To: Mayor Meer, Mayor, Don Przybylinski, President Michigan City Councl, and Craig Phillips, Director Michigan City Planning and Development
Repeal ordinance 4509
We wish to have Ordinance 4509 repealed. The density is too high for the infrastructure in our community. Our community is mostly filled with single family residences and has been for over one hundred years. This ordinance creates an unappealing urban environment which is not appropriate for a resort community.
Why is this important?
This ordinance was created during the course of one meeting with no public feedback. Public feedback was not provided as the document sent to adjoining neighbors did not provide the correct location.
Little or no consideration has been given to the fact that this is a resort area which harbors vehicular and pedestrian traffic for the beaches in the area. Traffic is already straining the existing infrastructure. There are no contiguous sidewalks.
No consideration has been given to the fact that 'double tracking' or decreasing the time for local train traffic to/from Chicago will likely increase Michigan City's population substantially.
The current Lakeside Townhomes plan allows all traffic to/from only one street (Felton Street), while a normal 10 unit subdivision has traffic moving in four directions. Opening a second traffic flow (to Blaine Street for example) would help decrease traffic pressure on Felton Street.
The following is In direct reference to Ordinance 4509 as quoted:
Section B:"the requested change in zoning...will not have an adverse effect on surrounding land." Not true, these duplexes will overload current vehicular and pedestrian traffic as well as infrastructure.
Section C: "requested change in zoning will not be injurious or detrimental to surrounding property values". This ordinance will put 10 units in an area which usually provides for 5 smaller homes. These lots are already small compared to the rest of Michigan City. We feel that our property values will decrease due to overpopulation. We feel that single family homes are a much better fit to the neighborhood and would be an asset to existing residences.
As there is a substantial amount of undeveloped property in the area, this project would be setting a negative precedence of overcrowding.
Under D: "requested change will promote orderly and responsible community growth and development and will not adversely affect the community....." Not true for reasons previously mentioned.
Under F: "the change in zoning is not "spot zoning" which will confer a special benefit on a relatively small tract without commensurate benefit to the community." This is spot zoning, as there are very few duplexed residences in the community. This does not provide commensurate benefit to the community due to overcrowding and all access/egress moving through one street.
We are not adverse to positive change in our community. Single family developments are welcomed here.
Little or no consideration has been given to the fact that this is a resort area which harbors vehicular and pedestrian traffic for the beaches in the area. Traffic is already straining the existing infrastructure. There are no contiguous sidewalks.
No consideration has been given to the fact that 'double tracking' or decreasing the time for local train traffic to/from Chicago will likely increase Michigan City's population substantially.
The current Lakeside Townhomes plan allows all traffic to/from only one street (Felton Street), while a normal 10 unit subdivision has traffic moving in four directions. Opening a second traffic flow (to Blaine Street for example) would help decrease traffic pressure on Felton Street.
The following is In direct reference to Ordinance 4509 as quoted:
Section B:"the requested change in zoning...will not have an adverse effect on surrounding land." Not true, these duplexes will overload current vehicular and pedestrian traffic as well as infrastructure.
Section C: "requested change in zoning will not be injurious or detrimental to surrounding property values". This ordinance will put 10 units in an area which usually provides for 5 smaller homes. These lots are already small compared to the rest of Michigan City. We feel that our property values will decrease due to overpopulation. We feel that single family homes are a much better fit to the neighborhood and would be an asset to existing residences.
As there is a substantial amount of undeveloped property in the area, this project would be setting a negative precedence of overcrowding.
Under D: "requested change will promote orderly and responsible community growth and development and will not adversely affect the community....." Not true for reasons previously mentioned.
Under F: "the change in zoning is not "spot zoning" which will confer a special benefit on a relatively small tract without commensurate benefit to the community." This is spot zoning, as there are very few duplexed residences in the community. This does not provide commensurate benefit to the community due to overcrowding and all access/egress moving through one street.
We are not adverse to positive change in our community. Single family developments are welcomed here.