My WebLink
|
Help
|
About
|
Sign Out
Home
Browse
Search
03-28-05 Council Meeting Minutes
sbend
>
Public
>
Common Council
>
Minutes
>
Common Council Meeting Minutes
>
2005
>
03-28-05 Council Meeting Minutes
Metadata
Thumbnails
Annotations
Entry Properties
Last modified
12/10/2007 10:24:22 AM
Creation date
12/10/2007 10:24:19 AM
Metadata
Fields
Template:
City Council - City Clerk
City Counci - Date
3/28/2005
There are no annotations on this page.
Document management portal powered by Laserfiche WebLink 9 © 1998-2015
Laserfiche.
All rights reserved.
/
22
PDF
Print
Pages to print
Enter page numbers and/or page ranges separated by commas. For example, 1,3,5-12.
After downloading, print the document using a PDF reader (e.g. Adobe Reader).
Show annotations
View images
View plain text
REGULAR MEETINGMARCH 14, 2005 <br />my house, have been divided up, added onto, and renovated numerous times since they <br />were built. I did not buy my house as investment rental property but rather as my home <br />and with the intention of fixing it up. However, I am neither interested in, nor can I <br />afford, doing so with expensive “restoration” techniques and materials “in character” <br />with the way the house was when it was built in 1898, renovated in 1945 and 1979 or <br />whenever. This is 2005 and I live across the street from a heliport. Whatever “historic <br />character” my house my have had at one time, is long gone. I won’t object if the good <br />people who live of the tree-lined cobblestone streets in the beautiful truly-historic <br />neighborhood behind my house want to create a “local historic district” for their benefit <br />but I do not want them to diminish my property rights by imposing restrictions on my use <br />of my property just so they can use my street as a buffer zone without any other rationale <br />for its inclusion in the proposed district. I urge you to table the proposed ordinance until <br />such time as the Chapin Park Board is able to distribute the revised Guidelines, to answer <br />the questions regarding the boundaries, and to demonstrate significant support from a <br />majority of the property owners affected. Moreover, since I have noticed that many of <br />those opposed to the LHD, like myself, live on the periphery of the proposed district, I <br />encourage you to recommend that such support be measured street by street rather than <br />across the entire area. If you do go forward with the proposed ordinance at this time, I <br />urge you to exclude all of Lafayette Boulevard (and perhaps other peripheral streets) <br />from the LHD, not just the property on Lafayette Boulevard owned by Temple Beth-El <br />that was previously excluded. <br />Charles Rosenberg, 410 Manitou Place, South Bend, Indiana, stated that he is a 25 year <br />resident of the neighborhood and opposes to such guidelines and rules. Mr. Rosenberg <br />urged the Council to table discussion until the residents can see the modified guidelines. <br />Carol Rosenberg, 410 Manitou Place, South Bend, Indiana stated that she is opposed to <br />guidelines and covenants. The word covenant is not a nice word and does not belong in <br />this neighborhood. <br />Dan Slattery, 754 Lelan Avenue, South Bend, Indiana <br />Anne Hayner, 754 Leland Avenue, South Bend, Indiana, advised that she loves the <br />Chapin Park Neighborhood. She encourages preserving its uniqueness, however, the <br />proposal before you tonight is destroying neighbor against neighbor. <br />Laurence & Margaret Porter, 917 Leland Avenue, South Bend, Indiana, read their letter <br />into the record. We are writing to register our opposition to the Chapin Park Local <br />Historic District. Our opposition centers primarily on the lack of due process, the <br />arbitrary boundaries for the proposed district and some implications for the future of our <br />street and the neighborhood. The Chapin Park Board of Directors (10 people from an <br />area of over 300 households) in conjunction with the South Bend – Saint Joseph County <br />HPC have put forth a proposal on behalf of residents without any canvassing, <br />questionnaires, or other type of vote of referendum. The Board has taken the position <br />that lack of opposition during the process indicated agreement. Many of us assumed that <br />before a proposal became guidelines mailed out to the households in the area there would <br />have been some effort made to contact property owners (as was done by the Mishawaka <br />HPC recently) to let them have an opportunity to voice opposition or support. In its own <br />1993 publication City of South Bend Summary Report: Indiana Historic Sites and <br />Structures Inventory the HPC states that in the case of potential local historic districts <br />“Designation of these neighborhoods, would necessitate support from a majority of <br />property owners in the area” (p. 235 of the Inventory). At not time from the inception of <br />this plan by the Chapin Park board members has support been measured or actively <br />sought. Communications have come through a listserv, to which fewer that 1/3 of the <br />residents subscribe and through a newsletter, which is delivered by volunteers rather than <br />U.S. mail. Since the Guidelines were sent out last fall there have been repeated requests <br />for a referendum on this proposal, but the objection by the board is that it would be “too <br />messy” and too much work. Many of us are troubled by the fact that board members use <br />the legitimacy of their election to the board as a mandate to impose the historical <br />designation on all the property owners, but are unwilling to pursue a process that would <br />insure the right of all of us to be hard and counted. As far as we know there has been no <br />effort to follow up to make sure that the guidelines and the concept of a local historic <br />11 <br /> <br />
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.