Northwest Indiana Discussion

Northwest Indiana's Leading Discussion Forum
It is currently Mon Jun 24, 2024 6:37 am

All times are UTC - 6 hours




Post new topic Reply to topic  [ 19 posts ]  Go to page 1, 2  Next
Author Message
 Post subject: Hammond looks better, than some think.
PostPosted: Sun Mar 11, 2012 1:54 am 
Offline
Senior Member

Joined: Tue Jun 29, 2010 12:20 pm
Posts: 1011
I happened to be out in the very early morning hours last week and in my travels, I went through several seperate districts of Hammond.
It's amazing how clean the city is. I didn't see those abandoned houses, but I did see numerous new street lights that have been installed, the streets were clean. Where those lights have been in place, the streets was bright and well lit. If action can be taken about those unsightly houses, and the elimination of abandoned cars in empty lots, the city would have a whole new look. One location that has been pitch black for years, has been Hoffman street coming out of East Chicago, and Sibley east of Calumet. now they are bright and clean along with many other streets too numerous to mention. You have to give credit, when credit is due.


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: Hammond looks better, than some think.
PostPosted: Sun Mar 11, 2012 12:14 pm 
Offline
Senior Member

Joined: Tue Nov 21, 2006 7:29 am
Posts: 989
I recall reading that the City of Hammond has demolished 400 homes in the last four years. Now granted there are three times that many that need to be taken down but if you lived near one of those four hundred you would appreciate it.


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: Hammond looks better, than some think.
PostPosted: Sun Mar 11, 2012 4:43 pm 
Offline
Senior Member

Joined: Tue Oct 07, 2008 1:22 pm
Posts: 1435
With 1,200 homes to demolish in a relatively small city, just about everyone lives near a dump. What a wasteland....what incompetence.


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: Hammond looks better, than some think.
PostPosted: Mon Mar 12, 2012 6:17 am 
Offline
Senior Member

Joined: Tue Nov 21, 2006 7:29 am
Posts: 989
LaughingAtLakeCo wrote:
With 1,200 homes to demolish in a relatively small city, just about everyone lives near a dump. What a wasteland....what incompetence.


Even at 1200 the ratio is about right for any city of its size. Of course you cant see past your Garden of Eden, wherever that may be. If we could get the owners who abandoned these properties to fix them themsselves we could build a sewer retention pond instead of raising Celtic's rates.


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: Hammond looks better, than some think.
PostPosted: Mon Mar 12, 2012 6:39 am 
Offline
Senior Member
User avatar

Joined: Sun Nov 12, 2006 12:19 pm
Posts: 13802
xmpt wrote:
Even at 1200 the ratio is about right for any city of its size.


no it isn't.

_________________
Has Obama ever won a free and fair election based on the merits of his ideas?


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: Hammond looks better, than some think.
PostPosted: Mon Mar 12, 2012 8:35 am 
Offline
Senior Member

Joined: Fri Aug 15, 2008 7:24 am
Posts: 2529
xmpt wrote:
LaughingAtLakeCo wrote:
With 1,200 homes to demolish in a relatively small city, just about everyone lives near a dump. What a wasteland....what incompetence.


Even at 1200 the ratio is about right for any city of its size. Of course you cant see past your Garden of Eden, wherever that may be. If we could get the owners who abandoned these properties to fix them themsselves we could build a sewer retention pond instead of raising Celtic's rates.


You know better than that ..... 2 completely separate taxing entities. It's like saying that maybe we could hire some more police officers if we just didn't buy so many damn library books or didn't build a school or 11 .... They work completely independent of each other and you know it.

We need to build a retention pond and pay off a huge lawsuit and fine because it has been ignored until now by every Mayor back to the original incident under McDermott Sr.

You would have thought that Daddy could have at least left a note taped to the door to his son ..... "Tommy ... fix retention pond that I didn't get to ..... Love, Dad"

_________________
In a time of universal deceit, telling the truth is a revolutionary act. --George Orwell

"None are so hopelessly enslaved as those who falsely believe they are free." Johann Wolfgang von Goethe


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: Hammond looks better, than some think.
PostPosted: Sat Mar 17, 2012 12:16 pm 
Offline
Senior Member

Joined: Tue Nov 21, 2006 7:29 am
Posts: 989
Well hopefully if they dont want them demolished then they could repair them, there choice. Either way someone should take responsability for these homes instead of the city having to threaten or fulfill demolition orders. I guess if you are living outside of Lake County or even outside of Hammond you dont much care what the property looks like but after demolishing 400 homes the city has certainly shown an interest.


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: Hammond looks better, than some think.
PostPosted: Sat Mar 17, 2012 12:58 pm 
Offline
Senior Member

Joined: Tue Oct 07, 2008 1:22 pm
Posts: 1435
There is little motivation for any landlord to fix up a home in Hammond. The city attracts a poor element and is doing nothing to alleviate that problem. Why fix up a rental property when you won't be able to recover the cost (because no rational person with means would set up a household in Hammond) and when you know that the people that are likely to rent the place will simply trash it? Further, Lake County's bottomless appetite for tax dollars will continue to drive away the very people you wish to attract. May as well knock the buildings down and make baseball fields out of the lots.


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: Hammond looks better, than some think.
PostPosted: Sat Mar 17, 2012 1:04 pm 
Offline
Senior Member

Joined: Tue Nov 21, 2006 7:29 am
Posts: 989
LaughingAtLakeCo wrote:
There is little motivation for any landlord to fix up a home in Hammond. The city attracts a poor element and is doing nothing to alleviate that problem. Why fix up a rental property when you won't be able to recover the cost (because no rational person with means would set up a household in Hammond) and when you know that the people that are likely to rent the place will simply trash it? Further, Lake County's bottomless appetite for tax dollars will continue to drive away the very people you wish to attract. May as well knock the buildings down and make baseball fields out of the lots.


The city attracts a poor element because landlords fill there basement apartments with drug users and gang bangers while they are living in St. John in there newly built Bi-level. So in the near future they will be living next to the very element they were renting to because section eight applies anywhere.


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: Hammond looks better, than some think.
PostPosted: Sat Mar 17, 2012 4:17 pm 
Offline
Senior Member

Joined: Tue Oct 07, 2008 1:22 pm
Posts: 1435
I guess I am amazed that a city that has razed so many blighted homes and is engaged in such vigorous redevelopment (think those gangbuster (no pun intended) projects at Woodmar and Gateway Plaza) can't attract a better class of people. Why, I read somewhere that after only eight or so years, a beautiful Starbucks is scheduled to open at the site of the old Woodmar Mall (is it going to happen?). Now that McTavern's and LaRosa's are closed down, the sky should be the limit.

I know that if Lake County simply followed in the footsteps of the other 91 counties in Indiana and implemented an income tax that this money would be used wisely. What of the assets that Hammond, Gary, and East Chicago have that almost none of the other 91 counties do (casinos?) Really, how is it that money slated strictly for infrastructure seems to be used for everything but that-well, excluding baseball fields?

What gives?


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: Hammond looks better, than some think.
PostPosted: Sat Mar 17, 2012 5:20 pm 
Offline
Senior Member

Joined: Sat Nov 18, 2006 4:33 pm
Posts: 1672
Soccer fields will be the next recipient of casino revenue. Gotta have priorities people.

_________________
Eat it up, wear it out, make it do, or do without.


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: Hammond looks better, than some think.
PostPosted: Sat Mar 17, 2012 10:03 pm 
Offline
Senior Member

Joined: Tue Nov 21, 2006 7:29 am
Posts: 989
Typical ignorant response about Woodmar. The developer is not the city of Hammond just as the development on 41 in Schererville is not Schererville's. Why no comment on that developer.


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: Hammond looks better, than some think.
PostPosted: Sun Mar 18, 2012 1:32 am 
Offline
Senior Member
User avatar

Joined: Sat Dec 11, 2004 6:49 pm
Posts: 9660
Location: Stupid Liberals!
xmpt wrote:
LaughingAtLakeCo wrote:
With 1,200 homes to demolish in a relatively small city, just about everyone lives near a dump. What a wasteland....what incompetence.


Even at 1200 the ratio is about right for any city of its size. Of course you cant see past your Garden of Eden, wherever that may be. If we could get the owners who abandoned these properties to fix them themsselves we could build a sewer retention pond instead of raising Celtic's rates.

CP dates back as least as far and does NOT have a ratio like that.

You have your receptor to urban sprawl set to "community organizer" levels.

_________________
“At the core of liberalism is the spoiled child — miserable, as all spoiled children are, unsatisfied, demanding, ill-disciplined, despotic and useless. Liberalism is a philosophy of sniveling brats.”
P.J. O'Rourke


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: Hammond looks better, than some think.
PostPosted: Sun Mar 18, 2012 6:07 am 
Offline
Senior Member

Joined: Tue Oct 07, 2008 1:22 pm
Posts: 1435
xmpt wrote:
If we could get the owners who abandoned these properties to fix them themsselves we could build a sewer retention pond instead of raising Celtic's rates.


There is a reason that owners walked away from those properties, just like there was in East Chicago and Gary in previous years. Hint: it has nothing to do with a shortage of baseball fields or a lack of taxpayer-funded take-home vehicles for municipal employees.


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: Hammond looks better, than some think.
PostPosted: Sun Mar 18, 2012 9:04 am 
Offline
Senior Member

Joined: Thu May 01, 2008 8:25 pm
Posts: 5662
Really? All of the photos are less than six months old. That much change huh?


http://www.northwestindiana.com/discussionforum/viewtopic.php?f=15&t=10556&sid=1345b8541a8e986faa2a31d08121edc5

_________________
XMPT wrote in Dermott Minions now stating No Sweet House? Posted: Sat Mar 12, 2011 9:04 am. Hammonite you might want to say a prayer to your God for freetime. She got back what she dished out.


Top
 Profile  
 
Display posts from previous:  Sort by  
Post new topic Reply to topic  [ 19 posts ]  Go to page 1, 2  Next

All times are UTC - 6 hours


Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 43 guests


You cannot post new topics in this forum
You cannot reply to topics in this forum
You cannot edit your posts in this forum
You cannot delete your posts in this forum

Search for:
cron
Powered by phpBB © 2000, 2002, 2005, 2007 phpBB Group