Subdivision Decision Delayed

Subdivision Decision Delayed

Tuesday February 10, 1970

Residents of the Garden Homes subdivision on the city’s northwest side want something done to remedy blight and health hazards in that development—but they’re not sure this something should be Urban Renewal.

At the request of these residents, the City Council last night agreed to delay 90 days a decision whether to designate Garden Homes as a “district area’’ and thereby make it eligible for federal urban renewal or Neighborhood Development Program funds.

The subdivision was annexed to the city last April, and the 95 acres have been the scene of failing sewers, non-passable roads, and deteriorating houses. It was believed the only way to improve the area would be with federal funds.

At a public hearing conducted to get viewpoints on the “district area” a spokesman for the Garden Homes Association—James Perry—said that after looking at what could be obtained through urban renewal, the residents would first like to look at all other possibilities.

Perry said one of the reasons for concern is that the subdivision contains many persons who have lived there a considerable length of time, and they wish to remain there. He said when the residents agreed to annex to the city they did so to “better their lives, not to have their homes torn down.”

Residents annexed to obtain water and sewer service, Perry said, adding they are willing to bring their homes up to city code and will work with the Planning Commission to develop the area. “We don’t feel this (district area designation) should be on the agenda at this time. Residents should be given a chance for further research,” Perry said.

City Clerk Harold R. Saunders noted that for the area to receive Urban Renewal funds (pointing out there are no Neighborhood Development Program funds available now) it must first be designated a district area. He said the urban renewal process would call for the development of a plan consulting with citizen groups and which would have to be approved by City Council after a public hearing.

Commenting on a recent meeting with residents of Garden Homes, Planning Director Michael Prochaska said there appears to be a split between those wanting to leave the subdivision and those wishing to stay.

One resident expressed the fear homes would be torn down, and a Planning Department representative said about 47 per cent of the homes in the subdivision would not be eligible for federal grants for housing improvements and would, therefore, be demolished.

Questioned by Mayor Robert J. Harris, it was noted this figure could drop if the city does not strictly enforce housing codes on single-family residences—a provision incorporated in the new housing code amendments passed by council last night.

Lloyd Fairbanks, noting that housing prices have risen considerably, asked where those persons having their homes demolished would be able to obtain mortgage money in the tight money market. Saunders said provisions for this could be incorporated in the program.

"It is agreed by all that current conditions in this sub-division represent a serious health hazard,” said Fifth Ward Councilman LeRoy A. Cappaert. “The city now bears an obligation to correct this condition.”

He said if the city used its normal procedures of special assessments for water and sewer lines it “would cause an economic and social injustice to many of the current residents. This is why urban renewal was considered. It offers the opportunity for federal dollars to meet the problem.”

Cappaert endorsed the 90-day delay and asked that when a proposal comes back to council that there be evidence presented showing community support.

Second Ward Councilman Robert G. Faber said he does not view the 90 days as being lost time, stating if urban renewal is the answer a plan must be drawn anyway. "Urban renewal is a great dirty name in this town and I think that’s unfortunate,” he said, adding he didn’t know if it is the answer for Garden Homes. He asked that it not be prejudicially overlooked.