^ 7 ( 1.40973 
 
 E£,S2-n 
 
2 
 
 &*" •• 
 
 * 
 
 
 
 V ;V 
 
 

 
 
 
1 
 
 i 
 
 - i 
 
PLANNING 
 
 PROJECTS 
 
 for 
 
 ELKHART 
 
 INDIANA 
 
 By JOHN NOLEN, City Planner 
 PHILIP W. FOSTER, Associate 
 
 With a Supplement on 
 
 ZONING 
 
Beg Your Pardon! 
 
 The name A. H. Beardsley in the Elkhart City Plan Commission (on 
 title page) should be A. H. Burrell. 
 
 CORRECTIONS ON MAPS 
 
 Despite the fact that three days were spent in careful correction of 
 engraver’s first proofs of the seventeen plates for the colored maps, 
 errors were inadvertently overlooked. Please note the following: 
 
 On General City Plan map (inside front cover)— 
 
 Purple south of Fourth Ward School at Oakland avenue and Mason 
 street should be red with dotted line (proposed schoolground). 
 
 Purple east of old Fifth Ward School at Prairie street and Park 
 avenue should be red with dotted line (proposed schoolground). 
 
 Riverside Drive from Bower street to Edwardsburg avenue should 
 be yellow. 
 
 Richmond street, showing partly blue, should be green (center 
 parking). 
 
 Small red spot on West Franklin street opposite Thomas street 
 should be purple. 
 
 On Diagram of New Developments map (inside back cover)— 
 Small purple rectangular plot at westerly side of Elkhart river, south 
 of N. Y. C. “Old Road” and just east of center of map should be 
 black-checkered like other industrial properties. 
 
 Red triangular plot between Middlebury street, Goshen avenue and 
 city boundary should be yellow (proposed schoolground). 
 
 On Zone Plan map (page 20)— 
 
 Northeast side of Sterling avenue from Indiana avenue to Lusher 
 avenue should be red (proposed business zone). 
 
■O M/L E3 
 
 TO &/MOMTOH 
 
 TO SlHfOMTOA/ 
 LAKE ^Ht/LES 
 
 S> At /LEO 
 
 TO BRISTOL 
 a 5 MILE 3 - 
 
 J TQL 
 
 Kffc // Th/angle. 
 
 CHAMBER, OF COMMERCE! 
 
 INDIA 1 ST A. 
 
 GENERAL * PLANSi 
 
 JOHN NOLEN CITY PLANNER,. 
 
 PHILIP WFOSTER ASSOCIATE"’ 
 HARVARD SQ • CAMBRIDGE A^ASS 
 1922 El cu 
 
 TO MISHAWAKA 
 // Mli.ES 
 
 wena 
 
 -a ve/TUT 
 
 !□□□[ 
 
 □qDQpi 
 
 n £J TO! 
 ■iCHOO 
 
 ZlYCROIDE I 
 
 Pari 
 
 % iui j un 
 
 eo'U'ek' 
 
 to south be ho 
 '6 M/LES 
 
 mmm 
 
 UOOLEDVRK 
 
 MIDDLE BUM : 
 
 ]□□□□□□□ 
 
 □papa 
 
 nhn Hffi 
 
 
 JC IKJl g}ry 
 
 jgSBL 
 
 I tszsse . 
 
 □am 
 
 gaoclma 
 □jlir r 
 
 : W&y* r 
 
 nnn 
 
 □□□dan 
 
 HD 
 
 □□□I 
 
 ]□<□□□ 
 
 LEGEND 
 
 cOHcoED 
 
 Car L ines 
 
 £BQSi|iSl 
 
 Railroads 
 
 Parks an d Play grounds 
 
 EX/JTIAIG JJQQ| PROAOSEO 
 
 Scfioolfipound y 
 
 ex/sr/rvG HQ proposeo 
 
 Public and Semi Public 
 Prope r!;/ 
 
 EXtST/HG TTX m PROPOSED 
 
 Industrial Property 
 Cem c (e rics 
 
 ekiStihG ppc eojeo 
 
 
 vwamm 
 
 mm 
 
 nnmmm 
 
 
 m 
 
 mmwwmmm 
 
 ^ e''''!' 's'.'.'. '.'SS/synj* LvjJaiiiSS 
 
 Glee/ *' 
 Parkway* 
 
 to burns 
 
 
 TO ItJDIA HA POLES 
 /J7 Ai/i-BS 
 
 OJ M/LEJ 
 
 
 LJ 
 
 k 
 
 *■> 
 
 tf 
 
 MAS 
 
 n 
 
 
 i 
 
 i- 
 
 LJ 
 
 ll b 
 
 7?7Z 
 
 J 
 
 II jyji 
 
 
 Av'tflTU'S - 
 
 03C3 
 
 1 'TW* 
 
 
 
 
 SmUULi 
 
 nn 
 
 77 
 
 
 lid 
 
 LJ 
 
 >.»LEV MOHOH 
 
 i-H 
 
 0 £ 
 
 V P 
 
 
 
 BBS 1 
 
 t 
 
 ■■ 
 
 Hi 
 
 □ 
 
 n 
 
 
 JL 
 
 uu 
 
 nn 
 
 p 
 
 j 
 
 2r 
 
 
 nn 
 
 i 
 
 if 
 
 Jr 
 
 JO 
 

 Official Personnel 
 
 of the 
 
 City of Elkhart, Indiana 
 
 1923 
 
 City Officers 
 
 Mayor .Hon. B. Frank Leader 
 
 Controller .Mr. Wm. P. Krau 
 
 City Clerk . .. v .Mr. V. C. Meisner 
 
 City Treasurer ..... Mr. Fred Lundquist 
 
 City Attorney ..... Orrin M. Conley, Esq. 
 
 City Judge ...... Walter G. Walker, Esq. 
 
 City Engineer .. Mr. H. J. Weaver 
 
 City Electrician .,... Mr. Vernon V. Mann 
 
 Street Commissioner . Mr. James Leicester 
 
 Park Superintendent . Mr. Henry D. Seele 
 
 City Sealer and Health Inspector . Mr. Ead C. Meyers 
 
 Chief of Fire Department . Mr. Walter Tavernier 
 
 Chief of Police ... Mr. Loren H. Northrup 
 
 City Council 
 
 Councilman-at-Large ... Mr. John H. Wineland 
 
 Councilman-at-Large ... Mr. A. B. Winey 
 
 Councilman-at-Large . Mr. R. D. Compton 
 
 First Ward ....■.. Mr. Ira E. Elliott 
 
 Second Ward .....Mr. A. H. Burrell 
 
 Third Ward .:.. Mr. J. G. Keil 
 
 Fourth Ward ..... .. Mr. John H. Vehlber 
 
 Fifth Ward ..... Mr. Robert Cook 
 
 Sixth Ward . .. Mr. Charles S. Miller 
 
 Board of Public Works 
 
 Mr. A. G. Winey, President 
 
 — Mr. Otto H. Helfrick Mr. W. H. Riblet 
 
 Board of Health 
 
 Dr. A. A. Norris, President 
 
 Dr. G. B. Hoopingarner, Secretary Mr. Ira R. Van Gorder 
 
 Board of Police Commissioners 
 
 Mr. George L. Minnix, President 
 
 Mr. Charles A. Larson Mr. George A. Shaffer 
 
PLANNING PROJECTS for ELKHART, INDIANA 
 
 Report on Planning Proposals Based on Planning Survey 
 
 By JOHN NOLEN, A. M., Sc.D., City Planner : PHILIP W. FOSTER, Associate 
 
 Harvard Square, Cambridge, Massachusetts 
 
 Prepared for and Presented to The City of Elkhart by the Elkhart Chamber of Commerce and Subscribers to a City Plan Fund 
 
 WITH a SUPPLEMENT on ZONING 
 
 The CHAMBER of COMMERCE 
 COMMITTEE on CITY PLAN 
 
 Appointed by President C. D. Greenleaf, 
 
 May 20, 1920. 
 
 E. HILL TURNOCK, Chairman 
 
 A. H. BEARDSLEY 
 
 H. F. BORNEMAN 
 
 JOHN C. BOSS 
 
 M. U. DEMAREST 
 
 EDNA E. GRIMES 
 
 H. I. ISBELL 
 
 W. N. SHAW 
 
 H. J. WEAVER 
 
 W. E. WIDER 
 
 E. B. ZIGLER (Deceased) 
 
 EX-OFFICIO MEMBERS of 
 The COMMITTEE 
 
 C. D. GREENLEAF 
 
 President, 1920-21 
 
 DR. J. C. FLEMING 
 
 President, 1922 
 J. L. HARMAN 
 
 President, 1923 
 
 W. L. SHAFER 
 
 Secretary, 1920-23 
 
 The CITY PLAN COMMISSION 
 of ELKHART, INDIANA 
 
 Authorized by City Ordinance, December 22, 
 1921—Appointed by Mayor W. E. Wider 
 and City Council, December 30, 1921 
 
 E. HILL TURNOCK, President 
 A. G. WINEY, Vice-President 
 TOM H. KEENE, Secretary 
 H. F. BORNEMAN 
 A. H. BEARDSLEY 
 HERBERT FINCH 
 C. E. JACKSON 
 H. J. WEAVER 
 
HON. ELIHU ROOT ON THE VALUE OF CITY PLANNING: “I think that the existence of plans known to 
 
 everybody will give just enough direction to the movement of the multitude of separate impulses to lead the 
 
 growth of the city along the right lines.” 
 
 fC*/ 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 I AM YOUR TOWN. Make of me what you will—I shall reflect you as clearly as a mirror throws back a candle beam, 
 tj If I am pleasing to the eye of the stranger within my gates; if I am such a sight as, having seen me, he will remember 
 me all his days as a thing of beauty, the credit is yours. <J Ambition and opportunity call some of my sons and daughters 
 to high tasks and mighty privileges, to my greater honor and to my good repute in far places, but it is not chiefly these 
 who are my strength. My strength is in those who remain, who are content with what I can offer them, and with what 
 they can offer me. It was the greatest of all Romans who said: “Better be first in a little Iberian village than second in 
 Rome.’’ C| I am more than wood and brick and stone, more even than flesh and blood—I am the composite soul of all 
 
 who call me Home. CJ I am your town.—American Legion Weekly. 
 
7 ?HftO 
 PO 
 
 FOUNTAIN MONUMENT REVERING DR HAVILAH BEARDSLEY. FOUNDER OF ElKHART 
 
 PLANNING PROJECTS for ELKHART, INDIANA 
 
 By John Nolen, A. M., Sc. D., City Planner — Philip W. Foster, Associate 
 
 The following report on the Planning Projects for Elkhart, 
 Indiana, sums up the recommendations that have been made 
 for the improvement of the present conditions in the city and 
 outlines the way in which new growth and development should 
 be guided and controlled. Such a program carefully carried 
 into execution will insure for the future an orderly, convenient 
 and beautiful city; a place in which to live and work under 
 the best conditions and a place in which opportunity is 
 afforded for recreation and pleasure, thus making the living 
 and the working worth while. 
 
 The general plans which accompany this report are the 
 final outcome of the previous studies, based on the planning 
 survey, copies of which have already been submitted. The 
 following reports have been presented during the progress of 
 the work for the approval and use of the City Plan Committee. 
 
 Planning Survey 
 
 Prepared as the Basis for Planning Studies. 
 
 Preliminary Report 
 
 On Planning Studies. 
 
 Supplementary Report 
 
 On Zoning to accompany Planning Studies. 
 
 Letter Reports with Center Plan 
 On Location for Proposed Hotel. 
 
 Letter Report with Sketch 
 
 On Main Street Grade Elimination. 
 
 THE GENERAL PLAN 
 
 To bring together the planning proposals and recommen¬ 
 dations that are submitted the General Plan has been pre¬ 
 pared, consolidating the different elements that enter into the 
 make-up of the city and showing their interrelationship and 
 
 harmony. This plan has been drawn at the scale of 400 feet 
 to the inch and shows clearly, although in a diagrammatic 
 way, the proposed changes and new planning. These changes 
 and additions taken together with existing conditions have 
 been organized so as to form a system of main thoroughfares, 
 parks and parkways, schools and playgrounds, covering and 
 serving the entire city. The plan also brings out forcefully 
 the importance in the whole plan of such features as the 
 Main Street railroad grade elimination, the development of 
 the Civic Center, the importance of the Parks along the river 
 bank, and other city planning proposals. 
 
 The legend on the plan shows the car lines, railroads, 
 parks and playgrounds (existing and proposed), school 
 grounds (existing and proposed), public and semi-public pro¬ 
 perty, industrial property and cemeteries. 
 
 MAIN THOROUGHFARES 
 
 We recommend the establishment of a system of main 
 thoroughfares as shown on the accompanying General Plan, 
 and the Diagram of Main Thoroughfares; existing streets 
 selected to constitute the framework of this system being as 
 follows: 
 
 Bristol Street. 
 
 Mishawaka Avenue. 
 
 Beardsley Avenue. 
 
 Bower—Sherman Streets. 
 
 Lexington Avenue—Vistula—Jackson Streets. 
 
 Franklin—Harrison—Division Streets. 
 
 Middlebury Street. 
 
 Indiana Avenue. 
 
 Lusher Avenue. 
 
Hiveley Avenue. 
 
 Twenty-first—Nappanee Streets. 
 
 Oakland Avenue—Michigan Street. 
 
 Sixth Street. 
 
 Benham Avenue—Third Street—Edwardsburg Avenue. 
 
 Prairie Street. 
 
 Main Street. 
 
 Goshen Avenue. 
 
 The Existing Conditions Map of the Planning Survey 
 should be compared with the General Plan as a ready means 
 of noting the recommendations as a whole. The changes and 
 extensions proposed in the main thoroughfare system are 
 indicated still more clearly on the Diagram of Main Thorough¬ 
 fares by a difference in the color in the rendering. 
 
 The principles of selection followed in making the recom¬ 
 mendations for changes and additions to the main thorough¬ 
 fares are, first of all, the recognition of the actual existing 
 street and other conditions in Elkhart and the opportunities 
 which those conditions afford to secure the best results at the 
 least cost, taking into account a reasonable standard of re¬ 
 quirements for traffic in a city the size of Elkhart with its 
 prospects for growth. Secondly, a consideration of the dis¬ 
 tances of one main thoroughfare from another approximately 
 parallel thoroughfare with a view of obtaining a main thor¬ 
 oughfare at about every half mile interval. And thirdly, the 
 necessity and advantage of recognizing and properly providing 
 for connections to and from the city with surrounding places 
 of importance in every direction—for example, St. Joseph, 
 Benton Harbor, Detroit, Middlebury, Fort Wayne, Indiana¬ 
 polis, South Bend and Chicago. 
 
 Special attention should be given in the examination of 
 the plan to the piecing out of the thoroughfare system by 
 providing for the “missing links.” Sometimes these are very 
 short distances, but great gain would result from these con¬ 
 nections. This is especially true in those parts of the thor¬ 
 oughfare system which follow in a general way the short 
 lines of the rivers or provide new outlets across undeveloped 
 areas. Attention should also be given to the proposals for 
 taking care more conveniently and agreeably of a number of 
 important street intersections. 
 
 No radical changes are proposed in the main street system 
 in the built-up sections of the city, for two reasons: First, 
 because the existing system is of such a character as not to 
 demand such changes; and secondly, the attempt to cut 
 through artificial diagonal streets across an already developed 
 rectangular system would not in our judgment in the case of 
 Elkhart be justified. A few diagonal connections in outlying 
 sections, both east and west, are provided and recommended, 
 especially those parallel to the New York Central Railroad 
 Lines, Old Road Division to Toledo. 
 
 We are inclined to be conservative in urging street widen- 
 ings in built-up areas in cities the size of Elkhart. Yet it 
 must be recognized that the demands on all the main streets 
 will increase with the growth of the city, and therefore, wher¬ 
 ever practicable, steps should be taken toward a gradual 
 general widening of the main thoroughfares. 
 
 Closely related to the subject of main thoroughfares is 
 the laying out of all streets and the formulation and adoption 
 of principles relating to the platting of land, the layout of 
 streets and the dedication of public property. Such control 
 is essential to the proper and right growth of the city. This 
 
 control of plats should cover not only the location of streets 
 and the size of blocks, but also in many instances the park 
 and other recreation areas, public building sites and district¬ 
 ing. Some local examples of the bad results of uncontrolled 
 platting are the following: West of Best Avenue and south 
 of Indiana Avenue (blocks too small and unnecessary alleys) ; 
 west of Twenty-first Street and south of Lusher Avenue (local 
 streets unnecessarily jogged); east of Eddy Street north of 
 Hiveley Avenue (superfluous alleys) ; Garden Street south of 
 Middlebury Street (an unrelated single street with fragmen¬ 
 tary alleys); north of Baldwin Street between Cassopolis 
 Street and Johnson Street (small, monotonous block with 
 double alley system); east of Sterling Avenue between 
 Indiana Avenue and Lusher Avenue (blocks excessively long). 
 
 A Guide on the Acceptance of New Plats prepared in 
 this office for the use of City Plan Commissions is submitted 
 in the Appendix as a supplement to this report. 
 
 In our study of the problem of the main thoroughfare 
 system for Elkhart and in our recommendations we have been 
 guided by the facts revealed by the Planning Survey, and 
 invite your attention to those facts and to the maps submitted 
 on Existing Conditions, Land Values, Distribution of Popula¬ 
 tion and Occupation of Land. Many of the facts revealed 
 by our studies, and made graphic by the Planning Survey 
 maps, have influenced our action in the selection of existing 
 streets for classification and development as parts of the main 
 thoroughfare system. 
 
 PARKS AND PARKWAYS 
 
 The present parks and playgrounds of Elkhart are shown 
 on the Existing Conditions sheet of the Planning Survey. 
 While Elkhart has made a beginning in the acquisition of 
 park lands, the extent of these lands is inadequate, and 
 comparatively little has been done on most of the areas to¬ 
 ward real development and full utilization. 
 
 The following are the present public park areas 
 
 in Elkhart: 
 
 Name 
 
 Location 
 
 Acreage 
 
 Development 
 
 Island 
 
 Between St. Joseph and Elk 
 hart Rivers 
 
 7 
 
 Developed. 
 
 McNaughton 
 
 North Bank of St. Joseph River 
 at West City Limits 
 
 40 
 
 Developed. 
 
 Rice 
 
 Goshen Ave. and Elkhart River 
 
 30 
 
 Undeveloped. 
 
 Studebaker 
 
 South Bank of Elkhart River at 
 East City Limits 
 
 20 
 
 Developed. 
 
 Willowdale 
 
 Christiana Creek at North City 
 Limits 
 
 3 
 
 Undeveloped. 
 
 Johnson 
 
 Cedar and Prospect Streets and 
 Riverside Drive 
 
 14 
 
 Developed. 
 
 Riverside 
 
 West Riverside Drive 
 
 25 
 
 Developed. 
 
 Beardsley 
 
 Monument 
 
 Beardsley Avenue and River¬ 
 side Drive 
 
 TTJ 
 
 Developed. 
 
 Floral 
 
 Massachusetts Avenue and Su- 
 wanee Street 
 
 1 
 
 Undeveloped. 
 
 The principal proposed parks and parkways which are 
 recommended in connection with the city plan follow. They 
 can be better considered by referring to the General Plan. 
 The names used are not necessarily intended as final, but 
 have been adopted for convenience of reference. 
 
 Northwestern Park 
 Bristol Triangle 
 Christiana Parkway 
 North Park Playfield 
 Conn Park 
 
 Bower Park 
 Hoosier Greens 
 Indiana Field 
 Prairie Park 
 Grove Park 
 
 4 
 
5 
 
VISUALIZING SOME OF DOCTOR NOLEN’S PROPOSED STREET EXTENSIONS 
 
 Compare with “Main Thoroughfares map: 1—High street along Elkhart river from Jackson boulevard. 2—Bridge over Elkhart river would connect 
 downtown Elkhart direct, via Division street, with this willow-bordered drive (Division street) through Rice Park to Goshen avenue and Rice 
 Cemetery. 3—View from South Main street of proposed Charles street extension to South Main, with “subway" under New York Central tracks at 
 Charles and Madison streets and emerging between St. Vincent’s Church and No. 2 Fire Station into South Main and Prairie streets. 4—Proposed 
 extension of East street from State to Middlebury. 5—Proposed Benham avenue extension northeasterly to South Third. 6—South Third street at 
 Harrison—-proposed "subway under New York Central, connecting with South Third south of railroad. 
 
 6 
 

 [ 
 
 'll **' 
 
 II 
 
 
 1 ' 
 
 !lli 
 
 m 
 
Puterbaugh Parkway Benham Field 
 
 St. Joseph’s Riverway Central Square 
 
 East Park Aviation Field Southeastern Park 
 
 Portage Hiveley Playground 
 
 Studebaker Park Extension Elkhart Riverway 
 
 West Riverway Glen Parkway 
 
 Michigan Mall 
 
 To this list there should be added a larger area (probably 
 500 acres or more) in the territory more distant from the 
 city, preferably surrounding some natural feature—for exam¬ 
 ple, a lake. 
 
 The three chief principles which have been followed in 
 making the selection of park and parkway areas are, first, to 
 do what still may be done without insuperable difficulty to 
 secure for the public as much as possible of the shores of the 
 Elkhart River and the St. Joseph River, these streams being 
 the most characteristic and attractive topographical features 
 of Elkhart. The second is to add to these river areas blocks 
 of land of considerable size (the largest ninety acres in area), 
 distributed in different sections of the city, especially in those 
 sections from which the river banks are not so readily acces¬ 
 sible. The final principle of selection is to recognize at this 
 time the opportunity and necessity to adopt a more liberal 
 policy of land acquisition for parks that will provide eventu¬ 
 ally sufficient land not only for Elkhart’s immediate needs, 
 but for the future city, with its undoubted larger requirements 
 in the way of public property for recreation purposes. 
 
 An examination of the Planning Survey sheets will disclose 
 the fact, we believe, that the park areas recommended for 
 acquisition are of such a character, of such price and in such 
 locations that their purchase would not involve any serious 
 difficulties. On the other hand, we believe it will be evident 
 that the proposed park system would serve the needs of each 
 section of the city and the general requirements of the city 
 as a whole. 
 
 No argument is presented here for public recreation nor 
 its justification as we feel that it is already sufficiently recog¬ 
 nized in Elkhart. 
 
 It seems wise to add to this section of the report a refer¬ 
 ence to the fact that a park system cannot be made for a city 
 by merely acquiring land. Parks mean public service for the 
 people. Therefore it is essential that such park land should 
 be carefully designed and developed to serve the purposes 
 for which its selection has been made. 
 
 The Existing Conditions Map shows that only a few of the 
 school properties of Elkhart include an entire block of land— 
 Weston, Roosevelt and two newly selected sites, one at Wood 
 and Crescent Streets and the other at Erwin and Dearborn 
 Streets. Even in the case of these schools, however, the 
 blocks are smaller than in most cities. The grounds of the 
 other schools are decidedly small, in some cases occupying 
 only one-quarter of a block or even less. 
 
 We recommend additions to the school grounds as shown 
 on the general city plan and as here listed. 
 
 Central School, Second and High Streets. 
 
 East Elkhart School, Gladstone Avenue and North Street. 
 
 Fifth Ward School, Near Prairie Street and Park Avenue. 
 
 EXAMPLES OF PERMANENT PARK IMPROVEMENT 
 
 (Pictures at right, reading down) : A sunken garden at Peoria, Ill. (easily 
 possible in Rice Park)—Entrance to Snyder Park, Springfield, Ohio—View 
 in Snyder Park—A St. Louis park vista—A kiddies play pool—Island Park, 
 Racine, Wis. (a suggestion for a driveway around Elkhart’s Island Park.) 
 
 8 
 
HBBE0H 
 
 lEBBEffi 
 
 ■oz 
 
 DCO 
 
 
 m 
 
 £ □□□□[ 
 
 
 "IT ~ Is 
 
 
 ~ « rurar- 
 
 __ji__ _ is i, 4/ 
 
 L'-v. 
 
 _ IL_ _ 1. 
 
 mmnnri; 
 
 
 ‘nrnmtf 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 u 
 
 
 
 
 % 
 
 rv. 
 
 Isu _ 
 
 
 
 
 vi 
 
 
 
 J 
 
 s# 
 
 9 
 
Fourth Ward School, Harrison Street and Oakland Ave. 
 
 High School, Second and High Streets. 
 
 Middlebury School, Middlebury Street, East of Main St. 
 
 Samuel Strong School, Vistula Street and Lexington Ave. 
 
 South Side School, Cleveland Avenue and Sixth Street. 
 
 Willowdale School, Michigan and Simonton Streets. 
 
 Rural School, Nappanee Street, near Franklin Street. 
 
 Rural School, West of Main St. and north of Hiveley Ave. 
 
 Rural School, East of Main St. and south of Hiveley Ave. 
 
 One final point in connection with school grounds should 
 be emphasized, and that is the possibility of economy and 
 better results to be had by selecting and acquiring school 
 properties in advance of the spread of population. In accor¬ 
 dance with this view we have recommended that the following 
 school sites as shown on the plan (or locations near-by) be 
 purchased. 
 
 Bristol and Cassopohs Streets. 
 
 Bower Street and West Boulevard. 
 
 Alabama Street and Linden Avenue. 
 
 Leininger Avenue and Seventeenth Street. 
 
 Lusher Avenue and Tenth Street. 
 
 Hiveley Avenue and Sixth Street. 
 
 Lusher Avenue and Prairie Street. 
 
 Folsom and Huron Streets. 
 
 Middlebury Street and Goshen Avenue. 
 
 MAIN STREET GRADE ELIMINATION 
 
 In many respects for both the railroads and the city the 
 locations of the railroads in Elkhart are under present condi¬ 
 tions unfortunate. The situation in connection with the Main 
 Street crossing is intolerable. 
 
 The main right-of-way of the New York Central Lines 
 comes into the city from the southeast, cuts through a settled 
 district to a point close to the heart of the city, turns sharply 
 and at an awkward angle right across Main Street, and then 
 follows a general line to the southwest out of the city. An¬ 
 other line cf the New York Central (the Old Road Division 
 to Toledo) comes into the city from the northeast and con¬ 
 nects with the main line of the railroad at Mam Street. Main 
 
 Street itself at its intersection with the railroads, instead of 
 going straight ahead, turns at this point to the southeast, and 
 Middlebury Street joins Mam Street, also crossing the railroad 
 at an awkward angle. Both Main Street and Middlebury 
 Street have important double track car lines. 
 
 From this very brief description and from even a cursory 
 examination of the Existing Conditions Map, recalling at the 
 same time that all streets and railroads are on the same 
 grade, the great difficulty and urgency of the problem can be 
 appreciated. 
 
 While the acute feature of the railroad situation is at the 
 Main Street crossing, other difficulties in the city plan arise 
 from the fact that the New York Central Railroad in connec¬ 
 ter;,'? Street Grade Elimination 
 
 Key Pea 7 /v 
 
 Sc/SLP <00'+/" 
 
 CHAVBLK Of CQMME*C£ 
 
 ELK M A R T 
 
 /NO/ AfO/\ 
 
 Alain Street Grade Separation 
 
 Jo An .Vo'« »» C/y P/o tin* r 
 
 r/tt/'A $Y Eos Are- Ajsoqio 
 t/a U'-c/ Wyoare CarnArrJo* Afar 
 rt*» > 
 
 r -* 
 
 10 
 
“NECK OF THE BOTTLE’’—SHOWING NEED OF ELIMINATING MAIN STREET GRADE CROSSING 
 
 Four pictures visualize the actual, continuous vehicular and pedestrian traffic and its interruption by freight and passenger trains at an average 
 business hour (even much heavier at noon and evening closing hours). A count, made about four years ago, showed more than 25,000 persons 
 crossing at Main street in one day. Center picture shows Middlebury street and the N. Y. C. Mam Line and Old Road tracks leading off at acute 
 angles, adding complications to the Mam street grade crossing elimination. 
 
 ticn with this right-of-way through the city occupies large 
 centrally located areas with railroad yards and shops (said 
 to be the fifth largest in the United States). In some places 
 these yards are from 1,500 to 2,000 feet in width. From 
 the point of view of physical planning it is difficult to con¬ 
 ceive of a more serious handicap to a growing city in pro¬ 
 viding convenient, safe and adequate street circulation. 
 
 The immediate and mcst pressing problem is the question 
 of the Main Street grade crossing. It is locally stated and 
 firmly believed that no radical relocation of the railroad right- 
 of-way is feasible at the present time. Furthermore, no slight 
 change of the general right-of-way would appear to be of 
 much advantage. On the other hand, it would seem that a 
 redesign and rearrangement of the principal streets in the 
 neigborhood of the Main Street crossing, together with the 
 elevation cf the tracks of the railroad (which is assumed to 
 
 be essential under any circumstances) would afford a satis¬ 
 factory solution of the chief problems. The awkwardness of 
 the situation is due largely to the fact that the streets, the 
 traction lines and the railroads all center at the same place. 
 The railroads can be elevated, but change in their location 
 would be difficult. On the other hand, a change in the 
 layout of streets and blocks immediately south of the railroad 
 could be carried out with real advantages and without exces¬ 
 sive cost. 
 
 As an illustration of the general character of this solution 
 of the problem, a sketch has been made and is submitted 
 showing the direct extension of Main Street to St. Joseph 
 Street, a relocation of a section of Middlebury Street, the 
 abandonment of portions of some streets, the reblocking of 
 the area affected, and other minor changes as indicated on 
 the plan. 
 
 OF ILL. UB. 
 
Sc/£HT/ST 
 ! Chism ch 
 
 P&F&a yrsMiA>,< 
 
 . Church . ' 
 
 SECOND 
 
 Tx/h/ty 
 
 Church 
 
 1 7?} At. 
 
 Mtftyc/H*. 
 
 Bu/ld//YO 
 
 iJl'fiHQA H/OH ScHOO/. 
 
 A-i/oirop./uM 
 
 (R/tetKUXC S ~-*} 
 
 SrUp.HHls Church 
 
 THIRD 
 
 CssRfUf-l 
 
 -Stahhg 
 Sc/too;. 
 
 U CA 
 
 no rat 
 
 sou TH 
 
 
 CHAMBER. OF COMMERCE 
 
 E Lu K El v\ R.HT 
 
 INDI A JSTAV 
 
 P/an for Civic Center and Centra/ Open Space 
 
 JOHN NOLEN CITY PLANNER. 
 
 PHILIP W- FOSTER. ASSOCIATE 
 HARVARD SQ • CAM BRIDGE MASS 
 • 1 022 * - 
 
 n/L/lH Afo £C 
 
 PLAN FOR CIVIC CENTER AND CENTRAL OPEN SPACE 
 
 Elkhart is peculiarly lacking in open spaces in the heart 
 of the city. It has, it is true, a better grouping of public 
 buildings (at Second and High Streets) than most cities have, 
 but each of these buildings covers a large part of the lot 
 which it occupies. There is no sense of spaciousness around 
 the buildings—no setting nor adequate foreground. They 
 simply stand upon four corners of a narrow street intersection. 
 The result is that there is nothing in the center of Elkhart in 
 the nature of an open, unbuilt-on, permanent open space—no 
 common or central park. 
 
 The need of at least one open block in the central section 
 of cities is, or ought to be, obvious. Under any proper con¬ 
 ception of civic life, it is really as necessary in many ways 
 as a municipal building. This became more pointedly clear 
 recently at Elkhart in the search that was made for a suitable 
 place for a community Christmas tree celebration. Everything 
 was ready for such a festival, but no suitable place could be 
 found. 
 
 After a careful study of local conditions, we have drawn 
 up for your consideration a plan for an open central square 
 and a proposed building location plan. This scheme begins 
 with the idea that the region in the neighborhood of High 
 
 and Lexington and Second and Third Streets is the logical 
 permanent center of the public life of Elkhart. In this region 
 there are already located the Municipal Building, the Public 
 Library, the Central and the Junior High Schools, and near¬ 
 by the Samuel Strong School. In addition there are in the 
 same general section the Y. W. C. A. Building, the Masonic 
 Temple, and five churches. 
 
 The form of our recommendation is this. We propose as 
 an open space a central square extending from High to 
 Lexington and from Second to Third Streets, in one corner 
 of which would stand, as at present, the Municipal Building 
 (which should be improved by a new facade on its western 
 front facing the square). The present public or semi-public 
 buildings in the neighborhood would, of course, remain as a 
 nucleus of the grouping. In addition, as shown on the plan, 
 attractive, well-arranged sites would be provided for a com¬ 
 munity building, a future extension to the library, an audi¬ 
 torium (on the block with the High School), an hotel site 
 at the corner of Lexington and Second Streets, and also good 
 frontages for other public and semi-public buildings along 
 Third Street. 
 
 A simple, practical layout is shown on the plan for the 
 central square, including a site for a band stand. 
 
TYPICAL STREET SECTIONS 
 
 A detailed sheet is submitted showing street sections for 
 thoroughfare with street car reservations, a business street 
 
 with double car tracks, a major street, a secondary street and 
 a minor street. The dimensions of the subdivisions of these 
 streets are given on the plan. 
 
 When is it Cheapest to Widen the Street? 
 
 When like this? or this? or this? 
 
 widened at the time the ad¬ 
 jacent land is cut up into 
 buildinq lots almost without 
 cost 
 
 a 
 
 Failinq this a buildinq line 
 may be established that will se¬ 
 cure its eventual wideninq when 
 the residences are replaced by 
 stores 
 
 with expensive commercial 
 buildinqs wideninq often be¬ 
 comes prohibitively expen¬ 
 sive. 
 
 From a drawing prepared by Robert Whitten, City 
 
 Planner for the Cleveland City Plan Commission. 
 
 13 
 
Studies for Riverbank Development 
 
 Studies for Riverbank Development 
 
 JcAr I Mc/cn City Planner 
 
 Phihp HPoster Assoct ate 
 Harvard Square CamSr/dye Mass. 
 
 r^'O 
 
 Rtv e RStDC 
 DRt\/e 
 
 2R 
 
 Typical Cr oss-sect/on as at Riverside Drive 
 
 // 
 
 Typ/cal Cross-section as at East Beardsley Ave. 
 
 HOUSE 
 
 John No ten City P/anner 
 Ptn fip W- Poster Associate. 
 fia.rpa.rd C</uare Camttrcdye Mass. 
 
 Typical Cross-section as at West High Street 
 
 Private 
 
 Property 
 
 Proposed Pa 
 Proper. ty 
 
 Line 
 
 Typ/cal Cross-section as at Peninsula Park 
 
 STUDIES FOR RIVER BANK DEVELOPMENT 
 
 These comprise four typical cross sections with locations 
 as fellows: 
 
 1. At Riverside Drive. 
 
 2. At East Beardsley Avenue. 
 
 3. At West High Street 
 
 4. At Studebaker Park. 
 
 The present development of river bank property in Elkhart 
 leads us to recommend at least four types of improvement. 
 The first as shown at Riverside Drive provides for a planted 
 bank with a street of typical cross section at the top—a path, 
 tree planting strip and driveway. The second at East Beards¬ 
 ley Avenue provides a retaining wall at the water’s edge and 
 a narrow strip of proposed park property, with a five foot 
 path close to the river, there being no roadway in this instance 
 between the private property and the water front. The third 
 at West High Street provides simply for a planted frontage 
 of park property, improving the appearance of the park from 
 across the river, but on account cf the steepness of the grade, 
 no walk or drive through it. The fourth at Studebaker Park, 
 a path only through the park property at the top of the grade. 
 
 The topography of the banks of the rivers in Elkhart is 
 exceedingly varied, and therefore we recommend that this 
 variety of topography have definite recognition in the varied 
 form and character of the park design and planting. 
 
 In accordance with the agreement the General Plans sub¬ 
 mitted with this statement and the Planning Survey place 
 before you our main recommendations for the improvement of 
 Elkhart’s city plan. We ask your consideration of these 
 proposals. Please bear in mind what is so often overlooked 
 by cities to which city planning is new—that the program is 
 
 for a long period, perhaps a generation or more. Some things 
 are urgent, and should be taken up without delay. Others 
 may without disadvantage wait. It is most essential, however, 
 that the relationship between various parts of the plan should 
 be fully recognized and kept in mind in making partial plans. 
 It is also appropriate at this time to mention the advantages 
 of providing a method of following general planning with 
 detail plans by a city planner, as a basis for those projects 
 which are to be executed first. 
 
 Respectfully submitted, 
 
 JOHN NOLEN 
 
 July 1st, 1922. City Planner. 
 
 SUBSCRIBERS TO CITY PLAN FUND 
 
 E. Atkins 
 W. A. Barker 
 A. H. Beardsley 
 A. R. Beardsley 
 James A. Bell 
 
 G. C. Berkey 
 
 H. W. Boles 
 J. C. Boss 
 
 E. C. Borneman 
 Herman Borneman, Sr. 
 H. F. Borneman 
 James F. Boyer 
 W. G. Bussard 
 J. H. Collins 
 0. G. Curtis & Son 
 M. U. Demarest 
 C. S. Drake 
 
 Elkhart-Goshen Cleaning 
 & Dyeing Co. 
 
 Elkhart Printing Co. 
 Elkhart Rubber Co. 
 
 J. C. Fleming 
 J. C. Foster 
 
 14 
 
 W. H. Foster 
 C. W. Frink 
 C. D. Greenleaf 
 Edna E. Grimes 
 
 E. J. Gulick 
 L. D. Hall 
 H. M. Hayes 
 Chas. W. Haywood 
 H. Helfrick & Sons 
 
 F. D. Hershberger 
 Wm. B. Hile 
 
 B. D. Houseworth 
 Geo. E. Howe 
 
 Isbell Lumber & Coal 
 Company 
 
 G. 0. Johnson 
 Ed C. Keene 
 Arthur Kegerreis 
 Geo. C. Kistner 
 John I. Liver 
 Marchesseau Plumbing 
 
 Company 
 
 C. E. Metcalf 
 
 C. F. Miles 
 C. L. Monger 
 R. W. Monger 
 Ora Neff 
 W. H. Patterson 
 Poorbaugh & Riley 
 J. B. Porter 
 A. W. Pounder 
 Reid Electric & Supply 
 Company 
 Geo. E. Rush 
 W. J. Schult 
 W. L. Shafer 
 A. J. Stryker 
 Roy R. Sykes 
 Wilbur Templin 
 
 G. B. Tuthill 
 J. F. Walton 
 Wm. E. Wider 
 The Rudolph Wurltizer 
 Manufacturing Co. 
 Conrad Ziesel 
 Edw. B. Zigler 
 
MANY A CITY WOULD GIVE A MILLION DOLLARS FOR ELKHART’S RIVER BANKS 
 
 15 
 
SOME OF ELKHART’S BEAUTIFUL BILL BOARDS AND THE UGLY SPOTS THAT THEY HIDE! 
 
 16 
 
Other Expert Opinions on City Planning 
 
 MAKE BIG PLANS—AIM HIGH 
 
 Make no little plans; they have no magic to stir men’s 
 blood and probably themselvesi will not be recognized. Make 
 big plans; aim high in hope and work, remembering that a 
 noble, logical diagram once recorded will never die, but long 
 after we are gone will be a living thing, asserting itself with 
 ever-growing insistency. Remember that our sons and grand¬ 
 sons are going to do things that would stagger us. Let your 
 watchword be order and your beacon beauty.—Daniel H. 
 Burnham, “Father” of the Plan of Chicago. 
 
 THE EFFICIENT CITY IS THE “CITY BEAUTIFUL” 
 
 There has been a wrong impression that city planning is 
 nothing more or less than the embellishment and beautifica¬ 
 tion of the city, whereas, as a matter of fact, it is the lopping 
 off of the unnecessary things; it is the cutting down to the 
 practical things that makes your city efficient, that makes it 
 responsive to every call that is put upon it; and out of that 
 order, out of that very rhythm of movement, out of the ability 
 to do the things placed upon it, will come the “City Beauti¬ 
 ful”—J. C. Nichols* from a paper read before the twenty- 
 fourth annual convention of the National Association of Real 
 Estate Boards. 
 
 CITY PLANNING AND THE “CITY BEAUTIFUL” 
 
 City planning is widely believed to be a “City Beautiful” 
 idea. In the sense of providing a city with necessary public 
 works which shall be attractive but not additionally expensive 
 because of such attractiveness, city planning may truly be 
 said to be a “City Beautiful” idea. The “City Beautiful” 
 may be promoted by such objects of city planning as proper 
 street design; clean, noiseless pavements; removal of un¬ 
 necessary poles and wires; planting of shade trees; uniform 
 sidewalks; absence of unsightly signs. But these are things 
 which should be done, not expensive extravagances. Beauty 
 and extravagance are not handmaidens. We can have beauty 
 without extravagance, and in this sense city planning may be 
 considered a “City Beautiful” idea. Where utility is sacrificed 
 and extravagance substituted the “City Beautiful” may be 
 promoted; city planning is not.—Harland Bartholomew, City 
 Planner. 
 
 BUILDING THE CITY OF TOMORROW 
 
 When we build, let us think that we build forever. Let it 
 not be for the present delight, not for present use alone. Let 
 it be such work as our descendents will thank us for, and let 
 us think, as we lay stone on stone, that a time is to come when 
 those stones will be held sacred because our hands have 
 touched them, and that men will say as they look upon the 
 labor and wrought substance of them, “See! This our Fathers 
 did for us.”—John Ruskin. 
 
 THE CITY AND RECONSTRUCTION 
 
 Good planning for cities and closely-built towns and villages 
 is not primarily a matter of aesthetics, but of economics. The 
 main object is to prevent or remedy the physical and moral 
 evils and losses which accompany congestion of population. 
 
 The laying out of most American cities has been casual, 
 and thoughtless of future needs. The common rectangular 
 layout without any well-considered diagonals, causes a great 
 daily waste of human and animal labor and of fuel, while 
 high buldings, narrow streets, and lack of open spaces make 
 it impossible to keep the cities well aired and sunned. To 
 improve or reform the layout of most American cities is there¬ 
 fore a great public need, not only for beauty’s sake, but for 
 the sake of the health, efficiency, and happiness of their 
 people.—Charles W. Eliot, President Emeritus of Harvard 
 University. 
 
 What will the 
 change be forty 
 years from now? 
 
 At right— 
 
 Main Street 
 in 1923. 
 
 Below— 
 forty years ago. 
 
 17 
 
Z 0 N I N G—A Supplement 
 
 (EDITOR’S NOTE—Dr. John Nolen prepared, as a definite part of his Elkhart City Plan service, a tentative Zoning Ordinance for Elkhart. This 
 has, for several months, been under the consideration of both the City Plan Commission and City Council, with some minor changes suggested and 
 incorporated, but as yet in an unfinished state and not adopted at the time this publication is issued, October, 1923. Such being the case, it was thought 
 best not to include the proposed ordinance herein, but simply to give informative expressions for Elkhart citizens from men who know what zoning 
 is and what it means.) 
 
 ZONING ONE OF THREE BIG FACTORS IN CiTY 
 
 PLANNING 
 
 BY JOHN NOLEN 
 
 The districting or zoning of a city is, or should be, one of 
 the three fundamental parts of every comprehensive city plan. 
 The other two are: Channels of transportation, including 
 railroads, streets and water ways; and public open spaces, 
 parks, play grounds, etc. Districting is as far-reaching and 
 important as each of the others, but it is singular in this 
 point, that it costs the city nothing to put it into execution; 
 involves no cost other than the trifling sum needed for the 
 study of the problem and the prepartion of a plan. In fact 
 if the distributing is wise, it will afford not only stability, but 
 additional income to property owners, and also to the city. 
 Such a plan for districting should be part of a comprehensive 
 city plan. Provision for mam thoroughfares and for rapid 
 transit, the selection of land for parks, and other features of 
 a city plan, will surely affect the districting of the city. 
 
 Districting, after all, is nothing more than an extension 
 and wider application of the principle of restrictions. This 
 principle is well understood, and has been long applied by 
 private owners, and to some extent by the public. It is a 
 principle that is particularly well understood in the United 
 States by real estate operators. The restrictions placed upon 
 
 Zoning Will Protect Residential Neighborhoods From The Building Buzzards 
 
 —Philadelphia Housing Association. 
 
 the purchaser in the conveyance of property often include a 
 long list of the kinds of business which are classified as 
 nuisances, and which may not be established or maintained 
 upon the property. These restrictions also include regulation 
 as to stables and garages, fences and walls, setback of build¬ 
 ings from street and from lot lines, the minimum cost of 
 building, easements and rights of way for public utilities, and 
 in some cases, the approval of house plans and specifications. 
 The point of view with regard to these restrictions is indicated 
 by the fact that the real estate operator now often refers to 
 them as “safeguards.” It has became evident, however, that 
 we cannot depend upon private restrictions imposed by a land 
 owner for the districting of a modern city. 
 
 The action of the city of New York in approving the report 
 of the commission on building districts and restrictions is, 
 perhaps, the most important single step that has been taken 
 in this country in the planning of cities. The principles which 
 are fundamental in the commission’s plan are as follows: 
 
 1. Provision for light and air is a primary essential in building 
 regulation. 2. Building regulations in each section of the 
 city should be adapted to the requirements of that section. 
 3. It is desirable, as a general rule, to treat all buildings in a 
 given block according to a uniform rule, because there should 
 be a substantially uniform contribution from each owner to 
 the light and air of the block. 4. A building is usually appro¬ 
 priately located when it is surrounded by buildings of similar 
 type and use. Order in building development is essential to 
 the health, safety and comfort of the public, and the best 
 means of conserving and enhancing values. 3. All residence 
 sections should be protected against unnecessary invasion by 
 commercial and industrial users. 
 
 The gist of the New York regulations may be stated as 
 fellows: All future buildings will be restricted as to their 
 
 height, size and use, the restrictions being different in different 
 parts of the city; the height of buildings will vary with the 
 width of the street, from one time to two and one-half times, 
 with exceptions for buildings set back from the street line and 
 for towers; specified areas of open space are required in the 
 different zones for yards and courts, these automatically in¬ 
 creasing with the increased height of the buildings; in use, 
 residence and business districts will be reasonably protected 
 from the invasion of industry and manufacturing. The law 
 is not retroactive. It applies only to the future, and reason¬ 
 able changes in the law have been provided for. Nothing is 
 said about the effect of the law on the appearance of the city 
 in the sense of making it more beautiful, but it is recognized 
 that the result will be a more orderly and more harmonious 
 city, and therefore more attractive. 
 
 Fortunately for those interested in this movement, a recent 
 decision of the United States supreme court upholding the 
 right of the city of Los Angeles to remove a manufacturing 
 plant from a residental district fixes the essential principle 
 involved in the establishment of differentiated building dis¬ 
 tricts. Justice McKenna said, in rendering this opinion: “A 
 vested interest cannot be asserted against the police power 
 of a state because of conditions once obtaining. To so hold 
 would preclude development and fix a city forever in its 
 primitive conditions. There must be progress, and if in its 
 march private interests are in the way, they must yield to the 
 good of the community.” 
 
 It is surprising that so few American cities have acted in 
 this matter. It is now the one great outstanding opportunity 
 in city planning. The New York principles point the way, 
 and the courts have given an unqualified endorsement as to 
 
 18 
 
ZONING AND CITY PLANNING WOULD PREVENT FUTURE INVASIONS LIKE THESE INTO ELKHART’S HOME DISTRICTS 
 
 I—A factory. 2, 4, 5, 6 and 8—Neighborhood grocery stores. 3—A garage. 7—An unnecessary street jog—at Michigan street and Strong avenue. 
 
 See “Mam Thoroughfares" map for Doctor Nolen’s suggestion for Michigan Mall. 
 
 19 
 
20 
 
legality. The public mind is awakened. Conditions are pecu¬ 
 liarly favorable. Action should follow rapidly, but it should 
 be based upon a survey of local conditions and be accom¬ 
 panied by a comprehensive city plan of which the districting 
 should be an integral part, perhaps the principal part, so far 
 as immediate action is concerned. 
 
 WHAT IS ZONING? 
 
 BY LAWSON PURDY. 
 
 President of the National Conference of City Planning. 
 
 The term “zoning” has come to be used to mean the 
 regulation of buildings in a city. It signifies such regulation 
 of the height, area and use of buildings as will protect each 
 land-owner from the impairment of his share of light and 
 access, as will protect his ears from unseemly noises, his nose 
 from unpleasant smells, and his eyes from offensive sights. 
 Some of the purposes of city planning and zoning are: 
 
 To prevent undue congestion of population. 
 
 To insure better sanitary conditions, providing minimum 
 requirements for light and air. 
 
 To simplify the problem of street traffic regulations. 
 
 To make possible a sensible and more practical street 
 program for the future. 
 
 To insure the permanency of character of districts when 
 once established. 
 
 To stabilize and protect property values and investments. 
 
 To protect and maintain the home and home neighbor¬ 
 hoods. 
 
 To offer a safe district in which industries may be located 
 without protest and with every facility to do business. 
 
 To render possible great economics in paving city streets 
 through a decrease in the width of roadways, where the size 
 and number of buildings are limited. 
 
 To prevent the scattering and intrusion of any inappro¬ 
 priate and destructive uses of buildings which deteriorate and 
 decrease property values. 
 
 DO WE NEED ZONING? 
 
 BY JOHN M. CRIES. 
 
 Chief, Division of Building and Housing, Bureau of Standards, 
 Department of Commerce. 
 
 Some one has asked, “Does your city keep its gas range 
 in the parlor and its piano in the kitchen?” That is what 
 many an American city permits its household to do for it. 
 
 We know what to think of a household in which an un¬ 
 disciplined daughter makes fudge in the parlor, in which her 
 sister leaves soiled clothes soaking in the bathtub, while father 
 throws his muddy shoes on the stairs, and little Johnny makes 
 beautiful mud pies on the front steps. 
 
 Yet many American cities do the same sort of thing when 
 they allow stores to crowd in at random among private dwell¬ 
 ings, and factories and public garages to come elbowing in 
 among neat retail stores or well-kept apartment houses. Cities 
 do no better when they allow office buildings so tall and bulky 
 and so closely crowded that the lower floors not only become 
 too dark and unsatisfactory for human use but for that very 
 reason fail to earn a fair cash return to the individual in¬ 
 vestors. 
 
 “Live and let live” is a better motto for the modern city 
 than the savage one of “dog eat dog.” 
 
 It is this stupid, wasteful jumble which zoning will prevent 
 and gradually correct. We must remember, however, that 
 while zoning is a very important part of city planning, it 
 should go hand in hand with planning streets and providing 
 for parks and playgrounds and other essential features of a 
 well-equipped city. Alone it is no universal panacea for ali 
 municipal ills, but as part of a larger program it pays the city 
 and the citizens a quicker return than any other form of civic 
 improvement. 
 
 DOES ZONING PAY? 
 
 BY JOHN IHLDER. 
 
 Manager Civic Development Department, Chamber of Commerce 
 of the United States. 
 
 Does zoning pay? Yes, if it is true that a nickel saved 
 is a nickel earned. Zoning pays not only in that it makes 
 the return on real estate investment more sure but also in 
 
 that it prevents or lessens capital loss. Among the greatest 
 
 losses from which our cities suffer are: 
 
 1. Depreciated values due to changing character of a 
 district. 
 
 2. Fire losses. 
 
 3. Mis-spent taxes. 
 
 That zoning stabilizes the character of a district, prevents 
 the blight due to a mixture of mutually harmful uses, is 
 generally recognized. The residence that cost $5,000 or 
 $10,000 loses half its value if a store is opened next door, 
 loses even more if its new neighbor is a factory or a garage. 
 
 The retail store that did a thriving business will find its trade 
 
 diminishing if the neighboring property is occupied by business 
 or industry offensive or disturbing to customers. The industry 
 that has residences for neighbors is nearly sure to be handi¬ 
 capped in operation or expansion by complaints of its noise, 
 its odors, its smoke or some other manifestation of its activity. 
 
 These facts have been recognized though not always real¬ 
 ized, as long as men have lived in cities. The oldest towns 
 had their different quarters or bazaars; the butchers tended 
 to congregate in one section, the jewelers in another, the cloth 
 merchants in another, because experience showed this was best 
 for business. Zoning simply utilizes this age old experience 
 and applies it logically and in orderly fashion. 
 
 Fire losses are among the great preventable wastes of 
 America. They are increased by jumbling different kinds of 
 occupations together and by crowding buildings too close to 
 each other. In our cities business men often pay higher in¬ 
 surance rates than they would if their fire hazard were not 
 increased by neighboring properties. Householders pay more 
 than they would if there were wider spaces between houses 
 or if business or factory buildings were not mixed in with 
 residences. This is a constant and unnecessary tax. Zoning 
 reduces it. 
 
 Zoning also reduces the other tax, that paid not to private 
 companies but to public treasuries. Public taxes for public 
 improvements are a real item to every business man and to 
 
 THE AWKWARD SQUAD 
 
 —From "Progress," Pittsburgh. 
 
 21 
 
every householder. Figures from eight American cities show 
 an average per capita tax of nearly $22.00. The chief items 
 in this are: Education (schools and libraries) $7.50, high¬ 
 ways, nearly $4.00, police $2.34, fire department $2.63, health 
 conservation $1.53. To the last should be added the cost of 
 public hospitals and a large part of public charity appropria¬ 
 tions due to failure to conserve health, nearly $1.00 more, a 
 
 total of $19.00. 
 
 All of these are affected by zoning. Some of our good 
 and expensive school buildings are of doubtful value because 
 of the environment that has developed about them. They 
 should be and many will be scrapped long before they are 
 worn out simply because of the neighborhood. Teachers and 
 pupils are only partly efficient because of their surroundings,— 
 noisy, dirty, dangerous, distracting. The loss here is constant 
 and it is permanent, for the pupil can not live over again his 
 partly wasted years. He goes out into life handicapped. 
 
 Our highways are costing more and more every year. If 
 a highway is built to serve a miscellany of uses, or without 
 any clear idea of the character of its district, it is sure to 
 cost more than it should. Wide, heavy pavement suitable for 
 trucking costs much. It should be confined to stretches of 
 streets directly past establishments needing it and from them 
 by the shortest routes to destinations, such as freight stations. 
 If it passes through residence districts it not only represents 
 waste in cost of unnecessary construction but waste of time 
 and energy on the part of truckers. Narrow, more lightly 
 paved roadways are adequate to the needs of residence dis¬ 
 tricts except in the case of a few arterial highways. But if 
 they are used by heavy trucks they soon are broken up and 
 must be repaired. 
 
 The cost of laying sewers and water mains is an item of 
 consequence. In a properly zoned city it is possible to figure 
 just what volume these services will have to carry when a 
 district is fully built up. Then the right size can be laid in 
 the first place. In an unzoned city the safe thing is to err 
 on the side of adequacy and lay pipes larger and more costly 
 
 ZONING WOULD PREVENT THIS 
 
 —Courtesy “Atlanta Journal.” 
 
 22 
 
 than are likely to be needed because this waste is so much 
 less than the waste of replacing pipes within a few years. 
 
 The work of our police and of our fire departments is 
 simplified in a zoned city. A conglomeration of dwellings 
 with gas tanks, lumber yards and warehouses offers infinite 
 possibilities for trouble. This kind of conglomeration also 
 adds to the work of the health department both on its pre¬ 
 ventive side and its hospital side. 
 
 So zoning does pay. 
 
 J* 
 
 CONSTITUTIONALITY OF ZONING 
 
 BY HERBERT S. SWAN. 
 
 Executive Secretary, Zoning Committee, New York. 
 
 (From "The Zone Plan,” City Plan Commission, St. Louis.) 
 
 Zoning is an exercise, not of the power of eminent domain, 
 but of the police power. When property is taken under the 
 power of eminent domain compensation must be paid the 
 owner if damage can be shown. No compensation is paid for 
 property taken, or for limitations imposed upon the use of 
 property, under the police power. 
 
 The two questions of fundamental interest to property 
 owners in a municipality adopting a comprehensive plan 
 controlling building development are: 
 
 1. Whether such regulations come within the purview of 
 the police power; and 
 
 2. Whether the particular regulations adopted can be 
 sustained as a competent exercise of that power. 
 
 In answering the first question, it may be stated that it is 
 no longer open to doubt that cities in this country can apply 
 different building regulations to different districts. The deci¬ 
 sions of various state courts as well as the United States 
 Supreme Court are conclusive upon this point. In Welch v. 
 Swasey, 79 N. E. 145 (1907) for instance, the Supreme 
 Judicial Court of Massachusetts sustained the validity of the 
 act limiting the height of buildings differently in different 
 districts in Boston. In Cochran v. Preston, 108 Md. 200 
 (1908) the Court of Appeals in Maryland sustained a some¬ 
 what similar act limiting the height of buildings in Baltimore. 
 The decision of the Massachusetts court was confirmed by 
 the United States Supreme Court in Welch v. Swasey, 214 
 U. S. 91 (1908). 
 
 Zoning limitations on the use of buildings have also been 
 sustained as being within the scope of the police power. 
 
 Such regulations have been sustained by the courts in 
 
 half a dozen states (Arkansas, California, Illinois, New York, 
 Texas and Washington) as well as by the United States 
 
 Supreme Court. Even retroactive regulations, which have 
 weeded out undesirable business establishments from certain 
 districts, have been approved by the highest courts in Arkan¬ 
 sas and California, and on appeal, by the United States 
 
 Supreme Court. 
 
 How broad a scope has the police power? Answer to this 
 question is of the greatest interest to those who have the 
 future planning of a city at heart for so much city improve¬ 
 ment depends upon what may or what may not be done under 
 the police power. 
 
 The police power, of course, extends to the public health, 
 mcrals and safety. But the power of the state by appropriate 
 legislation to provide for the public convenience stands upon 
 the same ground precisely as its power by appropriate legis¬ 
 lation to protect the public health, the public morals, or the 
 public safety (Lake Shore and Michigan Southern Ry. Co. v. 
 Ohio, 173 U. S. 285, 1899). In Bacon v. Walker, 204 U. S. 
 311 (1907) the United States Supreme Court held that the 
 police power of a state embraces regulations designed to pro¬ 
 mote the public convenience or the general prosperity, as well 
 as those to promote public health, morals or safety; it is 
 net confined to the suppression of what is offensive, disorderly 
 or unsanitary, but extends to what is for the greatest welfare 
 of the state. The same view was expressed in Chicago, Bur- 
 
lington & Quincy Railway Co. v. Drainage Commissioners, 
 200 U. S. 561 (1906); and in Eubank v. Richmond, 33 
 Sup. Ct. 76 (1912). A still more extensive scope was given 
 to the police power in Noble State Bank v. Haskell, 31 Sup. 
 Ct. 186 (1911). In this case the Court stated: “It may 
 
 be said in a general way that the police power extends to 
 
 all the great public needs. It may be put forth in aid of 
 
 what is sanctioned by usage, or held by the prevailing 
 
 morality or strong and preponderant opinion to be greatly 
 and immediately necessary to the public welfare.” 
 
 The fourteenth amendment to the constitution does not 
 curtail the police power of the states when properly exercised. 
 The United States Supreme Court stated in Barbier v. Con¬ 
 nolly, 113 U. S. 27 (1885) that it was not designed to 
 interfere with the police power of the state “to prescribe 
 regulations, to promote the health, peace, morals, education 
 and good order of the people, and to legislate so as to in¬ 
 crease the industries of the state, develop its resources, and 
 add to its wealth and prosperity.” 
 
 Zoning is designed to promote not only the public health, 
 morals and safety, but also the public convenience and general 
 prosperity of the community. If the police powers extended 
 only to the public health, morals and safety, it might be 
 difficult in certain instances to show conclusively that every 
 detail of a zoning scheme came within a competent exercise 
 of the police power. But with the scope of the police power 
 so extended as to include the promotion of the public com¬ 
 fort and convenience, the addition of wealth and prosperity 
 to the state, the increase of its industry, and the development 
 of its resources, it is hoped that every feature of it can be 
 shown to be a legitimate exercise of the police power. 
 
 Although the United States Supreme Court refrains from 
 any attempt to define with any exact precision the limits of 
 the police power, its disposition is, nevertheless, to favor the 
 validity of laws relating to matters completely within the 
 territory of the state enacting them. It will interfere with 
 local legislative authority, especially when its action is ap¬ 
 proved by the highest court of the state whose people are 
 directly concerned, only when it is plain and palpable that 
 it has no real or substantial relation to the public health, 
 safety, morals or general welfare (Cusack v. City of Chicago, 
 
 37 Sup. Ct. 192, 1917). 
 
 The answer to the second question it seems will depend 
 upon, first, whether the height, use and area classifications 
 can be shown reasonable; and, second, whether their appli¬ 
 cation to specific districts can be shown reasonable. If the 
 reasonableness of both the classification and the application 
 of the several regulations can be demonstrated then the 
 victory will be complete. The attitude of the United States 
 Supreme Court toward such regulations as have come before 
 it furnishes strong ground for the hope that zoning will be 
 upheld in full. 
 
 Zoning is not designed to operate oppressively upon any 
 owner or upon any group of owners. Each scheme is framed 
 with the greatest consideration for property rights commensu¬ 
 rate with the public welfare. But despite this fact certain 
 owners will no doubt feel themselves aggrieved. This, how¬ 
 ever, does not make the law any less valid so long as its 
 provisions are not arbitrary. It is believed that the regula¬ 
 tions adopted in any city may meet all the tests of consti¬ 
 tutionality laid down by the United States Supreme Court. 
 In Barbier v. Connolly, 113 U. S. 27 (1885), the Supreme 
 Court discussed the question as follows: “Regulations for 
 these purposes may press with more or less weight upon one 
 than upon another, but they are designed, not to impose un¬ 
 equal or unnecessary restrictions upon any one, but to promote, 
 with as little individual inconvenience as possible, the general 
 good. Though, in many respects, necessarily special in their 
 character, they do not furnish just ground of complaint if 
 they operate alike upon all persons and property under the 
 same circumstances and conditions. Class legislation, dis¬ 
 criminating against some and favoring others, is prohibited; 
 
 but legislation which, in carrying out a public purpose, is 
 limited in its application, if within the sphere of its operation 
 it affects alike all persons similarly situated, is not within the 
 (14th) amendment.” 
 
 The attitude of the United States Supreme Court toward 
 zoning was discussed in concise and clear language in sus¬ 
 taining the constitutionality of a zoning ordinance in Little 
 Rock, Arkansas (Reinman v. Little Rock, 35 Sup. Ct. 511 
 1914). “So long as the regulation in question,” said the 
 Court, “is not shown to be clearly unreasonable and arbitrary, 
 and operates uniformly upon all persons similarly situated in 
 the particular district, the district itself not appearing to have 
 been arbitrarily selected, it cannot be judicially declared that 
 there is a deprivation of property without due process of 
 law, or a denial of the equal protection of the laws, within 
 the meaning of the 14th Amendment.” 
 
 In Hadacheck v. Sebastian, 36 Sup Ct. 143 (1915) the 
 United States Supreme Court gave frank expression to the 
 view that a city’s expansion and growth are superior to the 
 whims of a few capricious land owners who might wish to 
 thwart the greater welfare of the community: “The police 
 power of a state cannot be arbitrarily exercised. The principle 
 is a familiar one, but in any given case it must plainly appear 
 to apply. It is to be remembered that we are dealing with 
 one of the most essential powers of government—one that is 
 the least limitable. It may, indeed, seem harsh in its exer¬ 
 cise, usually is on some individual, but the imperative necessity 
 of its existence precludes any limitation upon it, when not 
 exerted arbitrarily. A vested interest cannot be asserted, 
 against it, because of conditions once obtaining. To so hold 
 would preclude development and fix a city forever in its 
 primitive conditions. There must be progress, and if in its 
 march private interests are in the way, they must yield to the 
 good of the community.” 
 
 An examination of the decision of the United States 
 Supreme Court, and especially of the four great cases on 
 zoning—Welch v. Swasey, Reinman v. Little Rock, Hada¬ 
 check v. Sebastian and Cusack v. City of Chicago—offers 
 every encouragement for the belief that zoning may be sus¬ 
 tained by the highest court in the land. Care must, however, 
 be exercised in drafting the regulations for each locality so 
 that they fit local conditions, that they are not arbitrary or 
 discriminatory, and that they do not fall within the ban of 
 class legislation. Above all, reasonableness must be the test 
 of both the classification and the districts established. Whether 
 the legality of any particular zoning scheme will be sustained 
 seems to depend more upon the carefulness and fairness put 
 into the preparation of the regulations than upon a lack in 
 the forward-looking attitude of the court. 
 
 REASONABLE AND COMPREHENSIVE ZONING IS LEGAL 
 
 The enactment of a zoning ordinance is an exercise of the 
 police or community power. Regulations to abolish public 
 nuisances and to require safe building construction by speci¬ 
 fying the strength and kind of material, fire-proofing, fire- 
 escapes, plumbing, sanitary conditions and other requirements 
 in building and housing codes for the preservation of health, 
 safety and the general welfare are enforced under the police 
 power. The enforcement of these police power regulations 
 was once vigorously contested, but their validity is not now 
 questioned. The decisions of the state and federal courts in 
 many cases where the application of the police power has 
 been involved, and in cases where the legality of zoning 
 regulations has been attacked, seem to consider conclusively 
 that a comprehensive zoning ordinance, enacted under power 
 conferred by an adequate state zoning enabling act, will be 
 sustained, provided the regulations and the districts created 
 are reasonable and not arbitrary or confiscatory.—From “The 
 Providence Zone Plan” by Robert Whitten, Consultant to the 
 Joint Standing Committee on Ordinances, Providence, R. I. 
 
WHY ZONING PAYS 
 
 Zoning sells a town. An unzoned town is like a dead 
 stock of goods on the shelves. 
 
 Zoning is a flexible harness in which city expansion works; 
 it may be adjusted in case it galls or frets at any point. 
 
 Zoning will flatten out the human pyramid, which con¬ 
 gestion has created in a crowded portion of the city. 
 
 Zoning substitutes method for chance, symmetry for con¬ 
 fusion, progression for patchwork, and order for chaos in city 
 development. 
 
 Zoning affords for the poor man such security from nui¬ 
 sances and invasions as the rich may provide at great ex¬ 
 pense.—Charles B. Ball in the Chicago City Club Bulletin. 
 
 ENORMOUS LOSS WITHOUT ZONING 
 
 The uncertainty as to the ultimate character of different 
 districts in a city where no restrictions exist has deterred 
 many property holders from improving their lands. A par¬ 
 ticular kind of building which would now seem appropriate 
 may in the near future become obsolete and result in great 
 financial loss to the investor. Any restrictions which will 
 tend to forecast and preserve the character of the various 
 districts within a city, for a reasonable number of years, will 
 consequently stabilize land values and encourage buildings 
 of similar character in like districts. Any growing city failing 
 to regulate and control its building development must inevit¬ 
 ably suffer enormous social and financial loss through the 
 changing conditions in different districts and the instability 
 of property values.—Harland Bartholomew, City Planner, 
 in “The City Plan of Hamilton, Ohio.” 
 
 ZONING SAVES CHICAGO BILLION DOLLARS 
 
 That a saving of approximately $1,000,000,000 in pro¬ 
 perty values will be made within the next generation as a 
 result of the zoning plan in Chicago was estimated by Charles 
 Bostrum, chairman of the Chicago Zoning Commission, at a 
 meeting of the American Civic Association in that city, says 
 the Toledo “City Journal”. Edward H. Bennett, director of 
 zoning work in Chicago, explained how the saving will be 
 made. 
 
 “What we are trying to do is to create conditions favorable 
 to industrial enterprise, to the protection of business and the 
 improvement of working conditions,” he said. “This neces¬ 
 sarily takes time. But it is well worth it. Zoning, we believe, 
 will save approximately one billion dollars by preventing pro¬ 
 perty depreciation and in increasing property values within a 
 thirty-year period, including ten years back and twenty years 
 ahead.” 
 
 BUILDING THE FUTURE CITY 
 
 Zoning is a first essential ta< the securing of a measure of 
 orderliness in the building of the city. The common sense 
 of the average citizen leads to a degree of order in the home, 
 the store and the factory that is all but lacking in the life 
 and work of the community as a whole. For want of a well- 
 considered plan of building development each man builds 
 without reference to his neighbor. The result is chaotic. 
 Haphazard growth is inefficient, wasteful and ugly. Why not 
 use the same forethought and care in the building of our 
 community home that each sane man uses in the building of 
 his individual home or factory? Zoning is the direction of 
 building development along orderly and well-considered lines 
 of city growth. On the economic side, zoning means in¬ 
 creased industrial efficiency and the prevention of enormous 
 waste. On the human side, zoning means better homes and 
 an increase of health, comfort and happiness for all the 
 people.—Robert Whitten, Zoning Expert, in “The Providence 
 Zone Plan.” 
 
 PURPOSE OF ZONING 
 
 Zoning expresses the idea of orderliness in community de¬ 
 velopment. Just as we have a place for everything in a 
 well-ordered home, so we should have a place for everything 
 in a well-regulated town. What would we think of a house¬ 
 wife who insisted on keeping her gas. range in the parlor and 
 her piano in the kitchen? Yet anomalies like these have 
 become commonplace in our community housekeeping. In 
 what city can’t we find gas tanks next to parks, garages next 
 to schools, boiler shops next to hospitals, stables next to 
 churches, or funeral establishments next to dwelling houses? 
 What would be considered insanity if practiced in the ordinary 
 house is excused as an exercise of individual liberty when 
 practiced in the city at large. And yet misplaced buildings 
 are to be condemned much more than out-of-place pieces of 
 furniture. 
 
 The whole purpose of zoning is to encourage thet erection 
 of the right building in the right place. It protects the man 
 who develops his property along proper lines against the man 
 who develops along improper lines. Rightly understood, zon¬ 
 ing means the substitution of an economic, scientific, efficient 
 community program of city building for wasteful, inefficient 
 haphazard growth.—From Report of Executive Committee, 
 Commission on Building Districts and Restrictions, Newark, 
 New Jersey. 
 
 LETTER OF TRANSMITTAL 
 
 Elkhart, Indiana, December 7, 1921. 
 
 W. E. WIDER, Esq., President City Council of Elkhart, 
 
 Elkhart, Indiana. 
 
 Dear Sir:—The Board of Directors of the Elkhart Chamber of Com¬ 
 merce unanimously endorsed the following action at its meeting yesterday: 
 
 RESOLVED, That the Elkhart Chamber of Commerce hereby agrees 
 to transmit to the City of Elkhart all maps and data pertaining to the City 
 Plan of Elkhart submitted as preliminary services by Dr. John Nolen, of 
 Cambridge, Mass., with all professional fees of Dr. Nolen in connection 
 with the complete plan to the extent of Six Thousand Dollars paid by said 
 Elkhart Chamber of Commerce and the subscribers to the special City Plan 
 Fund as originally agreed; 
 
 PROVIDED, That the City Council of Elkhart will immediately enact 
 an ordinance creating a City Plan Commission of Elkhart and will at once 
 appoint the members of said Commission, as provided by an Act of the 
 last Indiana General Assembly; which Commission shall proceed with Dr. 
 Nolen in working out the final and complete City Plan of Elkhart as pro 
 posed by the agreement between the Elkhart Chamber of Commerce and 
 Dr. Nolen. Very respectfully submitted, 
 
 W. L. SHAFER, Secretary. 
 
 INDEX 
 
 Billboards and Views They Hide (illustrations) .16 
 
 Bridges (illustrations) . 7 
 
 City Plan Commission . Title Page 
 
 City Planning, Other Expert Opinions on .17 
 
 Civic Center and Central Open Space (illustrated).12 
 
 Elkhart Chamber of Commerce Committee on City Plan.Title Page 
 
 Letter of Transmittal . 24 
 
 Existing Conditions Map . Title Page 
 
 General City Plan Map . Facing Title Page 
 
 Grade Crossing Elimination (illustrated).10 II 
 
 New Developments Map . Facing Page 24 
 
 Parks and Parkways, 4-10; Park System Map . 9 
 
 Parks, Existing and Proposed . 4 
 
 Platting . 4 
 
 River Bank Development (illustrated) .14 15 
 
 School Sites Recommended, New, 10; Additions . 5 
 
 Street Extensions Proposed (illustrations) . 6 
 
 Street Sections, Typical (illustrated) .13 
 
 Street Widening Recommended, 4; Illustrated .13 
 
 Subscribers to City Plan Fund .14 
 
 Thoroughfares, Main, 3; Map . 5 
 
 Zoning Supplement . 18-24 
 
 Constitutionality of Zoning .18 22 23 
 
 Nolen on Zoning .18 
 
 Expressions by Other Experts .21-24 
 
 Nolen Zone Map .20 
 
 24 
 
 DESIGNED AND COMPILED BY TOM H. KEENE AND W. L SHAFER 
 MAPS AND ENGRAVINGS BY SOUTH BEND ENGRAVING COMPANY 
 PRINTED IN ELKHART BY JAMES A. BELL COMPANY 
 

 rflAj 
 
 V- 
 
 
 Mr 
 
 
 
 
 
 • , 
 
 
 
 
 V_ 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 - 
 
 ’ ' ‘ / 
 • , * 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 p 
 
 ' ■ ..±:.7 
 
 '*■ • 
 
 ii : - 
 
 
 
 - - - • 
 
 ' 
 
 
 
 - 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 .... 
 
 ■ U! . 
 
 ■ \ v *\ Vj* • , AV 
 
 
 : • 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 •- . 
 
 , f 
 
 -- . -- - w. . - - ‘ 
 
 
 
 
 . i 
 
 

 I 
 
 I 
 
 » 
 
 * V 
 
 I 
 

 lIllSz 
 
 ^25= 
 
 =flft= 
 
 =aas4i 
 
 
 =se= 
 
 db 
 
 
 =fifi= 
 
 =flfi= 
 
 
 fissri 
 
 l3< 
 
 
 Which Shall Elkhart Be? 
 
 HE DEAD TOWN sees only Its 
 Past.” It harps upon back-yonder 
 days; builds monuments; lolls along 
 leisurely; is satisfied with decrepit public 
 works; let's George do it; stagnates; loses 
 its ambitious young folks and live citizens, 
 who go where Opportunity does not knock 
 vainly in her occasional visits. 
 
 “THE LIVE TOWN looks to The Future.” 
 Revering past heroes and achievements in 
 suitable memorial form, benefiting by ex¬ 
 periences, it has vision; seeks civic, commer¬ 
 cial and social progress for its citizenry; 
 inspires civic loyalty and co-operation; pro¬ 
 vides every possible public convenience for 
 work and play and worship; keeps its own 
 young people and attracts the best man¬ 
 hood and womanhood from the wide world; 
 looks ahead and gets ahead—tor Opportun¬ 
 ity lives right there. 
 
 Which shall Our Town be, Mr. Elkhartan? 
 “It’s up to YOU.” 
 
 
 ft! 
 
 rasci 
 
 ftseJ 
 
 
 ■Off- 
 
 nDOn 
 
 sflfts 
 
 nr 
 
 -ii ii- 
 
 ooc 
 
 = 90 = 
 
 °^OOiEE° °°^° c s 
 
 .Bit 
 
 =BB= 
 
 =25= 
 
 aflfts 
 

 
 
 

 
 h 
 

 : ILLINOIS-U 
 
 UNIVERSITY OF I 
 
 ,ndiana