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 />district designation are understood by everyone or that they were even received. There <br />are people in the neighborhood who are elderly, in poor health, non-native English <br />speakers. When we brought this up at the December 20, 2004 HPC meeting we were told <br />that our “concerns were commendable” and we should go out and contact our neighbors. <br />We have done so to the best of our ability given the weather and time. The people we <br />have talked to admit they did not understand the guidelines, what they meant for them. <br />Some people assumed the guidelines were already in effect, a done deal so to speak. <br />There are also those who own the rental properties. Did they get copies of the guidelines <br />at their residences or were they sent to the tenants? Even though we may have deep <br />reservations about some of the landlords the guidelines will be imposed on rental <br />properties as well and that has an effect on all of us. We also believe that it is not <br />coincidental that the Chapin Park board and those who have spoken out strongly in favor <br />of LHD are resident of Park and Forest Avenues. Lafayette, Navarre, Leland, Rex, <br />Portage, Marion and Madison have very few, if any, supporters of this proposal, at least <br />not any expressed through the listserv, the only means we have had to gage support or <br />opposition so far. However, if there is no vote or referendum we will never know. We <br />have tried to find out how the boundaries for the LHD were established. We have asked <br />this of the HPC and the Chapin Park board, but have not yet received an answer. The <br />closest responses are statements made in private by board members. For example, <br />Leland Avenue is included as “buffer” for the more historic parts of the neighborhood. <br />Leland Avenue, although it has some well-maintained and restored homes has no <br />structures that are rated as historically significant, at least not based on HPC’s own <br />inventory. The section of Rex Street closest to Portage Avenue is not included, because <br />the homes there are pretty run-down rental properties and if included it would be difficult <br />to get demolition approved. This reasoning is troublesome for those of us who live on <br />Leland Avenue where there are many rental properties, some in questionable condition. <br />We take this to mean that if we are included in a LHD the changes of demolition of <br />troublesome houses will be practically non-existent. However, it there are different <br />reasons for the boundaries no one has spoken up to tell us so. We are preservation <br />minded people. Our home has been renovated and restored with as much care and <br />attention as our financial situation has allowed. We are members of the Historic <br />Landmark Foundation of Indiana and the Northern Indiana Center for History. However, <br />our street of modest homes and is closer in proximity and type to areas not included in <br />this proposal, such as California Avenue. We are both active members of the NNN, Inc. <br />(Near Northwest Neighborhood Association, Inc.) which as a community development <br />organization works to rehab and build homes in the area for middle and low income <br />residents. We are fearful that the work of NNN will not be possible under the restrictions <br />of LHD status. As a case in point, we have a newly constructed home next door to us, <br />which would not have been possible under a LHD designation. The possibility of <br />demolishing houses and replacing them with new construction of homes that fit the <br />character of the neighborhood will diminish. While we would certainly like to be wrong, <br />it is not too farfetched to envision a street with predominantly rental housing, owned by <br />landlords, who, rather than comply with regulations and restrictions, have elected to <br />forego improving their properties. For the reasons stated above we urge you to <br />recommend that the proposed ordinance be tabled until current boundaries are re- <br />examined and until there is a referendum, poll, questionnaire, or other evidence that the <br />proposal is supported by a majority of the property owners. <br />Tab Roehrs, 609 Portage Avenue, South Bend, Indiana advised that he is opposed to this <br />th <br />bill and that it is a direct violation of the 14 Amendment of the United States <br />Constitution. <br />Vicki Bely, 20154 Jackson Road, South Bend, Indiana, commended both side for their <br />time and effort. She urged the Council to take this bill under advisement when there is so <br />much imformation to process. <br />There was no one else present wishing to speak in opposition to this bill. <br />12 <br /> <br />
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.