03-28-05 Council Meeting Minutes

Home Browse Search

REGULAR MEETINGMARCH 14, 2005 district designation are understood by everyone or that they were even received. There are people in the neighborhood who are elderly, in poor health, non-native English speakers. When we brought this up at the December 20, 2004 HPC meeting we were told that our “concerns were commendable” and we should go out and contact our neighbors. We have done so to the best of our ability given the weather and time. The people we have talked to admit they did not understand the guidelines, what they meant for them. Some people assumed the guidelines were already in effect, a done deal so to speak. There are also those who own the rental properties. Did they get copies of the guidelines at their residences or were they sent to the tenants? Even though we may have deep reservations about some of the landlords the guidelines will be imposed on rental properties as well and that has an effect on all of us. We also believe that it is not coincidental that the Chapin Park board and those who have spoken out strongly in favor of LHD are resident of Park and Forest Avenues. Lafayette, Navarre, Leland, Rex, Portage, Marion and Madison have very few, if any, supporters of this proposal, at least not any expressed through the listserv, the only means we have had to gage support or opposition so far. However, if there is no vote or referendum we will never know. We have tried to find out how the boundaries for the LHD were established. We have asked this of the HPC and the Chapin Park board, but have not yet received an answer. The closest responses are statements made in private by board members. For example, Leland Avenue is included as “buffer” for the more historic parts of the neighborhood. Leland Avenue, although it has some well-maintained and restored homes has no structures that are rated as historically significant, at least not based on HPC’s own inventory. The section of Rex Street closest to Portage Avenue is not included, because the homes there are pretty run-down rental properties and if included it would be difficult to get demolition approved. This reasoning is troublesome for those of us who live on Leland Avenue where there are many rental properties, some in questionable condition. We take this to mean that if we are included in a LHD the changes of demolition of troublesome houses will be practically non-existent. However, it there are different reasons for the boundaries no one has spoken up to tell us so. We are preservation minded people. Our home has been renovated and restored with as much care and attention as our financial situation has allowed. We are members of the Historic Landmark Foundation of Indiana and the Northern Indiana Center for History. However, our street of modest homes and is closer in proximity and type to areas not included in this proposal, such as California Avenue. We are both active members of the NNN, Inc. (Near Northwest Neighborhood Association, Inc.) which as a community development organization works to rehab and build homes in the area for middle and low income residents. We are fearful that the work of NNN will not be possible under the restrictions of LHD status. As a case in point, we have a newly constructed home next door to us, which would not have been possible under a LHD designation. The possibility of demolishing houses and replacing them with new construction of homes that fit the character of the neighborhood will diminish. While we would certainly like to be wrong, it is not too farfetched to envision a street with predominantly rental housing, owned by landlords, who, rather than comply with regulations and restrictions, have elected to forego improving their properties. For the reasons stated above we urge you to recommend that the proposed ordinance be tabled until current boundaries are re- examined and until there is a referendum, poll, questionnaire, or other evidence that the proposal is supported by a majority of the property owners. Tab Roehrs, 609 Portage Avenue, South Bend, Indiana advised that he is opposed to this th bill and that it is a direct violation of the 14 Amendment of the United States Constitution. Vicki Bely, 20154 Jackson Road, South Bend, Indiana, commended both side for their time and effort. She urged the Council to take this bill under advisement when there is so much imformation to process. There was no one else present wishing to speak in opposition to this bill. 12