IU advancing demolition plan opposed by city

Back to TopCommentsE-mailPrintBookmark and Share

Indiana University's Board of Trustees is expected to vote this week on a plan to move or tear down six houses in a Bloomington neighborhood that city officials have been trying to protect.

The houses are within the University Courts Historic District, which was created in March by the Bloomington City Council on the edge of the IU campus. A new three-story Phi Gamma Delta fraternity house is planned for the site in a land swap with the university.

IU spokesman Mark Land said the school plans to move four houses to locations within a couple blocks and demolish two others.

"People had the assumption that we'd tear them all down, but really we're not tearing down more than two," Land told The Herald-Times.

The Board of Trustees is scheduled to consider the proposal during its meetings Thursday and Friday at IU South Bend.

University officials don't need the city's permission to demolish or move the houses because the school is a state institution.

Opponents have said it would be a mistake to destroy houses in the neighborhood, which dates back about 100 years and is the last area in the city with brick streets. About 65 properties are included in the historic district, more than half of which the school owns.

The six houses that would be moved or razed are now occupied by various university offices.

Land said that work in the neighborhood won't begin until the fraternity has raised the money to build its house, although he said fundraising is going well.

The fraternity's proposed design calls for a roughly 51,000-square-foot house and 17 parking spaces.

In exchange for the new site, Phi Gamma Delta is giving up its existing house, which is in the oldest section of campus next to the IU Maurer School of Law

Land said the university hasn't decided how it will use that site.

"We want it for the academic portion for campus," he said.


Post a comment to this story

We reserve the right to remove any post that we feel is obscene, profane, vulgar, racist, sexually explicit, abusive, or hateful.
You are legally responsible for what you post and your anonymity is not guaranteed.
Posts that insult, defame, threaten, harass or abuse other readers or people mentioned in IBJ editorial content are also subject to removal. Please respect the privacy of individuals and refrain from posting personal information.
No solicitations, spamming or advertisements are allowed. Readers may post links to other informational websites that are relevant to the topic at hand, but please do not link to objectionable material.
We may remove messages that are unrelated to the topic, encourage illegal activity, use all capital letters or are unreadable.

Messages that are flagged by readers as objectionable will be reviewed and may or may not be removed. Please do not flag a post simply because you disagree with it.

Sponsored by

facebook - twitter on Facebook & Twitter

Follow on TwitterFollow IBJ on Facebook:
Follow on TwitterFollow IBJ's Tweets on these topics:
Subscribe to IBJ
  1. I am not by any means judging whether this is a good or bad project. It's pretty simple, the developers are not showing a hardship or need for this economic incentive. It is a vacant field, the easiest for development, and the developer already has the money to invest $26 million for construction. If they can afford that, they can afford to pay property taxes just like the rest of the residents do. As well, an average of $15/hour is an absolute joke in terms of economic development. Get in high paying jobs and maybe there's a different story. But that's the problem with this ask, it is speculative and users are just not known.

  2. Shouldn't this be a museum

  3. I don't have a problem with higher taxes, since it is obvious that our city is not adequately funded. And Ballard doesn't want to admit it, but he has increased taxes indirectly by 1) selling assets and spending the money, 2) letting now private entities increase user fees which were previously capped, 3) by spending reserves, and 4) by heavy dependence on TIFs. At the end, these are all indirect tax increases since someone will eventually have to pay for them. It's mathematics. You put property tax caps ("tax cut"), but you don't cut expenditures (justifiably so), so you increase taxes indirectly.

  4. Marijuana is the safest natural drug grown. Addiction is never physical. Marijuana health benefits are far more reaching then synthesized drugs. Abbott, Lilly, and the thousands of others create poisons and label them as medication. There is no current manufactured drug on the market that does not pose immediate and long term threat to the human anatomy. Certainly the potency of marijuana has increased by hybrids and growing techniques. However, Alcohol has been proven to destroy more families, relationships, cause more deaths and injuries in addition to the damage done to the body. Many confrontations such as domestic violence and other crimes can be attributed to alcohol. The criminal activities and injustices that surround marijuana exists because it is illegal in much of the world. If legalized throughout the world you would see a dramatic decrease in such activities and a savings to many countries for legal prosecutions, incarceration etc in regards to marijuana. It indeed can create wealth for the government by collecting taxes, creating jobs, etc.... I personally do not partake. I do hope it is legalized throughout the world.

  5. Build the resevoir. If built this will provide jobs and a reason to visit Anderson. The city needs to do something to differentiate itself from other cities in the area. Kudos to people with vision that are backing this project.