110 S. Second Street
40 S. Fifth Street
515 W. Cedar Street
535 W. Cedar Street
I own the four above-listed houses in the town. We have fought this battle before. Variances have been given instead of following existing rules. This has lead to another attempt to undermine the rights of property owners. I do NOT support this ordinance.
My home address is 7555 S. Ford Rd.
S
Steve Betz
4 years ago
Featured
I live in the village at 715 W Hawthorne Street. I feel that this is a solution that is looking for a problem. In other words, I don't think there is a problem with property owners expressing themselves through architecture and maintaining a diverse design language that evolves and progresses over the decades.
R
Robin Damm
4 years ago
The document that has been presented does NOT discuss in detail the ordinance and commission that is being proposed for both. Instead it describes in great detail what a historic district would look like - greatly limiting our property freedoms. So is the end state being presented in advance - the agenda hand being tipped? I don’t know and for that reason, I cannot support. If was just to develop a commission, that is what the document should have been about
We need something - just add a tear down process with appropriate restrictions in the zoning or permitting process?
S
stacey singer
4 years ago
145 N 3rd street
E
Erin Collier
4 years ago
835 W Pine St. Pink House. I am not in favor of the ordinance.
S
Scott Petrin
4 years ago
980 West Pine Street
S
Sarah Cartwright
4 years ago
Sarah Cartwright
595 W Hawthorne St
R
Ryan McCauley
4 years ago
The concepts portrayed in the current draft are way too broad. The draft needs to be more targeted to its founding intent to ensure all ordinances derived from it cannot be over regulation.
A
Andrea Peters
4 years ago
75 N Fourth Zionsville
S
Sarah Cartwright
4 years ago
I do not want any ordinance telling me what to do with my property. If the planning commission would stop giving variances so that super large homes are built on the lots, this would never have been an issue.
V
Vickie Kenney
4 years ago
290 N Fifth St
L
Leslie Gardner
4 years ago
I need to be sure that this ordinance does not restrict access to solar panels or wind energy.
J
Jen Luczak
4 years ago
750 W. Oak St.
R
Ross Miller
4 years ago
520 W Hawthorne Street
G
Glen Collier
4 years ago
835 west pine street
I am not in favor of this ordinance.
G
Glenn Hoge
4 years ago
I am in opposition but aT the most any participation should be voluntary.
Participation could be voluntary but once a property is “contributed” it would remain within the preservation district. This allows for a phase-in and does not constitute a “taking” of the property by the Town. Any additional encumbrance on a property has the possibility of impacting the value. There is no way to predict whether positive or negative today and it is very subjective going forward as well given that a third party with changing members would be given some jurisdiction over the property in perpetuity. If the owner contributes the property, it is hoped that they have weighed the pros and cons both of the impact on their property and the perceived benefit to the neighborhood. If they choose not to participate, then when they sell the property, the new owners would be in a position to make a different decision.
40 Bailey Ct, 46077
40 Bailey Court
I live at 340 Fitch Place in Zionsville.
9th St
110 S. Second Street 40 S. Fifth Street 515 W. Cedar Street 535 W. Cedar Street I own the four above-listed houses in the town. We have fought this battle before. Variances have been given instead of following existing rules. This has lead to another attempt to undermine the rights of property owners. I do NOT support this ordinance. My home address is 7555 S. Ford Rd.
I live in the village at 715 W Hawthorne Street. I feel that this is a solution that is looking for a problem. In other words, I don't think there is a problem with property owners expressing themselves through architecture and maintaining a diverse design language that evolves and progresses over the decades.
The document that has been presented does NOT discuss in detail the ordinance and commission that is being proposed for both. Instead it describes in great detail what a historic district would look like - greatly limiting our property freedoms. So is the end state being presented in advance - the agenda hand being tipped? I don’t know and for that reason, I cannot support. If was just to develop a commission, that is what the document should have been about We need something - just add a tear down process with appropriate restrictions in the zoning or permitting process?
145 N 3rd street
835 W Pine St. Pink House. I am not in favor of the ordinance.
980 West Pine Street
Sarah Cartwright 595 W Hawthorne St
The concepts portrayed in the current draft are way too broad. The draft needs to be more targeted to its founding intent to ensure all ordinances derived from it cannot be over regulation.
75 N Fourth Zionsville
I do not want any ordinance telling me what to do with my property. If the planning commission would stop giving variances so that super large homes are built on the lots, this would never have been an issue.
290 N Fifth St
I need to be sure that this ordinance does not restrict access to solar panels or wind energy.
750 W. Oak St.
520 W Hawthorne Street
835 west pine street I am not in favor of this ordinance.
I am in opposition but aT the most any participation should be voluntary. Participation could be voluntary but once a property is “contributed” it would remain within the preservation district. This allows for a phase-in and does not constitute a “taking” of the property by the Town. Any additional encumbrance on a property has the possibility of impacting the value. There is no way to predict whether positive or negative today and it is very subjective going forward as well given that a third party with changing members would be given some jurisdiction over the property in perpetuity. If the owner contributes the property, it is hoped that they have weighed the pros and cons both of the impact on their property and the perceived benefit to the neighborhood. If they choose not to participate, then when they sell the property, the new owners would be in a position to make a different decision.