Welcome everybody It is Wednesday May 20th and you're at the greatest place to be on a Wednesday night
Disneyworld no, I'm at a City Council meeting. We welcome you to this City Council meeting I will call
it to order and will the honorable clerk stole please call the roll Councilmember Flaherty Stasburg
here Piedmont Smith here
Zulek, here. Asari? Here. Daly? Here. Rallo? Here. Ruff? Here. Rosenberger? Here. Thank you so much.
Today the meeting agenda is posted on
both sides, and so you can access this remotely online. We have a sort of standard meeting where we'll
be approving some minutes, I believe. We have some reports from council members, the mayor, offices
of different commissions, and then we'll have some appointments, boards, and commissions. We have one
piece of legislation for first reading and four pieces of legislation. I'm sorry.
Lots of legislation for second reading. And so with that, I will stop delaying. Do we have any minutes
for approval? No. No. OK, thank you so much. So we will move on right into reports. Do any council members
have any reports? Council member Stasberg. Thank you. Good evening.
I just wanted to say that tomorrow is the last day of school for MCCSE students. Yes, hallelujah in
my house right now. But I just wanted to congratulate all students, teachers, administrators, parents,
all of the other staff members and buildings that make our schools go and bus drivers and other
transportation specialists, et cetera, et cetera.
As a parent of two high schoolers, it feels every year like it's been a long year, and then every summer
will feel like a long summer. But I just wanted to make sure to send those well wishes out to everybody,
and I hope everybody has a great last day tomorrow, or at least last student day tomorrow, and special
congratulations to all of the graduating seniors and their parents who have stuck with it for a number of years.
Yeah so that is what I wanted to say. I also wanted to mention that I do have some open office hours
coming up. They are on my public calendar.
Next Saturday the 30th of May you can sign up for 15 minutes with councilmember Stossberg I'm doing
that at the farmers market in the morning between 930 and 1130 So if you have anything that you want
to chat with me about you can find that link on my page And if you're not sure where to find it, you
can email me and I'll help you out. Thanks Thank you so much councilmember P. Smith Yes, good evening
I wanted to talk just a little bit about
The land that was purchased for the Convention Center project by the Monroe County Commissioners several
years ago, and that is in process of being deeded over to the Capital Improvement Board, which is overseeing
the Convention Center expansion. That is the land to the south and west of the current Convention Center.
It includes Seminary Point Apartments.
and several local businesses, including the Friendly Beast Cider and Blue Tip Billiards. And we received
a memo from a coalition of Bloomington Homes for All and the Bloomington Democratic Socialists of America
Housing Working Group a couple of days ago. They have
they're trying to figure out how they can preserve and even expand the affordable housing and commercial
space at Seminary Point, which has a very uncertain future given that it will soon be owned by the CIB,
and they are not in the business of renting property. They're in the business of building convention
center. So I've
Talked with some colleagues about about this. We have a very limited role in this whole discussion because
Of course the CIB will own that property The property that the CIB is interested in for a hotel for
the Convention Center is owned by the Bloomington redevelopment Commission So it's also not under our
control But I think that they have proffered a very interesting plan and a very
a really great innovative vision for that little mini neighborhood in the future as being a space of
cultural and social gathering and real truly low income housing. And if there is a way that that can
be facilitated by this body, I'm open to do so. I think that
the land swap that has been proposed. So the C.I.B. is interested in the land at College Square owned
by the R.D.C. to put the convention center hotel and R.D.C. as issued a call for proposals to sell that
land. So it's been suggested that the summit point and other parcels that the C.I.B. owns or will own shortly
be traded for the college square site land. Now those those parcels are of vastly different value. So
I think the the almost seven million dollars the RDC paid for the college square site should be recouped
in some degree. But I think there should also be some flexibility to see if we can make this vision of
low income housing and community space of reality. So I'll be working with colleagues to see if we can
come up with a unified message to relate to the RDC which of course is a partner organization within
the city itself to see if we can if we can make this work. I was at the CIB meeting today and they are
extending the leases for the commercial and
Residential tenants until the end of August so that gives a little more breathing room. They were supposed
to Terminate in July and Jeff's warehouse gets until the end of September due to Particular circumstances,
so we have a little more time and I look forward to working on this in the weeks ahead. Thank you Thank
you so much councilmember Flaherty
Thank you. I also had a report this evening, also involving College Square, believe it or not, by way
of follow-up from our deliberation session last week, which was about snow removal on pedestrian paths
and sidewalks throughout the city, which has been a persistent challenge. And kind of the worse the
snow events are, the worse of a challenge it is. So this year was especially bad, but it's not unique
to this year. In fact, we face it most years.
So just thanks to the members of the public who came out and gave really unique and helpful insights
based on their experience. Also to the council members who were able to join and colleagues who couldn't.
Happy to chat with you about it. Also Transportation Commissioner Boland and Casey Guarino from the
Council for Community Accessibility. We are looking at kind of across operations, resourcing or budget
and policy or city code what
types of improvements we can make. I think there will be opportunities in all of those areas. Going
to be coordinating with at least council members Stossberg and Daly on some of that. And wanted to note,
just because it was an interesting tidbit and follow-up and just helpful for your information, we did
talk about the College Square property because we noted that even city-owned properties sometimes we
don't end up clearing the sidewalks.
and Director Colleen Hanson reached out and let me know, she listened in to the meeting, which she hadn't
attended live, which I appreciate that she was checking it out, and just let me know that there was
a lease executed with College Square for Weddell Ruther's construction, for construction management,
I guess, that puts them in charge of snow removal and mowing, and so she said that any gaps in snow
removal were not on the RDC, it was the tenant. But that was an issue we highlighted that isn't just
unique to the city, it's actually something that the hand department
has trouble navigating when landlords say, look, it's not my responsibility, my lease says that my tenant
has to take care of the snow removal. So it was a bit interesting that the RDC itself was here through
Director Killian Hanson saying that. But what we surfaced last week also is that city code doesn't say
that the duty can be assigned. It's the duty of the property owner, full stop. And I think that's like
an example of an operational improvement that we can make where we stop
failing to get compliance because of this perceived loophole or something. If the fine needs to be issued,
because ultimately that property never did for two weeks, almost three, never did come into compliance,
the RDC-owned property at College Square. It clearly wasn't effective, the U Reports and other things
that were filed.
So if we just go with the appropriate citation within the appropriate timeline, whatever happens in
private contracts between the property owner and their tenants from there, that's up to them to resolve.
If they want to pass that cost on to the tenant because it's in the lease, they can do that. But we
should not be foregoing the responsibility of the city to try to ensure safe and accessible sidewalks.
So I thought that was a really interesting follow-up and just again an example of what would
be an operational improvement,
necessarily usually the purview of the City Council per se, but these deliberation sessions and the
conversations with staff to follow are meant to kind of, I think, help build collaborative work towards
any range of improvements, including ones that aren't squarely our job per se. So anyway, that's the
report. Thanks. Thank you so much. There's Council Member Zulek. Yes. Hello, everyone. Thanks for being
here. The clerk's office has asked
Me to remind all of us that in accordance with resolution 2025-15 established expectations for councilmember
liaisons for boards and commissions and Few staff liaisons when they were checked in with knew who they're
assigned council liaison is so I just want to remind everyone that we should have all checked in with
all of our counts all of our staff liaisons for the boards and commissions for which we liaise to and
chair of those boards and commissions and introduce yourself other responsibilities are Just let them
know your role as councilmember liaison checking in at least three times a year Serving as the point
of contact for liaisons and chairs as a two-way communication for activities or concerns they may have
and attend at least one meeting of the Commission annually and
Inform assigned Commission chairs and liaisons of relevant proposed legislation from the council and
and getting feedback from said Commission. Thank you Thank you so much. Any others the councilman Arula?
Thank you. Just off the cuff. I'd like to respond to a couple of my colleagues Well, first of all, I'll
say that drawing on our monthly constituent meetings council member Ruff and I and the third Saturday
Saturday of the month
have a constituent meeting that sometimes goes on for several hours and Invariably people are concerned
about infrastructure in the city Particularly the conditions of the streets and sidewalks Obstacles
on the sidewalks that present problems with people Being able to use them, especially people
with accessibility problems and and also
the transformation of owner occupied housing or potential owner occupied housing to rentals and the
pressure to Essentially by investors to to buy up those properties and turn them into plexus and Forever
essentially render them inaccessible for for owner occupancy. That's a very very real concern and
of core neighborhoods surrounding campus downtown Brian Park neighborhood in particular where a lot
of that has happened The second thing I wanted to say is that I I wanted to extend my appreciation to
my colleague councilmember Piedmont Smith Regarding the property that she was referring to which is a
Second Street, we need to have a close look at that property. I think because it has a lot of potential
For affordability and I think that we don't have many opportunities downtown to develop those properties
and so we ought to be very Cognizant that we may not be able to find other places where we can have
real affordability for people Who are currently living there by the way?
The third thing I wanted to touch on is something that is, I think it's a tsunami that's happening,
and that is data centers. So data centers are propping up everywhere in our country. We essentially
have, I understand, about half of the world's data centers currently, which is numbering over 5,000,
and we've got 3,000 more on the way.
These are enormous facilities. The one in Utah is proposed, I don't know if you've seen it, to be 62
square miles in size. And because it is used for cloud storage and AI training and compute, it utilizes
a lot of energy and a lot of water for cooling. And so these things plop in communities and they're
often unwanted.
By the people and there's a huge resistance to them. Fortunately, I understand that our county colleagues
and the County Planning Commission put a pause on any more on any AI data centers or any data centers
Development and until for a year and I think that expires in July They drive up utility costs They use
tremendous water. They externalize a lot of
the cost of the public. And so we ought to be on guard and aware and wary of these data centers. Maybe
there's more to talk about in the coming weeks. Thank you. Thank you so much. Any other council colleagues
with an update or statement?
All right, well we will move along then. We now have a handful of reports. First we'll hear from the
Commission on the Status of Black Males and then the Commission on the Status of Children and Youth.
Come to the microphone and take it away, sir.
Good evening. It's nice to be here before you again. My name is James Sanders, chair of the City of
Bloomington Commission on the Status of Black Males. Thank you for the opportunity to present our 2025
annual report. Tonight, we will highlight the commission's work over the past year, share the impact
of our programs and partnerships, and discuss our goals and priorities moving forward.
The Commission on the Status of Black Males is a seven-member volunteer commission supported by the
City of Bloomington Community and Family Resources Department. Our work focuses on addressing disparities
impacting black males in the areas of education, health, criminal justice, and employment while also
celebrating achievement, leadership, and community engagement. Throughout 2025, the commission continued
building partnerships with schools,
nonprofits, health organizations, and community leaders to create meaningful opportunities for youth
and families across Bloomington. 2025 was a year of strong community engagement and continued growth
for the commission. During Centennial Black History Month, the commission recognized four recipients
through the Outstanding Leaders of Tomorrow awards for leadership, scholarship, and community involvement.
The Black Barbershop Health Initiative led or helped during Bloomington's Juneteenth celebration partnered
with organizations including the National Merrill Donor Program, Hoosier Health, and the NAACP to provide
culturally responsive health, outreach, and education in trusted community spaces. The National Million
The National Million Father March had more than 40 plus fathers, mentors, and volunteers at Fairview
Elementary School to support students at the start of the school year and encourage positive family
engagement in education. Our Black Male Youth Summit brought together 67 students for a day of leadership,
development, and mentorship featuring speakers Dr. Adrian Parker, Keelan Mark, and Arthur Thomas X.
Williams. Finally,
our window wonderland partnered with the NAACP Freedom Fund banquet city of Bloomington parks and rec
and other community organizations to provide a positive holiday experience for more than 100 families.
These programs continue to strengthen relationships, increase the visibility and create opportunities
for black males and families throughout Bloomington.
As we move forward into 2026, the commission is focused on expanding community partnerships, increasing
outreach, and continuing to grow our signature programs. We plan to strengthen engagement efforts through
tabling opportunities, collaborative programming, and youth-centered activities that encourage leadership,
development, and community connection.
The commission also plans to continue enhancing the Black Male Youth Summit and Black Barbershop Health
Initiative while identifying additional funding and sponsorship opportunities to sustain long-term program
growth. Although funding and resource development remain ongoing challenges, we remain optimistic about
the partnerships and support that continue to emerge throughout Bloomington. The commission is proud
to currently have full membership representation
which positions us well for the continued collaboration and impact in the coming year. We invite community
members, organizations, and local leaders to stay engaged with the Commission on the Status of Black
Males by attending our programs, partnering with our initiatives, and supporting our mission. We encourage
everyone to participate in upcoming events such as the Black Barbershop Health Initiative in June, National
Million Father March in August,
Black Male Youth Summit in November and Winter Wonderland in December. Monthly Commission meetings are
open to the public and provide opportunities for residents to learn more about our work and contribute
ideas that help strengthen our community. Additional information, meeting schedules, and program updates
can be found on our website at City of Bloomington Commission on the Status of Black Males. Thank you
for your continued support
and commitment to advancing opportunities and positive outcomes for black males in Bloomington. That
concludes my presentation. I'll now entertain any questions that you have. Thank you so much.
Thank you. Are there any questions or comments. Thank you so much for all of your good work. I know
we we saw you here last year so you've been at the helm for for a while now.
Can you tell us a little bit more about the winter wonderland? I'm not real familiar with that program
so winter wonderland was an event that ultimately or originated from I use a black student organization
we did that in conjunction with us and a few other organizations and
Black Greek letter organizations that really started as a toy drive. So we wanted to reach out to I
guess Minorities in the community via the Banneker Center and we just wanted to make gifts available
for students of all ages we aimed from two to about 14 years of age and
From about I would say five years ago a little bit before kovat. It just kind of grew into Toy drive
then toys and pictures with Santa and then we just slowly added events and now when families come we
have about 20 events that the That the children can stop at anywhere from games to
different types of trivia Obviously pictures with Santa and then the last thing that they do is Go and
get a gift. So it's kind of cool. They get a passport when they first walk in They have to visit so
many stops and at every stop community leader stamps their passport and Once they have collected the
mandatory amount they can go get a gift But usually we find out the kids want to stop at every station
So we have everything from my cocoa stations to cookie decorating stations to carts to Santa events
like that, so We're really proud of it because it's free to the community we know during holiday times
it can be very expensive and Hectic for families that you know want to share those special, you know
holiday moments But that don't necessarily have the funds so
They get a picture with Santa they get a gift they get a fun day of events the event spans for about
four hours We pull volunteers in from all aspects. You don't have to be necessarily tied to the Commission
or any other organization group we put the the need out and we get a
astounding responses every year. So every year it just keeps getting bigger and bigger. I think this
last year was our biggest year. And it's not only fun for the kids, it's fun for everyone who joins.
I know that was pretty long-winded, but it's one of our flagship events. That's great. And that's at
Banneker Center? Yes, ma'am. I have another question. Do you have a staff liaison?
The person who did it before has moved on from the city. Do you have a new staff liaison? We have an
acting staff liaison. She currently holds multiple positions. Ms. Shatoya Moss, she's been graciously
helping us, assisting us in everything that we need. So yeah, she helps us do the tireless work as you
see her behind me with her lovely son. So we're thankful for that.
Thank you so much. Thank you so much for being here and for all that work. I mean, that's amazing that
y'all are very, very busy. So thank you. I have a question. One of your events you said you hold in
June. Was that the barbershop mental health? Yes, it is. OK. Is that part of Juneteenth celebration?
Yes, it is. So we used to have the event in various barbershops around Bloomington.
But we wanted to reach a more broad audience. And a few years ago, the city started putting on a Juneteenth
event. So we wanted to target black people, people of color, and generally anyone who was interested
in their health. And so at that event, we held a tabling with multiple medical screeners. Last year,
we screened for blood pressure,
I think we discussed A1C in the bone marrow registry. And that was new for us. So we were able to reach
everyone who wanted to have health screenings performed at the event. I think it was over 100 people.
So not only do you walk away with information about health in general, but you can walk away with information specific
specific to you, so it's good to know about blood pressure, but what is my blood pressure? Where is
my A1C stand? How old do I have to be to be in the bone marrow registry? I found out last year that
the cutoff was like 40 or something, so I won't age myself, but a lot of that information was helpful
to know, and not enough of us
Not just people of color and black folks know about that those kind of things Thank you for the presentation
I was wondering about the Million Father March, that's a national effort. Yeah, it's I'm sorry. Go ahead.
Well, I just I was just looking into it and so it's a national effort you're tied into that yes, and it's
essentially to have a parent come to school and engage with Is I understand it in my am I correct there?
So yes, that's that's some of it We really just aim to make sure the the students feel supported on
their first day of school so we know that we've all been students before in grade school that can be
one of the most hectic days that you face and
you know, coming in, you know, learning your new teachers, you know, meeting new friends or connecting
with older friends that you've had. So the commission just wants to show their support or aims to show
their support for children on their first day of school. So we have a huge turnout. We have
Types of organizations we have the firemen we have the police department come we have city officials
as some of you have participated In the past to just come and welcome the students high-five them Just
give them an encouragement and let them know that they have an entire community behind them That's really
great Well, my second question is You're doing a lot. Are there resources that you may need that you
Have trouble that would help you help the commission Say again resources city resources. Are you finding
city resources are available? To help your commission. Sure. Yes. Are you does it? Yes, we are so a
couple of our flagship events that are most expensive are the winter wonderland and the blackmail youth
summit so we found creative ways to support those events and
through different partnerships with, for instance, Pizza X assists us with donating food for
the participants. And we get other donations like that. For the toy drives, we reach out to the entire
community to assist us with gift donations. So they either donate the gifts or donate the funding for
us to purchase those gifts.
The commission has a budget that we use that our city liaison manages and we pull from that as well.
So the donations come from all over the place and I can get you a specific report probably a little
later. But even though we have lost some donors we've also gained again more donors. OK great.
Budget times coming up soon. So if you a million dollars, okay Okay, I got it see what I can do I'm
only one of nine All right, there's a motion and a second will follow will follow up Any other comments
or questions? All right. Thank you. Thank you. Thank you. Thank you
We'll now hear from the commission. Yay, clapping makes everything better. We now will hear from the
commission of the status of children and youth. Take it away. Hi, everybody. Hi. Erin Reynolds-Nylan
here. I am the vice chair this year, but last year I was the chair of the commission on the status of
children and youth. Thanks for hearing us. Good to see you guys again. Tonight, similar to the status on
black male Commission we will be providing a brief overview of our work and our Highlights of like several
key accomplishments from the year And our goals for moving forward for what we would love to see for
children youth and families throughout Bloomington the Commission on the status of children and youth
CSC why was established in 2004 and serves as an advisory board for the Commission for
Our advisory commission focused on issues impacting children youth and families in Bloomington We have
nine volunteer members appointed by the mayor and Common Council and is supported by CFRD Our mission
is to strengthen connections and opportunities that empower and support young people through collaboration
advocacy outreach and community engagement and
And so throughout 2025, we focused on youth recognition, literacy initiatives, strengthening partnerships,
and increasing awareness of resources available to children and families in our community. We had a
really great year last year. It was a year of growth and community engagement. We were super involved
with various other commissions and just
within the community, one of our largest accomplishments was the Swagger Awards, which recognizes students
who demonstrate generosity, growth, and leadership. So Swagger stands for students who act generously,
grow, and earn respect. We just voted on our nominees last night, which was super great. A lot of really
rewarding things going on in our community in terms of growth for children and opportunities. This year's
event, 2025's event,
was the largest to date. We used to have it in here in City Commons or in Council of Commons. Like maybe
five kids would be nominated and voted on. And this year we had 179 attendees with 23 nominations submitted
through schools, youth organizations, community groups, so many different opportunities throughout
Bloomington. So we're really jazzed about that.
The commission also continued its annual read for the record initiative in partnership with MCC schools
and community volunteers. This year's book was called Nigel and the moon and the program resulted in
more than 120 shared reading experiences that encouraged literacy and family engagement. It was a really
really sweet book.
In addition to or in addition CSCY expanded community outreach efforts through participation in the
Children's Expo school resource events and partnerships with organizations such as Exodus refugee and
tandem. The commission was also supported.
or supported collaborative community initiatives, we've partnered with or we participated in the Million
Father March and the Winter Wonderland to help strengthen family engagement and yeah, show up for our
fellow commissioners. As we move into 2026, we are super focused still on expanding partnerships and
strengthening youth advocacy.
and continuing our partnerships that positively impact children. One major priority is establishing
a teen liaison to help elevate youth voice and representation within the commission. We also plan to
continue using community data and feedback such as the Indiana Youth Institute's Kids Count Data Book
to help guide priorities and identify emerging needs specifically in the county.
The commission will continue building upon the success of programs like swagger, which is next Wednesday
while increasing partnerships and sponsorships and opportunities to help sustain future growth of that
specific program. So although the commission operates with very limited funding, the community partnerships
and local support allowed us to secure nearly four thousand dollars in additional sponsorships during our
last year, 2025, to help expand the impact of our work specifically for Swagger. So the success of the
CSCY depends on strong community involvement and collaboration. We encourage residents, organizations,
educators, and community leaders to stay engaged by attending meetings, volunteering, supporting youth
initiatives, and partnering with the commission. We meet every third Tuesday of each month at 5.30 here
at City Hall, and our information can be found on the website.
And we're actually full, which is really exciting. We're not looking for more commissioners, which is
so first time since I've been on in 2023. So yeah, thank you for your continued support of children
and families in Bloomington. Thank you so very much. Questions or comments? Well, just thanking you
so much for the time. Oh, Councilmember Rangel.
Yeah, I'd like to ask the same question I did before which is So you were able to with limited funding
you said And get an additional four thousand dollars would I mean you commissions do so much work? So
for a little bit more we could do so much more. Do you find that you come up short? At times I'm sorry.
Do you come up short? I mean everybody would like more money, right? But I guess what I'm saying is
that are there things are there are there?
Are there things that you would like to do that you're hobbled because it just isn't the resources aren't
there. Financially I mean I feel like the commission we're still finding our niche with what what we
can do. There's so much support and different organizations in town focused on children right. And we
don't want to duplicate. We want to maximize what's going on.
and elevate what's happening. And so currently, I mean, the biggest barrier that we have is the funding
for Swagger to keep the momentum and maintain. That $4,000 was acquired for prizes. And some of it was
in-kind donations, too. Some of it was sponsorships to help with that specific event.
Yes, and it's we could always use and find some opportunities. I mean, I would really love to help sponsor
And elevate things that are happening and how we can support Events and things like that through sponsorships
or anything like similar to that. So It's kind of a kind of an answer Well, that's very helpful.
Thank you. I just you know, it's great presentation you do a lot and
Budget times coming up and I would like to see our boards and Commission's support to do more. Yeah,
as much as they're capable Yeah, I think at annually we operate on like maybe 2000 and we spent about
14 of our own funds on swagger last year, so it doesn't leave a lot of room, right? So yeah, thank you.
Good. Okay. Thank you so much Excellent. Thank you. Any other questions comes from Stossberg
This isn't a question so much, and it's kind of for both of these commissions. I remember last year
when we got these presentations, I think both of them. But I know for sure the Commission on the Status
of Black Males needed more commissioners. And this year, both of these commissions are full. And I just
think that that is something to celebrate. And I'm really glad that we have some community members who've
stepped up to participate in both of the good works of these commissions. Because when you're operating
on not very much budget, what you're doing, what you're
Which need is person time. Yeah, and they they have person time this year. So that's great and keeping
the commissioners, right? I we've turned over maybe 70% We just have like just now started our full
commission from the beginning of the year Mostly brand new people. Yeah, definitely want to keep them
and do some more really good work with a full team. So, thanks Yeah, thank you so much
Thank you. Thank you for the comment. Thank you again for your work. Yay. All right. We now move to
the first of two sessions or sections of public comment or reports from the public. If you would like
to give comment, if you could so kindly come to the microphone, there's a sign in sheet if you could
kindly sign in. If you'd like to state your name or your alias for the record, that will be great. People
online, you can just raise your hand on Zoom and we'll be able to take your question. Is there anybody
who'd like to give public comment at this time? No one in chambers. Is there anyone online?
Fantastic, moving smoothly along then. We'll now move then to legislation for, oh, I'm sorry. We have
any reports from council committees? I jumped over, I'm sorry. Nope, good, I'm grateful that I jumped
over. I knew it, that's why I jumped over. Apportments to Boyden Commissions, do we have any? Tremendous,
we are moving swiftly along to legislation for first reading then. Are there any motions?
I move that ordinance twenty twenty six dash twelve be introduced and read by the clerk by title and
synopsis only Second there is a motion and a second any discussion Seeing none will the clerk please?
Oh actually voice book all those in favor. I Opposed same sign. All right that motion carries nine.
Oh fantastic. Will the clerk please read Ordinance number twenty twenty six twelve
To amend Title 15 of the Bloomington Municipal Code entitled Vehicles and Traffic to create a chapter
for streets and alleys that are closed to vehicular traffic synopsis. This ordinance seeks to codify
streets and alleys in Bloomington that disallow vehicular traffic. Specifically, this ordinance codifies
the seasonal carless schedule of specific blocks of Kirkwood Avenue
With this ordinance businesses and residents can expect a permanent seasonal carless Kirkwood allowing
businesses businesses the predictability to invest in outdoor infrastructure for guests. The
city administration has provided valuable operational feedback in its 2026 memorandum.
Identifying important challenges regarding infrastructure sanitation public safety and accessibility
that naturally arise as temporary programs transition towards Permanent city fixtures with that this
ordinance aims to provide the necessary legal and budgetary certainty for the city to move beyond Incomplete
solutions and invest in more permanent infrastructure such as more ADA compliant features and high quality
seating recommended by staff
Move to discuss ordinance 2026-12 second All right, there do we vote on that we do vote on that, okay,
there's a motion in a second to discuss Ordinance 2026 12 all those in favor say aye. Aye opposed Just
to be clear comes Morello that was the I for the first not the second it was an I for the
Okay, thank you. Okay that carries eight. Oh Is there anyone to present? All right, I will be presenting
for this. So thank you very much Okay, so in plain terms ordinance 2026-12 wants to take our Fairly
recent Carlos Kirkwood tradition and turn it from a guessing game into a predictable city standard so
so so specifically
It amends title 15 the vehicles and traffic section of Bloomington's municipal code to officially designate
specific blocks of Kirkwood Avenue as a dedicated pedestrian zone each year from April through November.
So we see this you know we've we've made sure to put in here a bit of an emergency valve. It gives the
city engineer full legal authority to temporarily reopen the street to cars if there's an emergency.
maybe perhaps a utility disruption, et cetera, et cetera. So why now? A little bit of context about
how we got here. If you feel like we've been talking about closing Kirkwood for years, you're absolutely
right. It's because we have. Here's a brief timeline of why this legislation is hitting the table right
now. So we piloted this during the pandemic.
Carlos Kirkwood started as an emergency pilot program to help local restaurants survive COVID-19 by
moving tables to the street. It was highly popular. And so the City Council has been renewing it as
a temporary year-to-year program. Last year, we renewed it on a three-year timeline. So we didn't have
to keep voting on it every year so that there was a little bit more predictability for everybody.
But earlier this year, the administration had decided to not do the full street closure for the 2026
season. Instead, they pivoted to a parklet model, which we had done a year or two before because of
construction. So that parklet model meant the streets stay open to cars, but restaurants can block off
the metered parking spots directly in front of their buildings for dining. And when they made this decision,
they raised
the city staff raised some incredibly fair logistical points for making this pivot. You know, they noted
that when the street is closed 24 seven, but there aren't active festivals or events happening, the
empty asphalt can look a little barren and maybe sad on a Tuesday afternoon. They also pointed out valid
headaches concerning delivery trucks, public safety routing and accessibility issues were temporary
ramps, you know, and the, you know what I'm trying to say, just weren't cutting it.
And so finally, they noted that a massive holistic Kirkwood corridor study is scheduled for early 2027
to figure out the long-term future of the street. We see codifying this closure now as a way to go ahead
and start addressing all of those problems rather than just hoping they'll get addressed down the road.
So that's partially why we're introducing this ordinance right now. Instead of looking at the technical
worries as a reason to give up,
on pedestrian Kirkwood we're introducing this ordinance to give the city the tools to actually fix those
problems. So temporary year to year pilot programs naturally create temporary and incomplete solutions.
So that's why we see this as a strategic move. So number one it would unlock budgetary uncertainty
Local businesses and city departments are hesitant to spend any real money on Kirkwood. A restaurant
isn't going to buy any beautiful high quality outdoor furniture and the city isn't going to help build
any beautiful pocket parks or permanent shade structures in areas that it's needed if the program just
might be canceled next year. Nobody's going to be making those investments.
By making the seasonal window permanent, though, everyone gets the financial predictability they need
to invest in making the space gorgeous and active. We also see this as upgrading, you know, from the
band-aid accessibility to a more universal design. When the closure is temporary, the accessibility
features are temporary, too. So think, right, plywood ramps, confusing detours for residents with disabilities.
A permanent seasonal framework means the city can design and build high quality level surface permanent
ADA infrastructure along the corridor. And we see this as being helpful in setting the vision for the
twenty twenty seven study. So the planning department along with the SD is doing a major Kirkwood corridor
study next year.
This ordinance doesn't step on their toes. It's not designed to do that. It's actually meant to give
them you know helpful clear directive. The council's job is to set the policy vision. We want a safe
walkable vibrant downtown and the twenty twenty seven study will be the perfect tool for our brilliant
engineering and planning staff to figure out the exact design to bring that vision to life. So this
ordinance is not set up as a fight.
between anybody, between council, the administration, the city staff, it's meant to be a partnership.
That's how we're approaching this. By establishing a clear recurring baseline, we aim to provide the
budgetary certainty that both the city and our local businesses need to invest. We wanna move away from
reactive ad hoc setups and build a predictable, safe, accessible public living room that Bloomington
can be proud of for decades to come.
So tonight's not about forcing a vote or overriding the operational expertise of our staff. It's aligning
the council's policy goals with the administration's technical excellence. So I look forward to working
closely with the staff, the Transportation Commission, and all stakeholders to help refine this draft
into something that makes Bloomington safer, more accessible, and vibrant. Thank you. Excellent. Councilman
Rosenberger, did you want to add anything?
Will chime in just a little bit. I think Councilmember daily did a great job. I almost said Congress
person daily, so I don't know if that's a premonition or what I just wanted to hone in a little bit
on the legislative changes beyond just
saying it is changing title 15. So the ordinance that we did in 2025 2502 says in cases of emergency
lack of participation or any other reason that may render the program impractical the common council
authorizes the city engineer to permanently or temporarily suspend the program. So this is changing
that to take away that lack of participation or any other reason that
makes it impractical. So this ordinance says in cases of emergency the city engineer may temporarily
restore motor vehicle traffic as authorized under his duties in title 15. So that is I would say like
the very specific parts in question that we thought we would change to make the conversion more predictable.
Thank you.
All right. All right. Council members, any comments, questions? Council Member Pumas-Smith.
So in addition to the Kirkwood closure this ordinance Talks about an alley between 4th Street and Kirkwood
100 feet of the alley to the East of Walnut shall be closed as well could why is that? What is that
about? Great great question. So this is
ordinance to amend title 15 is meant to then include it would be a new chapter called streets and alleys
that are closed to vehicular travel and so that is an alley that is already known to be closed to vehicular
travel so it would be going in that list director seaboard did weigh in and say that this is
not a comprehensive list and so
engineering and or planning would need to give us a comprehensive list to include in in this update.
So that alley that portion of the alley is already off limits for vehicles. Yes. Yes. That came from
planning. Other questions or comments comes first last week.
Yeah, the last couple of years, I think that one of the things that's happened is that not every block
of Kirkwood has been closed and I'm specifically thinking about the block in front of the library. And
there were several times that
I either noticed being utilized or I myself utilized dropping somebody off right in front of the library.
Was there consideration given to keeping that particular block open to still provide that kind of service,
like I guess I'm especially thinking about
Because the the children's section is right there by the doors off of Kirkwood and so being able to
like drop off your Middle elementary kid and know that they're walking right into where they need to
be without parking might sometimes be benefit for parents and Was there any thought given or consideration
given to that block it wasn't something that we discussed You know since there is the drop-off in the back I
I don't feel that we felt that it took anything away. I know that there have been grumblings about when
you have to drive around the block, you're going around the two blocks. But there is the drop off in
the back. So it wasn't a conversation that we had about keeping that part open. It would really kind
of being smacked up in the middle of Kirkwood would kind of break up the continuity of the whole thing.
I mean, I'm open to a conversation. Like I said, this is
Did you check in in transit about that at all? Because I feel like I also saw BT buses dropping people
off there and they wouldn't be able to fit in the excuse me Fit in the lot in the back. Oh They do go
through the lot in the back. I Did so Bloomington Transit removed all routes from Kirkwood years ago
Anticipating a permanent closure to vehicles on the street. So they have not had a bus on Kirkwood in
years we the
Councilmember Daly and I did divide and conquer some of this. And I know Councilmember Zulik and I talked
about library entrances. And so mostly what I consulted was not about children, but was about accessibility
entrances for the library, which tends to be around back because as you walk in on Kirkwood,
you have stairs. There is, I think, a ramp.
From the back you have the whole parking lot and then easier access. So we did talk about that and we
mostly included all of the blocks because the vision I mean this is all of course debatable in this
part of this conversation. The vision is sort of the walnut to Indiana being a pedestrian space comes
from Brazil and then Piedmont Smith then Rallo.
Yes, I just have a couple, I guess, responses to all of this conversation. Kirkwood is in my district.
I speak to a lot of the business owners there and outside of the district. The accessibility issue that
Councilmember Rosenberger and I discussed was not specifically to one person entering. It was actually
stone belt.
that has difficulty entering the back side of the library. And so the front side is really the only
space that they could utilize to access the library as a group. And so that is just one of the community
accessibility things that I encourage all of us to think about. I'm not opposed to this. I just want
to put out what I know. The other thing is the church
I believe it is First Christian Church. They have some community members with disabilities who also
utilize their alley that is only accessible through Kirkwood. And so those are just some things that
we might need to circumnavigate. Again, not opposed to the full closure of Kirkwood, but those are two
issues that we need to solve.
Yes, thank you. Actually, the first Christian church was on my list to contact. I hadn't gotten to that
yet. We did also reach out to the Council on Community Accessibility for more input and to start that
conversation. So thank you. I really appreciate that you're thinking that way. Thank you. I'll connect
you. Thanks. I was wondering, I think I heard that this went to the Transportation Commission this week.
Can anybody report on what they said. I can. Yes. So it only went as a discussion item. It did not go
as an agenda item. So it was very similar to this Q&A on the topic. It. So I did take a lot of notes.
So we took we talked a lot about. Well it was a lot getting them up to speed on this topic. And oh hi. Yeah.
So one major topic was whether or not the transportation commission wanted to hear this as an agenda
item where they created a resolution to send to us in support or in opposition of this. And the chair
is here tonight who can potentially weigh in and give his own summary of it.
They are they did schedule a special session on June 8th for this to go before their commission as an
agenda item. And then they can still decide to do a resolution to support or oppose or say hey this
is not in our purview or we don't prefer to weigh in because it is much more than a transportation topic.
But the Transportation Commission touches a lot of areas
in general as does transportation so Right, so I have a list of questions from them and I think if Chair
Boland wants to speak about it to he is here and and and can Chair of the Transportation Commission
as Constable Robert Rosenberger said The Commission did discuss this we didn't get it quite in time
to make it a formal case, a resolution for this month's meeting. But we were able to put it, we have
the equivalent of what you now call deliberation sessions and that was our version of it. So in it,
we at least decided that we wanted to hold a special session in order to be able to make a
formal recommendation before
the last meeting you have before recess on June 10th. So again, as she said, we'll be scheduling, the
meeting is scheduled for Monday, June 8th at 7 p.m. immediately following a planning session of the
Transportation Commission where we're talking about a different subject. So it has to come after that.
And I just wanna remind council that this will be on our radar no matter what you decide because it's
part of our portfolio.
and as you recall, the commission has representatives from the Council for Community Accessibility,
Board of Public Works, and Bloomington Transit. Specifically, Bloomington Transit mentioned what Councilor
Rosenberger said about Kirkwood no longer being a route that BT buses travel. They use 4th and 6th Street mostly.
So that's that they've already said that wasn't going to be an issue for them, but I'll be listening
tonight to try to tee up Questions for the commission to deliberate over we're going to make
a recommendation, but it could be positive negative or neutral It will be the resolution of the commission
will decide it either way but
I want to be able to take what you say tonight, and we're already gonna have staff looking into some
issues that we express concern about on Monday, but we really are taking our cue from you. So, yeah,
all that. If you have any questions, I'm happy to answer them. Thank you. All right. Are there any questions
for Commissioner Volin? And I think,
Councilman Rallo, do you have a question for Commissioner Roland? Are you ready to make your? Your next
in queue anyways, but it's unrelated to this topic. Okay We all have questions It's it's to you customer
no, I have a comment about I think it's great that we're having this discussion this evening and I think
I I Look forward to hearing
Transportation Commission's opinion of this I had a question for mr. Allen our council attorney so this
is a subject that's been debated for the last few years and that is Who has authority over? Streets
in Bloomington, I guess it could be said multiple parties do
So I wondered about the interpretation of our code specific to title 15 and any relevant state statute
That is I understand the engineer has authority to close streets for emergencies, etc but it previous
the council had latitude our Latitude was permanent changes and roadways and streets and things and
This actually came up in the enabling language of the Transportation Commission. So it went back to
that. What's your interpretation? Are we are we is it within our purview? What I want to ask on my initial
read, I believe it is, you know,
From the standpoint of the city of Bloomington's regulated streets for a long time via Title 15, generally
as a high level principle, the regulation of streets and highways is a designation of legislative authority
from the state of Indiana via the police powers of the state, which are exercised by the city. I know
that right now the administration has a differing viewpoint.
on that and I would be very interested in learning more about their viewpoint and seeing a little bit
more about their arguments on that regard so that I could review them in more detail and get back to
you with a more thorough analysis. I will just tell you that my initial read of state code, it does
seem like council would have this authority. There are of course a myriad of ways in which council sometimes
has overlapping authority. In this case also,
As a regard to the city engineer the council also has passed an ordinance which is essentially
the authorizing ordinance for the city engineer Himself and certain of his powers and granting the emergency
closure of roads and things like that So that's where I'm coming from, but I'm certainly open to hearing
any Legal arguments that the administration have that differ with that and giving you all a very thorough
interpretation Okay, so you you haven't received an interpretation of code and
in a written form that you could then pass judgment on or have your interpretation.
Last night that would be helpful. So you're saying that would be very helpful for it to be a little
bit more fleshed out in full disclosure last night an email was sent by engineer seabor That included
three bullet points with general citations to Indiana code that just dealt with the establishment of
the city engineer I didn't see a whole lot that specifically Supported necessarily the argument that
the City Council has no authority whatsoever
Streets and highways. That's why I'm interested to learning more. I think he just meant it as hey, I'm
just flagging this issue for you all That's how I took it. It didn't seem like it was a full legal memo
at this point But if that exists, I would be very interested in reviewing that Okay, good. Well, we
should request that I would ask the chair to request a memo that our Council attorney could interpret noted
Thank you. I actually have a follow-up if it's OK. I don't want to butt in. But in terms of implementation,
both in terms of first timeline, so is our thought that as soon as we take action on this, assuming
that we pass it, that
the road would be closed or is there some type of a sort of lead in to that is question one. But then
question two is in this for counsel attorney Allen there are a couple of and I'm honestly not sure if
they're in code or if they're just procedures like the ways that we do alley vacation that's
that I think the way that it happens is that a petitioner with the support of a council member goes
to planning and there's a whole process there. So by creating this new chapter, would that then allow,
for example, an alley vacation to just be done via code? So I'm just trying to think about the mechanics
of, I like the idea of having this codified. You all know I'm very supportive generally of moving this
directive. I'm just trying to understand the mechanics of how this will work, how it will interact with other
policies and code that we have related to these things.
If you'd like a response just briefly in terms of the alley vacation very specifically that's that is
dictated by a very specific state statute. And so the council likely could not deviate from that statute.
You can't create an alternate procedure than what the General Assembly has already has already provided
for which requires notice of hearing and then the council to hold a hearing and then to vote on the
vacation of alleyways. I think in this case what we are talking about largely
is the currently I believe the temporary closure which I think fits into a slightly different category
than the vacation of right away even if even if this is close to vehicular traffic it doesn't seem like
the city is is vacating its right of way in any significant sense and so I think that that's a different
process I will know just for the good of the order there are
There are other considerations, of course, in terms of what's allowed on Kirkwood, how we deal with
encroachments and Title 12 in addition to Title 15 as well. So there are plenty of considerations there
in terms of the implementation that we'll think through. Thank you so much. And Councilmember Rosenberger,
Councilmember Daly, any thoughts on the timeline particularly then? We were hoping to be able to take
advantage of it partially this season. That would be our ideal.
scenario We also understand that you know More conversation would have to be had But we'd like to be
able to enjoy it for part of this season, you know, it's late but we still got time and I think to It
doesn't necessarily have to be tomorrow, you know if this gets passed at some point it there are multiple
ideas and I think that is something we Purposely left out for council to discuss. Yeah, excellent
Excellent. Any other comments or questions? And then I want to move along to public comment.
But go ahead, Councilmember Zulek. I just want to give Director Coopersmith one last opportunity, if
she wants to talk about feasibility or anything like that. We're talking about it, and you're here.
And thank you for being here. Yeah. Thanks for having me, and thanks for the discussion.
You know, like I said, I'm largely just trying to be here as a resource if you have specific questions.
I think in terms of implementation, I have a little heartburn about that just because we have current
funding and a consultant to activate under the current strategy. And I think it's going really well.
I think we have a killer plan and it involves certain closures on certain days, our standard special
events, and then
weekly activations and that's already pretty labor intensive. So we, I mean, if you all decide to close
the whole thing this year, I,
hesitate to think that we would actually be able to successfully program it, although I take and appreciate
the point that this legislation gives a nod to funding in order to be able to have capacity to do that
properly when it goes through that budget cycle. So that was one concern. And then just, I think this
would be dealt with within the legislation, but there are maintenance of traffic plans right now for
like the construction on the first block and the resurfacing that's happening on the 500 blocks.
and then number three would just be I understand the framing of this is to give the predictability and
The one major improvement I think over the parklets this year were that we required at grade Platforms
and so the businesses that are participating in the parklet program have made significant investments
in those so it's it could be worked through but I would like for those investments to be able to be
I mean, they're wonderful and and completely ADA so that the mini ramps going into the dining areas
are no longer a thing It's all completely accessible from from the sidewalk. So I just want them to
be able to Use those investments in some some way. That's it. Those three anything else Thank you, I
kind of have some random things but well director Cooper Smith is there
I appreciate what you say about how you guys have already kind of thought about programming and various
things this year if you could maybe write up what you are planning so that that can go in the packet
just so that we can see that in terms of informing a decision about this for this year like I would
really appreciate that just so that I can really understand what what you guys are thinking about in
terms of activating that right now and
Yes, we have that so that would be really easy to share and I'll see if I can Thank you, thank you Can
I continue so another random thing I was just kind of looking at the calendar and realizing because
I watched the Transportation Commission last night too and I think that their special session was scheduled
for June 8th and our next meeting is actually June 3rd and
And so are we gonna postpone it on June 3rd or like to do the sponsors? Yes, yes, we First Transportation
Commission decided June 8th because they already had a planning Meeting that day and it got added on
to that and we did say we could depending on the
the will of council either have a second reading on the third and still wait for the 10th if there's
a lot that needs to get covered if there were like a lot of questions that could come back to have a
second reading you know probably pretty brief and then the final either a second or third reading would
be the 10th so it was like very flexible at this point okay great thank you and I have one more actual
question about it you you have permission for the city engineer to restore
Vehicular traffic in an emergency situation for up to 90 days before it requires approval by council.
Why'd you choose 90 days? I Took this from somewhere else in code and I don't remember where but I basically
copied it I don't know if anyone else knows where I got it Does anybody?
I guess I think that I got a constituent message about like 90 days being a lot. And yeah, that it could
be like the whole summer. And so I guess I just want to
Maybe maybe revisit that number a little bit really kind of think about what makes sense because like
a piece of what makes sense is Emergencies but another piece of what makes sense is like weather conditions
Which you can't always control at either end but like do we really need 90 days for that? So I guess
you know in the sake of discussion I would I would just want that investigated a little bit to make
sure that that's like A number for a reason Some emergencies are really big
I think mostly because of what has happened in the past. I was to imagining Sewer work construction
things like that where trucks might need to be in or the road is literally gone for a while But that's
great and in my notes to revisit. Can I add another please go and then comes to that director Cooper
Smith she's been a great sport and we have met formally once and We did chat
at the Transportation Commission, and we have another meeting in the books, I think, where Council Member
Daley is joining, if you can, did we? We actually may have scheduled it and then said we were going
to invite you in the exact little moment. But we did, we are just continuing to talk and throw out ideas
with this. So I think it's with ESD very open line of communication. Council Member Piedmont-Smith. Yes.
Isn't the board of public works involved in this decision or at least in the past when we temporarily
closed each year they had to agree to either the parklets or both parklets and closing the street. So
what is their role in this. They have been involved in the past in the in the past they had adopted
rules for the temporary closure. So specifically the participation of businesses, those rules were taken
to the Board of Public Works and they were adopted initially for businesses that were participating
in the parklet and the street closure program. Now generally the Board of Public Works does handle all
of the day-to-day logistical operations through the department of road closures. In terms of in statute
what's required whenever taking
bringing in ordinance like this that would alter Title 15. The Transportation Commission is the only
requirement in terms of a hard requirement for them to consider. The Board of Public Works not necessarily,
but it would be important, obviously, to have the department and the board's buy-in in terms
of implementation in the future. So has there been any outreach to the Board of Public Works or the
Director of Public Works? I met with Director Adam Wason yesterday.
We had a conversation. Somebody has to put up the bollards and stuff, too. That would be in his domain.
We didn't get into those details. Didn't get that into the weeds. Just more general talk about the closure
on a regular basis anyway. And he wasn't terribly supportive of it. He likes the idea. But logistically,
he had some issues with it that we agreed, well, maybe those could be worked out.
We didn't settle on anything. Okay. Well I would appreciate having a memo or something from him if he's
or just have him attend the next time we talk about this. Thank you. Yeah he wasn't available this evening
but he sent his regrets.
Excellent. Now, I'm mindful of time and the amount of things we have on the agenda, so I'm going to
move to public comment. Just saying, just ahead of time so you all can think about it, after public
comment it would be useful if you had any things that the sponsors had asked that this be sort of a
generative conversation. So if there's things that you would like to see added to this, no pressure
if you don't have them, but I think would be helpful for the sponsors if there's any sort of direction
that you have for them. So I'll open it up for public
public comment. Does anybody want to comment on Ordinance 2026-12? And same rules as always,
please sign in, say your name or alias, same if you're online and you'll have three minutes to comment.
We'll start in chambers and I'll go online afterwards. Go ahead. Hi, Joshua Stockton. I just wanted
to briefly comment on my experience using the library and that specific section of road. The library
does get a lot of
especially in their parking lot, and it eventually does spill over into the adjacent area of street
parking. So I found myself oftentimes parking in that section of road. And I also wanted to highlight
the importance that there are two accessible parking spots on that section of road in front of the library,
as well as seven more parking spots. So closing that road would eliminate those spots. Thank you so
much. Next commenter in chambers.
Hello, I'm Greg Alexander. So first thing, I have to say this. The data that ESD presented showing fewer
visits on Kirkwood is bogus. It's provided by a vendor called Placer.ai. Placer claims that they use
opt-in data collection. Did you opt into that? I didn't. Nobody did. It's spyware. What they do is you
install an app that says it'll do one thing and instead it sends information to advertisers and data mongers.
And then they use AI to turn that spotty data based on people that were gullible enough to take a virus
onto their phone and they extrapolate for the rest of us that's Very poor methodology if you had asked
a planner instead of ESD They would have said this is very hard data to get but instead we got a very
gullible department that but silicon snake oil I'm sorry
It's non-information. You don't know, I don't know whether it's more or less, and that's really unfortunate.
I'd like to know that. But for decades, I've heard a ton of people saying, I will never go downtown
if. And frankly, I don't listen to that because they either go downtown or they don't. They continue
to go downtown if they're the kind of people that go downtown. They continue to not if they don't. They
don't change their behavior based on all the things that drivers complain about. So I'm gonna buck that
trend. I'm gonna say outright the truth. I don't think I'll go downtown more
if you close it to cars. I'll go downtown either way. But if I'm not quite so close to cars while I'm
walking or eating or playing with my kids, I will enjoy it more. For me at least, the quantity won't
change, but the quality will. And I think we really shouldn't be focusing on numbers, number of visits,
number of minutes, number of dollars. We should be looking at the quality of the place and look at IU.
For example, I went to IU because it was so cheap. My parents were staff. I got a huge discount. A lot
of my friends were paying out-of-state tuition, like literally eight or 10 times as much as I was. I
couldn't believe it, so I would ask them. And they said, I came for a visit, and it was the most beautiful
campus I'd ever seen. And that didn't happen by accident. You know, I take it for granted. I grew up
here. I was playing pooh sticks in Jordan River before I could, you know. And that was built.
Herman Wells said we're going to emphasize quality of place and we're gonna let the numbers take care
of themselves and that works Please have faith in making a quality place downtown. Thank you Thank you
so much our next commentor in chambers and then I'll move on then Paul Russo Thank you for bringing
this forward I'm a strong supporter of the idea three quick points
With regard to the public library, I routinely see small BT access buses in the parking lot in the back
of the library. So they do come in and out, and they do pick up people there. Second point is that with
regard to the timeline, I would remind you that there is currently rather adversarial relationship between
the legislative and the executive, and if you
Pass this on your 10th June 10th meeting and the mirror vetoes it That's six weeks gone until your next
meeting Whereas if you pass it on the third You have time to come back and override a veto and you are
this is something that is overriding what she wanted to do so consider that and the
Other issue is that again possibly having to do with the answer adversarial relationship. I would advise
not having 90 days Because we already have a city that is abusing I think in my opinion for whatever
reason not impugning anybody's motives, but the 180 day orders are consecutively consecutively being
used and I think those are supposed to be an emergency basis only so
We have a precedent here for emergency orders being abused. Thank you. Thank you. We'll move online.
Are there any commenters online? All right, back in chambers. Good evening. This is Chris Ramsey from
the Greater Bloomington Chamber of Commerce, a membership organization with 900 businesses. 80% of those
are small and nonprofits. We're kind of getting into a little bit of the summer repeats. I feel like
I've been up here. I've talked about this. I think I've blogged about it.
Kirkwoods, when there's festivals happening, outdoor dining, and it really comes together, it's where
people come, where we have community. But the real question before us is are we prepared to build the
infrastructure needed to support what would increasingly become a permanent pedestrian district? We
can't just say no cars and it becomes this high quality Herman B. Wells vision of a pedestrian mall.
It's much more complicated.
Than that I mean because it no longer we're dealing with a temporary pilot the ordinance speaks to long-term
certainty predictability of seasonal schedules and more permanent civic environment It's a major policy
shift and I understand it. I thought Councilmember daily did a wonderful job of sort of presenting the
legislation But we're moving that direction We need to recognize that these districts don't succeed
it simply by closing streets We don't just that it doesn't make a pedestrian mall doing that they succeed
when we invest in the systems and make them functional and
Accessible and sustainable. I think right now we're putting a little bit of the cart before the horse
Many of the businesses I know even that ones that support feel like the The vision is moving faster
than the infrastructure behind it. The chamber has never taken a stand on the Kirkwood closure We've
been very much split with our members on that it works for a lot of some of the downtown bars and restaurants
and other ones I know the bicycles shopping one of them didn't support it
And there's other issues we'll maybe get into later, but I think the main one right now that we gotta
think about is the infrastructure. Are we closing it way too early before we've really got that in place
and where we're kind of creating more of a pedestrian desert than an oasis? Thank you. Thank you so
much. Next commenter in chambers.
Hi Steve Olin I wanted to speak individually not as a chair of the Transportation Commission to talk
about a few of the issues that I know we're going to be looking at. One of the reasons that we're talking
about who has the authority to make decisions about street closures came from
a debate that some veteran members of council would recall as to whether or not the engineer, whether
or not every street control or closure should be in city code or whether it should be abstracted out
to an administrative document that will be overseen by what is now the director of engineering. And
so it's an administrative issue, but it did start, that's where this debate over, well, who should have
the authority
Came from and it's I think actually a problem that you all are going to be you know You're already thinking
about it and you're going to be facing it soon enough It's a little bit above our pay grade
at the Transportation Commission We are also going to be looking at the various ways that a street can
be closed partially as well as fully Jersey barriers bollards and the like I
We want to talk about the significance of parking and how to measure the value of it as an asset and
what data is really reliable rather than anecdotal for the commission to use in deliberating on these
issues. The legal question is also one that's a notch above us. We are actually waiting for some kind
of guidance because there is a
That's is still in dispute who has authority. I mean my personal belief is that it is the council's
authority ultimately To decide to close streets a reminder that the Board of Public Works is represented
on our body Rick Coppock is the representative appointed by the Board of Public Works so they're aware
of what we do director Wason was at our recent meeting on Monday and We're regularly in touch with them
The June 10th date was also decided because we want to give staff the time to be able to create a memo.
We're expecting that we're gonna be able to present you with some documentation from consulting Board
of Public Works, the engineering department, the planning department, whoever is going to be tasked
with, I mean planning should be making a recommendation on this as well.
Fine and finally the the last thing to say is that when multiple departments and interests are stakeholders
Who should be making policy? We're gonna tee up as much as we can But this issue is one we're looking
to you for guidance on which department or departments should be making should should outrank others
make the final decision on policy last thing is But that's your time The mayor has ten days to override a veto
So you won't be able to override. Thank you. Any other comments in chambers? Good evening. Chris Sturbaum.
I spend my Saturdays with my grandson. We call it Grandpa Saturdays. And we usually often head to Kirkwood,
and he likes Goodfellas pizza. And you know what? My memory of Kirkwood in the summer, Bear,
tables sitting in the hot sun with like three or four people out on the tables. That's just what we
see. We also find it harder to get to good fellows. I become an expert on old people or I'm fast becoming
an expert on old people and old people don't get around the same way young people get around. And when
you think about taking away what the concept of a shared street
Means there's place for people their place for cars. There's even parking but when it's a barricaded
street, you know with empty tables inside it we have to we find like we have to work our way to get
into Goodfellas and He's a better walker than I am and I don't walk that far anymore but just think
about the rest of the continuous constituency that is older and the funny thing is
The students have left town. So now sometimes the townies take over and they'd like to go downtown.
And sometimes that feels more like a barricade than a wonderland. So I just wanted to give you that
perspective. Thank you. Thank you so much. Last chance for people online. Fantastic. All right. Any
final comments? And thank you all for your comments. Any final direction comments that you'd like to
offer Councilmember Ruff?
We spend a lot more time thinking about an implementation thinking about timeline It just seems to me
like there's the fundamental question of whether the administration Is going to say and I want to thank
dr. Cooper Smith very much for being here But whether the administration is going to assert that this
is not within the council's peer view and
seems to be come before any of these other discussions because If it comes down to a dispute the council
doesn't have staff to Implement the measures to turn the street into a pedestrian way for a part of
the year So if it's a stalemate it doesn't happen Does it lead to a further legal
Confrontation that's a long time in coming then so You know one of the first dramatic things that this
new administration did when the term began one of the early ones besides telling council that That they
would not support any or indoor sign any resolutions that the administration deemed not really city business
One of the other first initial big things dramatic steps that was taken changes from prior administrations
was to assert that title 15 that Council didn't have any purview over what happened on the streets,
right? That was a purely administration business And judging it based on how quickly the administration
from beginning till the very end asserted over and over again the Council's
Ability or lack of ability to us have reasonable conditions on the Hopewell project. I'm I'm sort of
I Don't understand why we don't have a firmer Statement of position from the administration right now
on this and I just I don't really want to spend much more of my own time and I don't think council or
public time and
on talking about implementation and timelines, et cetera, et cetera, until we know, you know, what is
the position going to be? Is it going to be that council does? Because then the veto doesn't even matter.
The mayor doesn't need to veto something. The administration says that we don't have the right to do
it, and they're just not going to do it because they disagree. Then there's no need for a veto. So,
you know, a lot of what we're doing here, and I appreciate very much
My council colleagues are bringing this forward And again, I appreciate director Coopersmith being here
But I think there's a fundamental question that we need to know Soon very soon before we really take
this much farther and it spends much more time discussing it So that was my final comment. Thank you.
Thank you so much Councillor Flaherty. Thank you I'm excited generally about the prospect of opening
Kirkwood to pedestrians
not a closure, it's just framing, you know, do we open it to cars, do we open it to pedestrians, at
no point will the street be closed, it will be open at different times for different uses. Second, on
the point of council authority, I guess, Council Member Ruff just kind of covered this, there's also
been other instances.
Corporation counsel has sort of been casting doubt on counsel's authority, and then we end up in this
sort of limbo where they essentially have what they want, which is we're not regulating anything via
Title 15 anymore. I'm reminded of this monthly at Transportation Commission when Director Seaborg comes
and reminds us of the ever-expanding list of 180-day orders that are being extended and extended in
perpetuity. I actually don't think that's acceptable. I think our temporary counsel attorney support
mentioned Bloomington Code 15.08.040,
which is about enabling, empowering rather, the city engineer to make such regulations in the first
place, the administration's violating that code right now, no question. By its letter, there's
no optionality, shall not remain in effect for more than 180 days. In the event they want to make it
permanent, they shall be made in writing that request and submitted to the common council for
its consideration prior to the expiration of the order. They've been violating this for years, they've
been doing it more egregiously since the mayor took office, it's unacceptable.
So I'm not okay with that. I think we need to seek resolution immediately. And if not, seek to hold
the administration accountable for violating city law. Third point, this goes to Mr. Emgy's point. I
think he's right to some degree. I don't think it's a cart horse. I don't think we should choose not
to proceed because we haven't decided every issue. But you're right, the, let's say, mixed experience
and diverse perspectives around just how successful it's been
to open Kirkwood to pedestrians while closing it to cars for periods of time is it's largely chalked
up to a failure of vision, not a failure of possibility. And look at Burlington, Charlottesville, Ithaca,
Boulder, Iowa City. All of these places have wonderful pedestrian malls that have been successful for
many decades. Boulder, among the longest standing, Pearl Street in Boulder,
been open to pedestrians and other users besides cars for half a century. That took vision. I once read
the story of how it was created. It took a lot of work to get it done. There was a lot of opposition,
as you might expect. And it's amazing. It makes that town to a significant extent. We have that potential
here. It takes vision. I know that's not coming from this mayor. The question is whether the council
can use its authority both to create the legal
structure, I guess, necessary to enact this, but then also through the budget process. If we want to
see this done, let's see it done. We can accelerate these things. We can choose what to prioritize.
We can focus that attention and have that infrastructure redesign that's needed to make this a truly
wonderful pedestrian mall experience. It's so naturally suited to it from the courthouse square to the
sample gates. I hope we can get it done. I very much appreciate my colleagues for bringing this back after the
Shannigan's a couple months ago with the other ordinance that did this. Thank you Thank you so much
any other comments Fantastic go ahead councilmember daily
Just wanted to really quickly thank councilmember Rosenberger for all her really hard and amazing work
on doing this. Thank you And all of the you know city staff that we've met with and have been giving
us their feedback, especially Director Cooper Smith for being here this evening and director Cooper
Smith. I'm really sorry that we cause you heartburn I will try to not cause you as much heartburn as
possible But that's it I just want to thank everybody for their comments tonight, too. I
One more real fast because councilmember Flaherty is talk about budgeting and that we have budget power
reminded me of our 2027 budget priorities letter that I sent to the administration and one of the things
on that priority list was creating vibrant third places slash neighborhood hubs which included activating
vacant space and investing and ensuring public spaces are high quality engaging and active and the activation
of Kirkwood could be
It absolutely falls under that I think that it was even mentioned specifically but I just wanted to
point that out both to the public to council members and also to any administration Officials including
the mayor who may be watching this meeting. Thank you Excellent excellent, I would like to take the
privilege of saying the last thing of just saying I echo all the things that were said so Okay, we any motions
I move I motion to move this to June 3rd Second there's a motion in the second any discussion All those
in favor. Hi Any opposed I just had one point of discussion just that at this time Council members or
anyone else has anything, you know, we council member daily and I are accepting questions and comments
great. Yes
Well, we already passed the motion to move it in nine. Oh So let us move on. Thank you very much. We'll
now move to legislation for second readings and resolutions I Move that resolution 20 2605 Be read by
title and synopsis only second. There's a motion and a second any discussion All those in favor say
aye aye any opposed
Alright that motion carries eight. Oh Will the clerk please read Resolution 20 2605 a resolution to
initiate a proposal to amend title 20 unified development ordinance of the Bloomington Municipal Code
in order to improve sustainability and housing affordability synopsis
This resolution sponsored by council member Flaherty directs the plan commission to prepare amendments
to the unified development ordinance regarding one, a reduction of minimum lot widths, lot areas, and
building setback requirement to better align with Bloomington's historic form and character.
Two, sustainability incentives and planned unit development requirements.
for building electrification and Three the elimination of minimum parking requirements to facilitate
housing development and reduce housing costs I move that resolution 2020 605 be adopted second. All
right councilmember Flaherty Thank you. So it's been a minute, but I did present on this maybe six to
eight weeks ago at some point
And what I'd like to suggest to start actually is that we just consider an amendment that was needed
to kind of clean something up. And in fact, there was an amendment 1A that went out with a clerical
correction in your packet this afternoon. There was a typo, I was off by one section of Indiana code
that was referenced in 80.5.
After one of the the citations, so that's that's an amendment 1a and I'd like to move we adopt Amendment
1a to resolution 2026 with six second Go ahead So, I don't know if it's helpful to display every we
could basically this this is to amend section 6 of the of the resolution section 6 covers the process
that will follow from this resolution, so it's a state-defined process for
council-initiated recommendations to the Plan Commission for UDO changes. So it used to be a 90-day
window in total for the Plan Commission to develop a consider proposal and get back to the council with
a recommendation. Now it's sort of bifurcated to 60-day windows that are up to 60 days. So they have
to hold a public hearing within the first 60 days, the Plan Commission does, and then it says they shall
vote on a proposal within 60 days of holding the public hearing.
And so yeah, that's the new process that was changed in state code I think a year ago when this was
first, a prior version of this resolution was drafted. Previously that was not the case. So I was not
aware of that when I brought this back in the form this year and that's why the correction. Any questions?
No, seeing no.
We'll move to public comment then does anybody like would anybody like to comment specifically on amendment
one to Ordinance resolution 2026 oh five Just on the amendment Is does this deal with the parking issue
Amendment one or are there three different issues?
three different amendments that We don't usually answer but I bet that you know, we should I don't As
a point of information this amendment is is only clarifying Some code references in the synopsis, right?
I'm not necessary synopsis section 6. It's about the process to plan commission uses to consider Changes
it's not about the substance of any changes. Oh, that's Issues but those issues don't
Anything to do with this is that what you're not with this amendment, but you'll get a chance to comment
on the broader thing Which is included there. Yes Thank you Good evening, Dave Askins with the B square
bulletin. I think that mr. Allen can confirm What I'm about to say is correct councilmember Flaherty's
recitation of the history is just factually wrong This 260 day windows have always been In place that's
the way it's always been
and the use of a 90-day window that was based on the advice of past city council's legal counsel that
I think was just flat-out inaccurate. But I think that, according to Mr. Allen, the synopsis has been
corrected to reflect the accurate history of the legislation. And I'm content that in writing it's accurate,
but what Councilmember Flaherty just recited is not, thanks.
Any other commenters in the chambers? Anyone online? Okay, we will come back to amendment one. Council
member Fleuraday. Just thank you to Mr. Askins for the correction. Glad we've got it right in writing.
That's what we count on our staff for. Thank you. Any other comments? Questions?
Happy to take a vote on amendment one If there was a motion I think yeah, sorry. We already have a motion.
Can we do a voice vote on this? Clerk we have to do it individual. Will you please call the roll? Council
members Tosberg. Yes, Piedmont Smith. Yes, Zulek. Yes. I'm sorry. Yes, Daley. Yes, Rallo. Yes, Ruff. Yes. I
Rosenberger yes clarity Yes Okay now now the bill as amended So as I noted I did have a PowerPoint
presentation on this that I presented previously when we first heard it So I don't feel the need to
go through that again also in the packet Somehow the file is not not readable Which I was at a work
event all week and didn't catch a
to correct it earlier, but again, no matter, I don't think I need to present that PowerPoint. Again,
what I'd like to do is just kind of do a brief or talk through of the policy aims here and the sections
of the resolution so that, yeah, just to refresh, because it's been a minute. So is it possible to display
the resolution itself and maybe zoom in a little bit on the sections as I kind of go through?
Okay, so high level I mean this is about three Policy areas that are all in city goals and plans that
we've adopted They all relate to sustainability and affordability hence the title of the resolution
And I'll break it down into three sections so we could go to the first section And those first two sections
are about housing most squarely in particular that we need more
housing of all kinds. We need more market rate housing, but that market rate housing is not a binary.
Adding more housing could be suburban sprawl. It could be high density multifamily. We've definitely
had some of that. It can also be infill, and in particular, infill with modest home sizes, and in some
cases, missing middle housing. This proposal has nothing to do with missing middle housing. It only
has to do with basically
removing some barriers to developing the type of housing that we've always developed historically.
And namely, that is allowing smaller homes on smaller lots, which when compared like for like with other
adjacent housing, is more affordable. I will say new construction is rarely the most affordable because
it's expensive to build things new. But we have a housing system, and as things age over time, they
tend to become more affordable.
And also, again, when you're comparing apples to apples, smaller lots, less land, smaller homes all
mean more affordable relative to bigger lots, bigger homes, et cetera, under the same conditions. So
to enable that, section one looks to basically the residential zoning areas and looks at the minimum
lot sizes and
the lot widths, which are, as currently in the UDO, much bigger than the historical development patterns
of Bloomington. And my PowerPoint presentation that I presented to you all previously demonstrated that
with some different neighborhoods throughout town, that we had 2,500 square foot, 3,000 square foot
lots with modest homes. We don't allow those anymore in code. Section two covers some related areas
which have
Basically, when you change minimum lot sizes and minimum widths, to make that functional, you probably
need to look at some things like the setbacks, possibly the subdivision requirements, lot frontage
requirements, things like that. Maybe impervious surface coverage. So this just calls out some of those
things that might be corollaries to changing minimum lot size and width that the planning commission
and staff supporting them will need to consider.
Sections one and two, which again are about basically enabling the type of development that we used
to have that we no longer allow. Moving on to section three, this is kind of the second substantive
area of the resolution, sections three and four. So this is about adding, beyond the efficiency that
is already a part of our, like energy efficiency that is already a part of our incentives in the UDO,
adding electrification to that.
So from an affordability perspective from a resident health perspective and from a sustainability standpoint
high efficiency all electric buildings are the only viable path that's aligned with our city commitments
and long-standing goals on reducing climate pollution and when efficiency and electrification are paired
it's both cost competitive in new construction and lower cost operationally over time and
And so what this aims to do, and we can't mandate these things by the way. We can't mandate electrification
in the same way we can't mandate inclusionary zoning and that we can't mandate energy efficiency that
goes beyond state code. And so what we rely on for those things that we value in Bloomington but don't
have the home rule authority to enact as mandates, we use the incentives, the power of incentives in
the UDO. And so that's what this would do. It would bring electrification into the incentive section.
around sustainability and that's it, that's what it would do. If we wanna scroll down to section four,
it would then also have PUDs mirror that by requiring the PUDs to follow some path on the sustainable
development incentives in the incentive section of the UDO. So PUDs right now, we already require that
on the housing affordability front.
On the sustainability front, it's a little looser. It does reference it, but it's sort of like left
at the discretion of the planning director. And so it's kind of wishy washy right now, what we expect
on the sustainability front from PUDs. And I'll note here specifically that our Bloomington Climate
Action Plan explicitly calls for requiring building electrification in PUDs, electrification in PUDs.
So that's implementing or would implement what's in the Climate Action Plan.
Okay, so on to section 5 the third substantive area of this resolution This also is called for in the
climate action plan and it's about eliminating minimum parking requirements Throughout the city and
so a few things about that. It does not change maximum parking requirements That is it doesn't change
what people can choose to build None of that would change what it does do is it stops mandating? parking where a
housing builder may choose not to include it for various reasons. It could be that the type of clientele
or prospective tenants or owners that they want to cater to are not folks that need or prefer to have
multiple cars. It might be that it's transit-oriented development. It might be that it is in a dense,
walkable area in downtown or near the university. There are lots of reasons, and we have good examples
of this historically that used to have to jump through a lot of hoops to be built.
The, in particular, one I've referenced before are the apartment buildings on the southwest corner of
4th and Madison, right by the IFL building there. They used to be called the bicycle apartments. I don't
know if they're still called that. You know, there's some of the more affordable apartment options in
the downtown. There's more housing there, and it was lower cost to build because they didn't have to
build parking on site. So again, lots of folks choose to drive and want one or two or more parking spaces
where they live.
That's not everybody. There's a significant portion of our community that doesn't drive at all, chooses
not to, can't, et cetera. So it stops forcing us to build parking when it's not always warranted, while
still allowing us to build as much parking as currently allowed with new developments. And just to note
that this has been taken up by now hundreds of cities around the country. It's very well documented
that this has been a major driver of increased housing costs and a barrier to housing development at all.
And our peers up in South Bend have already done this. Lots of peer cities in college towns across the
country. And so yeah, on to section six and seven. Section six we just amended. This gets to the process
that follows from here. So just a reminder that this resolution is not itself enacting any new policies.
It is directing Plan Commission to consider new policies.
make recommendations and bring it back to the council in the form of an ordinance that we would then
later consider. So we will have opportunity at later point to discuss the details of what this actually
looks like as formal proposed policy. Right now it's saying we would like the plan commission, we would
like staff to move on these things that are aligned with our goals, sometimes called for in our plans
that we have not yet at staff's initiative brought forward. So that's the process we've done at a fair
amount this term.
with UDO or at least a few times. Let's see, Section 7 is just about severability. So if any provisions
deemed not valid, the other ones still are upheld. And I would say there are public engagement. The
Plan Commission process itself is
built for that. We also had lots of engagement on these topics with the Planning Department through
deliberation sessions last year. A lot of these topics were discussed. The Planning Department is also
working on developing substantive changes. I think these are somewhat aligned, but probably distinct
in some areas. Just with some preliminary conversations with staff, I don't think all of these things
would be coming necessarily from staff and the administration.
So I think it's just a shared responsibility. We can both propose and bring things to the UDO. I think
it aligns well with their timelines and is worth moving on. The thing that was the impetus for me in
bringing it back actually was the Hopewell South PUD where we allowed for two and a half blocks virtually
everything in this resolution. And the fact that we don't allow any of these things currently was the
driving factor for why the administration chose to bring a PUD in the first place rather than just following
city code.
And so I'm hopeful that we can use some of these tools that the administration agreed at that time were
you know, well well proven affordability solutions to and housing availability solutions to Apply them
more broadly citywide. But again, those votes will come later. This is just directly the process happy
to answer any questions. Thank you Any questions council members All right seeing none any comments
Okay councilmemor and then it will go to public comment. Yeah briefly first of all, thank you councilman
for flirty for your patience because I know this has come before the council many times I Find this
in general alignment with a comprehensive plan. I do find that there are devils in the detail I don't
want to go explicitly into them just to say that regarding minimum lot sizes, I think that there's there's a lot of
work that could be done in order to To create more housing in traditional neighborhood forms. I'm supportive
of the electrification Commitment the minimum parking requirements. I have trouble with the times I
think it depends upon the the placement of it because I see that Having only minimal parking sizes.
Obviously the developer might choose the
Build as much as possible which increases more housing, but then it imposes parking parking elsewhere
So but since this is a resolution, I think it's very Good idea to have planning staff explore these
topics bring back Relevant ordinances and then I'll reserve judgment on those when they appear.
Thank you. I'll support it Thank you so much
Otherwise, if seeing none, we'll go to public comment. Would anybody like to comment on resolution 2026.05
as amended? See a couple of people, thank you so much. And online, you'll get your chance shortly, so
have your clicker fingers ready. Exactly.
For those who commented earlier if you didn't if you did not sign in just a reminder please go and sign
in so we can surveil jokes. My name is Kathy Barry and with respect to council member Flaherty's care
about sustainability and affordable housing. I am here to disagree with this resolution a resolution
to initiate
a proposal to amend Title 20 in order to improve sustainability and housing affordability.
In a few words, please don't initiate this. Most of the changes are already available for people and
are being tried. I think we need to wait and see if they have the intended effect. For example, paragraph
four of the preamble says minimum lot widths and areas required by the UDO do not align well with the
historic and existing form of the relevant zoning districts, but they do.
They are the history of older zoning and even no zoning. Original owners may have bought two lots or
two neighbors split a lot between their houses. This gives a neighborhood character and creates different
prices for the houses. The paragraph goes on to say minimum lot widths unduly restrict housing availability
and affordability. But I think increasing the number of compact form houses only attracts more buyers
who want that lifestyle.
and that will increase the cost. I appreciate that focus groups have established that Bloomington is
not affordable for many people. But I, as one who worked for 35 years in clerical and customer service
jobs, have also noticed what people focus on. Secretaries, nurses, delivery drivers, bank staff, and
hospitality workers do seem to feel and will say Bloomington is too expensive. But I wonder if they
mean too expensive for what you get.
I believe that people who work on their feet face to face with people for 10 or 12 hours a day don't
want to get off work, pack up the family, and walk to the park or the farmers market. Their children
who may have been in excellent schools or low-cost child care have not seen their parents for 10 or
12 hours. Maybe they are tired of playgrounds even if the equipment is really cool.
The people I meet in all these walks of life often commute from Lawrence, Morgan, Owen, Green, and even
Orange counties, perhaps because for the same cost of a brand new zero lot line home in Bloomington,
they can get their own backyard and a sense of privacy and family togetherness.
I know that as a city we are committed to sustainable actions and have deadlines looming under the climate
action plan. But again, all the changes sought in this proposal as legislation are actions that individuals
can take now.
Please let's set this proposal aside and watch what happens with Hope Well Bloomington co-housing the
land trusts and other housing and facility use trends and let's all continue to encourage each other
to use resources wisely as our life circumstances and convictions guide us. Thank you. Thank you. Next
comment in chambers. Hello I'm Greg Alexander.
It's a good proposal, good start. My worries are all processed. I'm worried that staff will drag their
feet and neither plan commission or you guys will be able to press the issue. I'm worried the room for
interpretation might wind up gutting it. I'm worried the zoning map itself will continue to be a collection
of special interests written down on a map rather than a rational approach to building a city. I'm worried
that if it ever does come back to you after plan commission that you guys will chicken out that it won't
pass here.
Mostly, though, I'm worried about a parallel staff-led process that might make essentially the same
changes. When Hopewell South first came before you guys, I said that the one-off PUD was being brought
instead of comprehensive reform, and Director Hittle confronted my claim head-on. He said that his department
was urgently pursuing reform, and he laid out a timeline that could result in major UDO updates before
this body as soon as September.
He probably believed it was true when he said it but I knew it wasn't true and I hope you guys weren't
fooled either it's not true the administration is pursuing hopeful instead of Comprehensive reform.
So my biggest hope for this resolution is that it might provide a little kick in the pants for that
process You guys need to face the reality that in actual fact You will have to play hardball with the
mayor if you want to solve any of our city's problems The mayor wants to avoid an ugly political scene
more than she wants to make Bloomington prosperous for all of its residents
After my kids move out in six years, I want to build a small house, a shotgun shack in the side yard
of my 10th acre property. It's just half a mile north of here. I want to recoup some of my costs by
renting it out. And then when I retire, I want to sell it so that I can keep my house that I live in
now that I love. I want to provide a retirement for myself. I want to provide additional housing for
my neighborhood.
for the businesses that I go to, and I want to keep my house. My goals are reasonable. It will take
an active council, though, to make it happen. You can make it happen if the minimum lot size and setbacks
are small enough. For comparison, Hopewell South reduced those numbers to zero.
Zero minimum lot size zero setback. That's a reasonable goal for a city. We are a city It's not a reasonable
goal out in the county. It would be a disaster in Ellisville But this is a good first step. I just hope
it doesn't turn into nothing. Thank you Thank you so much. Are there any other commenters in the room?
He's preparing if there's anybody online you'd be ready. You're next. So I now understand that this
is just a proposal to examine all this stuff and most of it makes good sense. You know the I just want
I just live in a neighborhood a core neighborhood where one or two extra cars is a crisis. People are
parked and
It sounds really good to eliminate parking restrictions, but somebody puts a triplex nearby and there
are no parking restrictions. It wrecks the neighborhood. We're going to be parking locks away and there's
no alternative. People have to have, I have a car for my business. My wife has a car to pick up the
grandson and to do all her things. And one great idea really doesn't fit all places and
Right now you can have you can appeal the parking issues and let the bca look at that area and say,
you know Is this going to cause a negative impact on adjacent property? And eliminating that and giving
it by right Means we don't really care if it has a negative impact on adjacent property because we think
we have the best idea but if you really think about how to apply it and
Carefully and sensitively. That's the same thing with density It's a great idea in a lot of areas some
places. It doesn't really work. So Just watch out one size doesn't fit all and there are real consequences
to real people down on the ground Thank you all Thank you so much anyone online Fantastic anybody else
in chambers
All right, and we'll come back to council members and then any final comments Councilmember Stossberg
Thank you. Um, I just want to thank councilmember Flaherty for his persistence With this resolution.
I'm very happy to support it this evening. I do want to address the public comment that talked about the
Commitments that director Hittle made I did actually check in with him a few weeks ago about how that
process was going He said he was actually waiting for to figure out what was that gonna happen with
this resolution? So there I think that the Planning Department is eager for us to deal with this because
it has been on our agenda multiple times But our meetings have just gone so long that we didn't have
a chance to vote on it So I'm very pleased that we can actually consider and move on this tonight. So,
thank you and
Anyone else. Council member Rosenberger a little question a little question. How does the transportation
plan work in conjunction with this that these are you do changes and then would it make sense during
this process for council to also take on looking at
transportation plan for how it might fit or be updated because just in the vein of things that hope
well Did differently there were? Setback not set back there were right-of-way requirements that were
difficult and on-street parking and sidewalks things that so would it make sense to sort of be looking
at that while this is going on or have you thought of that or is it something that would happen later or
I would say it's invoked essentially by section 2 which mentioned subdivision standards and gets into
that. I think we identified that maybe the most significant part of the transportation plan that needs
some change and flexibility with respect to its interaction with housing development in the built environment
is the ability to adjust the required right-of-way width based on whether or not the street typology
You're using, well, just the street itself has parking or not, basically. So the rights of way in the
transportation plan are rigid, and they assume a street typology that has parking included. It's sort
of like the model for that type of street, neighborhood connector, arterial, general urban, whatever.
And some streets just don't have parking. There are older streets. They're not going to have parking.
We know that. I don't know.
Henderson would be, or I always get them confused, Hillside and Henderson, whichever one's north-south.
That's a good example, right? We're not gonna add like a parking lane to that street. Henderson,
thank you. So we need the ability to adjust the right-of-way width because when lots are being subdivided,
that's a good example. Like a lot that's in Bryant Park that could be subdivided that fronts on Henderson,
it might not be functionally possible without additional changes to address that. And so it's possible
that would like warrant
You know wouldn't be able to fully unlock the potential here until we make changes to the transportation
plan Maybe some of that can be covered in the subdivision standard section of the UDO which again is
called out here but really that's gonna be for planning experts planning step experts to Guide I think
I think we can help do that and I guess just to that to that. Well, yeah. Yeah, so I think that's my
answer Great. Thank you. I just thought about it when it was brought up at public comments about maybe
subdividing a point one acre of
locked and that right of way would make it probably pretty challenging. So that's great, thank you.
Can I say one follow-up thing to that, which is that we've generally required lots of any size, even
single lot subdivisions to come into compliance with all those things. And I do wonder if different
approaches are warranted for a full block when a full block is being changed, like it was in Hopewell
versus a single lot
on a street. We did just make an adjustment. If you recall, the staff brought changes recently up to
the UDO. We now have a sidewalk payment in lieu option on a site-specific basis like that where it doesn't
really make sense to build just a single lot of sidewalk. Maybe it's proposed still. Sorry. Time is
fluid right now. Anyway, good question. I think it will potentially have some interaction with that.
which I think, again, is already on staff priority. Excellent. If it's OK with the body, I'd like to
move to a vote, because we have lots of other things on the agenda, and this will come back to us. Can
I say one last thing? Yes, yes. Which is just thank you. Thank you to my colleagues for consideration,
and I hope I get your support. Also, just to planning staff, I don't know how common this is when we
pass these resolutions. I would like to be, I guess, I offer to be as involved as you all would let
me in the steps along the way, just to
Try to ensure we have alignment and you know, if you have questions about intent that kind of thing
I'd love to stay involved. So thank you All right. Will the clerk please call the roll? Councilmember
P. Monsmith Yes, so like yes. I'm sorry. Yes Daley. Yes, Rallo. Yes rough Rosenberger. Yes clarity. Yes
Yes, that carries nine. Oh, thank you very much everybody And thank you councilmember Flaherty for both
your patience and hard work on this. All right moving on other I move that resolution 20 2606 be read
by title and synopsis only Second there's a motion in a second. All those in favor say aye aye all those opposed
All right, that motion carries nine. Oh, will the clerk please read? Resolution 20 2606 a resolution
directing the Housing and Neighborhood Development Department to develop a framework for long-term housing
affordability Synopsis the resolution sponsored by councilmember member Zulik directs the Housing and
Neighborhood Development Department hand
to develop a legally permissible framework for ensuring the long-term affordability of housing units
supported by the city, including the use of tools such as silent second mortgages, rights of first refusal,
and other shared equity mechanisms, and to provide recommendations for any necessary amendments to the
unified development ordinance and related provisions of the Bloomington Municipal Code.
I move that resolution 20 20 606 be adopted Second, all right council members of it. Yes. Thank you.
Just real quick I know we have lots to do today. So I will very quickly go through the sections essentially
this is intended to be a continuation of our intent to produce affordable housing across the city and
indicate our
intent to do this much past Hopewell this was initially intended to be voted on right after Hopewell
so that we were all still thinking about it. But as you know that was a long council meeting. So essentially
this resolution
directs the housing and neighborhood development department to develop a framework for affordability
measures across our city evaluation of tools development of clear standards a review of best practices
and then a presentation of findings to counsel within 120 days.
If you're if anyone has a question of why 120 days I will remind us all that we have a six week break.
Well yes I did plan on doing it six months ago but there will be a six week break at this point. So
now we will need that extra time to accommodate for council recess. The last section is next steps at
which point after presentation from the hand department council can then consider any additional legislation.
So that is my presentation. Happy to answer any questions Fantastic. Is there anybody from the hand
department or from city? Offices that would like to comment on this Okay, I'm seeing none and council
members questions All right council member comments, all right, we'll go to public comment on resolution 20 2606
Is there anybody in the public who would like to comment on resolution 20, 20, 606? Good evening again,
Council. It's Christopher from the Bloomington Chamber of Commerce. I appreciate Council Member Zulek's
work on this and it is a very important issue. We've been talking about affordability for quite a long
time and, um,
I think we all have the same affordability and attainment for homeownership goal. The concern moving
forward is the same kind of debate we had on the Hope Well, which is just ensuring that these policies
are workable in practice. Affordability requirements need to be balanced with financing realities,
construction costs, and long-term feasibility.
The affordability standards and too rigid administratively complex in projects may deliver fewer units
or fail altogether, which we've seen. So I just want to keep that in mind as we sort of move forward
with affordability issues. I thank you for your time. Thank you very much. Is there anyone online who'd
like to win the prize of being the first online commenter for the night?
No, they the prize might be great. Okay Anyone in there all in the room? I keep on I say the office
none. Okay fantastic back to council members any comments councilmember Stasberg Thank you. Um, I just
want to say there's a few parts of this resolution that I'm not very comfortable with and I didn't ask
questions about them because I figured it was more of a comment than a question so I didn't want to
do that then and
In terms of making amendments to Title 20, which is the UDO, I'm really uncomfortable with a resolution
Basically gives the hand department that capability when really it's the planning department and the
planning commission that should have that capability to do that and that really like any city department
can reach out to another city department and ask questions or have collaboration and and talk about
proposals like that, but I'm kind of uncomfortable from the council perspective of Saying yes to a resolution that that
titles that in this way. Secondly, I'm gonna have to go back to what I said during Hopewell numerous
times in terms of these methods of affordability that, I mean, there's, I appreciate that it's a resolution
saying, hey, investigate these things, but you know what, I think that the Hand Department has been
investigating these things for an incredibly long time and never, still never gave us any really good
information
data, et cetera, about their efficacy. And I voted no, ultimately, on the affordability amendment related
to Hopewell because of that. And I considered voting no on the whole thing because of that, because
I just am really skeptical that we'll get any better information from hand that we've gotten in the
last six months around this. So I find this whole resolution really frustrating.
That's Yeah, I just find find the whole thing very frustrating it goes along with my frustration with
the hand department and This yeah, so I just can't support this I think that hand is probably already
doing this anyway, especially since hope all was passed with the affordability resolution or affordability
amendments that basically allowed them to use whatever tools they wanted to so
And yeah, so I guess that's my comment and I'll be voting no on this this evening. Thank you Thank you
so much. I'm other I see councilmember. Okay councilmember Zulek councilmember Flaherty comes over daily
I just I would have appreciated that feedback anytime in the past six weeks where that's been on the
agenda and
Thank you, thank you Council Members Zulik for bringing this. I still think a framework, I share some
of the reservations, but I think a framework will be helpful. My broad concern here is that I think
some of the mechanisms that the hand department or director has sort of favored at times are ones that
may require kind of like periodic ongoing public subsidy in order to sustain as permanent affordability
and like definitionally like maybe that's not permanent affordability anymore if you have to keep putting
money into it.
I think the opportunity to like, you know, we passed the UDO, or it's not the UDO, the PUD, the Hopewell
South PUD, with some uncertainty sort of there, but a requirement for permanent affordability, I think
we may confront that reality at some point, but I think the opportunity to revisit this in the form
of a framework will be a good chance to like look further, look more holistically and look further downfield
and think about the trade-offs involved with various options here. So thank you again, I'll support it.
Yeah, I'm really excited to support this too. I I think I just want to say thanks councilman Brazil
look for all the work that you put into this because I think this is a really important good step and
I think we definitely need this and I think it'll do good things. So it's a it's a great initiative.
Thank you. Happy to support it Any other comments Seeing that will the clerk please call the
roll Councilmember Zulek Yes
Sorry. Yes, Daley. Yes, Rallo. Yes rough. No Rosenberger. Yes clarity. Yes Stasberg no Piedmont Smith.
Yes That motion carries seven to thank you so very much councilman Zulek All right. Any other motions
I Move that
Getting there ordinance twenty twenty six. Oh seven be read by title and synopsis only Second Yes,
all right, there's a motion at a second any discussion all those in favor say aye Any opposed same sign?
All right that motion carries nine. Oh, will the clerk please read? Ordinance twenty twenty six. Oh
seven to amend title eight of the Bloomington Municipal Code and
Entitled historic preservation and protection to establish a conservation district regarding cottage
Grove Conservation District Bloomington Historic Preservation Commission petitioner synopsis his ordinance
amends chapter 8.20 of the Bloomington Municipal Code entitled list of designated historic and conservation
districts in order to designate the cottage Grove Conservation District and
neighborhood of a hundred and twenty two properties in the city of Bloomington Monroe County, Indiana
as a conservation district the majority of structures in the proposed district date from the years before
and after World War one and are built in the folk Victorian and Queen Anne styles representative of
this period in Bloomington's history houses from the late 1910s and 1920s are mostly craft
Craftsman style with a conspicuous number of limestone Tudor revival houses Many of the pre-war houses
were built by employees of the showers brothers furniture company and bear the hallmarks of carpenter
built folk housing While many of the larger post-war houses are associated with Bloomington's booming
limestone industry the neighborhood demonstrates a high degree of integrity and many notable houses and
Thank you very much. I move that ordinance 20 2607 be adopted second. All right Mr. Sandweiss, I think
I saw you come in Are you still there you already do the presentation? But is there anything you wanted
to add based on questions that came up last time or any additional comments? I had received a question
about the potential council process for any map amendments This has been done in the past I believe
for the Johnson Creamery property
In 2022 where there was a council proposed amendment to the map I haven't received any follow-up on
any specific proposals Other than that we have received a couple of more Comments that are now included
in your packet since This ordinance was last considered
I'm also available for any additional questions if I receive any more Excellent. Thank you so much.
Are there any further questions? Councilmember Stasberg Thank you. I do have questions for mr. Sandweiss.
So don't don't sit down. Thank you. I Just I just want clarification about the
I'm going to assume at this point that it's going to roll over into a historic district in three years
because most conservation districts do and the state standard for keeping them conservation districts
is extremely high. So I'm going with that assumption with these questions. So at that time when assuming
it would roll over into a historic district then somebody within the district would need to write district
guidelines correct.
That's right. How is that process usually done in terms of how many meetings is that done at? How many
people tend to attend those meetings? Is there some kind of vote of approval at the meeting? Are there
other kinds of votes of approval? How is that usually done? So this process is usually handled by groups
from the neighborhood, oftentimes a neighborhood association if one exists.
They will often request that members of the Commission or staff attend these meetings. They have to
be public meetings So that we can make sure that you know, what is being proposed is allowable by local
code Generally and we don't control the process when this is being proposed from the neighborhood they
will vote on resolutions for
guidelines for you know different areas of design that are considered and once that has been reviewed
by Members of the Commission who've been invited to comment for I guess Being able to hold water according
to state and local statutes It's presented to the Historic Preservation Commission for a vote which
then ratifies what's presented from the neighborhood Okay, so in terms of the votes by the neighborhood
Those resolutions that you said so is that usually like in person at the? For lack of a better term
neighborhood association meetings whenever I've attended it has been in person. Okay, so I This this
might sound like a comment but it probably is one of one of my concerns has to do with those
with those standards and the number of people who participate in that process and approve that process.
So been talking to attorney Allen around that process and amendments that we could make to that process.
And currently our code doesn't say much about that process but
But he he did tell me at least initially he thinks that that code could be modified to define that process
more including ensuring that for example the majority of owners within the district approve those guidelines.
Would you agree that we could potentially amend city code to put in guidelines around those resolutions
and how many property owners within the historic districts would need to approve those rules. I would
want to see what other precedent there is in the state if there's any other certified local governments
that I guess involve the city in that way.
I know that, you know, different cities handle the creation of guidelines in slightly different ways.
I would also want to make sure that a system of guidelines is created, because if they're not, then
it's going to be up to the commission to interpret, and we really want to make sure that there's,
you know, something that's presented to us by people who live in or own property in the neighborhood.
And it can be difficult to get, you know, a substantial number of people to
You know show up to meetings or comment to you know respond to emails or letters that are sent initiating
this process So, you know, I wouldn't rule it out, but I would want to make sure that there's some sort
of precedent and that it would be workable Okay, great. Thank you Any other questions customer rough
That's your 10 ways so I've visited the area like four times on foot and bicycle over the last
or two and as I Went around the area I noticed like going down 12th Street East from Grant, which is
the current proposed boundary I saw Homes that were I Didn't see any difference between some of those
homes that are east of between Grant and Indiana
On 12th Street that were seems any less significant or any less diverse. Why would they not have been
a part of the proposal? Do you know um So there were several different maps that were proposed by the
petitioners for this district And When boundaries for a historic district are drawn, you know, they
should include an area that has a
sort of a consistent historical and architectural context. I think my understanding is that, and I would
agree, that the buildings for the most part in this area fit this context. It could be drawn larger
or it could be drawn smaller to include or exclude buildings that may or may not contribute to it, but
there has to be a boundary drawn and there is often a preference to
you know, making discrete boundaries based on sort of clear geographic divisions like Grant Street,
for instance. For example, there are a number of contributing buildings east of there, but a lot of
that area of sort of the eastern part of the Cottage Grove neighborhood has already been substantially
redeveloped. So it's really west of Grant Street that you have a big sort of consistent historic context.
So you don't think that along 12th
There are some definitely homes that could have been included and that would have fit really consistently
well. Okay, and then further along 12th, I noticed there are what obviously were homes probably from
the era. Now they're just grass lots, they're just empty lots. Pretty big area with a lot of that.
Can you tell me what that's about? Do you have any idea? Um, I'm not sure when the Commission gets a
demolition delay for a property that's not located in a historic district the basically the options
that are presented are either to Nominate the property for designation to City Council or to release
demolition delay I'm trying to think I got the statistics for somebody who asked recently, but I
I think within the past three years there's been One building that has been designated through the demolition
delay process so usually that's going to mean release which means that the property owner can then do
you know according to County and UDO guidelines whatever they want with that property So I don't know
what the plans are for those properties that are now grass lots So well, I mean the grass they
Obviously, it's not very recent that they've been bare for a while obviously from the looks of them
at least Then if I can ask one last follow-up related question follow-up Some members of the public
spoke at the last meeting where this was discussed and Indicated that there had not been Outreach and
communication or negotiation with
involvement with The property owners in that area And I'm wondering if you can at all speak to The validity
of that assertion that there were there was not engagement or involvement with some of the folks who
are property owners in the area that that maybe aren't supportive of the
Okay, so from my position at the city when I was required to I sent Three letters to all the property
owners in the district plus an additional letter As a courtesy to the Petitioners or I believe Anyway
four letters were sent three of them from the hand department and
To let them know about steps in this process including when the properties came to the HPC
for The Commission's vote on the proposed district when interim protection was placed and when a date
was scheduled for a hearing with City Council There were also I believe three meetings that the petitioners
put on that were publicly noticed I
From the last mailing that I sent out I received one letter that bounced back. So other than that the
letter should have been received by You know, whatever property owner they were addressed to Okay, yeah,
thank you very much for your replies, thank you so much other councilmember questions All right, I'm
gonna move to public comment at this time Same thing. Can I just see a strove hands of you plan on public
commenting on?
Okay. Fantastic. All right. So same thing. We'll keep it at three minutes. And if you're ready online
you might win a prize. Thank you also for waiting so long. Go ahead. Okay. My name is Amy Butler. My
husband and I were involved in creating this district. And first of all I wanted to follow up real quick.
We sent out multiple emails
Neighbors to start this process We sent out a letter in the mail which cost us a lot of money to do
We only did send one letter So I admit that through the mail But we did send out a ton of emails and
we contacted and talked to anybody who contacted us back And we stayed in contact with them as they
stayed in contact with us Cottage Grove is a neighborhood worth protecting
This neighborhood is a small collection of 100 year old or older homes that represent diverse architectural
styles that are core to Bloomington. They are built of materials and use techniques from their era.
They cannot be duplicated. Once they are lost we are not getting them back. All the bits and pieces
are present that make for a nice place to live. We have small green spaces around our houses including
big mature trees and the subsequent shade they provide even cooling the houses next door and the houses
down the street.
Our streets all have sidewalks, some of which are made of 100 year old bricks. And then there's the
WPA era limestone sidewalks created by people needing work in a difficult time for our country. These
sidewalks, our hand built limestone walls and the big old trees make for an especially pleasant place
to walk in the summer when we are heading downtown.
Most of our houses also have big porches, providing exterior spaces our residents can enjoy much of
the year. Some of the porches wrap around the house and the house will have a second entrance, offering
an additional place for the inhabitants to enter their home. This is a great example of how houses were
able to work well for the resident owner and the renters at the same time. Our neighborhood has a wonderful
versatility to it. These old houses have multiple uses over the years. Some have been residences for
many years and others have been rentals since they were built.
Some rental houses have even turned back to owner occupied residences. Our host houses are adaptable
and useful, and that is why they have lasted for all these years. These are houses built by our working
class, business managers and mill owners. Indiana's own Hoagy Carmichael was born in a house that would
have been in our district, but it was torn down.
We have students, retirees, professionals, even families. Our neighborhood is a great example
of Bloomington's cultural heritage. It is facing significant development pressure and I encourage you
to vote in favor of protecting it. This neighborhood is full of naturally occurring affordable housing.
Please help us save it. Thank you for your time and considering Cottage Grove.
Hello, my name is Greg Alexander. Let me tell you about a house a couple blocks south of this district
I coveted this house the location the architecture the size Still to this day. It's my dream house.
I found out about it in the 90s when a former council member lived there and They didn't keep it up.
So it was very affordable when they sold it but of course the bank would not lend me for a
fix her up or at that point I missed my opportunity. Instead it was bought by someone who is today a
judge. And that future judge poured a ton of money into it and then she sold it to a real estate management
company that specializes in luxury historic rentals. So the building was preserved. Hooray, right? But
I am excluded and its role in the community has gone forever. My kids will not sit in that majestic
living room and smoke pot with Harmony students. That will not happen ever. That house is gone.
The moral is, I hope we're looking at results. What are you trying to accomplish here? I can tell you
one thing it will accomplish is putting future development under the thumb of the Historic Preservation
Commission. I cannot say enough bad things, unfortunately, about that commission. Every single meeting,
someone points out they aren't allowed to regulate use, and yet that's all they want to talk about.
They ignore that advice. That's all they want to talk about. It's a backdoor HOA. At best, busy bodies
are interfering with their neighbors. At worst, it's naked corruption. I'm sorry, but commission members have
line their own pockets and use that position to punish their competitors. That's happened a lot. Another
thing is it will make development just more expensive. Those costs will be passed on to tenants. It
will reduce the amount of development overall. There will be less housing so close to campus. If we
can't build housing near campus, we'll build it somewhere else. So we'll contribute to sprawl in parking
lots too. Another effect is it will kill the engine that made this beautiful neighborhood in the first
place. These houses are
the result of an era when people solved their problems by building density in cities. Today we solve
our problems with commuting. That is a big change. We can't entrench that in law and get a good result.
What we'll get is a bad result. It makes it harder for good neighborhoods to be built in the future.
There is no other opportunity to build a neighborhood so close to downtown or close to campus if you
take this off out of the options.
Historic preservation here will make this neighborhood more expensive and more exclusive and it will
also Exacerbate the problem of people living in drafty and moldy houses because their landlords won't
have the opportunity to make rational choices And just as an aside, I checked the names on the petition
The address is almost entirely rentals. The names are not the names of the owners. That's fine You know
as an activist I really I envy that skill to get students to sign a petition and
But the volume of names here reflects nothing but naive good wishes from people who were presumably
told the city wants to tear down their house. Thanks. Hi, I'm James Ford. I live in Cottage Grove. I've
lived there for 20 years. Lived a few blocks from there since 1984.
an auspicious year. So I've waited a long time to be here tonight. I have a lot of things I could say,
but I'm only gonna really say one thing about something that was mentioned two weeks ago. And that was
a discussion about the old Northeast Neighborhood Association. These are the bylaws of that organization
that was formed in March of 1998 by four people, three of which have died, and one of which has moved
on to a different
Neighborhood Association, I'll talk about that in a moment. This Neighborhood Association is huge. It
ranges from Kirkwood through to 12th, from college to Woodlawn. Quoting from the bylaws, it includes
four of Bloomington's historic neighborhoods, Cottage Grove, North Indiana, North Washington,
and university courts, so they acknowledged from the beginning that College Grove is a historic district.
The general purpose is the aim of promoting the welfare of residents and improving the general living
conditions of the area. That's what Old Northeast was originally about. One of their guiding principles,
to encourage all owners, residents, and businesses to take pride in this neighborhood, to appreciate
its beauty, uniqueness,
and historical significance and to enhance its viability. That was in 1998. In 2006, it was a breakaway
of some actual residents because most of the people in that neighborhood association were landowners
who didn't actually live in the neighborhood. So the High Point Residence Association, not the neighborhood,
but the Residence Association was formed in April of 2006.
The goal was to maintain and improve the architectural integrity of the neighborhood, but specifically,
the membership was restricted only to people living in that area. It was for residents to talk about
their neighborhood. I want to talk about one house real quick.
that's in our neighborhood. It's on Cottage Grove. It's right on the corner of Grand and Cottage Grove.
It's a beautiful house now. It wasn't so beautiful for a while because there was a lady named Martha
Douglas who lived in there until she was 100 years old. And when she died, this house was purchased.
I thought it was going to be torn down, but instead the people who bought it, they fixed it up. They
made it look beautiful. They put in a lot of special effort to paint it baby blue, fix the roof up with
the traditional shingles, planted roses all around it.
That group was called Horn Properties, which is a large corporation that owns a lot of properties in
the area, but they chose to fix this one up, and it is beautiful. It's the corner anchor of our neighborhood.
And I hope that they choose to do that with other properties in their neighborhood. Thank you.
Thank you. Next commenter in chambers, and then we'll move to see if someone's going to win this prize online.
I'm Elizabeth Cox Ash. I am a member of the McDowell Gardens Neighborhood Association and we
are Bloomington's very first historic conservation district and later historic district.
And I recommend all nine of you go back 25 years ago and please read how we went through the whole process
of becoming first a conservation district and a historic district. A lot of your questions that you're
asking tonight can be answered just by reading this. Another thing.
Cottage Grove has many of the original showers homes. This means they have hardwoods from 150, 160 years
ago. Those are not grown anymore. So if those are torn down, you've lost the sustainability of this
neighborhood. You've lost it. When McDowell Gardens started this,
25 years ago, we were 60% rental, 40% owner occupied. The rentals were many times, they were owners
whose grandma who had the house, and they were out of the area, in some cases, out of the country. So,
any rate, the importance is,
Once we got our historic conservation district, you would not believe how fast within the next few years
it flipped. Now we are over 60% owner occupied and 40%, maybe even less, rental. That left a lot of
affordable housing available for homeowners to buy. We still continue
Even though prices have gone up, we still continue getting new buyers in. We are a very attractive
neighborhood. I just want you to all know that. Please, please do this. Save this neighborhood.
Thank you. Thank you so very much. I'm going to go online and then we'll come to you here in chambers.
Is there anyone online?
Oh, yes, the winner. All right. Comments are online. You've received, what have they received?
This gavel, you will receive this gavel. Okay, but go ahead, person online. Is this me? Am I the only
person online? Yes, yes, that is you. Okay, yes, hi. My name is Michael Brahms. I am a out of state
property owner, developer. I've owned property
in Cottage Grove for the past 25 years. I heard one of the council members express some concern about
engagement with other people in the neighborhood. I live in New York City, which is not close by any
means. I can tell you from my personal experience, I felt that the efforts to reach out to people in
the neighborhood were more than sufficient. I was on
the phone, not having to come in for both of the meetings at the library that were held regarding this.
So for me personally, that was not a concern at all. I feel that maybe if people didn't participate,
they didn't maybe want to. But I can tell you being out of state, I had no problem getting a notification
at all of what was going on and constant communication of what was going on.
I will tell you as a property owner in the neighborhood, I said at the last meeting, a lot of my tenants
value houses. They want to live in a house. That's why they rent some of my properties. If they didn't
want to live in a house, they moved downtown or to different areas. So I know for me personally, seeing
things that look like houses
and fit with the neighborhood. I don't view it as rooting my property value. I look at it as probably
increasing it at a benefit. That's it. Thank you so much. We'll be sending this gavel to you in New
York. Back in chambers. I'm Paul Ash. My wife and I went through all of this with McDowell Gardens neighborhood
Which now a historic district the the the trick is in in the the guidelines if if you write your guidelines
with everyone's input and You know be very democratic about it. You can really avoid an awful lot of
controversy, but if you don't approve this historic or historic conservation district I can
I can pretty well tell you what'll happen because when we first were setting our boundaries, we wanted
to set them up on First Street, so you know, right south of the hospital properties. And we got some
real opposition and had to pull back to Wiley.
guess what happened to all those little affordable houses? They were historic, not always, I mean they
were humble, but rentals and people had lived in them a long time and hadn't really kept them up and
they're gone. They did not have the historic protections and so what you saw there further on 12th Street
where there were empty lots,
Yeah, you're going to see more of that. Thank you. Thank you so much. Is there anyone else in chambers?
And then we'll go online again. Go ahead. Hello. My name is Dr. John Butler. I'd like to just address
a few of the questions that have been asked and a few of the statements that have been made.
Councilmember rough asked some questions about our Boundaries on the eastern side and there were some
homes on the eastern side that we would have liked to included We would have liked to had our boundaries
stretch further east And that was actually the majority of the people who responded to us felt that
we we should go ahead and include those homes but as with the people of McDowell Gardens we ran into
quite a considerable pushback from
one property owner who basically said I can't condense you including those homes and so we attempted
to negotiate with that owner and we did not extend our boundaries further east. Apparently that was
not enough because this owner's still opposing us. In terms of some statements that were made earlier
about this and affordability, I think those were absolutely off base.
because it's not a simple case of a home being preserved, historically preserved, and then the price
goes up. Actually, it's sort of an option between the home being historically preserved and maybe the
home is fixed up and there's some investment, so the price would go up slightly, or the home is torn
down and it's replaced by a million dollar investment property.
That million dollar investment property is absolutely out of my reach, and I imagine it's out of reach
of most Bloomington homeowners. And so I think that was a mischaracterization that a historic district
is going to lead to higher prices. If anything, by protecting marginal homes or homes that need to be
fixed up, what we do is we allow for that, I don't know what you would call it,
Sweat equity where the owner can actually you know put in there in their free time they can fix up their
home they can improve that home and That can then be sold or moved on to another property so Having
some of these homes that are not as good shape that will be included in this district will allow people
to fix them up And will allow some of these homes that would be torn down because that's what would
happen. They would just be removed and
They will still stay viable structures that can be lived in. And to our east, we have lost an incredible
number of homes. There was the rest of Cottage Grove neighborhood, but it's gone. And it was taken out
by the developer who's opposing us and trying to save the rest of it. So I think the Better Business
Booster guy said that there was one home maybe that was threatened. That's simply not true. I mean,
they tore down 14 in the other neighborhood. Thank you.
Perfect timing one more comment and in chambers, then we'll move online All right My name is Jordan
Evans. I did speak at the last meeting I am the current president of the old Northeast neighborhood
association to be clear We did participate in the meetings in the beginning
What happened was our comments were disregarded as they were not in line with the petitioners. There
was no meaningful discussion, no compromise with the Old Northeast, nor any further engagement. I want
to also be clear that this is the last neighborhood with zoned density near campus. If we go to protect
this the way that this is being proposed,
we're eliminating the ability for any further density to be built close to campus, which in turn will
affect affordability across Bloomington. I feel that it is counterintuitive to everything that I've
heard you all discuss tonight and last week to preserve these homes. As mentioned by the folks in McDowell,
their home values have gone up. This is not going to lead to
Cheaper rents or anything along those lines I want to be clear in my position with the old northeast.
I don't oppose the historical district I oppose the boundaries and the history lesson mr Ford provided
for all of us high point separated due to a difference in ideals and needs three years after the old
northeast was formed very quickly it was realized and actualized
Ask that if possible council pushes to reconsider the boundaries to limit this to the High Point neighborhood
and Even further south of where it is into the already historical district there for those of you not
familiar High Point is Lincoln Washington 12th to 8th Thank you for your time Thank you, and we'll move
online. Are there any more commenters online? Oh
OK, fantastic. You don't win a prize, but we'd love to hear from you. Person online, I think you should
be unmuted at this point. Hi there. Hello. Hi, I'm Rebecca Swanson, and I'm a property owner, have been
for about 20 years in this area. And I just want to say simple and sweet, I think this is a great idea.
I lived in that neighborhood for 15 years and watched it
Just really a lot of sad investment property owners come in and do things with the neighborhood that
made it not feel like a neighborhood that I wanted to live in anymore. I really wish we would have done
this a long time ago. I think it's a great idea. And so now I'm a landlord and I just wanted you to
hear me say that I still think it's a good idea. If you wanna know more about why,
I don't wanna take up your time. I just wanted you to hear the voice of a landlord and somebody who
owns property that I support this. They were communicating with me clearly. I found everybody to be
very, there's no hidden agenda here. So thank you. Thank you so very much. Back in chambers, Mr. Rousseau.
I don't live in this neighborhood, but I go through it almost every day. And I've actually,
Had the pleasure of getting to know several of the neighbors because they're out in front of their houses
taking care of them and I Stop on my bicycle and get to know them and I really enjoy going through this
neighborhood because it's so beautiful So many of the houses are just gorgeous. I Council member rough
made the mention about asked questions about why it wasn't extended east of grant on 12th Street And
I asked the same question myself There's a
Two or three houses there with brick facades that look pretty good and look pretty historic to me. One
of them without a brick facade also looks very good. I noticed the other day that it's got a demolition
sign in front of it. There are two others in the neighborhood that have rubble on them, limestone rubble
I might notice. I might note the new houses, replacing them will not be built from limestone probably,
will not be built from brick. It's too expensive. When we're tearing down an old house, we're tearing
down value.
And yet the marketplace knows only one thing profit if it's profitable to tear down something of long-term
value, but it's Better to replace it with something that might it might not even last 20 or 30 years.
I don't know that's what they'll do and It's really important for us to step in as a city to say no
for the benefit of the whole We'd rather keep these homes It's a beautiful neighborhood. I hope you pass this
Thank you. Thank you so much. Next in the chambers. Before I start, I just want to say I really resent
this podium. I know there's a shorter one in storage, and I really wish people would get it out. I feel
literally like a talking head.
Good evening. My name is Jan Sorby, and I want to talk to you tonight about voting yes for this petition.
I understand that historic preservation and conservation districts are sometimes seen as barriers to
growth, but I would like to encourage you to see them as a tool, a tool to help Bloomington grow while
protecting the qualities that make people want to live, work, study, and invest here.
Bloomington's charm is one of its greatest assets. Our older neighborhoods with walkable streets, mature
trees, front porches, limestone architecture, and human scale design create a strong sense of place
that benefits residents, local businesses, and the university community as well. These neighborhoods
also teach important lessons about how people live well together.
lessons worth preserving for the upcoming generations. Many older homes were designed before
air conditioning, and they rely on natural light, cross ventilation, shade trees, deep porches, and
operable windows to remain comfortable and energy efficient. The neighborhoods themselves encourage
walking, social connections.
an even more human scale relationship between building and public space. As a parent and a community
leader, we should want future generations to inherit a Bloomington that still reflects those values
rather than losing them piece by piece over time. Preservation also supports goals this council and
our community already value.
reusing existing buildings reduces demolition waste and Excuse me conserves the embodied carbon it supports
reinvestment in neighborhoods where infrastructure already exists and rehabilitation projects support
local contractors and skilled trades Importantly preservation does not mean stopping change
Bloomington's older neighborhoods have always evolved over time. Conservation districts simply help
guide new development. So it complements existing neighborhoods rather than overwhelming them. This
is not a choice between preservation and growth. Bloomington needs housing and badly needs investment.
Preserving helps ensure that the city's growth
It does not gradually lose qualities that make Bloomington distinctive and sustainable and livable.
Please support this. Thank you so much. Next in chambers. I'm on the other side of the spectrum here.
My name's Doug Horn with Horn Properties. Our 50-year-old firm has been supportive of multiple historic
district efforts, University Courts, Garden Hill, for example. We own four single-house local historic
districts, one of which is included on the National Historic Register. We pride ourselves in offering
a variety of affordable housing options across our 70 properties residential portfolio.
Most of our buildings are historically designated. This petition concerns us on multiple fronts. Most
requests for multi-property historic district designations have been brought forward by neighborhood
associations. This one engages across boundaries of two, neither of which offer support, one of which
asks you to deny it. Also, most proposals focus on
platted homogeneous additions to the city, sharing a common human demographic and story. This one is
a confab of various additions and varied stories. As you walk the area, you can feel shifts in character,
period, layout, and quality. Most concerning is the fact that local designation and its associated limiting
parameters
will significantly impair if not completely stop a property owner's ability to increase area density
as encouraged by our current UDO and its associated zoning designations. Expansion of building footprint
is significantly limited or prohibited by existing historic districts.
Owners attempt to continue to salvage or adapt existing structures to affordable higher densities through
cold compliant additions will all but be eliminated, even to the lowly contributing class that makes
up a majority of the buildings affected by this proposal. In our opinion, this prohibition negates near
and longer term community land use intentions.
Through all of this, we must remember that absolute protection already exists for these properties and
that the HPC must approve any building permit application filed on even these lesser properties from
total demolition to something as mundane as replacing an entry door. Three minutes is almost up and
I have five additional concerns that do not support this request and in fact,
We have few arguments in support of it. The most significant of these, however, is that the petitioners
are wonderful people. And with heartfelt intentions, which I'm sure you would agree, on balance, we'd
ask that you vote no on this proposed ordinance. Thank you for your consideration. Thank you so much.
Next in chambers. And while they're signing in, is there anybody else online?
Okay, if you are still online and you'd like to, all you need to do is raise your hand and you'd like
to comment. Go ahead. I'll be quick. I won't need three minutes. My name is Melody Duesner. I'm a professor
at IU. I serve on the Historic Preservation Commission. I am a renter in Bryan Park and a pedestrian.
And I just want to reiterate that if you are on the fence about what to do about this district and how
you want to vote on it, I just want to remind you that we really have no options in the middle. I wish
there was a way for us to kind of find maybe some middle ground, but there's not.
the district is not protected these houses become worth more dead than alive and There is no way that
people with less money fewer resources We cannot compete with out-of-town developers. We cannot at
at historic preservation, we cannot halt the demolition of things. You will not be able to see us in
here for each of these remarkable houses because although they make Bloomington Bloomington, they are
smaller scale and ordinary and they belong to ordinary people. So I'm asking you to keep in mind that
even if you are worried that a historic
District in your mind is overreach or something along those lines We have no other option in terms of
preserving the character and just the existence of these homes Given the scale of development in Bloomington.
They will be gone. Thank you Thank you so much next person in chambers. I
My name is Mary Kropinski I've been a local architect to Bloomington for almost 40 years now gave it
away I Lived at 213 East Cottage Grove for 30 years It was an affordable solution to raise my family
in at the time I want to share part of a story that over the years I had several neighbors
Were elderly and as they passed away those homes became rental homes and As those homes became rental
instead of being one person or two person homes They became three person homes and five person homes
by adding bedrooms and basements and such as that happened You know while you bought into the neighborhood
by living there that there would be parties in the neighborhood it became extraordinary
To have 50 people in the yard across the street from you where your grandpa Bob used to once live That
became almost unbearable Especially when you could no longer park on your street There are many homes
in the neighborhood that don't have driveways and I parked on the street for 30 years but when the house
is turned over I Had to routinely walk a block away even if I had groceries and
So don't think that transition is necessarily always good. This neighborhood has rich fabric. Please
maintain it. Please maintain the niche one of the niches of Bloomington. The hole is always greater
than the individual. And yes while these homes may be protected from a demolition permit one by one
they will not be
Protected as well as if they're looked at as a whole. I wish this would have been done 20 years ago
And I think we'd still have a lot of that fabric here. So please please Grant this neighborhood this
district. Thank you. Thank you so much Next person in chambers. Thank you all for your comments so far
My name is Jim Butler. My wife and I bought a house in this district 50 years ago so I've probably seen
this change and evolve more than most people in this room and we live there for about 10 years and then
we bought another house a couple blocks outside the district so we have a long association. When we
live there we bought it for really two reasons. One it was within walking distance of downtown. It was
a neighborhood with sidewalks where you had children. We had a lot of young young people newlyweds.
It was a neighborhood of young children retired people business owners factory workers. We even had
one state representative living in that district at the time. So it's not a homogenous it has a heterogeneous
character to it which was really nice people knew each other and we didn't buy the house because it
was historic. We actually bought the Ivan Adams house without knowing who he was. We found little pieces
of carved limestone in the yard and such that came to light.
Number of years later, but to me having neighborhoods where you can have young people with children
is important We have grandchildren in the MCC SC. It's my understanding that the student population
is decreasing Primarily because there's not enough affordable housing in Monroe County. So people are
moving to Green County Owen County and
And if I just a casual driving around town, I see all these apartment complexes. I don't see playgrounds
for kids in those. Those are not made for families. So that's my feeling, my comments. Thank you.
Thank you. Is there anyone else in council chambers? Take it away.
My name is Jeremy Hackard. I am the current chair of the Historic Preservation Commission We're here
today because we received an application to consider this area for historic protections The Commission
has options available to it We can consider an area's historic and architectural significance and that's
it based on the staff report that we received the information that we received from the petitioners it meets
both of those criteria, and that's why we're here tonight. There's a couple things that people have
said about what happens once things are protected. I just kind of wanted to clarify. Just two meetings
ago, there was a notable house in a historic district where we approved an addition and an ADU. Work
can be done in these areas. We have no purview over work that is done inside homes. You can renovate
all the houses all you want on the interior. It's totally fine. You can keep these up.
We also have the support from my predecessor, Sam DeSaller, who was chair before me. He asked me to
read part of a letter out for him. He writes, I'm writing to express support for the proposed Cottage
Grove Historic District. I'm a practicing architect and served on the Bloomington Historic Preservation
Commission for over a decade. I've seen many proposals for historic districts. I did not vote for all
of them, but this one has my wholehearted support.
Cottage Grove is the type of neighborhood you think of when you think of Bloomington. It has a distinct
architecture character, and streetscape is contiguous and is under threat. He says, please vote to establish
Cottage Grove Historic District. And I would also like to add, this is a great way for us to preserve
our cultural heritage, the architecture that we used to have in this town, the limestone buildings that
we used to have. Let's keep it. Let's let people continue to live here. It's near campus.
Please vote, yes. Thank you. Last chance. Comments in chambers. Good evening. My name is Eric Ost, and
I am currently the president of the Elm Heights Neighborhood Association as well as the Council
of Neighborhood Associations, but I'm not here to speak
in regards to any position of those organizations other than to mention that The Elm Heights neighborhood
association is currently reviewing its historic district guidelines and I want to offer that as proof
that guidelines are not set in stone and they are open to revision I Wanted to read
Section of the comprehensive plan that I think is applicable here And this is on page 80 I believe But
anyway, it's under a section housing trends and issues some of Bloomington's neighborhoods are relatively
diverse both economically and by housing type whereas others are comprised almost entirely of single-family
homes and limited in development by covenants and
And I think in regards to the resolution that was introduced earlier, I think covenants will have a
large role in terms of being able to densify many neighborhoods in Bloomington, where perhaps there
should be denser development. But most core neighborhoods are stable, but are trending towards a lower
percentage of new single-family homes. With greater density in the city comes the challenge to preserve
neighborhood character
and the opportunity to strengthen neighborhoods by developing small commercial nodes as community gathering
places. Existing core neighborhoods should not be the focus of cities increasing density. Elm Heights
is a neighborhood that had been since 1988 and it is very dense. Infrastructure plays a very large role
in being able to increase density.
affordability is something that we've spoken of and I have come to appreciate the value of Naturally
occurring affordable homes and these are homes that were built 1950 1920 some even before that and they're
built usually with very good construction and When those homes are demolished in a new structure is
built it is going to be far less affordable than
perhaps designed for one purpose If this if for nothing else besides just neighborhood Agency, which
is another thing that historic districts and conservation districts Provide for you should consider
the effect of What conservation districts and historic districts can do to preserve affordability so
I asked you to support a
the creation of this conservation district. Thank you. Thank you so much. All right. Any comments online?
All right. Last commenters online. Take it away. Hi. Can you hear me? Yes, we can. Hi. My name is John
Lawrence, and I'm from the Bryant Park neighborhood. I'm the past president, but I'm not here in an
official capacity. I hope you'll support this proposition.
A local historic district can be an important tool for protecting long-term neighborhood affordability
because it helps preserve the existing scale, character, and housing patterns of a neighborhood rather
than encouraging speculative redevelopment and luxury tear downs. In neighborhoods like this one and
mine, rising land values often create pressure to replace modest older homes with larger, more expensive
projects that drive up taxes, rents, and overall housing costs.
Historic district protections can help slow that cycle by encouraging reinvestment in existing homes,
preserving smaller and more attainable housing stock, and maintaining the diverse lockable character
that makes the neighborhood livable for people of different incomes and stages of life. Used thoughtfully,
historic preservation is not just about architecture. It's also about protecting community stability
and preventing displacement. So I live in one of the last
Poor neighborhoods, that's not protected. And we're feeling this pressure, the same pressure. People
are buying small affordable houses, spending $200,000 on them, tearing them down, putting up $500,000
structures and charging $1,000 a bedroom. So we are losing affordable housing that exists in
our neighborhood, and it is being turned into luxury development.
Historic protection is one of the few ways to protect this affordability. So I hope you will help protect
this cute little neighborhood and give them the protection they need. Thank you very much. Thank you
so much. Any last commenters online? Oh, after the last call, our final commenter in the room.
I've missed it.
Go for it. In 1978, there was a landmark case, Penn Central versus New York City. This beautiful station
was going to be torn down and was fought by the local preservationists in New York. This went to the
Supreme Court because the investors said,
We now own, we have every right to build the tallest building and this is in our way and we're gonna
tear it down. So it became this conflict between property use and the community good. And what's interesting
is they found in favor of the community. They said, as long it is not a taking, as long as the owner
can still make a reasonable economic return on the property. And that is the foundation
of your decision today. That's the law you stand on. That's the preservation law foundational rule.
You know, did you you all got maps I think of the neighborhood and it showed lot by lot and you saw
a lot of blank lots also. And what it made me think of is when we played Monopoly when I was a kid,
you know, and you get enough lots together and the houses are off of it.
and you can sell and make the big bucks and win the Monopoly game. But in my family, somebody always
cried when we played Monopoly. I don't know if everybody's experienced that, but you know, you wipe
out your little sister and she's crying. Anyway, I always went for the little houses. I don't know if
it's part of me always, but I'd get those two little houses, the affordable ones right near Go.
There are speculators in this neighborhood and they're good people but their businesses to get lots
Make money on them and you know someone mentioned they own 70 properties They're not going to be hurt
I mean those you heard from landlords who were happy with this project and you heard from tenants who
are happy with this Proposal these people are going to get their money back
I mean, they may not get it for the strip they bought along the high along the railroad track speculating
that the city might build a bike path, but they'll get their money out of the rest of these properties.
So let's not make anybody cry if we can and let's protect this neighborhood. You know, I, I was part
of the first local historic district in Bloomington.
And at the time, just the idea that a neighborhood could be historic was new because famous person hadn't
lived in the house. You know what I mean? But the neighborhood is a living biome. That's your time.
Am I out of time? Yes, sir. Thank you. Appreciate getting to come and talk to you. Well, thank you.
You closed this out. Thank you very much. We'll come back to council members. Any comments at this point?
Final comments? And if we could so kindly, we have a timer set.
I believe for five minutes councilmember Rallo then councilmember Rallo Well, I agree with this I support
this petition Preserves our community identity. It's sustainable Particularly the embodied energy in
these structures I do see over time that it trends to owner occupancy in time
And I'm I'm satisfied with the boundaries. I Appreciate I just want to say I appreciate the work that's
been done this I really appreciate the butlers for their work. Mr San wise put together in a very complete
pack packet That I appreciate and I also appreciate the Star Preservation Commission for coming in and
giving your Expert expert opinion on this. So I'll be supporting it. Thank you. I
Thank you very much. I have a lot I could say, but it's already late, so I'll keep it fairly brief.
But I just want to say that I very, very much support the conservation of Cottage Grove. I walked this
neighborhood, and I believe that it strongly contributes to much of what Bloomington is, providing a
lot of character and community and a strong sense of our own history here in Bloomington.
I understand the importance and the desire for development and profit and for building new homes, but
it does not need to be done at the expense of this sense of neighborhood that I felt very strongly as
I was walking around Cottage Grove. You know, we talked a lot about affordable housing. I really do
believe that this is a large element of helping to maintain some affordable housing in our community.
To deny this request is to give the thumbs up for demolition and for cheap but overpriced development
where they will charge a lot more than people will be paying to live in these homes that are already
here in Cottage Grove. It may not happen in the immediate future or even within the next few years,
but it absolutely will happen eventually. And I'm not at all okay with that. Newer is not always better.
The vacant lots that I saw when I walked around the neighborhood just felt so harsh and out of place.
And the new buildings that I saw going up also did not inspire much of a sense of belonging in the area.
Lost my place now. And density has come up a couple of times in this conversation. So I want to just
forcefully push back against the idea that this conservation designation would destroy density efforts.
Not at all. ADUs are permissible here. In fact, I saw one property that's planning on adding one soon.
I saw another property that already had a really cute brick one out in back. Editions are also allowed
to these buildings. I saw at least one home that had already expanded with some additions. And in fact,
I know that there were at least a few of them that I probably just didn't even notice as I walked past
them because they just blended in so seamlessly.
Long story short, I feel very strongly about this preservation. So I'm very happy to support this tonight
and hope that it passes. Thank you. Yes, thank you. I feel a little bit like the Lorax right now because
I'm going to speak for the renters. When I was in college, I started college in 2020, graduated in 23.
The first apartment that I signed a lease for was for $1,200 with one other person. So I was spending
$600 a month.
And that was pretty much all I could afford. There was no option for me to go to the luxury apartments.
I now work two jobs and I still can't afford anywhere near that level of rent. And so when I look around
and I think about historic preservation as one of the only opportunities to preserve some of the housing
opportunities for people who look like me, for people who grew up like me,
When we think about the working class, they are not in those luxury apartments. If we want to bring
the working class back to Bloomington, we have to start providing real housing for them. And it's not
new apartments, guy rises. So I'm really excited to support this. This is in my district. And the other
thing I just want to say is I think I've had the opportunity to work with the butlers who are the petitioners
for about a year now. And for those of you who don't know, I've done some organizing professionally.
they're kind of the best I've ever seen. Like they knocked every single door multiple times. Like they
can articulate probably every single person's personal opinion. And that is incredibly commendable.
And I really, really admire how persistent you've been. And this is, I think we should always support
community members who have really engaged democratically, especially in an age where
Democracy seems to be dying in darkness. So thank you very much for your efforts and I look forward
to supporting this Yeah, I tend not to speak that much during council meetings So I'll probably take
all my five minutes and then I'll take my two afterwards my total seven This is
So first of all, I wanna say something really quick. It's been mentioned by a couple of my
council colleagues, most recently by Councilman Zulek to talk about the oft sort of repeated and assumed
but demonstrably totally false idea that we will get cheaper rents by allowing development just to follow
the market and let development take its course.
I was doing this a little earlier. Just look, anybody else got their computer? 422 East Cottage Grove,
614 North Grant, 521 North Dunn, 711 East Cottage Grove, all right in this area, all much denser multi-unit
apartments have been built and displaced, the exact kind of homes we're talking about here. The rents
in all of them,
Are fourteen hundred dollars per bedroom per month fourteen hundred It stems to be false that they're
cheaper because you can go there right now and find the existing Rental units there and they're significantly
cheaper than this It's so it's just absolutely untrue. This is going to it's demonstrably false You
can you can just look at what's available in this in this just folks in this area and
This idea of finding balance. I'm all about that But if you start from this area that's proposed right
now and you go east There's all that is not Proposed to be part of this and it's not designated you
go across the road tracks to the blocks then north from there on up to 17th Street You go across College
of Walnut and
on the other side of the tracks and go west to that whole area that goes back to where the marathon
is and where Chandler's garage is and those homes in there. You go south from this area from 10th Street
between Walnut and Indiana and Dunn and go towards town. There's plenty of balance. The vast majority
is available
for property owners to do what they want how they want when they want The balance I think is to preserve
areas like this that we have that are left that do Provide practical benefits for naturally occurring
affordable housing both in terms of rental and potential buyers and single-family residential buyers and
also preserving Our history character a little bit of what's left of this town And Lastly I want to
do want to say I don't blame The investment property owners at all for wanting to preserve the ability
to do what they want how they want when they want it I Would probably likely do the same thing or advocate
for the same thing if if that was my job
That's not my job. My job as a council member is to weigh the overall pros and cons and balances for
this benefits to the city to our community and make a decision and In this case, it's clear to me that
voting to support this is achieves that balance and achieves
My responsibility and my goal as a as a representative of the community of Bloomington So I'm gonna
be happy to support this. Thank you. Thank you so much councilmember Piedmont Smith and then councilmember
Stossberg Yeah, I am very pleased to support this tonight and just walking through the neighborhood
it It did remind me of my own childhood growing up in Bloomington not in such historic district, but just I
Having the variety of houses, the variety of residents, the cool different architecture from different
eras. And I see in my district, as some of my constituents have said, that a lot of these older, especially
the small homes, are being torn down and replaced by things that are not as affordable as the rent was
on the original home.
changing the streetscape and not for the better. And it's sad to see. So I'm pleased that the Butler's
did all this work and all this outreach to involve a lot of people in this and get the word out.
And really, we've received more positive comments than negative, especially from people who actually
live there.
So the only the only thing that that does bother me a little and has always bothered me about historic
districts is that it's such a small group of people in the end who write the guidelines who can dictate
what all the property owners in the district can do with their houses. So we really should do everything
we can to try to involve as many people as we can when those guidelines are written so everybody knows and can
bring forward their concerns and those can be discussed in a democratic way can lead to guidelines that
people can agree to and live with. But I'm really excited that this is coming forward for protection
and I'm sure I will enjoy more walks through that area in the future. Thank you. Hi, thank you.
I've had a lot of conflict about this petition. I think a lot of you probably know that I generally
have a lot of concerns with historic preservation petitions. And some of that has to do with
what Councilmember Piedmont-Smith just said about a small number of people who write the regulations,
like the ultimate guidelines, has to do with the state's rules about how it switches from a conservation
district to an historic district.
pretty much automatically just because the bar is so high to get over to keep it a conservation district.
And then I think you have to continue to make motions to keep it a conservation district as opposed
to it rolling over. And so that's not something that can be changed, but that's just one of my
My general concerns with petitions like this and similarly I have witnessed myself some of the ways
that various petitioners have been treated by the HPC when they have come to them wanting to do something
to one of their historic buildings and the increased costs associated with that. I do not think that
it is affordable to make something historic district. It is not affordable.
And where this location is right now, I mean these are not affordable houses like just FYI These are
not affordable houses. They are too close to campus to be affordable Okay, like the land value underneath
them. I mean it just kind of dictates like that So that that is my general like concern with with historic
districts this petition is really interesting though to me because I I
I this neighborhood has a lot of what I would consider really well constructed old buildings old houses
like if we want to think about historic integrity and And the variety I really appreciated the variety
when I was there one of the commoners against the petition kind of derided the variety but I actually
think that that's a benefit to the whole district and a lot of the
Houses are very well maintained. There are not very many that I automatically look at and go, ooh,
that one. Something that uses the space a lot better could or should go there. It's relatively dense,
and even within the lots, there are relatively small lots and small houses, but the houses that are
on the lots, they take up
enough of the lot so it's not like there's hardly any house on this huge lot in the way that some of
other areas are. And I think that the houses there generally have been constructed really well. So this
is part of the reason why I've had such conflict is that I don't generally like
And I don't generally like the process. I think that there's some real problems down the road but this
is a neighborhood that I do think should should be Preserved as it is because even though I say, you
know making it a sort district like it's it's not going to be affordable But if you kind of think like
leaving it as it is, you know, it might stay like this historic district adds some amount of
Money right like it makes it less affordable But it absolutely makes it a whole lot less affordable
to tear down these houses and then put in you know a quadplex or Actually, they're really duplexes with
five bedrooms on each side. Like those are even less affordable New construction is less affordable.
So it's this like we're not really preserving affordability here, but we also maybe making something
more affordable
than another option might be. So this is my conflict. And I'm gonna wait until it's my turn to vote
to figure out where I stand in the end of that conflict. But I think either way, I will be looking at
code over the next year and figuring out ways to change code in order to figure out a logistically possible
way to make sure
that there is buy-in from Hopefully in my mind a majority of property owners within our historic districts
to agree to
whatever rules there are in the end, because honestly, it's those rules, like how onerous is it in front
of the HPC? It all depends on those rules. And then similarly, I think that I really appreciate that
there's some rewriting of rules going on, and I think that there should be requirements about frequency
of having to address and potentially rewrite those rules. And so I will be pursuing that no matter how
I vote tonight. Thanks. Thank you. Would you like your extra two minutes?
Okay. All right. Any other comments? Councilman Rosenberger? Hi, thanks. I'm going to bop around like
normal. First, a little romance. I graduated from college in 2005 and my first college boyfriend lived
in a sixplex in this neighborhood and I lived in
a four or fiveplex at 10th and Grant. So I paid $450 a month. I paid for my own college outside of any
scholarships I got. But I couldn't afford anything fancy either. So the multifamily that I got to live
in, I very much appreciate that I got to graduate college without undergrad, without student loan debt.
OK, high level here.
I'm going to talk about more than high level but I am not supporting this until the state of Indiana
changes the way it works with historic districts and conservation districts. I don't like that. There's
not one conservation district that is known to have survived as a conservation district and everything
is forced into a historic district. I live in Prospect Hill.
and bought my home before it was a conservation district, and then now it is, of course, a historic
district, and I have gone through my own ups and downs with trying to change some, or not change some
things, but renovate some things on my house that were rotting, and then I wasn't allowed to change
because of the historic preservation committee, commission.
So that can be hard. Okay. I love sitting next to someone who we mostly agree on everything but in this
case we very much disagree and I think that's so cute. I haven't really read a lot that says preservation
equals affordability and a very big thing for me is
Affordable housing and Bloomington and for me it is econ 101 the more supply we have the more Competition
we have the more we can stop prices from rising as fast as they are I think prices will always be rising
for renting and for owning I know there's a lot of tension between Preserving I like to say preserving
not protecting also preserving great
Buildings versus not freezing neighborhoods in place. I I just read an article about this today preparing
for this that said More and more historic districts are being created despite there being fewer districts
that like really qualify across the US Some quick numbers
Historic preservation, increased renovation costs, increased maintenance costs, increases red tape and
process, increases unpredictability and what can get done, increases utility costs, because mostly we
are dealing with homes that leak air at an absurd degree. This all increases rents. It increases the
shortage of homes. I understand we have
We have small homes in this neighborhood and we have again my ex-boyfriends sixplex and the rents in
them are the same. They're nine hundred dollars a bedroom for a two bedroom house nine hundred per bedroom
or a bedroom in a sixplex nine hundred dollars. What happens when you have a shortage of housing as
we push out low income residents. I know we all already know that this neighborhood like council member
Stossberg said is already unaffordable. So that's not changing whether it's
Preserved or not preserved it is It's similar to prospect hill prices. I was looking at homes recently
sold. I just looked at a prospect hill home Going on the market for 320 grand and had rotting joists
that would require crawlspace work for another 20 grand So it's a two bedroom one baths in a historic
district That really isn't livable right now I
I think that's about it. I'd love to hear Elm Heights is redoing their historic standards. They are
the they are known as the neighborhood with the strictest rules and they're also the most expensive
neighborhood in the city. And I think that is probably related. OK. That's all for me. I do appreciate
everyone and everyone willing to show us around. But I pretty much usually have the same answer on that.
Thanks so much. Thank you.
Councilmember Ruff, you wanna follow through on your two minute threat there? Well, I wasn't going to,
but I get to tell my little story. It's not a romance story, but it's a bit of a romanticized story.
So I know I look much more vital and vigorous than 64 years old, which I'll be this summer. But if you
can imagine little Andy on a stingray,
for biking from the north side, where I grew up, down Indiana, under the railroad track, crossing there,
and along till 10th Street, and then cutting in to school at McCullough, where I went for six years,
from 1968 to, would have been, I guess, 73 or 74, when then they closed the school. But that whole trip,
Lot had a residence or a business all building forward including 10th Street between Indiana and done
Right across on the playground. What was the playground at McCullough all building forward a grocery
store Jerry's with the Jerry who lived above it and Hinkle's hamburgers a little farther down 10th, but
it's much less dense now than it was then and Largely because of speculative development efforts So
if freezing it in time, it's someone my council colleagues mentioned used that term Means maintaining
what was a more dense more diverse more
Community neighborhood centric or with stores restaurant grocery then so be it call it freezing it in
time It's what we need more of in this community right now the way it's been going so thank you that's
only two minutes Thank you so much Councilmember Stasburg, I'm so sorry. I just want to address one
other thing to you because some commenters and I think I got a couple emails mentioning the
that they have this preference for marking things one at a time for historic preservation instead of
whole districts. And I guess I wanna address that because I disagree with that. I think it would be
an administrative nightmare to just do one house at a time spotty all over the place would just be a
disaster. I just wanted to make sure to say that because that was something that had come up in comment
and some emails I got, thanks.
Thank you all so much. All right. Will the court please call the roll. Council member sorry. Yes. Daily.
Yes. Rallo. Yes. Yes. Rosenberger. No. Flaherty Stasburg. Yes. Piedmont Smith. Yes. So like yes.
That motion carries 7-1. Congratulations. Thank you so much. Are there any more motions? Oh, yes.
There are. Okay, so I move to consider ordinance 2026-08, ordinance 2026-09, ordinance 2026-10, and
ordinance 2026-11 together.
second Thank you. There's a motion and a second the for clarity The motion is to the motion is to consider
all of these at the same time It was councilmember Stossberg All right, all those in favor say aye Yes,
but there's a point of information I had my computer closed because it's dying. Those are all the ud.
Oh ones, right? Correct. Great. Thanks. Yes All those in favor say aye Any opposed?
That motion carries 7-0. So we are now considering, will Mr. Gruelich? Do we need to still have the
clerk read them in? I don't believe that we have to have a synopsis. We already read these for first
reading, so I don't believe we have to have a synopsis read. Attorney Allen?
I don't think you need to read the synopsis again, but if you'd like to have it, somebody can make a
motion to have it read. We will adopt. We will move to adopt before we vote. We're going to vote on
each one individually. OK. Yeah. So we can do one presentation, then we can adopt individually or not
accept individually. So Mr. Gulick, you can present on all of the above. So as quickly as you want to.
So we are here tonight to present our annual UDO amendments. So as usual, these kind of run the gamut
from minor technicality changes, proofreading errors, spelling errors, to adjusting language based on
certain interpretations
Misunderstandings or not clarity in terms of how certain things are administered So there are a few
things within these amendments that I think I will kind of point out that I don't want to say our big
things but kind of are a little bit larger on the scale that vary from just adding a footnote
or a misspelling to kind of changes in terms of Language within the udl. So we have four
Ordinances that are coming for you tonight one of those encompass technical amendments. So those are
just kind of housekeeping things Nothing really substantial in in those particular series of amendments
The next ordinance comes for chapter 4 which addresses development standards So one of the things that
I wanted to point out that is a big thing that is happening in that particular ordinance section is
a change to or removal of a process for determining sidewalks or more specifically relief
from installing sidewalks. There is a determinate sidewalk variance process in the UDO right now.
That was introduced in 2017 When we went through some of the modifications to the language within the
udio we incorporated a new Process that allowed for a determinant sidewalk variance to be approved So
a determinant sidewalk variance means you are granted temporary relief from having to install a sidewalk
but there is a zoning commitment that is recorded that can allow for the city to
Call in that sidewalk requirement at some point in the future that some point in the future could be
weeks months years decades. So those have are can be somewhat troublesome to track, but even more so.
Troublesome to to try to enforce or bring forward You know several years down the line when you're dealing
with a completely different property owner, you know who had no idea or You know certainly the implications
of saying you've got to build a sidewalk and spend several thousand dollars Can be very imposing on
that particular new property owner so we we
Here, determinate sidewalk variances occasionally, maybe a few of these a year. So they get recorded
on a property, but they don't really result in anything really being installed on a property,
and like I said, can be very challenging down the line for us to try to track those, and then even,
like I said, more specifically to call them in. So several communities within the state and around the
country have a process for a payment in lieu
Fund where instead of granting a variance a petitioner makes a contribution Somewhat proportional to
the cost of that sidewalk into a dedicated fund that that fund is then used to fund other pedestrian
facility improvements within that community So we are proposing to remove that determinant sidewalk
variance process and allow for instead a payment in lieu to be a
Made so this would go to the alternative transportation fund which is administered by the council So
this contribution would then be used subject to council's discretion as part of the fund distribution
for other pedestrian improvements throughout the community so this is kind of a big change and we feel
like it certainly results in a better benefit to the community as a result in a real concrete improvement
within the community rather than a
Piece of paper that is recorded that that doesn't result in anything So we did see this as a benefit
and like I said, there are many communities within the state that incorporate this so we do feel like
this is a Positive thing but is a big thing. So I certainly wanted to make sure to point that out the
rest of the amendments in chapter 4 another one that is somewhat substantial is a change in terms of
how landscaping is calculated or done for parking lots and
The current regulations deal with a certain amount of trees and shrubs per the raw number of parking
spaces in a lot over time we have found that that Can be can result in very large quantity of shrubs
and trees that is just simply not practical To get on a particular property and so we are shifting how
that is calculated and following the model that the county uses which just looks at
parking lot landscaping for the perimeter. So it's not based on just a raw number of spaces within a
property itself, but is more tailored to what was the goal of parking lot landscaping, which is to buffer
the perimeter, the view of these parking spaces from the perimeter. But then there is another requirement
that deals with landscaping within that parking area as well.
So it's just an adjustment in terms of how landscaping is done for parking lots to more closely align
that with reality and what is practical And so there is an adjustment made for that The next series
of amendments deal with amendments in chapter 6. So this is for administration and procedures section
There's nothing in here that I would
Classify is really kind of major again. These are just kind of some housekeeping sections This deals
with actually removal of the determinant sidewalk variance from a process Which just kind of goes along
with the language that I mentioned for chapter 4 And then the last series of amendments is for chapter
2 3 5 and 7 so that deals with zoning districts use regulations subdivision standards and definitions
Within this section, the one thing that I would say is probably the most noteworthy would be the removal
of the standardized business ordinance language. So if some of the council may remember, the standardized
business language was introduced probably 15 years ago, something like that, and was implemented as,
it was intended to serve as a way to
prohibit standardized businesses from moving into a location. However, as we went through the legal
challenges in terms of what we could actually regulate, you know, we can't say no to a particular business.
We can't regulate what it looks like on the outside for signage. So the language that got
folded into the UDO really got diluted from what was the intention of saying no to a business to regulating
just what exterior signage looks like. And so the language that's in the UDO in relation to standardized
business talks about making sure it's compatible with other signage or buildings along a corridor, which
again, as we've gone through several, several years of trying to administer, is very challenging.
To try to come up with some sort of a cohesive unified sign Appearance along a quarter because there's
so much and so it really just became very difficult to administer Wasn't really accomplishing what the
goal was intended to when it was built into the code And so we are proposing to take that out so those is
Those are kind of I would say that the brief overview obviously. I'm happy to go into specifics on any
of the Other items that maybe I didn't go into a detail. Thank you so much councilmember Ella Yeah,
I had a question about the parking lot trees so when you used of
Having trees in a parking lot is to reduce the island effect. And so by relegating them to the perimeter
You don't enjoy that effect. Is that our is that problematic for us?
Yeah, so so the as I mentioned there is still a requirement for landscaping within the interior and
it's just kind of shifted how that is calculated from a wrong number just based on how many spaces to
a percentage requirement within that interior so it requires a certain amount of green space and the
number of parking spaces then
Dictates, you know a certain percentage of that interior that has to be green space has to have a certain
amount of trees for every island You know, you have to have a island for every nine parking spaces So,
you know, I would say in reality you really accomplish the same amount of landscaping We still
get landscaping and trees within parking lots. So it certainly addresses the heat island effect that
we're concerned with it just adjusts
Number of shrubs and trees that were previously required that like I said, we're almost practically
impossible to accomplish And so we found time and time again variances were being granted from the Board
of Zoning Appeals just to Acknowledge that you know just was not possible to plant 900 shrubs or you
know Whatever the number might have been in some situations where you had large parking lots So it's
just a recalibration of how that's done. And like I said, it's reflective of what the county does and
So it makes it easier for developers, you know, they don't have to adjust to two different Requirements
for that. So it kind of expedites review as it makes it easier for developers to know what the standards
are Thank you The amount for the payment in lieu of sidewalk calculated I
Yep, so once a year the Plain Commission would set a rate For what that number would be so there are
certainly a variety of standards that we could use You know some of those could be a common cost estimator
that in not uses You know could be just a raw concrete amount. It could be a factor of something between
the amount of concrete and
labor and installation costs So that's something that I said that the Planning Commission will arrive
at at the beginning of every year and set that number You know, certainly we want it to be Somewhat
realistic in terms of what a material cost would be without at the same time being cost prohibitive
that You know, it's just too much that it wouldn't be practical for an individual to pay
Okay, and that, just to be clear, because this is kind of a policy departure, if somebody chooses the
payment in lieu, there's no guarantee that that's gonna be used for a sidewalk anywhere near them in
the future, right? It just goes into a big pot of money for the alternative transportation fund, and
it gets used for something. Yeah, again, so it'd be used somewhere within the community, and like I
said, well, I guess I didn't say this, we do maybe a handful of these a year.
You know, so we're talking about maybe four five or three or something like that So it's not a significant
amount that in and of itself that one contribution is going to result in a sidewalk along You know a
particular road frontage, you know, it's just you know here is here is the current process of determinant
sidewalk variances Which you know in reality accomplishes nothing, you know, it's something that sits
on paper and it just kind of gets sitting in a corner and here's something that
a real benefit within the community somewhere, you know, certainly the council can look at, you know,
where those contributions may have come from and use that as a factor as you look to proportion where
that money gets spent. But we don't expect it to be, you know, a substantial amount based on the limited
number of cases that we see. Yeah, no, I mean, it may be the same follow-up question that I'm about
to ask, so go ahead.
And then also, okay, so we have two follow-up questions on the payment in lieu. I was curious about,
so you talk about the sort of process by which or the considerations, right, of topography or other
things like that, but more specifically,
I was a little unclear on who makes the final call So the the Transportation Commission would be the
board that would hear that so because you know, we felt like because you know a request to not install
a sidewalk is is kind of a large deviation from the scene of the UTO that that is something that should
be Publicly vetted and so the Transportation Commission would be the board that would be approving those.
Okay past the comes we're starting them back to councilmember Pema Smith just in terms of
Did I hear you understand so the payment in the money would go into the alternative transportation fund.
Is that a non-reverting fund? Do you I believe it is is a non-reverting I am not a hundred percent positive
Okay, I guess I just want to make sure that we do a little bit of research in that to make sure that
it That that money goes into a non-reverting fund in the same way that payment in lieu for affordable
housing Goes into the housing development funds so that then that money doesn't end up getting lost
or reallocated if it doesn't get spent
In short, yeah within a year or something. So confirm that or not, but I don't believe it reverts. Yeah,
thank you Back to you. Sorry So the payment in lieu goes into the alternative transportation fund which
is used by Two or three different departments, but I think somewhere in your memo you implied it would
actually go into the pot of money that the Common Council Pedestrian Safety Committee
Uses Allocates. Yes, right. Yes As I yes, I understand that is the same that is the alternative
transportation fund. Yes, right But the the Common Council only has control over a certain amount of
money in that fund So I guess yeah, I don't know what I don't know what your limit is for how much of
that you can disperse So it may or may not come down to us I mean it it'll just go in that fund and
whatever portion of that fund we're allowed to
allocate that's the amount we're allowed to allocate yes and like I said I mean let's let's pretend
you know we we looked at a few realistic scenarios you know a common property that might be a hundred
feet long you know that are and needed to do a five you know six foot wide sidewalk
Might be looking at a contribution of four to five thousand dollars something like that might be a little
bit more So let's pretend, you know that there were like three of those a year you looking at a contribution
of maybe fifteen to twenty thousand So I don't I don't know proportional wise what's in that budget
amount item now, but Five hundred thousand dollars. Okay. Yeah. So yeah, that would be a very small
percentage I guess of of that Okay, I
I think I kind of answered it for myself that it would not be like we get an additional five thousand
dollars to play with. No we get whatever we allocate the budget. OK. Thank you. I had another question
that because when we've looked at payments in lieu as relates to housing developments we've run into
some sort of adverse incentives and like the costing which I think why you know that first question
was so important.
what mechanisms, or have we considered any mechanisms to think about ensuring that this doesn't create
an incentive for private developers, for example, to skirt building infrastructure? Is there a possibility
with the payment and lose structure for sidewalks to allow,
Maybe too hypothetical but like to allow a developer to skirt the needs like to just say actually I'm
not gonna build that here's a payment in lieu it right like so that's where the transportation would
Commission would evaluate that request kind of based on those same kind of same set of criteria as you
know You know, what is what is the pattern along the street? Is there likely to be other developments?
Are there unique constraints that prevent it? You know, so those are the the review criteria that are
in there are what they would use to evaluate that so if they find
That it didn't met that then they would say no you have to put it in. It's a fantastic. Thank you any
other questions Or comments All right, I'll move to a time of public comment. Thank you so much We might
have some things in a second. Is there anybody in chamber that would like to comment on? any of the
ordinances ordinance twenty twenty six or eight twenty twenty six or nine ten or eleven and
Is there anyone online? Tremendous. We'll come back to council council members any comments or further
questions? All right, seeing none, oh, please come to miss us I'll just comment real fast and thank
the plank mission and the planning department for the technical corrections I mean the UDO is a big
document and every year we've
find something in it that Needs some sort of fix and it takes a lot of detail work to do that and I
appreciate that work from staff. Thank you I Move to adopt ordinance 2020 608 Second there's a motion
to second all those in favor. Oh, no, there's motion to second. So any discussion All right, and will
the clerk please call the roll
Councilmember Daley Yes, Rallo Yes, Ruff. Yes Rosenberger. Yes clarity Stasburg. Yes Piedmont Smith.
Yes Zulek Sorry, yes that motion carries seven zero I Move to adopt ordinance twenty twenty six. Oh
nine Second there's a motion in a second any discussion
The clerk, please call the roll Councilmember Rallo. Yes rough. Yes Rosenberger. Yes clarity Stasburg.
Yes Piedmont Smith Yes, so like a sorry. Yes daily Yes, that motion carries seven zero any further motions. I
I move to adopt ordinance 2026-10. Second. There's a motion and a second. Any discussion? Will the clerk
please call the roll? Ruff? Yes. Rosenberger? Yes. Flaherty? Stasberg? Yes. Piedmont-Smith? Yes. Zulek?
Asari? Yes. Daly? Yes. Rallo? Yes.
That motion carries seven zero. Are there any more motions? I moved to adopt ordinance 2026 dash 11
second motion and a second. Any discussion? Well, the clerk please call the roll. Rosenberger. Yes.
Flaherty Stasper. Yes. Piedmont Smith. Yes. Zulek. I'm sorry. Yes.
Yes. Rallo? Yes. Raff? Yes. That motion carries seven, zero, and that finishes our time of second readings.
Thank you so much for your time and patience. We now move to our final time of public comment. If there's
anybody in chambers or online who'd like to make public comment who did not make public comment during
the first, well, no one made public comment. So if you'd like to make public comment at this time, you
can come to the podium.
You know the rules by now. I see one approaching Hi Dave Askins with the B Square Bulletin there was
some brief discussion about whether the synopsis should be read for the four items This is Bloomington
municipal code the editor the synopsis shall be read whenever the legislation and accompanies it introduced
at a council meeting for the first or second reading and it shall become part of the official record
so I would be delighted if
those four synopses could just be read aloud. Thanks. Thank you. Anyone online that would like my comment?
Anyone else in chambers? Fantastic. Are there any motions? I yeah, sure. I'm sorry. I move that the
clerk put me on the spot. I move that the clerk
Read by title and synopsis only ordinance 20 26-8 20 26-9 20 26 10 and 20 26 11 Second there's a motion
in the second any discussion All those in favor say discussion go. Yes, please I don't know how this
works with procedure right now since we already voted on it but I think because it's past 1030 we'll
have to do a roll call vote and
Sounds good. I think I don't really know that comes from Prima Smith. I think it can be understood since
there was no objection that we all decided to. What's it called. Wave the rules suspend the rules suspend
the rules and not have all those synopsis read. Mr. Allen.
I think that that's a fair interpretation, it was unanimous, and if someone objected, they could have
made a motion. I was reading a different part of the code, which, Dave's right, there's two different
references in terms of reading the synopsis, but I also think that that's a fair interpretation, that
you all decided to suspend the rules by opting to consider them as a group, and then not reading the
synopsis, title and synopsis. It doesn't hurt to read it as well at this point, either, so.
There's a motion and a second on the table any other discussion All right Will the clerk please call
a voice a roll call on the motion to read Yes, please Councilmember Flaherty Stasper. Yes. Yes. Yes.
Yes. Sorry. Yes. Yes
Yes Yes Yes Will the clerk please read that carries eight zero all four of them Ordnance 20 2608 to
amend to provide technical corrections and
to title 20 of the Bloomington Municipal Code entitled Unified Development Ordinance. Synopsis, the
ordinance contains technical corrections or clarifications in the UDO, including reference corrections,
removal of unnecessary wording, and syncing references across the UDO. There are 22 amendments proposed.
Ordinance 2026-09.
amend and provide technical corrections to chapter 4 Development standards and incentives of title 20
of the Bloomington Municipal Code entitled unified development ordinance Synopsis this ordinance contains
corrections and amendments to chapter 4 development standards and incentives there are 70 amendments
in this petition and
Ordinance 2026 dash 10 to amend and provide technical corrections to chapter 6 administration and procedures
of title 20 of the Bloomington Municipal Code entitled unified development ordinance Synopsis this ordinance
contains corrections and amendments to chapter 6 administration and procedures of the unified development
ordinance there are 27 amendments in this petition and
and ordinance 2026-11 to amend and provide technical corrections to Chapter 2, Zoning Districts,
Chapter 3, Use Regulations, Chapter 5, Subdivision Standards, and Chapter 7, Definitions of Title 20
of the Bloomington Municipal Code entitled Unified Development Ordinance Synopsis. This ordinance contains
corrections and amendments to Chapter 2, Zoning Districts,
Chapter three use regulations chapter five subdivision standards Chapter seven definitions of the unified
development ordinance. There are 28 amendments in this petition This is a schedule fantastic, please
consider this portion of code All right any other things for any other things for the first get council
schedule Yes, please Councilmember Piedmont Smith and Stasberg
Well, I was just going to clarify that the Committee on Council Processes is meeting tomorrow. But you
won't be at 4 p.m. Where are we meeting the Alison conference room, I believe. So welcome to come and
join the fun comes with us. There was a fiscal committee meeting scheduled for this Friday at 830 and
I canceled that. So I just wanted to make sure to announce that the topic that we were going to
consider we couldn't, because Reedy Financial was not available on that day. So there is one more meeting
of fiscal committee before summer recess. Has the clerks have canceled? Fantastic. It's already been
canceled. Fantastic. It's all officially canceled already. Fantastic. Daily then, Peter R. Smith. And
tomorrow, no, no, Tuesday. After Monday, yeah, yeah. Yeah, next Tuesday, the day after Memorial Day,
the Jack Hopkins grant
Allocation meeting will be taking place at 6 p.m. I believe in McCloskey Tuesday no, no, no Tuesday
right right after right after Memorial Day Correction for the committee on council processes meeting.
It's in the McCloskey room. Okay, excellent Thank you. We have cleared our backlog. This was a fantastic
achievement. We are adjourned