It seems odd to talk about Blight and missed opportunities at the same time, but here we are.
I attended the SBERP RDA ( South Bend Elkhart Regional Partnership Regional Development Authority) board meeting last week and heard presentations of several properties that would benefit from the Lilly Foundation funds that have been pledged to them for blight elimination. As a sign of the times, all of them included some form of housing, as additional and better housing is the biggest perceived need at this time. The project that would be most recognizable to those in our area contemplated a multi-million dollar renovation and repurposing of the old Kamm and Schellinger Brewery in Mishawaka currently known as the 100 Center.
Several properties in St. Joe and Elkhart Counties were submitted. Marshall County was conspicuously absent… thus the missed opportunity.
Blight, as referred to when talking about communities, is generally a reference to systemic vacancies. But it is sometimes referring to buildings with deferred maintenance. I’m sure we all can think of properties in our communities that would fall under one of these definitions. Without even trying, I can name seven properties that fit this definition in Culver. I can think of half a dozen in Plymouth. I know of several in LaPaz and Argos. I’m sure those familiar with Bourbon and Bremen could name similar properties there. So how did we allow this opportunity to pass us by? Couldn’t we have put together something? We are the smallest county by population in our three county regional partnership. There would have been strong incentive to try and share some of the largess if we would have presented something.
We’re at a disadvantage in these things that we need to figure out how to overcome. The internal staff available in South Bend, Mishawaka and Elkhart to throw at these opportunities far outweigh the capacity of any Marshall County community. One Marshall County is being touted as a possible answer to this, but they couldn’t muster the effort to make a presentation as they are still fighting to gain acceptance locally. This is sad, as this could have been an easy win for them that would have shown their value.
Just from attending public meetings, I know of three properties in Culver, two in Plymouth and one in LaPaz that have asked for help and would have qualified for this program. A Marshall County regional submission could have been a combination of projects that would have helped all of our communities. A rail transfer facility was floated at the PIDCO annual meeting for one of Plymouth’s blighted properties. There were opportunities there.
Submitting something would have helped our larger region as well. It’s been clear from the feedback from the Regional Partnership that they need to use some of the funding in Marshall County, but if we fail to give them something to spend it on, it’s hard for us to complain. At some point this could be a problem when the region goes for additional funding. The down state entities want to see the wealth shared.
Some of the issue has been disorganization and some has been a lack of cooperation. Both should be things that can be remedied for the greater good. The sad thing is that most Marshall County residents don’t even know about this missed opportunity. It is likely that most of the property owners of the above mentioned sites don’t know they missed an opportunity. But by definition of the program, the projects must be put forward with government support. Unfortunately, I would guess that the majority of our elected representatives aren’t aware of this either. At least that’s my hope. If they knew and did nothing, that is worse.
There will be more opportunities like this coming down the line. We need to take steps so they aren’t missed too…
I wrote a bit on this last January (here) when I first heard the Chevron Deference was up for consideration by the Supreme Court. (Kiplinger’s follow-up article here.) Now there seems to be a huge uproar over this or to paraphrase the words of Charlie Daniels: They’re all out there steppin’ an’ fetchin’, like their heads are on fire and their asses are catchin’… (from Uneasy Rider)
Saying that we’ve always done it this way, fails to recognize that the Chevron Deference is a product of the 80’s, not something springing from the Constitution. It was a case where the courts gave up their constitutional power to interpret laws, ceding it to the administrative agencies. This has been abused by the agencies and aided by lazy lawmakers, who intentionally or unintentionally write ambiguous legislation.
Unfortunately, the agencies are abusing their power over their clients, the citizens of the United States, while also ignoring their bosses, the Senators and Representatives that write the laws. (Check out this video of Democratic Senator, Joe Manchin, schooling Treasury Secretary, Janet Yellen, on the way that agency is disregarding very specific language in a Law he wrote and helped pass.) Unambiguous language in legislation is rare, but even when it’s in place, it requires legislators to be enforcers, as with the above video or citizens to risk their livelihoods taking them to court. The Chevron Deference had been used to give the advantage in these situations to the agencies as the de facto experts.
I seriously feel that the various bureaucratic agencies are being allowed to run the show. Even granting them the benefit of the doubt on knowing a lot about the things they oversee, bureaucracies tend to be invasive. They try and make themselves seem more valuable by growing and inserting themselves into more things. This is true with private bureaucracies and seemingly more so with public bureaucracies. When President Biden said we’re going to add 80,000 more IRS agents, I never heard the IRS say, they could get by with 50,000 or even lets start with 30,000 and see how it goes… No, they gladly accepted the growth, the larger budget and the increase power that came with this.
IRS: You owe us money. It’s called taxes. Me: How much do I owe? IRS: You have to figure that out. Me: I just pay what I want? IRS: Oh, no! We know exactly how much you owe. But you have to guess that number too. Me: What if I get it wrong? IRS: You go to prison. ME: [rifling through papers] Ok this is all kind of confusing, but I think this is how much I owe. IRS: Yikes, looks like you missed a number somewhere. I guess you’re going to prison. ME: [being handcuffed] Can’t argue with justice! – Jordan Stratton
As I mentioned on the previous post here, the agencies’ positions and enforcement can swing wildly based on whichever party is in office. Taking the political positions out, at least as much as possible, by putting it back in the hands of the judiciary, seem prudent. Acknowledging their expertise in these things, it would make more sense to bring them in when the law is being crafted rather than waiting until it’s in place and subject to their, sometimes bias, interpretation.
The striking down of the Chevron Deference seems to make perfect sense to me, but only time will tell. While in place, it was interpreted broadly, which caused the problems leading to the Supreme Court’s review. Doing away with it may create a new set of unintended consequences, but with government in general, less is better…
The Dunes received a major subdivision plat approval and site plan approval from the Culver Plan Commission on June 18th and from the Culver Town Council on June 26th. This was somewhat a foregone conclusion since Culver has been working with the developer for over a year on this project. It was interesting though that neither entity passed these approvals unanimously.
The preponderance of people in attendance at the meetings were against the project. Some in its entirety, but most in its scale. Some (falsely in my opinion) called the Town to task for not communicating enough and not listening to concerns. (If there is one thing that I would say Culver is above average in, it’s communication with its citizens…) There were also those that attempted to complain on both sides of the issues, saying it was too big, but might be left incomplete; it was being pushed to quickly, but the developer shouldn’t be give 8 years to complete it; it was not planned to be part of the community, but but it should be connected directly to State Road 17, to direct traffic out of community.
I remain generally in favor of the project. I am a little disappointed in the the follow through on requirements the town had placed on the project. The project presentation to the plan commission has been delayed twice because of engineering questions being unanswered. As presented, at the meeting, most of those were answered “in concept”, but details were still not complete. There were also pending questions regarding the projects connection to South Main Street that were not complete. And then there was the statement from the developer that the town would be receiving a lot of money from increased TIF capture on this project which could be directed towards some of the short falls in water and sewer needs. Many of these things affect adjacent property owners, including a wetlands and the town’s own well field, while the money being proposed for water and sewer improvements had previously been suggested for other TIF district needs not connected to this project. I would have liked to have seen all these things tied down before authorizing them to proceed.
I was pleased that many of the questions from the audience were addressed, but I have concerns with their substantiation. I do not in anyway want to speak ill of the developer and their honesty regarding the project, but the answers given were off-the-cuff, having little if any documentation or requirements of follow-through. Many of the questions were, frankly, not the business of anyone but project investors, but the reassurances carried no weight. While I trust that everything said was in good faith, there is nothing that keeps them from changing direction on them if economics of the project suggest better uses of funds. As suggested here before (second to last paragraph), their development agreement included none of the delineated requirements seen in past agreements.
That said, I think many of those protesting this development fail to understand that this project was not a surprise, but something that has been in the Town of Culver’s plans and one of their goals for over a decade. When the Culver Garden Court property was annexed around 2010, the surrounding property was annexed as well. It was rezoned as R-2 to promote housing in that area. When the last revisions to the Culver Zoning Ordinance were completed, R-2 was rewritten to allow higher density developments. The 2014 Comprehensive Plan suggested, due to citizen input, that more housing is needed. The Stellar Communities surveys of 2016 and 2017 indicated more housing is needed. The 2024 Comprehensive Plan still indicated the need for more housing, even with The Dunes under discussion. This was not a project that required a rezoning or multiple variances to make happen. It fits with the planned development of the town.
Do I think things might have been done better? Always. Until I’m appointed benevolent dictator, I will most likely always see alternatives that I would have pursued. (I still have questions about whether it follows the Culver Complete Streets Ordinance, whether there were drywells added, where they drain and who owned them, and whether the wetlands have been properly addressed, etc.) Do I think those in charge were (mostly) following the will of the majority of citizens? Yes.
Pitchforks and Torches were out at the Council Meeting
It was a very disheartening meeting of the Plymouth Common Council this past week. What should have been a relatively easy vote for the council, acting on the Plymouth Plan Commission‘s recommendation to rezone property for Garden Court’s GC Horizons project, went nowhere because of misunderstandings, miscommunications and emotional responses. The arguments at the plan commission meeting, some of them not much more than mudslinging, were apparently repeated over the last week, inundating the council with calls, texts and emails. The Plan Director, Ralph Booker, was not allowed to make his presentation nor present the recommendation of the Plan Commission. With no discussion, a motion to deny the rezoning was made, seconded and passed 4 to 2.
Some of the comments from the board after the vote were difficult to hear. It was said that this wasn’t the right location… This site was found after a year of searching, because the council voted down the site we presented last year. We vetted a dozen sites, some turned down by the City in pre-discussions and some because property owners were unwilling to sell or unable to make a decision to sell. This was a good site, following the Comprehensive Plan in a transitional neighborhood, adding apartments and single family homes in an existing neighborhood with apartments and single family homes.
From Ali Riza Kukuk on LinkedIn
The project was conflated with the motels on the north side of town, but not as a solution… just a spreading of the problem. Paraphrasing one statement made, “We (City, Council) should be directing our funds and efforts towards the motel issue instead of this project.” This is a specious argument since Garden Court has not requested any funds from the City. This project would bring in $14MM in outside investment to the community and put a new property on the tax rolls, maybe delayed by an abatement, but still, a property paying taxes above the current farmland rate. There is nothing preventing the City from investing in a different motel solution. These are different projects!
The volunteer Garden Court board stepped up to the challenge of helping with the housing problems in Plymouth with this project. They were encouraged by IHCDA, providing training and offered $14MM in capital investment. It is not the total solution, but it would have been a great first step. Hopefully, the effort hasn’t been completely in vain, but like me, many involved are feeling unappreciated and beaten down. Garden Court’s name has been dragged through the mud throughout these discussions. These were undeserved attacks on their reputation. We’ll see how or if this moves forward. Disheartening…
GC Horizons, Garden Court’s latest project was before the Plymouth Plan Commission last week. There were a lot of people there to speak on both sides. Jamie Fluery did a nice job on an article in the Pilot News that went through a lot of it before the meeting. The drawing from the paper shows the concept plan. Along with the new apartment complex, the City of Plymouth will sponsor some single family homes.
Continuation of Jamie Fleury article from Pilot News
There was a lot of Vitriol spent attacking Garden Court and the potential tenants for these units. Sister Connie spoke in favor of the project and was shouted down at the end. After the meeting she commented, “People look at these things with compassion or fear. Tonight there were a lot of people speaking from a place of fear.”
The proposed zoning change recommendation that was before the Plan Commission passed. That puts the issue before the Common Council this evening and there has been a lot of pressure put on the Common Council Members. I hope they are able to see that the few speaking out don’t represent the majority, but I know it’s hard when you’re being attacked for doing the right thing. Below are three positive letters that were sent to the Common Council stating the case better than I could. I thought it was important to include them here:
From Linda Yoder, Marshall County United Way:
Good afternoon, Plymouth City Council Members,
Thank you for your consideration of the Garden Court Horizons Project. Last week, United Way hosted a review of preliminary findings from the Housing Gap Analysis launched in February 2024.
For those that were unable to attend, attached is a copy of the presentation slides and, for your convenience, a summary of key findings.
Based on data included in the study, your favorable consideration of the rezoning and annexation request on Monday would:
Address a projected housing shortage of 1300 units
Focus on the largest housing need today which is rental units
(Due to multiple factors: high interest rates, high cost of construction making home ownership unattainable for many and a higher than normal % of population under 30)
In addition, a favorable vote will:
Bring $13 million in investment for a mix of 28 low/moderate (affordable) rental units and 8 permanent supportive housing units
Set the stage for a potential READI grant proposal to develop an additional 13 single family housing units for even more state investment in housing shortages
The 2019 Marshall County Stellar Designation opened this door to capture additional state funding through the Indiana Housing and Community Development Authority to address a critical housing shortage.
Michael Fortunato, the Housing Gap Analysis Consultant, shared this summary: The combined effects of a) a large, young renter class emerging, b) another large generation aging in place and therefore locking in the housing supply, and c) suppressed education levels that translate to lower wages overall would create a housing crisis anywhere.
Marshall County’s greatest assets are a) a county working together to be proactive around these issues, and b) a housing supply (with some vacancy) that is still not as constrained as some other neighboring counties.
Those that attended the IHCDA Housing Institute and serving as team members includes: Bowen Center: Zach Cook Bradley Company: Rod Ludwig, Alonda Jenkins
City of Plymouth: Sean Surrisi
Easterday Construction: Kevin Berger
Garden Court: John Myers
SRKM Architecture: Brent Martin, Jeff Kumfer
United Way of Marshall County: Linda Yoder
Additional advocates invited to the team are Jack Davis and Eric Holsopple.
We would be glad to talk with you to answer questions or provide additional information. You can contact me any time (evenings and weekends included).
Best regards,
Linda
####################
From Brent Martin, SRKM Architecture:
Dear Council Members,
As members of the Garden Court team know, I have been reluctant to reach out to plan commissioners or city council members regarding this most recent Garden Court project. I am self-aware enough to know invective is thrown my way as my career as an architect is designing buildings. At the same time, my history with Garden Court goes back over 33 years. Longer now, I think, than anyone else on the team. I guess that makes me “the old man”. Given that, if you’ll allow a bit of a ramble, here’s some perspective.
Mayor Glaub was instrumental in creating Garden Court in the early 1970s. I’ve been told he did so as his elderly mother could no longer take care of her home, wanted to remain in Plymouth, and had nowhere to go. So, the founding of Garden Court was based on providing housing for low-income seniors.
The first projects, Garden Court East & West, were funded by USDA Rural Development, back then called the Farmer’s Home Administration. A bit of history:
During the Great Depression, rural Americans needed the power of electricity that had been established in urban areas. Unfortunately, providing electricity to rural places was cost prohibitive and up to 90% of farmers were not able to access electricity because existing distributors would not build lines to their farms. In 1935, President Franklin D. Roosevelt signed an executive order to create the Rural Electrification Administration.
My Dad remembered when electrical power came to his Mom & Dad’s farm. He told me the deal was the farmers had to get together and set the poles and the REMC would then string the wire and bring in the service, but I digress……..
In 1984-5 Garden Court was approved for what’s called a HUD 202 project for low-income elderly and adults with disabilities of any age. That project is Garden Court downtown, the three-story building on Garro Street.
Then, in 1986 some crazy young architect moved to Plymouth and in 1991 was hired by Garden Court to design what is now known as Neidlinger Garden Court. The Garden Court board was not happy with a three-story building for seniors (no surprise there) and so I was directed to design a single-story building. However, the three-story design was the “HUD Model” and a real donnybrook ensued. (Long and occasionally humorous story there, best told over a beer). As you can see, Garden Court prevailed.
The Rev. Dr. Ronald Liechty was President of Garden Court by this time. He, along with Dean Byers, had the vision of building a Garden Court in every community in Marshall County. A development team of Ron, Dean, Bob Toothaker (Real Estate Management), Scott Huges (Hughes Associates Grant Administrators), and myself was formed to go after funding.
And we were highly successful without much fanfare getting projects funded in Argos, Bourbon, Lapaz, and Culver, along with Knox in Starke County and Mentone in Kosciusko County. While all this was going on we were also successful in funding Fairfield Garden Court and Hurford House Garden Court. You may notice Bremen is not mentioned. That’s because Bremen has a similar 202 project developed by a different non-profit. I would wager Marshall County may be the only county in the state with a facility in each community. That’s something to be proud of.
There is a part of me nostalgic for those development team meetings. The good conversations, the not-so-good coffee, and the real friendships that developed over time. 2024 isn’t 1995, that’s for sure. Not worse, just different. Rev. Liechty is deceased, Bob Toothaker retired, Scott Hughes pretty much out of the grant administration game, but Dean Byers, at 80 years old, is still going strong with Habitat and soon to be our next county coroner!
Since those days, Real Estate Management Corp. is now Bradly Company and has grown to a very large group based in Indianapolis with property management, real estate, and development portfolios. Plymouth is very fortunate Rod Ludwig, a hometown person, is the managing director of multi-family housing for Bradley.
I would be remiss if I did not note over the past 50 years federal agencies have changed the rules for both the development of, and the management of, these properties. And, depending on the funding source, the requirements vary. It’s the nature of bureaucracy. “Use our money, play by our rules.”
You may ask why Garden Court hasn’t expanded low-income senior housing recently? About 15-20 years ago HUD moved the decision making from Indianapolis to Chicago. I’m sure you can deduce where the funding goes now. Garden Court is consistently asking “where is the need?’ And, over the last 4-5 years, they determined there is tremendous need for the housing insecure.
And Garden Court continues to thrive and serve low-income persons, winning awards for excellence and most recently voted Favorite Apartment Complex 4 years running.
Kindly forgive my rambling history, but context and history are important.
As to the current project, here are a few things I’ll mention.
I’ve heard it said Garden Court could sell off this property or develop the whole thing as multi-family. After a 50-year legacy of doing precisely what was proposed for each project, this all volunteer, local non-profit is not going to pull a “fast one”. To say otherwise, ignores reality. Should the tax credit application be successful, we have an understanding with the City to donate the single-family property which becomes part of the match for the City’s proposed READI 2.0 single family housing grant. If not successful, the option to purchase expires.
I have also heard about traffic and of course this project won’t add a whit to issues with school pick up and drop off traffic as the elementary children living there are certainly going to walk to school. I am pleased sidewalks on Lemler to Michigan are planned in the coming year.
The Plan Commission tenders this petition to you with a favorable recommendation after a lengthy public hearing and your plan consultant recommended approval. Those recommendations should carry great weight as these are the people you appointed to make dispassionate decisions removed from political office. They reviewed the request, heard the comments, and then decided. (I’m sure you’ve also heard plenty of comments that aren’t fit to be in the public domain). And your recently adopted comprehensive plan says this:
1)COMPREHENSIVE PLAN: The City of Plymouth’s Comprehensive Plan and any other applicable, adopted planning studies or reports; The new Comprehensive Plan identifies this area to be a Traditional Neighborhood. The traditional neighborhood character area reflects Plymouth’s vision of diverse and inclusive community. This locale offers a range of housing options and living arrangements that cater to every stage of life, all while preserving the historical essence of residential neighborhoods. In this area, you’ll find a harmonious blend of smaller lot single-family detached homes, single-family attached homes like townhomes, apartments, and the versatile option for accessory dwelling units (ADUs). The architectural theme aligns with that of the Transitional Mixed-Use area, where homes stand closer to the street, with cozy front yards.
(from the plan consultant’s report)
In other words, the project is a precise fit to your new comprehensive plan, full stop. Note your plan doesn’t speak to who may reside in any of the mentioned uses. To do so, would be inappropriate at the very least.
I’m also sure you’ve seen Mr. Fortunato’s report on housing and the identified need, crisis really, at the bottom of the demographic ladder. I’m not going to repeat that study, simply encourage you to read it.
And of course, the Economy Inn and Red Rock have become conflated with the Garden Court project. Other than the possibility that a small number of the residents may qualify to move to this new project after going through the coordinated entry process, there’s no connection. None. Having said that, I’d encourage you to accompany Sister Connie or Jack Davis when they deliver food. I suspect you will be surprised to find the vast majority of the residents living there are good people.
Does Plymouth have too much low-income housing? A per capita comparison with Columbia City and Logansport says no. Will property values decrease? Studies in both Kokomo and Plymouth refute that assertion. Garden Court can only meet the need. To deny the need is just not supported by the facts.
Much of the vitriol is driven by fear, although generally people are loath to admit it. All I can say to that is I’ve completed about 25 low-income housing projects over the years, mostly in residential and mixed-use neighborhoods. Some controversial, some not so much. One of the comments I’ve heard from opponents after the project is up and running a few years is often: “I didn’t know it would be like that.”
I understand how difficult a vote can be when you’re being hammered by constituents. Keep in mind the loudest voices are not necessarily reflective of what is best for your community, nor the majority of your community for that matter. Everyone is entitled to their opinion, but the facts matter. I have always believed an elected official should carefully consider what is in the best interests of their community as a whole and then vote that belief.
Thanks so much for your time reading my somewhat rambling thoughts. I urge you to weigh carefully the recommendation before you and evaluate the veracity of comments both for and against this project. I will make myself available this weekend if you wish to contact me.
Brent
####################
From Gary Neidig, ITAMCO
Dear Plymouth City Council Members,
Our community is experiencing a dilemma. Everyone is concerned. Everyone has an opinion. Everyone wants something done. Everyone knows the need is real.
However, we all have a “not in my back yard” concern when it comes to something that is different than what we are accustomed to in our neighborhood.
I have a personal story that speaks to this subject.
A few years ago, I was made aware of a variance being requested for a home in our neighborhood across the street from my home. It was being requested by Pathfinders to open a Group Home.
Some of my neighbors, and myself were not pleased with that possibility, and began to investigate what could be done. After some investigation, we then discovered that there was already a Pathfinder Group home in our neighborhood, and that I didn’t even know about it. The variance was granted, and there have been no problems with the tenants. In fact, the house has been well maintained, and there have been no negative incidences that would have warranted the concerns we had.
I realize that this is a different demographic, organization, and project. However, Garden Court, and Bradley Company have done an outstanding job to vet residents, and to maintain a proper and safe environment.
The affordable housing crisis is a problem for all of us. Allowing the two former motels on the North side to be the nexus for aggregating citizens that are working but lack the resources to get a down payment, or security deposit is not the answer. This is now giving the appearance of a magnet, and is not indicative of what Plymouth has to offer.
Distributed projects like the Garden Court Horizons project are not the final answer, but it is a step in the right direction. If we can work together to create a strategy of helping people that are doing their best to succeed, then our whole community will benefit.
Duane, Don, Shiloh, Randy, Linda, Kayla, Dave, I’ve known you all for many years. You have caring hearts, and you want what is best for our community. We’ve witnessed together our community grow, and have seen improvements in so many areas. Let’s start the process of reducing the blight on the North side by allowing Garden Court to build this project.
Please vote yes for this zoning request.
Gary L. Neidig
President
ITAMCO
6100 Michigan Road
Plymouth, IN 46563.
O: 574.936.2112 D: 574.935.6903
glneidig@itamco.com
“Let the words of my mouth, and the meditation of my heart, be acceptable in thy sight, O LORD, my strength, and my redeemer.”
