot, what would
they do with it.
Neighbors have a variety of ideas of what could be
done with vacant lots, including:
• Farmer market
• Affordable multifamily housing
• New construction living space
• Sell to neighbors and adjacent properties
• Sell lots to abuters [sic]
• Rebuild homes, community gardens, rest and
relax areas
• Vacant lot into a park, “Larry’s Community Garden”
on Facebook
• 523 N. Scott Street, I own it, I want to buy 525 N.
Scott street–Why won’t the city sell it to me?
• Close irregular allies. [sic]
• Poplar Tree Garden
• Clean up and build affordable housing (non-gen-
trified)
• Put in a land trust
• Creative multi-use space, outdoor theatre, gar-
dens, parks
• If clustered, city could purchase for parkland or
greenfield development
• Wild flower patches, milkweed patches
• I want to buy empty lot at 521 N. Scott St. I own
523 N. Scott
• If you build new on vacant lots the new buildings
must mesh with existing in terms of materials,
scale, massing
• Small units
• Allow invested neighbors to purchase and use the
property
• Vacant lot sell to existing homeowners, remove all
taxes or code enforcements
• We own a home surrounded by vacant lots. We
would purchase the lots and increase the value of
our lot and home – but cost prohibited. Owners of
lots has defaulted on taxes–all lots different prices
get owned by 1 person–How to acquire?
• Safe and affordable housing for low income fami-
lies
• Offer to neighbors for purchase at a discount
• Sell to residents to improve soil and grow food
• Empty lots are visually an eyesore and a liabil-
ity for the city. Why not just approach existing
homeowners and “give” them the lot or a portion
of green space is always a good thing. These lots
generate no income currently–why they are va-
cant why the need to collect taxes.
• Build a park or community green house
• Build single family homes with TIFs
Neighbors said if they owned a vacant lot they would:
• Tiny homes
• Gardening
• The vacant lot that was/is part of my house is
landscaped well. But could allow public access as
a flower garden
• Make sure its use contributed to neighborhood
fabric
• Youth activity center
• Trees
• Assist people to build affordable housing they can
own.
• Plant weed!
• Plant a garden
• Create open space merchant stands
• Neighborhood gardens
• Please get garbage bags off of front porches and
back to alleys
• Green house. If I was given a vacant lot or able to
acquire one inexpensively, I would create a beauti-
fy the neighborhood program where I could grow
plants and donate to neighbors.
• Plant a market garden to provide affordable food
to the neighborhood
• Vacant lots–more neighborhood plots for gardens
• Offer to nighbor [sic] for purchase
• Increase ownership (lots next to my house)
• Plant a beautiful flower garden
• Garden?
• A playground w/ a slide, swings, ducks, splash pad,
and pond
• Develop into small-size zero energy homes–devel-
op into urban garden
• Vegetable garden for neighbor use
16
Infrastructure
Participants were asked to prioritize the types of in-
frastructure improvements that should be completed.
Streets received the most responses, followed closely
by sidewalks.
When asked about locations for improved infrastruc-
ture, street improvements identified were Portage
Ave. and several residential streets to the west of Por-
tage Ave. including Cushing, Sherman, Harrison, Allen,
and Blaine. Bike facility improvements were shown
as needed on Portage Ave., Angela Blvd., and along
Riverside Drive. Participants identified intersection
improvements needed at Portage Ave. and California
Ave.; Angela Blvd. and Woodward Ave.; and at Hudson
Ave. and Riverside Drive.
32
37
13 11
8
2
0
5
10
15
20
25
30
35
40
Sidewalks Streets Lighting Intersection
improvements
Bicycle facilities Stormwater
Priority of Infrastructure Improvements
Participant responses to identifying the top two most important infrastructure related topics
17
Charrette
A charrette is an intensive planning session where
neighbors, stakeholders, designers and others work
together to develop a vision for the future. It provides
a place to generate ideas and offers the unique ad-
vantage of giving immediate feedback to the design-
ers. The dynamic and inclusive process, with frequent
presentations, is a fast method of identifying and
overcoming obstacles. The shared experience helps
establish interest in the design and build support for
the vision. Charrettes are organized to encourage the
participation of all. That includes everyone who is
interested in bringing the vision to reality: residents,
property owners, developers, and local government.
In March, the city staff and consultant team engaged
with community members during a four-day design
charrette. During the charrette there were several
opportunities for the public to provide their input,
including an opening presentation, an open house, a
brown bag lunch discussion, a walking tour, 19 hours
of drop-in open studio, stakeholder meetings, and a
wrap-up presentation.
The opening presentation set the stage for the char-
rette by presenting the project, sharing the input
collected during the February community presenta-
tion & workshop, sharing the schedule and additional
opportunities for involvement during the four-day
charrette, and finally having participants complete
an interactive exercise exploring future land uses in
the neighborhood. The land use exercise asked par-
ticipants to break into groups and discuss a variety of
land uses and where they fit into the neighborhood,
marking locations on maps with dots.
The public open house provided an informal review of
in-progress ideas and drawings. There was an informal
overview of the ideas generated to that point and the
community was able to explore drawings and have
conversations with the city staff and consultants.
A brown bag lunch discussion was led by the Incre-
mental Development Alliance and focused on the
economics of neighborhood development. Commu-
nity members learned about different development
patterns and their value versus cost to the city. In
particular, older buildings and the more urban devel-
opment found in the Near Northwest is more valuable
(cost less for services and generate higher per acre
taxes) when compared to other development pat-
terns.
Residents and community members were invited to
join city staff and consultants on an informal walking
tour down Sherman and Harrison Avenues. Along the
way, there was discussion about the existing build-
ings, neighborhood building types, and opportunities
for the future.
The open studio offered the community times to stop
in, review the concepts & drawings in real time, and
talk to design team members. This provided commu-
nity members another opportunity to ask questions
and share their thoughts on the vision for the area.
A series of stakeholder meetings were held during
the charrette. These were small meetings with specif-
ic individuals and organizations in order to develop
feasible ideas as part of the vision. Stakeholder meet-
ings included area not-for-profits, elected officials,
residents from Sherman & Harrison Avenues, repre-
sentatives of area financial institutions and relevant
city departments.
The wrap-up presentation provided a chance for the
community to see and learn about the results of the
design charrette, including the concepts which would
continue to be refined and next steps.
During the charrette there were over 250 people
that participated across the events and hundreds of
sticky notes and comments were shared with the city
and design team. Feedback boards used during the
charrette and additional comments collected can be
found in Appendix 1.
Meeting attendees listen to the opening presentation Participants completing the “Map Your Neighborhood” exercise
18
Final Presentation
In April, a final presentation was held to provide a
chance for the community to see the concepts that
were developed throughout the series of public
workshops and engagement opportunities. The ideas
presented to the over 60 attendees were formalized
into the Plan Document.
Pictures from charrette process (clockwise): top left, attendees
take a closer look at concepts during the open house; top right,
participants stop for conversation during the walking tour;
bottom right, Opticos leads a focus group meeting; bottom left,
participants work together on the land use exercise.
19
The neighborhood strategy provides a 20-year vision
for the future of the Near Northwest. It provides a
broad framework for future investment and develop-
ment based on the shared vision of the community.
Guiding Principles
Based on community input and observations, guiding
principles were developed which identify key consid-
erations. The neighborhood strategy was developed
using the guiding principles as a frame of reference
for the planning process. The guiding principles are:
• Maintain and enhance the unique identity of the
neighborhood
−Build upon existing institutions, local organi-
zations, and community assets to reinforce the
Near Northwest Neighborhood’s image
−Protect historic landmarks and architectural
character
−Encourage new development to respond to
the existing character
−Consider neighborhood activities and events
that allow for community gathering
• Provide a neighborhood for all residents to thrive
−Enable stability and a sense of community by
increasing housing access
−Retain existing local businesses and promote
new neighborhood serving shops and services
• Future development should respond to its sur-
roundings and respect the existing neighborhood
−Use an incremental development approach
−New development character should fit within
the neighborhood
−Preserve existing housing while expanding
housing choice
−Develop high-level design principles for
“Downtown North”
• Reinforce the neighborhood center node on Por-
tage Ave.
−Explore adaptive reuse of the Ward Bakery
building
−Investigate opportunities to build on vacant
lots in the node
−Concentrate a mix of more intense uses in the
area
• Focus more intense uses along corridors
−Focus commercial uses within nodes, includ-
ing Lincoln Way West at Wilbur St. and Charles
Martin Sr. Dr.; and Portage Ave. at California
Ave. and Cushing St.
−Maintain the existing residential character
with thoughtful transitions to the surrounding
neighborhood
• Improve bike and pedestrian connectivity in and
around the neighborhood
−Strengthen connections to the river
−Improve safety for pedestrians and bicyclists
−Explore expansion of the trail network
• Improve resident access to parks and active recre-
ation
−Plan for better utilization of existing parks and
trails
−Explore the connection between Muessel Ele-
mentary School and Muessel Grove Park
−Explore enhanced access to park space west of
Portage Ave.
• Incorporate a mix of housing types
−Well designed, properly scaled & integrated
infill housing should be permitted
−Focus more intense housing along or near cor-
ridors with the most intense housing appropri-
ate for the Lincoln Way West corridor
−Thoughtful integration of missing middle
housing types can provide housing affordabili-
ty and housing choice
• Use short-and long-term strategies to activate
vacant lots
−Appropriate infill construction is desired, but
not all vacant lots will be developed
−Activated vacant lots can be an asset
−Community driven projects will have the
greatest impact
Neighborhood Strategy
20
Browneld Park
Leeper Park
Madison
School
Memorial
Hospital
Muessel Grove
Park
Muessel
School
Holy
Cross
School
Shetterly
Park
St. Joseph River
LINCOL
N
W
A
Y
W
E
S
TN Wilber StN N
i
l
e
s
A
v
e
N Hill StW Colfax AveN Brookeld StN
P
o
r
t
a
g
e
A
v
e
W Vassar Ave
N MICHIGAN STE Colfax AveN Adams StE LaSalle AveN Allen StN College StE Angela Blvd
W LaSalle AveN Blaine AveN Riverside
DrN Main StE Napoleon Blvd
N Lafayette BlvdN Walnut StN Sherman AveW California Ave
N Cushing StW Angela Blvd
E Peashway St
N Birdsell StN Diamond AveW Marion St N Staneld StN Foster StW North
S
h
o
r
e
D
r
W Lindsey Ave
N Taylor StN
W
o
o
d
w
a
r
d
A
v
e
W Madison StN Scott StN Harrison AveN Cleveland AveN Lawrence StN Leeper AveN Cottage Grove AveW Fassnacht St N Park AveN Lawndale AveW Ostemo Pl
W Tonti Ave
E Pokagon St
W Parkovash Ave
W Rupel St
W Wakewa Ave N H
i
l
l
c
r
e
s
t
RdN Iroquois StW Oak St N Forest AveW King St
E Madison StW Florence St
W Longley Ave
W Sibley St
W Navarre St
N Studebaker StW Park Ln
W Rex St
E Navarre St
E Bartlett St
W Bartlett St
W Pokagon St
W Pierce St
N Euclid AveN S
t
.
J
o
seph
S
t
E Marion StN Sancome AveW Werwinski St
E Crescent AveN Medora StN Dr. Martin Luther King Jr. StW LaSalle C
onN Kessler BlvdW Parallel St
W Hudson Ave
N Pagin StN Anderson AveW Marq
u
e
t
t
e
A
v
e
W Yukon AveW Golden AveE North Shore
D
r
W Hine St N Wildower StChapin PlN Gintz AveW Birn
e
r
S
t
W Fuerbringer St
N Jackson StW LaSalle Ct
W Harv
e
y
S
t
N
A
s
h
l
a
n
d
A
v
e
N Sycamore StN Marigold WayW Manitou Pl
W Van Buren St
W LaMonte
T
e
r
r
N India CtN Kunstman CtN Demaude Ave
E Hammond Pl
W Poplar St
N Fulton CtPeashway St
N Hamden CtN Seebert PlW King St
W Linden Ave
W California Ave
N Allen StW Angela Blvd
W LaMonte Terr
W Van Buren St
N Leland AveN Studebaker StW Marquette Av
e
N Leland AveN Lafayette BlvdN College StW Oak St N St. Joseph StN Riverside DrN Sancome AveN Diamond AveW Navarre St
N Adams StN Blaine AveN Cleveland AveDiamond AveE Madison St N St. Joseph StW Linden Ave
W Ma
r
q
u
e
t
t
e
A
v
e
N Scott StNORTH
Neighborhood strategy for the Near Northwest Neighborhood
21
Land Use & Zoning
While exploring opportunities to create a vibrant
neighborhood the current and proposed land uses, as
well as zoning, for the neighborhood need to be ex-
amined. Zoning and land use go hand-in-hand since
zoning divides land into districts, or zones, which
among other things regulates land use. The location
of future zoning districts and their regulations need
to support the vision for the neighborhood – a safe,
diverse, walkable neighborhood that provides oppor-
tunities for people to live, work, shop, eat, play, and
thrive.
During the charrette process, participants were asked
to complete an interactive exercise exploring the
future land uses, and ultimately zoning, in the neigh-
borhood. Participants worked in small groups, dis-
cussing different land uses and how, or if, they might
fit into the neighborhood. As part of the conversation,
they used a neighborhood map to show where the
land uses were appropriate in the neighborhood.
The results of the mapping exercise and the concepts
discussed by participants were compiled into a single
map. The land use exercise results can be found in
Appendix 2.
The future zoning of the Near Northwest Neighbor-
hood should foster the development of amenities that
serve the neighborhood; increase housing choice;
encourage a mix of uses; and activate key locations.
Future land use should look at opportunities for
mixed use development at the Portage Avenue node,
the Lincoln Way West and Charles Martin Sr. Drive
node, and key locations along Michigan and Main
Streets. Well designed, properly scaled and integrat-
ed infill housing should be allowed to be developed
within the neighborhood. Missing middle housing
types, such as duplexes, already exist in the neighbor-
hood, these and other missing middle types should
continue to be allowed to blend in with the surround-
ing area. More intense and larger scale missing middle
options should be focused along Lincoln Way West, at
the Portage Avenue node, and near downtown.
W Linden Ave N Michigan StW Lincolnway
W Lindsey Ave
N Cottage Grove AveN
LaPorte
Ave
N Birdsell StN Leeper AveE St. Vincent St
W Elwood Ave
W Marion St
N Portage Ave
W Oak StN Walnut StW Vassar Ave
W LaSalle Ave
W Fuerbringer StN Allen StN Wilber StN Park AveW Wakewa Ave
N Diamond AveN Scott StN Lawndale AveW Parkovash Ave
N Cushing StW Navarre StW Poplar St N Forest AveN Iroquois StN Blaine AveNWilliamStW California Ave
N Main StW Humboldt St
N Sherman AveN
Riv
ersid
e
D
rN Leland AveN St. Joseph StW Van Buren St
W Golden Ave NLafayetteBlvdW Manitou Pl
E Bartlett StNNile
s
Av
eW Y u kon A v e
W Hudson Ave
N Portag e CtW Angela Blvd
N Cleveland AveWNorthShoreDr
N
Woodw
ard
Ave
N Lafayette BlvdN Taylor StN
Hillcrest
R
d N Foster StW LaMonte Terr N St. Joseph StE Howard St
N
RiversideDr
E North Shore Dr
N Studebaker StW Pokagon St
W Fassnacht St N Eucli
d AveW Pierce St
E Angela Blvd
Peashway St
E Napoleon Blvd
N Fulton CtE Peashway St
WMadisonSt
N Hamden CtW Rex St
E Marion St
E Madison StN Harrison AveW Rupel St N Sancome AveW Sibley St
E LaSalle Ave
E Hammond Pl
W M arq uette Ave
W Tonti Ave N Otsego AveN Pagin StNDemaudeA veW Ostemo Pl
N Kunstman CtW L aS a lle C tW Harvey St
W Park Ln
W Birner St
W BartlettSt
LISF2
SF2
LB
SF2SF2
SF2
SF2
SF2
SF2
SF2 SF2
SF2
SF2 SF2
SF2
SF2
SF2
SF2
SF2
SF2
SF2SF2SF2
SF2SF2
SF2
SF2 SF2SF2
SF2
SF2SF2SF2
SF2 SF2SF2SF2
SF2
SF2SF2SF2SF2SF2
SF2
SF2
SF2SF2
SF2
SF2SF2
SF2
SF2
SF2SF2SF2
MF1
SF2SF2SF2SF2 MUSF2
MUSF2SF2
SF2
SF2MU
SF2
MUSF2SF2SF2SF2
SF2
SF2
SF2
SF2
SF2
SF2
SF2
SF2SF2
SF2
SF2SF2
SF2 SF2
SF2SF2SF2
SF2
SF2
SF2
SF2SF2
SF2
SF2
SF2MU SF2SF2
SF2SF2SF2SF2SF2SF2SF2
SF2
SF2SF2SF2SF2SF2
SF2
SF2
SF2 SF2SF2
CBD
LI LI MU MF1
SF2SF2SF2SF2SF2
SF2
SF2
SF2
SF2SF2
SF2SF2SF2SF2SF2
SF2SF2SF2SF2SF2SF2
MU
SF2
SF2LBMF1MF1
SF2 SF2SF2GB
SF2
MF1
SF2SF2SF2SF2SF2
MU
SF2
CBD
SF2
SF2
SF2
SF2MF1SF2SF2SF2MF1
MUMF1
SF2
SF2SF2MF1MF1MU
SF2 SF2SF2 SF2
SF2SF2
SF2
SF2
SF2SF2
SF2SF2SF2SF2SF2SF2MF1SF2LBLB SF2 SF2SF2LBMF1
SF2
OBMUSF2 SF2
CBD SF2
SF2SF2MUOB SF2MF1
MF1MU SF2
SF2SF2SF2
SF2
SF2
SF2
MUMUSF2 MUMUSF2SF2
LB MF1
MF1CBDCBDCBD
SF2
MU
SF2SF2SF2
CBD
MU MF1
MF1MU SF2SF2
MF1MU SF2
MF1
MU MF1
CBDCBDCBD
CBDMU
MU
MU
CBDCBDCBD
CBD
CBD
CBD
CBD
Single & Two Family Residential
Multi-Family Residential 1
General Business
Local Business
Office Buffer
Mixed Use
Central Business District
Light Industrial
Current Zoning
Near Northwest Neighborhood Plan - 2019
0 600
feet
1 inch = 600 feet
↑N
Current zoning for the Near Northwest Neighborhood
Compilation of public input from the land use exercise
NORTH
NORTH
22
W Linden Ave N Michigan StW Lincolnway
W Lindsey Ave
N Cottage Grove AveN
LaPorte
Ave
N Birdsell StN Leeper AveE St. Vincent St
W Elwood Ave
W Marion St
N
P
orta
g
e
A
v
e
W Oak StN Walnut StW Vassar Ave
W LaSalle Ave
W Fuerbringer StN Allen StN Wilber StN Park AveW Wakewa A v e
N Diamond AveN Scott StN Lawndale AveW Parkovash Ave
N Cushing StW Navarre StW Poplar St N Forest AveN Iroquois StN Blaine AveNWilliamStW California Ave
N Main StW Humboldt St
N Sherman AveN
R
i
v
e
r
si
d
e
DrN Leland AveN St. Joseph StW Van Buren St
W Golden AveNLafayetteBlvdW Manito u Pl
E Bartlett StNNil
e
s
Av
e
W Y ukon A veW Hudson Ave
N Portage CtW A n ge l a Blvd
N Cleveland AveWNorthShore
Dr
N
W
o
o
d
w
a
rd
A
ve
N Lafayette BlvdN Taylor StN
Hillcrest
Rd N Foster StW LaMonte Terr N St. Joseph StE Howard StNRi
v
e
r
s
i
d
e
Dr
E North Shore Dr
N Studebaker StW Pokagon St
W Fassnacht St N Euclid AveW Pierce St
E Angela Blvd
Peashway St
E Napoleon Blvd
N Fulton CtE Peashway St
W
MadisonSt
N Hamden CtW Rex St
E Marion St
E Madison StN Harrison AveW Rupel St N Sancome AveW Sibley St
E LaSalle Ave
E Hammond Pl
W M a r q u e t t e Ave
W Tonti Ave N Otsego AveN Pagin StNDemaudeAveW O st emo Pl
N Kunstman CtW L a S alle C tW Harvey St
W Park Ln
W Birner St
W Bartlett St
U1: Urban Neighborhood 1
U2: Urban Neighborhood 2
U3: Urban Neighborhood 3
UF: Urban Neighborhood Flex
NC: Neighborhood Center
DT: Downtown
OS: Open Space
Future Zoning
Near Northwest Neighborhood Plan - 2019
0 600
feet
1 inch = 600 feet
↑N
Future zoning for the Near Northwest Neighborhood
NORTH
23
Browneld Park
Leeper Park
Madison
School
Memorial
Hospital
Muessel Grove
Park
Muessel
School
Holy
Cross
School
Shetterly
Park
St. Joseph River
LINCOL
N
W
A
Y
W
E
S
TN Wilber StN N
i
l
e
s
A
v
e
N Hill StW Colfax AveN Brookeld StN
P
o
r
t
a
g
e
A
v
e
W Vassar Ave
N MICHIGAN STE Colfax AveN Adams StE LaSalle AveN Allen StN College StE Angela Blvd
W LaSalle AveN Blaine AveN Riverside
DrN Main StE Napoleon Blvd
N Lafayette BlvdN Walnut StN Sherman AveW California Ave
N Cushing StW Angela Blvd
E Peashway St
N Birdsell StN Diamond AveW Marion St N Staneld StN Foster StW Nort
h
S
h
o
r
e
D
r
W Lindsey Ave
N Taylor StN W
o
o
d
w
a
r
d
A
v
e
W Madison StN Scott StN Harrison AveN Cleveland AveN Lawrence StN Leeper AveN Cottage Grove AveW Fassnacht St N Park AveN Lawndale AveW Ostemo Pl
W Tonti Ave
E Pokagon St
W Parkovash Ave
W Rupel St
W Wakewa Ave N H
i
l
l
c
r
e
s
t
R
dN Iroquois StW Oak St N Forest AveW King St
E Madison StW Florence St
W Longley Ave
W Sibley St
W Navarre St
N Studebaker StW Park Ln
W Rex St
E Navarre St
E Bartlett St
W Bartlett St
W Pokagon St
W Pierce St
N Euclid AveN S
t
.
Jo
seph
S
t
E Marion StN Sancome AveW Werwinski St
E Crescent AveN Medora StN Dr. Martin Luther King Jr. StW LaSalle
C
o
nN Kessler BlvdW Parallel St
W Hudson Ave
N Pagin StN Anderson AveW Marq
u
e
t
t
e
A
v
e
W Yukon Ave
W Golden Ave
E North Shore
D
r
W Hine St N Wildower StChapin PlN Gintz AveW Birne
r
S
t
W Fuerbringer St
N Jackson StW LaSall
e
Ct
W Harv
e
y
S
t
N
A
s
h
l
a
n
d
A
v
e
N Sycamore StN Marigold WayW Manitou Pl
W Van Buren St
W LaMonte
T
e
r
r
N India CtN Kunstman CtN Demaude
Ave
E Hammond Pl
W Poplar St
N Fulton CtPeashway St
N Hamden CtN Seebert PlW King St
W Linden Ave
W California Ave
N Allen StW Angela Blvd
W LaMonte Terr
W Van Buren St
N Leland AveN Studebaker StW Marquette A
v
e
N Leland AveN Lafayette BlvdN College StW Oak St N St. Joseph StN Riverside DrN Sancome AveN Diamond AveW Navarre St
N Adams StN Blaine AveN Cleveland AveDiamond AveE Madison St N St. Joseph StW Linden Ave
W Ma
r
q
u
e
t
t
e
A
v
e
N Scott StConnectivity Plan
The goal of the connectivity plan is to increase neigh-
borhood walkability, bikeability, and connections
within and to the broader community. While examin-
ing the connections in and around the neighborhood
as well to the broader community, there were seven
(7) concepts identified for further exploration.
Improvements at Portage Avenue Neighborhood Nodes
With anticipated development at the Portage &
California Avenues node, complete streets principles
and traffic calming efforts should be pursued, such as:
clear on-street parking, improved pedestrian cross-
ings, street trees, minimal curb cuts, and reinforcing
bike infrastructure.
The William (Portage) & Marion Streets node, has op-
portunities for applying complete streets principles to
improve the experience for pedestrians and bicyclists,
including increasing safety by reducing the pavement
at the intersection.
Muessel Elementary School Connectivity and Circulation
Improvements
Not uncommon at schools, drop-off and pick-up
times can cause concerns for safety of students. There
is an opportunity to incorporate complete streets
principles at the school, particularly on Blaine and
Cleveland Avenues, in order to slow traffic and im-
prove pedestrian crossings.
During a stakeholder meeting, school officials noted
that if the connection between the school and Mues-
sel Grove Park were improved a variety of classes
could use the park. Though the distance between the
school and park is only two blocks, street crossings
present a challenge for moving students between the
locations. The future Coal Line Trail effort will make
significant improvements to the Vassar and Lawndale
Avenues crossing. Potential improvements at Vassar
and Cleveland Avenues would have a twofold bene-
fit - access to the park as well as assisting with drop-
off / pick-up. Additional improvements along Vassar
Avenue can be explored to improve the safety and
connection between these two neighborhood assets.
NORTH
Muessel Elementary School
Connectivity and Circulation
Improvements
Improvements at Portage
Avenue Neighborhood
Nodes
California Avenue Connectivity
Riverside Drive Traffic Calming &
Trail Network Connection
Leeper Park Traffic Calming
Bike & Pedestrian Connectivity
with the Broader City
24
Leeper Park Traffic Calming
Leeper Park is a neighborhood asset that attracts
many people from the neighborhood and broader
community. The improvements occurring in 2019 &
2020 will invite people to engage with the park in
new ways – with increased walking paths through
and around the park, an updated playground, and a
new river overlook.
Leeper Park is unique in that it is has streets within
it, dividing the park into three distinct sections. The
increased use brings greater attention to the need to
slow traffic down, improve the user experience, and
improve the connection between the different sec-
tions. Improvements at the Lafayette Boulevard and
Riverside Drive intersection will incorporate traffic
calming measures to slow traffic – including reduc-
ing the crossing distance across Lafayette Blvd. and
reducing pavement width along Riverside Drive. In
addition, as part of the new river overlook improve-
ment there will be a raised intersection at Riverside
Drive and the sidewalks at the overlook, this will help
slow traffic and improve the pedestrian connection
to the river. Although Michigan Street at Leeper Park
is owned by the State of Indiana, the City is exploring
opportunities to create a safe pedestrian and bike
connection across it.
California Avenue Connectivity
Given the unique nature of the neighborhood’s street
pattern, California Avenue (changing to Riverside
Drive to the east) is the only east/west connection
that extends through the entire neighborhood. Given
its importance as an east/west connector, opportuni-
ties should be taken to reinforce the street as part of
the bike and pedestrian network. This could include
a variety of approaches, as appropriate based on
location, such as: connection with the Coal Line Trail,
improved street crossings, adequate tree coverage,
and sidewalk improvements.
Bike & Pedestrian Connectivity with the Broader City
While it is important for neighbors to be able to easily
move around the neighborhood, it is also important
for them to be able to access the broader communi-
ty – whether to commute to work, to visit friends, run
errands, or for leisure and exercise. Opportunities to
provide connections to the broader region through
the trail network, bike network, and bus routes should
be taken, including connection points to the Coal Line
Trail, Riverside Trail, and the East Bank Trail.
Riverside Trail Network Connection
Following the construction of Riverside Trail, north
of Angela Blvd., the gap in the trail network along
Riverside Drive has been apparent. Due to the limited
right-of-way and space in the stretch between Leland
and Hudson Avenues a traditional trail connection is
not viable. However, in exploring the challenge there
may be alternate approaches which could provide
an improved level of connectivity. Approaches could
include providing some enhancements to the seg-
ment such as a separated path where able, safe street
crossings, and clear connection points for those wish-
ing to use the trail network. A preliminary concept has
been developed (see next page) but will need further
exploration to make a final decision on the path for-
ward.
Riverside Drive Traffic Calming
There is a recognition of traffic concerns along Riv-
erside Drive. Recently, the city installed a temporary
traffic circle at Hudson Avenue to test and adjust the
concept prior to a permanent installation. It is antici-
pated that a final design and permanent solution will
be installed in 2020/2021.
Another location of concern is the intersection of
California Ave., Leland Ave., and Riverside Drive. The
City also used a temporary traffic control installation
in this location in order to test possible solutions
to improve the intersection. Additional options for
intersection modification continue to be explored.
The goal of any improvements would be to clarify the
appropriate movements for intersection users and
help reduce pavement.
In addition, there are concerns about slowing traf-
fic along Riverside Drive between Angela Blvd. and
Michigan Street. Work in Leeper Park as well as trail
network connection work should explore opportuni-
ties to assist with slowing traffic in the area.
W VASSAR AVE
W CALIFORNIA AVENLAWNDALEAVENDIAMONDAVE NCLEVELANDAVENBLAINEAVEMuessel School
Muessel Grove Park
Coal Line TrailConnection between Muessel Grove Park and Muessel School along Vassar Ave.
East / West connection across Near Northwest Neighborhood (Coal Line Trail to Riverside Dr.)
Implement traffic calming
measures at intersection for
safe access to Muessel School
by students and faculty.
Improve connection between the parking lot and school entrance.
California Ave. access
point to the Coal Line Trail.
Implement traffic calming measures along streets for safety of pedestrians and vehicles.
Implement traffic calming
measures at intersection for
safe access to Muessel Grove
Park and the Coal Line Trail.
Repair / replace sidewalk
and pedestrian ramps for
improved connection along Vassar Ave.
Muessel Elementary School connectivity and circulation improvements overview
NORTH
25
Preliminary concept for Riverside Drive improvements N Woodwa r d Ave
W C a lifo rn ia A v e
W Golden AveW Yukon AveN Leland AveW Vassar AveN Ri ve r sid e DrWNorthShoreDrNRiversideDr
N Riverside DrN Riverside Dr
N Ri ve rside Dr
N Riv ers ide D r
W H u dso nA ve
N Woodward AveDepartment of Community InvestmentPlanning & Community InvestmentCITY OF SOUTH BENDN*(Riverside DriveRiverside Drive: from California to Hudson08016040feet1 inch = 40 feetIntersection realignment
to clarify travel lanes and
reduce pavement
Bump outs at intersections
to slow traffic and improve
street crossing safety
Separated path installed on
north side of street
Path joins existing sidewalk on
the south side of street for one
block due to lack of space
Intersection improvements
to increase safety at trail
street crossing NORTH
26
N Woo d ward Ave
W C a lifo rn ia A v e
W Golden AveW Yukon AveN Leland AveW Vassar AveN R i ve r s i d e DrWNorthShoreDrNRiversideDr
N Riverside DrNRiversideDr
N Ri ve r si d e Dr
N Riv erside Dr
WHudsonAve
N Woodward AveDepartment of Community InvestmentPlanning & Community InvestmentCITY OF SOUTH BENDN*(Riverside DriveRiverside Drive: from California to Hudson08016040feet1 inch = 40 feetIntersection realignment to
clarify travel lanes and reduce
pavement
Separated path installed on
north side of street
Small curb extensions at
alley intersection to slow
traffic
Reduce pavement to slow
traffic at curve and help clarify
intersection
NOR
T
H
27
Neighborhood Character
A common theme heard throughout the process was
that any future changes should be consistent with
the neighborhood character. It is recognized that the
character in different areas of the neighborhood may
vary slightly – in addition to the residential nature of
the neighborhood there are multiple historic districts,
commercial corridors, and a portion of downtown all
within one neighborhood. Although the details of
character might be varied depending on where you
are in the neighborhood, common themes exist:
• Front Porch Community - it is open and welcom-
ing through its built form;
• Walkable, urban neighborhood;
• Variety of housing types consistent with the early
1900’s including a range of styles and the number
of units;
• Vast majority of the neighborhood was built prior
to 1917, attention to detail is important;
• A mix of uses is appropriate in select locations
including the corridors and the area which is an
extension of downtown; and
• New development should not detract from the
character of the existing residential areas.
28
29
Memorial Hospital Development Principles
Downtown North is a key gateway into downtown
South Bend and given its current uses, mainly surface
parking lots, has significant opportunity for future de-
velopment. In anticipation of potential development,
general vision and urban design guidelines were
created to help encourage desired development:
• Reinforce entry into downtown from the north;
• Define building edges at roundabouts;
• Use building form to define primary and second-
ary streets;
• Define priority lots for development and identify
suitable locations for new, high quality housing as
well as a parking structure(s); and
• Use thoughtful transitions in form and scale to the
adjacent residential neighborhoods.
Priority locations and edges for encouraging develop-
ment were identified as along LaSalle Avenue, corners
located at the Marion Street and Bartlett Street round-
abouts, the edge along Leeper Park at Park Lane and
Michigan Street, a stretch of Michigan Street north of
Madison Street, and along N. St. Joseph Street. Build-
ings along the roundabouts should incorporate taller
elements at the corner.
Should an additional parking structure(s) be pursued,
four locations have been identified that would allow
for loading off secondary streets as well as the wrap-
ping of the garage with a building (concealing the
garage from the street and allowing for street activa-
tion).
Update Urban design 101 graphic as need-
ed - have illustrator
Priority Edges to Develop
Priority Corners and Locations for Taller Elements
Potential New Buildings (High and Low Priority)
Potential Locations for Parking Structures
Existing Buildings
Development principles for Memorial Hospital campus
NORTH
30
Existing view south on Michigan St. near Park Lane
View south on Michigan St. near Park Lane with example of implemented design principles
31
Portage Avenue Neighborhood Node
The Portage and California Avenues intersection is a
natural node within the neighborhood. It is centrally
located on the Portage Avenue corridor and is the
location of neighborhood assets Near Northwest
Neighborhood, Inc. offices and community space as
well as The Local Cup coffee shop. This node, which
spans from Golden Avenue to Van Buren Street, has
opportunity for development. The former Ward Bak-
ery building has been underutilized since the closing
of the bakery and more recently has sat empty for
several years. The building needs significant repairs
and improvements but could be redeveloped into a
true neighborhood asset. Concepts that have been
discussed include housing as well as a mixed-use de-
velopment providing business incubator space, small
commercial space, and some housing.
In addition to the Ward Bakery, there are several va-
cant lots south of California Avenue owned by either
the City or a neighborhood small-scale developer.
Thoughtful infill development - focused on walkable,
neighborhood scale, a mix of uses, and a variety of
housing types - can help to reinforce the neighbor-
hood node.
Portage and California Avenues intersection conceptual improvementsExisting Portage and California Avenues intersection
Portage and California Avenues conceptual plan for improvementsCottage Grove AvenueCushing StreetPor
t
a
g
e
A
v
e
n
u
e
California Avenue
Rex Street
Van Buren Avenu
e
NORTH
32
Lincoln Way West & Charles Martin Sr. Drive
Node
The City recently acquired property and complet-
ed streetscape improvements at the intersection of
Lincoln Way West and Charles Martin Sr. Drive. One
of the results of these efforts was the creation of a
development site at a key intersection just outside of
downtown South Bend. In addition, the infrastructure
improvements included complete streets principles to
reduce the amount of pavement, slow traffic, improve
the pedestrian and bicycle experience, improve vehic-
ular circulation, and provide clearly defined on-street
parking. Future development at this node should
utilize urban design principles to hold the corner, be
pedestrian oriented, and provide a mix of uses.
Conceptual improvements at Lincoln Way West and Charles Martin Sr. Drive
NORTH
33
Support Existing Neighbors
An engaged and active community is a powerful
neighborhood resource. The City wishes to support
efforts spearheaded by neighbors, community orga-
nizations, businesses, and other stakeholders that aim
to improve the quality of life in our neighborhoods.
Area residents and stakeholders are often better able
to implement ideas than government. Neighbors best
know their neighborhood, challenges, and opportu-
nities while government can have required processes
and policies which can hinder a project.
Though ideas may start out as small opportunities,
implementing several small, incremental efforts can
have a large impact. The positive momentum that is
created around locally driven efforts reinforces the
value of past commitments and encourages people to
pursue future projects. Neighbors, community organi-
zations, and stakeholders working together with city
government can have a lasting impact on neighbor-
hood quality of life.
Ultimately, a goal of a neighborhood plan is to make
improvements to the area that benefit those who cur-
rently live there. While future efforts will not directly
impact every property in the entire neighborhood,
there are opportunities to ensure residents have
access to resources which can improve their quality of
life. This includes the exploration of new or expanded
programs, continuing existing programs, and increas-
ing awareness of available resources.
The City recognizes there are challenges that the
neighborhood and its residents face – including in-
frastructure needs, crime, and limited incomes. These
challenges also impact other residents and neighbor-
hoods throughout our community. Citywide chal-
lenges must be looked at from a higher level and be
addressed in a more holistic way. While solutions may
need to be tailored to varying circumstances across
neighborhoods, we need to tackle these issues with a
thoughtful, city level approach.
Credit: Near Northwest Neighborhood, Inc.
Credit: Near Northwest Neighborhood, Inc.
Credit: Near Northwest Neighborhood, Inc.Credit: Near Northwest Neighborhood, Inc.
34
Vacant Lot Activation
There are nearly 500 unimproved properties in the
neighborhood. Using the Analysis of Residential Mar-
ket Potential, completed in 2018, the potential de-
velopment over 20 years is anticipated to impact less
than 50% of the unimproved properties. Ultimately,
solutions for the reuse of many neighborhood lots will
not be new buildings, but rather a community en-
gaged effort to activate the vacant lot. Types of acti-
vation can range from a garden to a playground, or an
art space to a dog park, and everything in between.
For lot activation to be successful, one of the key
elements is that there is community buy-in for the
project. Community members need to develop the
idea, create the space, and maintain it as a community
asset. Without this type of ownership projects will be
unlikely to have long term success, potentially return-
ing to an inactivate space within a short time. The City
is developing a resource guide to assist neighbors in
coming together to activate vacant lots and creating a
true neighborhood asset.
It is a common misunderstanding that the City owns
all the vacant lots throughout our community. The
City does not own most of the unimproved properties
within the neighborhood. As a result, collaboration
and engagement with property owners will be an im-
portant part of any effort to activate lots. Depending
on the project, setting up a way to take ownership of
the property might be necessary.
The birthday chair is a place making effort
Urban gardening
Sherman Avenue community garden and gathering space
Portage Avenue Unity Garden
35
Neighborhood Infill
Not uncommon across the country, as the post-war
housing market shifted away from urban neigh-
borhoods, the condition of housing in these areas
declined. The comparatively low value of housing in
South Bend reinforced the decline by discouraging
investment in the housing stock. Through the years,
many houses were demolished in the Near Northwest
but some of these vacant lots provide an opportunity
for development.
The City engaged with Zimmerman/Volk Associates,
Inc. in 2018 to complete an Analysis of Residential
Market Potential of three different geographies. The
study examined the potential market for new and
renovated housing based on the housing preferences
and socio-economic characteristics of households
in the relevant draw areas. One of the study areas
includes a portion of the Near Northwest Neighbor-
hood, Census Tract 6, as well as two additional Cen-
sus Tracts. For this study area it was determined that
“between 56 and 70 new mixed-income rental and
for-sale dwelling units could be developed and ab-
sorbed within Study Area A each year over the next
five years.” The study provided a breakdown of the
housing types and price ranges that would meet the
needs of the market potential. This information was
used during the charrette process when examining
infill opportunities.
When developing any new construction in the Near
Northwest the buildings should reflect the charac-
ter of the neighborhood. In addition, new housing
should include a range of types – from single family
and accessory dwelling units, to multiplexes, rentals
and mixed-use buildings. Housing should also provide
a range of price points to keep it a diverse, mixed-in-
come neighborhood. Any larger buildings should be
designed with consideration for human scale and to
fit into the existing urban context.
A variety of building types were explored throughout
the charrette process. The buildings provide a variety
of housing options and can fit into the existing neigh-
borhood fabric.
Single Family
A single-family house provides one unit on a parcel.
Duplex
A duplex provides two housing units on one parcel.
Units can be stacked or side-by-side, and units can
have individual entrances or share one entrance.
There are many originally built duplexes that seam-
lessly exist within the neighborhood.
Fourplex
A fourplex provides four housing units on one parcel.
Units can be configured in a variety of ways to fit into
a single building and on the property. Depending on
the layout of the units, they can share and/or have
individual entrances.
36
Accessory Dwelling Unit (ADU)
An accessory dwelling unit is a second, small housing
unit which is provided on the same lot as a primary
structure such as a single-family house or duplex.
ADU’s are often detached from the main house but
can also be attached, such as a garage which is con-
verted into an apartment.
Townhouse
A townhouse is a housing unit which shares one or
more walls with another independently owned hous-
ing unit.
Cottage Court
A cottage court consists of a series of small, detached
buildings arranged to define a shared court that is
typically perpendicular to the street.
Credit: The Tiny Life
37
Makerplex
A makerplex is a flexible building type that can ac-
commodate small scale manufacturing or other small
businesses including a retail storefront. They can
sometimes be combined with a modest sized housing
unit to allow for an artist or small business owner to
live and work in the same building.
Credit: MAKE South Bend
38
When pursuing infill development, the new con-
struction should be consistent with the nature and
character of the existing neighborhood. As such, it
is important to ensure that new buildings are sited
on parcels that are the appropriate size so the devel-
opment fits the scale of its surroundings. An analysis
was completed to determine the width of every lot in
the neighborhood. Through this process it was deter-
mined that nearly a third of the neighborhood parcels
are less than 40 ft. wide and almost 70% are less than
50 ft. wide.
Based on an understanding of the lot widths within
the neighborhood, a study of building types was com-
pleted to determine the type of buildings which are
appropriate for different lot sizes given the neighbor-
hood character. Using common lot dimensions (and
combinations of lots) within the neighborhood the
types of building appropriate for 30 ft., 50 ft., 60 ft., 75
ft., 90 ft., 100 ft., 133 ft., 150 ft., and 166 ft. wide lots
were explored.
While we understand the type of building that is
appropriate to be built, it is important to also under-
stand the dollars & cents of development. As part of
the plan development process, the consultant Incre-
mental Development Alliance developed proformas
for the variety of building types being explored for
neighborhood infill. A proforma is a tool used to pres-
ent financial information, such as costs and revenue,
for a specific project. The proformas can be found in
Appendix 3.
Given neighborhood economics, the cost of a con-
structing a new building is greater than the appraised
value of the property once it is completed. This cre-
ates a financial gap. This challenge must be addressed
in order to help create a sustainable model for new
housing.
Recognizing that there is a financial shortfall, there
are a few identified programs that could assist with
closing the gap. Each of these options will need to be
explored to better define if and how they would assist
with furthering development in neighborhoods like
the Near Northwest.
Lot Width
0-39 ft
40-49 ft
50-59 ft
60-69 ft
70-79 ft
80-89 ft
90-99 ft
100-119 ft 120-149 ft
150 ft and greater
Brownfield Park
Leeper Park Madison School
Memorial Hospital
Muessel Grove Park
Muessel School
Holy Cross School
Shetterly Park
St. Joseph River
N Olive StLINCOL
N
W
A
Y
W
E
S
TN Huey StN Wilber StN N
i
l
e
s
A
v
e
N Hill StW Colfax AveN Johnson StN Brookfield StN Elmer StN
P
o
r
t
a
g
e
A
v
e
W Bulla St
W Vassar Ave
N MICHIGAN STW Elwood Ave
E Colfax AveN Adams StN
L
a
P
o
r
t
e
A
v
e
E LaSalle AveN Allen StN College StE Angela Blvd
W LaSalle Ave
W Orange St
E Howard StN O'Brien StN Blaine AveN R
iverside
D
r
W Humboldt St
N Main StE Napoleon Blvd
E St. Vincent St
N Lafayette BlvdN Walnut StN Sherman AveE Cedar St
W California Ave
N Cushing StN Meade StE Corby Blvd
W Angela Blvd
E Peashway StN Fremont StN Birdsell StN Diamond AveN William StW Marion St N Stanfield StW Prast Blvd N Foster StW North
S
h
o
r
e
D
r
N Notre Dame Ave
W Lindsey Ave
W Roger St
N Taylor StW Washington St
N
W
o
o
d
w
a
r
d
A
v
e
E Sorin St
W Madison StN Scott StN Harrison AveN Cleveland AveN Eddy StN St. Peter StN Kaley StN Lawrence StW Bertrand St N Leeper AveN Cottage Grove AveW Fassnacht St N Park AveN Lawndale AveN St. Louis BlvdW Ostemo Pl
W Tonti Ave
E Pokagon St
W Kenwood Ave
E Miner St
W Parkovash Ave
W Rupel St
W Wakewa Ave N H
i
l
l
c
r
e
s
t
R
dN Iroquois StW Oak St E South Bend AveN Forest AveW King St
E Madison StW Florence St
W Longley Ave N Frances StW Sibley St
N Sadie StW Navarre St
N Studebaker StW Park Ln
W Rex St
W Calhoun St
N Turnock StE Navarre St
W Westmoor St E Bartlett St
W Bartlett St
W Pokagon St
W McCartney St
W Pierce St
N Euclid AveN S
t
.
Jo
seph
S
t
E Marion StN Sancome AveN Elm StW Werwinski St
W Lawton St
W Frederickson St
E Crescent Ave
W Smith St
W Bond
s
A
v
e
W Liston St N Medora StW Linden Ave
N Dr. Martin Luther King Jr. StW LaSalle ConN Kessler BlvdW Parallel St
E Kalorama St
W Hudson Ave
E Hull St
N Pagin StN Anderson AveW Marq
u
e
t
t
e
A
v
e
W Yukon Ave
W Golden Ave
E Campeau St
E North Shore Dr
W Hine St N Wildflower StN Grant StN Church PlChapin PlN Gintz AveW Holland St
W Birner
S
t
N Carlisle StW Fuerbringer St
E Luther CtN Jackson StW LaSalle Ct
W Harv
e
y
S
t
N
A
s
h
l
a
n
d
A
v
e
N St. Paul PlN Sycamore StN Marigold WayE Almond Ct
E McKinley Ave
W Manitou Pl
W Van Buren St
W LaMonte
T
e
r
r
N
B
e
n
d
i
x
D
r N India CtN Kunstman CtN Spruce StN Demaude Ave
E Hammond Pl
W Poplar St
N Fulton CtPeashway St
N Hamden CtN Seebert PlN South Bend
Ave
N Meade StW Longley Ave
W King St
W Linden AveN Meade StW California Ave
N Notre Dame AveW Colfax Ave N Fremont StE Miner StN Hill StN Frances StN O'Brien StN Allen StW Angela Blvd
W LaMonte Terr
N Michigan StW Van Buren St
W Liston St N St. Louis BlvdN Leland AveN Studebaker StW Marquette Ave
W Angela Blvd
N Leland AveN Lafayette BlvdN College StW Oak St N St. Joseph StN Meade StN Riverside DrW Longley Ave
W Ber
t
r
a
n
d
S
t N Frances StN Eddy StN Sancome AveN Diamond AveN O'Brien StW Navarre St
E Madison St
N Adams StN Blaine AveN Huey StN Cleveland AveN St. Peter StN Allen StDiamond AveE Madison St N St. Joseph StW Frederickson St
N St. Peter StW Linden Ave
N Meade StW Werwinski St
W Mar
q
u
e
t
t
e
A
v
e
N Scott St400 800200
Feet
Near Northwest
Neighborhood Plan
South Bend, IN
March 2019
Base Map
0 N
Lot Width
0-39 ft
40-49 ft
50-59 ft
60-69 ft
70-79 ft
80-89 ft
90-99 ft
100-119 ft 120-149 ft
150 ft and greater
Brownfield Park
Leeper Park Madison School
Memorial Hospital
Muessel Grove Park
Muessel School
Holy Cross School
Shetterly Park
St. Joseph River
N Olive StLINCOL
N
W
A
Y
W
E
S
TN Huey StN Wilber StN
N
i
l
e
s
A
v
e
N Hill StW Colfax AveN Johnson StN Brookfield StN Elmer StN P
o
r
t
a
g
e
A
v
e
W Bulla St
W Vassar Ave
N MICHIGAN STW Elwood Ave
E Colfax AveN Adams StN L
a
P
o
r
t
e
A
v
e
E LaSalle AveN Allen StN College StE Angela Blvd
W LaSalle Ave
W Orange St
E Howard StN O'Brien StN Blaine AveN R
i
vers
ide
D
r
W Humboldt St
N Main StE Napoleon Blvd
E St. Vincent St
N Lafayette BlvdN Walnut StN Sherman AveE Cedar St
W California Ave
N Cushing StN Meade StE Corby Blvd
W Angela Blvd
E Peashway StN Fremont StN Birdsell StN Diamond AveN William StW Marion St N Stanfield StW Prast Blvd N Foster StW North
S
h
o
r
e
D
r
N Not
re
Dame Ave
W Lindsey Ave
W Roger St
N Taylor StW Washington St
N
W
o
o
d
w
a
r
d
A
v
e
E Sorin St
W Madison StN Scott StN Harrison AveN Cleveland AveN Eddy StN St. Peter StN Kaley StN Lawrence StW Bertrand St N Leeper AveN Cottage Grove AveW Fassnacht St N Park AveN Lawndale AveN St. Louis BlvdW Ostemo Pl
W Tonti Ave
E Pokagon St
W Kenwood Ave
E Miner St
W Parkovash Ave
W Rupel St
W Wakewa Ave N H
i
l
l
c
r
e
s
t
R
dN Iroquois StW Oak St E South B
e
n
d
A
v
eN Forest AveW King St
E Madison StW Florence St
W Longley Ave N Frances StW Sibley St
N Sadie StW Navarre St
N Studebaker StW Park Ln
W Rex St
W Calhoun St
N Turnock StE Navarre St
W Westmoor St E Bartlett St
W Bartlett St
W Pokagon St
W McCartney St
W Pierce St
N Euclid AveN St
.
Jo
s
ep
h
S
t
E Marion StN Sancome AveN Elm StW Werwinski St
W Lawton St
W Frederickson St
E Crescent Ave
W Smith St
W Bonds
A
v
e
W Liston St N Medora StW Linden Ave
N Dr. Martin Luther King Jr. StW LaSalle
ConN Kessler BlvdW Parallel St
E Kalorama St
W Hudson Ave
E Hull St
N Pagin StN Anderson AveW Marque
t
t
e
A
v
e
W Yuko
n Ave
W Golden Ave
E Campeau St
E North Shore Dr
W Hine St N Wildflower StN Grant StN Church PlChapin PlN Gintz AveW Holland St
W Birner
S
t
N Carlisle StW Fuerbringer St
E Luther CtN Jackson StW LaSall
e
Ct
W Harvey
S
t
N A
s
h
l
a
n
d
A
v
e
N St. Paul PlN Sycamore StN Marigold WayE Almond Ct
E McKinley Ave
W Manitou Pl
W Van Buren St
W LaMonte
T
e
r
r
N B
e
n
d
i
x
D
r N Ind
ia CtN Kunstman CtN Spruce StN Demau
d
e Ave
E Hammond Pl
W Poplar St
N Fulton CtPeashway St
N Hamden CtN Seebert PlN South Bend Ave
N Meade StW Longley Ave
W King St
W Linden AveN Meade StW California Ave
N Notre Dame AveW Colfax Ave N Fremont StE Miner StN Hill StN Frances StN O'Brien StN Allen StW Angela Blvd
W LaMonte Terr
N Michigan StW Van Buren St
W Liston St N St. Louis BlvdN Leland AveN Studebaker StW Marquette Ave
W Angela Blvd
N Leland AveN Lafayette BlvdN College StW Oak St N St. Joseph StN Meade StN Riverside DrW Longley Ave
W Bert
r
a
n
d
S
t N Frances StN Eddy StN Sancome AveN Diamond AveN O'Brien StW Navarre St
E Madison St
N Adams StN Blaine AveN Huey StN Cleveland AveN St. Peter StN Allen StDiamond AveE Madison St N St. Joseph StW Frederickson St
N St. Peter StW Linden Ave
N Meade StW Werwinski St
W Mar
q
u
e
t
t
e
A
v
e
N Scott St400 800200
Feet
Near Northwest
Neighborhood Plan
South Bend, INMarch 2019Base Map
0 N
Lot width analysis of properties in the Near Northwest Neighborhood
NORTH
39
Building type study by lot width, 60’
Building type study by lot width, 133’
Building type study by lot width, 30’
Building type study by lot width, 50’
Building type study by lot width, 75’Building type study by lot width, 90’
Building type study by lot width, 150’Building type study by lot width, 166’
Building type study by lot width, 100’
40
1. Pre-Approved Building Plans for Small Residential
Structures
One of the “soft” costs of construction is paying for
a building plan that fits in the surrounding neigh-
borhood and meets zoning and local building
code requirements. A collection of pre-approved
plans would reduce the overall costs by providing
those interested in new construction a selection
of building types that fit into the neighborhood
context – both in style and characteristics as well
as common lot widths found within our neigh-
borhoods. Since properties have varying condi-
tions and constraints, a property specific site plan
would still need to be developed.
2. Detached Accessory Dwelling Unit Revolving Loan
Fund
Paying for the construction of an ADU can be chal-
lenging. Most homeowners do not have enough
equity in their home to access a home equity
related loan product, this is either due to the
mortgage balance or because the appraised value
of the home is less than the cost to build an ADU.
Obtaining a personal loan large enough to pay for
new construction can be equally as challenging.
Refinancing their entire property is often neces-
sary in order to amortize the pay back schedule
of such an investment to a manageable level. A
revolving fund would look to provide loans, in
part secured by the rents created by the new unit,
as another pathway for willing property owners to
add an ADU to their lots.
3. Infrastructure Replacement Funding
There are practical considerations for building in
older neighborhoods where underground infra-
structure can be 75 to 100 years old, including
making connections into existing utility lines in
the public right of way. Buildings that will use
municipal sewer and water services (this includes
all buildings within City limits) need to make con-
nections to the sewer and water lines which are
located under the street in front of the building. In
areas with existing infrastructure, this entails exca-
vating the street so new sewer and water laterals
can be installed. Infrastructure replacement fund-
ing would be focused on off-site infrastructure
such as sidewalks, water and sewer laterals, and
any repairs or upgrades to water mains required in
areas which may have insufficient service, partic-
ularly for new buildings with sprinkler systems.
Funding could be provided as low interest, long
term financing or as small grants.
4. Sprinkler Grants for Qualifying Rehabilitation and
New Construction of Multi-Unit Buildings
Building code requires certain types of buildings
to include sprinkler systems, such as mixed-use
buildings and medium sized multi-unit residential
buildings. The addition of sprinklers can be cost
prohibitive to the rehabilitation of existing build-
ings or the construction of new multi-unit build-
ings. Sprinkler grants would help to cover these
additional costs borne by small buildings that are
difficult to recover through rents early in the re-
development of the neighborhood. These grants
would likely be tiered to the size of the project
and would be phased out after a period of time.
5. Patient Capital to Provide Equity Positions for Small
Developers and Mission-Based Organizations
Patient capital could help keep small projects from
being largely owned by an investment partner,
providing a wealth building tool. This resource
could be used to fund 5-20% of a project in order
to help new developers or neighborhood-based
organizations have the capital necessary to obtain
construction loans. The equity would be in the
form of a low-interest loan that returns dollars
over a 3-10-year period. The terms and lengths of
loans could be adjusted based on the outcomes
achieved by the project.
6. Loan Guarantee Fund
A challenge sometimes encountered by small
developers is not having a personal financial state-
ment with enough assets to meet banking insti-
tution thresholds for a personal guarantee for a
construction loan. The loan guarantee fund would
provide the financial backing to viable projects in
order to assist the developer in obtaining a con-
struction loan. This allows the developer to focus
on securing investment dollars but not having to
attract an investor with high net worth and liquid
assets – who will likely want a high rate of return.
The fund does not directly provide resources
unless the developer fails to meet the repayment
terms of the construction loan.
Program parameters and requirements will need
to be developed in order to protect the funds
resources and ability to provide long term assis-
tance. Areas that will need to be considered in-
clude developer resources and credentials, project
viability, loan products to be used, eligible amount
of construction loans to be covered, and potential
cost containment measures such as requiring the
use of a pre-approved building plan.
While these programs have been identified as poten-
tial options to facilitate development they need to be
further explored and evaluated in order to determine
program requirements and if any would be a good
fit for South Bend. The City could develop a pilot
program(s) to test to see if and how these programs
would assist in furthering development. If programs
are implemented, they would phase out, or evolve, as
the market improves to address the gap on its own.
41
Development Strategy
The development strategy is a more specific exam-
ination of a target area to determine how to best
implement the principles and concepts identified in
the neighborhood plan. It provides a guide for imple-
menting a specific project based on examining things
such as feasibility, funding & funding gaps, partner-
ships, and phasing.
Infill housing should be focused in targeted areas that
build off existing strengths. Focusing efforts will help
to maximize the impact on the surrounding neighbor-
hood; the stability and certainty provided will enable
infill to expand into a larger geography. The initial
target geographies include Sherman and Harrison
Avenues as well as the Portage Avenue Node (which
was previously discussed).
Sherman and Harrison Avenues were identified as
the target area based on a variety of factors. Their
location helps to build off the strength of past in-
vestment in and around the neighborhood and will
reinforce this past work, allowing the positive impacts
to spread further in the community. In addition, this
geography was identified as a strategic target area in
past planning processes such as the West Side Main
Streets Plan and as part of the Federal Department
Property ownership in Sherman & Harrison target area
Target areas and the existing structures
of Housing and Urban Development (HUD) technical
assistance that the city received related to the vacant
& abandoned property initiative. Focusing on a target
area will allow the piloting of implementation strate-
gies with the results helping to inform the neighbor-
hood-level approach to infill development.
Within the Sherman & Harrison target area, the City as
well as partner organizations such as Near Northwest
Neighborhood, Inc. and Cross Community, Inc. own a
number of vacant lots. These properties will provide a
starting point for investment within the target area.
Cott
a
g
e
G
r
o
v
e
A
v
e
n
u
e
Har
r
i
s
o
n
A
v
e
n
u
e
Sh
e
r
m
a
n
A
v
e
n
u
e Lindsey Stre
et
Portage Avenue
California
A
v
e
n
u
e
Van Bur
e
n
Str
e
et
Lincoln W
a
y
W
e
s
t
NORTH
NORTH
42
Lot width analysis in Sherman & Harrison target area
The neighborhood level lot width analysis was used
to conduct a lot analysis within the target area. Lot
combinations, where there are multiple adjacent
vacant lots, were analyzed to determine typical di-
mensions and explore what opportunities exist for a
variety of building types in the area.
$-
$828,266
$2,804,978
$5,850,195
$9,632,290
0
50
100
150
200
250
300
$-
$2,000,000
$4,000,000
$6,000,000
$8,000,000
$10,000,000
$12,000,000
Year 0 Year 5 Cumulative
Revenue
Year 10 Cumulative
Revenue
Year 15 Cumulative
Revenue
Year 20 Cumulative
Revenue Total # of UnitsProperty Tax RevenueCumulative Property Tax Revenue & Unit Count
Oneplex
Duplex
Fourplex
Townhome
Cottage Court
Legend Oneplex
Duplex
Fourplex
Townhome
Cottage Court
Legend Oneplex
Duplex
Fourplex
Townhome
Cottage Court
Legend Oneplex
Duplex
Fourplex
Townhome
Cottage Court
Legend Oneplex
Duplex
Fourplex
Townhome
Cottage Court
Legend
No matter which building type is developed on a
particular property, there are some basic guiding prin-
ciples that should be followed to ensure that there is
cohesive and thoughtful development:
• Building design should be completed with a spe-
cial consideration for the character of the neigh-
borhood;
• Larger scale buildings are most appropriate at
corridors, nodes, and/or corner locations;
• More intense uses should be focused along the
corridors or in nodes;
• Buildings should address the street;
• Details will assist in making buildings consistent
with the neighborhood – including, but not lim-
ited to: roof design and pitch, exterior trim size,
porch or stoop proportions, first floor elevation,
eaves, etc.; and
• Consistent with City Code, garages will be ac-
cessed off an alley where one is present.
Using the Residential Market Potential Study as a
basis, projected 5, 10, and 20-year build-out scenarios
were developed. These are not intended to show the
exact type and location of new buildings but rather
provide a vision for how the neighborhood could
develop based on general urban planning and mar-
ket-based principles.
The buildout scenarios may appear aggressive, and
many of the units are anticipated to be missing mid-
dle housing types such as duplexes and fourplexes
rather than single family houses. As a result, the devel-
opment of one parcel could account for two or four
units.
Based on the future scenarios, the potential property
tax revenue was calculated for the target area. Under-
standing the potential tax revenue provides a frame-
work for examining the return on investment (ROI)
and can help determine the type and amount of City
investment. In five (5) years roughly $800,000 in tax
revenue could be generated and by year twenty (20)
a cumulative total of over $9 million in tax revenue is
possible based on the developed buildout scenarios.
For additional information, see Appendix 4.
As part of the process, proformas were created for
each housing type in order to examine the current
market viability within the Sherman & Harrison tar-
get area. It was determined that none of the housing
products examined can be accomplished with the tra-
ditional financing model. Based on this, we then ex-
plored what needs to happen in order to “get to yes”
rather than simply saying it does or does not work.
Of scenarios, the duplex appears to be most viable.
Viability of a housing type is determined based on
the amount of variation from the traditional financial
model that is required to make construction possible.
While both the owner-occupied duplex and purely for
rent duplex both perform relatively well, the own-
er-occupied duplex has the benefit of lower operating
expenses which improves its financial performance.
Financial constraints are based on the proforma –
including the baseline assumptions – and current
market conditions. The examination of market viabil-
ity helped identify the potential programs to assist
with addressing the financial gap which are listed in
the Neighborhood Strategy. Since the findings are
based on market conditions within a specific geogra-
phy – the Sherman & Harrison target area – it cannot
be assumed that the findings will directly apply to
other locations. Differing market conditions will result
in different levels of viability and differing financial
needs for the construction of the various housing
types. For additional information on the proformas,
see Appendix 3.
While efforts will focus in the Sherman & Harrison tar-
get area, it is anticipated that development will occur
in other portions of the neighborhood, building off
existing or future strengths and spreading outwards.
NORTH
43
Target area 5-year build-out scenario
Target area 10-year build-out scenario
Cott
a
g
e
G
r
o
v
e
A
v
e
n
u
e
Har
r
i
s
o
n
A
v
e
n
u
e
Sh
e
r
m
a
n
A
v
e
n
u
e Lindsey
Stre
et
Portage Avenue
California
A
v
e
n
u
e
Van Bur
e
n
Str
e
et
Cott
a
g
e
G
r
o
v
e
A
v
e
n
u
e
Har
r
i
s
o
n
A
v
e
n
u
e
Sh
e
r
m
a
n
A
v
e
n
u
e
Lindsey
Str
eet
Portage Avenue
California
A
v
e
n
u
e
Van Bur
e
n
St
r
e
e
t
Al
l
e
n
S
t
r
e
e
t
Bl
a
i
n
e
A
v
e
n
u
e
All
e
n
S
t
r
e
e
t
Scott
S
t
r
e
e
t
Lincoln Wa
y
W
e
s
t
Lincoln Wa
y
W
e
s
t
NORTH
NORTH
44
Target area 20-year build-out scenario
Cott
a
g
e
G
r
o
v
e
A
v
e
n
u
e
Har
r
i
s
o
n
A
v
e
n
u
e
Sh
e
r
m
a
n
A
v
e
n
u
e Lindsey Stre
et
Portage Avenue
California
A
v
e
n
u
e
Van Bur
e
n
Str
e
et
Scott
S
t
r
e
e
t
All
e
n
S
t
r
e
e
t
Bl
a
i
n
e
A
v
e
n
u
e
Lincoln Wa
y
W
e
s
t
NORTH
45
In this chapter the priority initiatives identified through the planning process are further explored to determine how they can be implemented. Each project is reviewed to develop an anticipated timeframe for completion as well
as identifying the lead entity. The lead role is crucial for the implementation of each project. Neighborhood revitalization efforts take neighbors, multiple stakeholders and organizations, and government working together. No
one entity can accomplish all efforts alone.
The Near Northwest Neighborhood has a true asset in the many engaged residents who care about the future of their neighborhood. Some of these neighbors are small-scale developers that own multiple properties and wish
to have a positive impact on the neighborhood through stabilizing existing buildings, building new, and working on placemaking efforts. In addition to the momentum created by neighbors there are organizations interested in
seeing positive projects happen in the neighborhood including, the City of South Bend, Near Northwest Neighborhood Inc., and Cross Community Inc.
Implementation
Strategy 1: Create a safe and attractive neighborhood through infrastructure improvements
Strategy & Action Steps Lead Role Potential Partners 1-2 Year 3-5 Years 5+ Years
Complete traffic calming improvements in Leeper Park to help slow
traffic
South Bend Venues Parks & Arts,
Division of Engineering, Dept. of
Community Investment x
Complete intersection improvments at Riverside Dr. & Hudson Ave.
to help improve safety
Dept. of Community Investment,
Division of Engineering x
Explore opportunity to improve the trail system connectivity along
Riverside Drive Dept. of Community Investment
South Bend Venues Parks & Arts,
Dvision of Engineering x
Work with Muessel Elementary School to address student drop-off
and pick-up circulation concerns
Dept. of Community Investment,
Division of Engineering Muessel Elementary School x x
Complete infrastruture improvements within the Sherman &
Harrison Avenues target area to support development
Dept. of Community Investment,
Divison of Engineering Developer(s)x
Explore reconfiguring the California, Leland, & Riverside intersection
to improve circulation and safety
Dept. of Community Investment,
Division of Engineering x
46
Strategy 2: Reinforce the neighborhoods strengths with housing development & preservation
Strategy & Action Steps Lead Role Potential Partners 1-2 Year 3-5 Years 5+ Years
Explore mechanisms that can assist with the financial gap that
impacts housing development Dept. of Community Investment Financial institutions, Non-profits x x
Support the production of a range of housing types including new
construction and rehabilitation of market rate and affordable units,
as well as homeowner and rental housing
Near Northwest Neighborhood,
Inc., Developers
Dept. of Community Investment,
Builders x x x
Continue and enhance partnerships with entities that can build and
rehabiliate housing
Dept. of Community Investment,
Near Northwest Neighborhood,
Inc.Non-profits, Builders, Developers x x x
Explore expanding the South Bend / UEA Pilot Home Repiar Program
geography to include a portion of the near northwest Dept. of Community Investment x
Strategy 3: Use vacant lots as an opportunity to support neighborhood vibrancy
Strategy & Action Steps Lead Role Potential Partners 1-2 Year 3-5 Years 5+ Years
Develop vacant lot activation guide to assist neighbors in reuse of
vacant lots Dept. of Community Investment City consultant x
Identify vacant lots for activiation and develop project Neighbors, Non-profits
Property owner(s), Near
Northwest Neighborhood, Inc.,
Dept. of Community Investment x x x
Continue being supportive of vacant lot activation efforts Dept. of Community Investment
Non-profits, Near Northwest
Neighborhood, Inc.x x x
Pursue strategic opportunites to acquire properties
Dept. of Community Investment,
Near Northwest Neighborhood,
Inc., Developers, Neighbors x x x
Support efforts for neighborhood scale infill development Dept. of Community Investment
Developers, Near Northwest
Neighborhood, Inc.x x x
47
Strategy 4: Reinforce the Near Northwest as a walkable, mixed-use, urban neighborhood
Strategy & Action Steps Lead Role Potential Partners 1-2 Year 3-5 Years 5+ Years
Update the zoning ordinace and map to facilitate missing middle
housing and neighborhood center nodes Dept. of Community Investment x
Encourage a mix of uses to be developed in neighborhood centers,
such as those on Portage Ave. and Lincoln Way West Dept. of Community Investment Developers, Non-profits x x x
Support the productive reuse of the Ward Bakery Building Dept. of Community Investment Developers, Non-profits x x x
Explore improvements at the Portage & California Avenues
intersection that reinforce the neighborhood node Dept. of Community Investment Division of Engineering x
Facilitate new development at the Lincoln Way West & Charles Martin
Sr. Dr. node Dept. of Community Investment Developers x x
Explore opportunities to reinforce Portage Ave. & Marion St. as a
neighborhood node Dept. of Community Investment x x
Encourage future development to be consistent with the existing
character of a walkable, urban neighborhood
Dept. of Community Investment,
Division of Engineering Developers, Non-profits x x x
Engage with Memorial Hospital on any future development - in
particular efforts related to the interface with Leeper Park, the
interface between the hospital and the surrounding residential areas
& Downtown, and future development between Marion Street &
LaSalle Avenue Dept. of Community Investment
Memorial Hospital, Division of
Engineering x
Strategy 5: Improve the experience of and access to outdoor recreation opportunities
Strategy & Action Steps Lead Role Potential Partners 1-2 Year 3-5 Years 5+ Years
Complete work in Leeper Park to upgrade the playground and user
experience South Bend Venues Parks & Arts Dept. of Community Investment x
Complete playground improvements at Brownfield Park South Bend Venues Parks & Arts x
Complete the construction of the first phase of the Coal Line Trail,
providing additional neighborhood access to the trail system and
introducing a trail head at Muessel Grove Park
South Bend Venues Parks & Arts,
Dept. of Community Investment,
Division of Engineering x
Explore opportunities to improve the pedestrian connection
between Muessel Grove Park and Muessel Elementary School
Dept. of Community Investment,
Division of Engineering South Bend Venues Parks & Arts x
Explore improving access to greenspace for areas outside a half-mile
/ 10-minute walk radius of a park
South Bend Venues Parks & Arts,
Dept. of Community Investment;
Non-Profits, Developer(s)x x
48
Strategy 6: Strengthen neighborhood connections and capacity of residents
Strategy & Action Steps Lead Role Potential Partners 1-2 Year 3-5 Years 5+ Years
Continue a close working relationship with the Near Northwest
Neighborhood, Inc.Dept. of Community Investment x x x
Continue to engage with neighbors related to concerns and
opportunities
Near Northwest Neighborhood,
Inc., Common Council, City of
South Bend Departments
Neighborhood Resources
Connection x x x
Encourage neighbors to organize around quality of life issues
Near Northwest Neighborhood,
Inc., Common Council
Neighborhood Resources
Connection x x x
Continue holding neighborhood events that build a sense of
community and neighbor capacity
Near Northwest Neighborhood,
Inc., Residents x x x
49
Page intentionally left blank.