I'd like to call the March 27, 2025 meeting of the Bloomington Historic Preservation Commission to order. Okay, we'll start with a roll call. Dumpkin Campbell? Here. Karen Duffy? Here. Jack Baker? Here. Jeremy Hackard? Here. Ernesto Castaneda? Here. Raynaud Cross? Here. Sam DeSolar? Here. Melanie Duesner? Elizabeth Mitchell? Daniel Schlegel? We have Quorum. Has everyone had a chance to go for the minutes? Yep. I will entertain a motion on the minutes. There's a motion to approve meeting notes from the last hearing. Second. Okay, and the second was you. Absolutely fine. Okay, so there's a motion on the table to approve and second the meeting minutes from March 13th. We'll take a roll call of voting members. Jack Baker? Yes. Jeremy Hackard? Yes. Ernesto Castaneda? Yes. Raynaud Cross? Yes. Sam DeSolar? Yes. Five yes votes. Minutes are approved. If I could prevail upon you to read our procedural and... Sure. Thank you. So this is the procedure for certificates of appropriateness and demolition delays. For each item, the historic preservation program manager will first present a staff report. We will then hear if the petitioner has any additional information, followed by a round of questions from each commissioner. We ask that petitioners, the public, and commissioners refrain from speaking until addressed by the chair, unless the question is directly addressed to them. If a member of the public or petitioner wishes to comment, please raise your hand until recognized by the chair. Once a motion is made, we will then open up discussion of the item for members of the commission. We encourage all commissioners, petitioners, and members of the public to be civil and respectful at all times. Thank you. Let's move on to our first COA. First COA, 2513 for 1122 South Rogers Street in the McDowell Gardens Historic District. 1122 South Rogers is a single-story California bungalow with a detached garage built in 1964. The Indiana Department of Historic Preservation and Archaeology surveyors listed the building as notable for its high degree of integrity and distinctive craftsman features such as exposed rafter tails and original windows and doors. Broadly speaking, the intention is to install PV solar panels on the furthest east roof of the house and on the west-facing roof of the garage. A solar power battery, a new electrical panel, and to remove the dying tree on the east side of the house and to cut a few limbs off of the large silver maple on the south side of the house to allow more sunlight to reach the PV panels on the house. 8,910 watt solar array to be installed. Half of the panels will be installed on the east facing garage roof. The other half would be installed on the south-facing easternmost section of the house roof. Storage 10,000 watts, 200 amps service upgrade, removal of large dying silver maple in front of east side of the house that can cast shade on house-mounted PV panels and cutting five branches from the sprawling silver maple on the south side of the house that would increase direct sunlight to reach the mounted PV panels. So here indicated where limbs would be removed from the remaining tree as well as placement of the solar panel on the house and placement on the garage. Staff approved COA 2513. The petitioner intends to install the PV panels at the same pitch of the house and garage roofs. The asphalt shingle roof is not in and of itself a significant architectural feature of the house so damage to architecturally significant features is not a concern. Comment from the district design review committee recommend approval of the plan which is similar to other installations nearby in the district. Oh two people are in the waiting room. We can just ask if there's any comments from the petitioners or from no from from the commissioners from let's move on to the next one. Okay all right next item um 11 COA 2514 for 1100 East 2nd Street in the Elm Heights historic district. The petitioner is at Apex Home Services. This is built in 1903. 1100 East 2nd Street is a slightly altered American four square with classical details. The house sits on a corner lot with the west elevation facing Hawthorne Drive. We are updating the interior the kitchen interior at 1100 East 2nd Street. As part of the renovation we are adding a new range hood above the stove. The unit will vent exhaust from the kitchen to the exterior of the home. This will require installing a termination on the exterior of the home for the range hood to connect to. We are proposing installing an Imperial six-inch galvanized steel R2 exhaust vent hood. We are proposing to paint the vent hood termination to match the exterior color of the home. It will be mounted near the entry door on Hawthorne Drive on the Hawthorne Drive side of the home. Pictures of the vent and the home are included. The yellow square on the home photographs indicates the ported location of the vent termination. Staff approved COA 2514. The proposed vent hood would be installed in an inconspicuous location near the existing exterior mechanical equipment and would not distract from or impact significant architectural features. The feature is small and the COA proposes painting the vent hood the same color as the house and existing mechanical equipment. Currently the site of installation is partially screened by Bush and the Elm Heights design review committee has not offered any objections to this proposal. Okay next commission review um 25 COA 2515 for 11 yes which one the one that was are the any of these petitions here well the first two there was one that was withdrawn that's going to be the second one that was under staff review or sorry commission or those are those are staff review oh okay okay so is the petitioner here for the first coa which is sir welcome petitioner indicated he was present all right and oh for the so we i think we went through this one already yeah right yes so we can go into the next coa the commissioner of u1 if you guys are ready yeah i think we're ready okay coa 2515 petitioner is tyler martin the address is 1104 north grant in the garden hill historic district on november 14th 2024 the historic preservation commission voted to approve the demolition of a non-contributing building at 1104 north grant subsequently the owner submitted a petition for a new build on for the december 12th meeting of the historic preservation commission which was withdrawn when it did not receive a recommendation the owner of the lot has communicated with the district design review committee in the following months to come up with a new design to meet district guidelines the request is for the construction of a new two story house the proposal calls for the use of asphalt shingle roofing seven inch reveal lp siding double hung vinyl windows and painted wooden posts and brackets so staff recommends approval of coa 2515 and this is new construction so there's a long list i'm going to read through okay materials the proposed materials include lp siding provided it does not have imitation grain brick veneer asphalt roof shingles and painted wood architectural details these are consistent with district guidelines a setback the 30 foot front setback matches the neighboring house and other houses on the block likewise the 15 foot side back setback matches the nearby buildings on grant being the same height as neighboring buildings on the block it can be located as close to them as they are to each other entry the one story entry front entry porch with tapered posts uh reflects similar porches found on contributing buildings throughout the district the addition of a side entrance on grant contributes to the pattern of fenestration typical on the buildings in the district and relates the building to its surrounding neighborhood context height two-story buildings are unusual in garden hill and generally the construction of a new building should fall within the range set by the highest and lowest contiguous buildings on the block if the block has uniform heights sitting on the corner of 15th street with two buildings directly east of the proposed construction approximately 25 feet high while this design presents a 26 foot 1.8 inch ridge height this is fairly close to the neighboring contiguous buildings on the block outline the dual gabled front entrance and full width uh single story porch on the south elevation match outlines recommended in the district guidelines on the western elevation facing grant a second story dormer breaks up the building's long orientation mass the 24 by 46 foot footprint is similar in site coverage to neighboring buildings on the 400 block of east 15th street and the 1100 block of north grant street and with height considered the overall mass is similar to building neighboring buildings on the 15th street block fenestration the regular fenestration patterns presented on the street facing facades are fairly typical of buildings in the district the use of double hung windows is consistent with many surrounding historic buildings and the new builds stylistic influences while the submitted plan is large by standards of the district its highest height mats and footprint fit into the context of the block and the proposed design elements fit district guidelines and reference architectural features found on historic buildings in the district both street facing facades convey a similar sense of entry to that which is expressed by the surrounding district i did received a neighborhood comment on this new design that was resubmitted 1104 north grant is missing something on the west side but the front of the house looks good the meeting went well tyler also said that they would replace the old trees they had cut to build they would have to cut to build there are three of them i wish i could be more specific about the west side that is the side facing grant the longer one uh it just looks plain but it's a lot better than it looked before so no real complaints all right if the petitioner is present sure are you present are you both there's two of you that are saying you're present or are you for a different case i'm the first one the 1122 south rogers south rogers that was the staffer for a little okay so you're good so you actually don't need to be here oh i'm done you're good you're good to go it all happened so fast it's like getting a shot i'm this one oh good good so do you have anything to add to what noah said about your project um not not really we you know when we cut it by 40 percent in length based off of the feedback we got last time and tried to make some adjustments to the roof line and front porch added everything that you just heard from noah but yeah we had a good meeting i feel like with the neighborhood and tried to acquiesce everything all the feedback we got that's about all they won't be black windows either that was a rough draft the other pictures probably a little more accurate to what we had planned i don't know that this district district reviews colors so i don't think okay great we have a question uh questions duncan you got any questions i do not ernesto you got any questions jack any questions new questions jeremy questions no karen renard um just one in terms of materials is there a restriction in the guidelines for the district about imitation grain on the lv signing it's in the material section it says provided it does not have you know right saying no no no product is imitating the grain of which is used oh and that's in their guidance yes okay um and is there a copy where you can actually read the dimensions on the plans i had sent a separate copy out with the uh it's in the email it's a separate it's a separate attachment it unfortunately just doesn't translate well to the size of it okay thanks a little bit better but fine are you looking at heights so do you want to look at no just yeah just the dimensions overall it'd be nice to have a look at it okay that's it this no i'm this one is better thanks all right who did i miss amelia i get you no question okay no questions uh i had a question for the petitioner two questions one lp sighting this is a louisiana pacific product um it looks like it only it and you're saying it's a lap sighting the lap sighting on lp on the louisiana pacific site says it's only available in cedar grain uh so is that so do you have an alternate material you can get it in smooth you can okay that's just what i was reading if you can get it in yeah it's a special order product you can get it things like okay cool sorry no worries anywhere sir i'm ernest i'm thomas partner i'm sam i have one other question would you bring up the site plan from the civil engineer so if you look at the back of the property you have a sidewalk leading up to the middle of that rear facade right and if you look at would you go to the elevations that they gave and show what the rear facade is so my understanding is the rear facade is the one in the lower right corner see the sidewalk dead ending on the middle of a blank elevation yes i think that is a mistake from smith's design which is very easy i mean basically it was wrapped to the front facade or west facade but i can let me pull it up make sure that yeah he pulled the foundation print and didn't look closely enough at how where the porch entrances actually were but that driveway would go to the west facade okay sidewalk so the sidewalk goes from the parking area correct to straight to the west correct because i think that's the only other entrance besides the south so okay all right um all right i had another question was my one other question um this will come back to me at this point do we and we do we have any additional comments from the neighborhood um if we can check if there's anybody from the neighborhood from the public okay what's your name sir yes we met with tyler and he did a really good job on the front appreciate that i wish god it wasn't five bedrooms i thought you said it was three really i wish i wish a lot of things i wish the city didn't allow them anymore um at one point they had gotten rid of them for a garden hill it was a core neighborhood down zone and i said to tyler they they've been a disaster in terms of innocence and all kinds of stuff um but anyway i think the front looks so much better so i'm very pleased with that i said to tyler when we met with him uh i wish hbc would just i don't know he's amenable to this on the west side well carrie we disagree on this but i was hoping he'd allow him to plant evergreens you know on the west side there that in bank and and uh i think he had mostly just some blank some windows or something i think you made him put an entryway there i think it would be a lot easier for him so when you say the west side the west side of the of the house facing grant that and that's that one with all the windows and stuff on it well it has another entryway yeah okay i just want to make sure we're talking about the same one right that's not showing up under the uh close captioning yeah but there's another door under that gable you know native plants and evergreen trees and and uh my bottom line as i said to tyler to try to push all activity to the front of the house so when the boom speakers start and they will they're facing south this is my mentality up there this is someone who's lived there for over 40 years and i know what's going to happen here tyler may be an exemplary landlord but you got to keep those beds filled that's the bottom line so um but you're wanting him to do this so i'm just trying to limit activity on that side of the house i don't know if he's amended i think it'd be cheaper i think for him to do that but that's my two cents but i appreciate surely appreciate what he's done with the farm thank you all right um i think we're at that point where we can do no other comments from the public or anybody online we do have a christer bomb chen hyuk lee zavier gray members of the public online if any of you have a comment on this proposal would you please raise your hand i'm not seeing any raised hands all right uh i think at this point we can entertain a motion i move to deny this is coa 2515 do we have a second in i'll second it so we can talk all right we have a motion on the table and it's been seconded uh want to talk through why you want to bring it down it's come a long way uh and i'm pleased with that and with the documentation that's being shown we can actually see what they would get there um i've driven the neighborhood a number of times now and i'm always sad to see what's happening to it it's it's transitioning from a neighborhood to a commercial development and this is not historic preservation this is allowing new construction and we're we're we're actually doing something that the plan commission can't do they can't really talk about windows and doors and windows and that sort of thing where we can fill that in and we can we can ask for those things and in terms of the um compliance with the way the neighborhood looks or tends this neighborhood is tending to be a commercial neighborhood rather than the original neighborhood there are houses there are a number of houses that are original to that neighborhood and i can't say that this fits with the houses that i saw there that's why i will vote no on the project sizing i can't argue with the size it's about a thousand square feet per level it's about two thousand square foot house 46 by 24 something like that i think i'm close um and the look isn't bad for the kind of house it is but it's not historic preservation anybody else want to address this i would i would agree with jack that i don't think it matches a lot of the historic homes in the district and looking around at those it matches a couple of the newer houses that are kind of outside of the district a little bit but they're within the same blocks so yeah i would agree with jack's observation on that anybody else have comments like you might have one yeah i'm just thinking you want to think about it yeah i yeah so can you have an example well the issue with new construction which is never going to be historic preservation is whether there's compatibility or adequate compatibility and i agree with jack that the neighborhood is radically changed which changes the concept of compatibility for me so you know in terms of how porches are arranged and the roof lines are and so on you know there's there's compatibility with lots of structures across the city most of the houses i saw this neighborhood that are remaining are single story front-facing bungalows for the most part they're few and far between though and there's some pretty nasty intervening multifamily stuff um county coroner from this site included stuff that's been there for 45 55 years i suspect this neighborhood is going to continue to go this way to the extent that you can acquire property in it um but in compatibility terms i don't i don't really have a lot of projection to it it's a whole lot better than most of the multifamily stuff that's been put in there um and i'm not sure what we're protecting here anymore honestly um i hate to i hate to say that but you know my preference would have been to not tear this house down but it's already been so significantly altered that preservation of it would be a complete redo probably cost almost as much as building this new house i i hear the i hear the neighborhood talking about five bedroom apartments but you know the days from the 1980 master plan are gone i mean we've overwritten just about all those good ideas in the meantime not not we you and me but no i know it i know um and we can't do anything about that about what's permitted um and in general also jack i think there's an issue about as these places change we've been consistent in our approval of enlarging existing structures as well it's not all great stuff but keeping these neighborhoods vital has somehow required enlarging the spaces people want more bedrooms they want garages they want you know and so we've approved dozens of them in core neighborhoods and even even though this is new construction it's really kind of the same thing so you know and i'm impressed that the owner has collaborated with the neighborhood and tried to do something that's that's most it's more compatible could it be more compatible yeah you could but i'm not inclined to send him back to do it again yes i agree with duncan i don't know what else is left there to compare one comment that i do have and should have brought this up earlier as a question i noticed that the drawings are showing looks like a slavon grade is that the case or is this going to be a crawl space it's very low grade once you get up past the evening it'll be a crawl space but it will be a crawl space more likely yes split face points it's just on the drawings and renders it breathes like a slavon grade it just looks like a slavon grade and if you were to do this do you have a preference yes in crawl space is the preference yes yes i mean yes i mean it would be good for you guys to be able to have access to plumbing and all that as opposed to a slavon grade that's my my observation we're very flexible on yeah i think that would be good for you guys for maintenance look better and it would look better for sure it would be taller yes which at this point it's okay i think we're being jumping out of the back and forth a little bit um i'm gonna make an exception i'm gonna ask that uh there's one other public comment i if you all are all right with it we can hear and bernard are you ready to come in uh who's the public commentator uh chris derbaum i asked him to unmute chris you could unmute let's hear what you have to say okay we'll give them another yeah a little bit let's when he unmutes i've got a sure i'm chatting with him so i i i i hear a lot of what my fellow commissioners are saying i think this proposal has done quite a lot to comply with guidelines i think it does really well on setbacks um it does the things and the language of the house it's you know it's it's very arts and crafts it feels weird to me and i think what you were talking about it feels like you're taking an arts and crafts house and putting it on a ranch slab so i'm really glad to hear that you're talking about putting it on a crawl because that's one of the places i don't feel it quite meets the guidelines because when you're talking about context and i think these guidelines are actually fairly well written in terms of what you're looking for in terms of context you're looking at adjacent contributing properties so the house next door to the east and the next one to the east aren't contributing properties so all the contributing properties that i see are single story or story and a half and all the ones that aren't contributing are two stories or the ones that are across the way which aren't even in the district or two stories and they're particularly horrible so i am concerned about the height and the mass of this i'm not concerned about the footprint i think the arrangement of entrances you've done are and if you are willing to boost up the porch i think that'll work but the things i am concerned about are i want to i want to see a site plan that actually matches what you got going on and the height for me is problematic i think it's an incredibly well detailed building and i'm really happy you went on top to the neighborhood but i would like to see it bumped up and i am very concerned about the height of this thing um has chris been able to unmute himself yes i'm unmuted all right chris what do you have oh just i i liked what duncan said and i want to say that what you're protecting is the overall character of this neighborhood and it's really a privilege to be able to do this fine line design control and we could have seen such a worse project without these kind of guidelines so i think understanding the role in each each neighborhood is different and this is this is a little bit of an odd one but keeping the character of the neighborhood is the job and i think we can get a little too caught up on some of these details and i would suggest you tell this builder he's done a nice job of listening and trying and go ahead to do a good job of executing this project thank you thank you chris all right anyone else miss anybody i'm in the unique position of being torn sorry i said i'm in the unique position of being torn usually i am easily on one side or the other but i've heard the comments and i'm still troubled there was one issue that i had before and i think you kind of cemented it in my mind in in the form of a question i had a difficulty between noah's comments about mass and your comments about the typical houses in the neighborhood being single story story and a half that's the majority of them there are a couple of two-story houses in the neighborhood that are contributing there's one immediately to the north that's a ranch that's contributing but my memory of the neighborhood is is is similar to what you described single story and a half to have you know 2300 square foot two-story house almost seems to be atypical for this neighborhood and i was just trying to figure out how noah kind of i can show my work if you like i just taught me through it sure um so the footprint each floor is approximately a thousand square feet that's fairly similar to the surrounding contributing buildings you know that context um a couple of the non-contributing buildings on the block they go a lot larger than that that's you know not really recommended um going to the section the guidelines on height um the language here about height generally the height of a new building should fall within a range set by the highest and lowest contiguous buildings if the block has uniform heights uncharacteristically high or low buildings should not be considered when determining this range so the both of the buildings to the east are approximately this height both of those buildings are non-contributing to sam's point um you know the context has to take into account contributing buildings that is the context and there are a lot of places in these district guidelines that reference that and that was one of my concerns with the previous design um that had a much larger mass it was 40 feet further back let me let me stop you could you could you comment with regards to the contributing buildings how does this building compare to the contributing buildings sure um i'd say among the contributing buildings in the district there are several that are two stories and several more that are one and a half stories um the one to the north of this building on the same block is kind of one and a half story yes i think that's worth looking at because that one's up on the hill it's got an exposed basement yeah okay so um oh screen share okay so this is the block of grant um this is the building to the north on that block um most of the other ones on this block are one story so taking it down to uh this is the lot where the new construction is being proposed okay okay so i'm mixing up my cases then i'm thinking of the one on lincoln that was withdrawn right and the one to the house to the north on that is a up in the hill okay that had a bit of a steeper slope than this one did yeah okay that's my that's my bad but this is actually very helpful because the immediate context you're getting a lot of single story story and a half and then you go to the east you get the two non-contributing two stories that's those guys right there and then the next building that contributes is that little short green guy that's a single story and then that gorgeous house in the corner which is story and a half maybe a story probably it's just a huge attic it looks like it's a great porch all right so i'm seeing within the immediate vicinity two story houses which are non-contributing and every other house that is there contributing or non-contributing single story so again i'm trying to square the circle how how how is this mass appropriate under the guidelines that constrain us and i suspect those single store structures are somewhere between a thousand and 1200 square feet probably right you're putting a 22 2300 square foot two story structure on a corner lot in this neighborhood i do think one of the things that mitigates that is it's on the lower end of the slope and some of the higher two story ones a block over that are contributing are on higher ground but yeah i i hear what you're saying i think there are as noah said there are fewer story and a half there's only a few double stories and i think a large part of the ones in neighborhood and correct me if i'm wrong are the contributing are single stories right a couple of the notable ones aren't two story most of the contributing ones are single story okay okay anybody has any other comments i don't know i'm sorry okay just think from time to time we need to draw the line in the sand they'll be stepped over but we have to say you know we are a historic preservation commission with all that said tonight i appreciate everything was said by all the commissioners and the developer but i disagree with some i agree with others but i think the primary for me is to be true to the the neighborhood of contributing houses and we said that those are single and single and single story and story and a half so i think i still find this building inappropriate for the neighborhood thank you anyone else all right i think uh we got to call a vote on this one a yes vote means we're turning them down may i ask jack to clarify in terms of the criteria for compatibility that there are um uh 10 lists or i'm sorry 11 listed in our local code um and do you know which uh whether it's height proportion i mean i can read them for you do you have specific criteria that you want in the record that you do not believe that it needs massing of this house compared with massing of the what i'll call the original houses of the neighborhood smaller contributing houses okay so it so just for the record i just want to make sure that we're clear on what the factors are so is the height a problem yes is proportion of the building's front facade that is the relationship of the width of the building to the height of the front elevation needs to be visually compatible with other buildings yes it's a height so it's like compared to the contributing buildings in the neighborhood uh what about relationships of solids to voids sorry say again relationship of solids to voids in the front facades the relationship of solids to voids in the front facade i'm sure that's he's referring to administration is that yeah i just want to make sure that we have a clear record roof shapes rhythm of instruments so if why don't you say if there are any additional things that she hasn't covered well let me so we don't have to go through it and i can give you the sort of the yeas and nays on this it's this design is not i think is not relevant to the contributing houses in the neighborhood it's not a bad design in itself but elsewhere but in this neighborhood i think looking at the contributing houses and as we've described in a single story story and a half this does not align with the look of those houses the massing of those houses and the actual design of those houses it's quite different it it aligns with the other commercial what i call the commercial houses but i'm not sure that we should be looking at those two as a as a commission yeah we shouldn't it's in the guidelines we don't use those as context so what i'm hearing from you is height and massing yes are the issues those would be my prime issues okay thank you thank you i think at this point unless we have to we have to vote on on the motion on the table so to clarify the motion is a no so in this case yes is a no yes is to deny yes correct okay so we've talked about the motion on the table to deny it's been uh moved and seconded we'll go through voting members jack baker yes jeremy hacker yes ernesto castaneda no reynard cross yes sam de solar no melanie dusner no we have a split vote three yes three no zero abstain all right so we could table another motion um i would ask that if the petitioner is willing to adjust the height of the porch and staff is willing to do a staff approval on the uh the site plan issue make sure that the sidewalk goes with the sidewalk needs to go um if the petitioner is willing to deal with that i will make a motion to approve it with those amendments so this would be for a higher porch and for space park wall space well the higher porch and space for the whole thing there are these things it's the way it we don't we're not means and methods it's just how it looks on the outside what you're talking about foundation that shows yes yes across space because right now what i'm seeing is the siding goes all the way down to grade and you need to expose some kind of split face or limestone or whatever and i think i can i'd be i'd be willing to do that as a staff approval too but i'll take a straw poll and can i comment please do uh it feels like the things that we're asking them to revise is is plenty enough for them to resubmit and for us to look at that as opposed to grant an approval without knowing exactly what's going to happen so you want to motion to table yes don't you i mean what would you like to see exactly what's going to happen as opposed to leave it out there i i mean i have enough faith in these petitioners that i'm willing to do it as a staff approval so somebody would look at it just not necessarily and i don't okay necessarily see the need for it to come back to commission i think no i would have to check with margie about that because technically staff is not authorized to approve new construction so then i guess we do have to either say it's all right i mean well if it's going to be tabled there should be specific reasons for why it would be tabled and the only reason i want to table it all right the only reason i would like to see something is i want to see it i want to see that porch expressed and i want to know where your sidewalk is going i have faith that you're going to do that the sidewalk does show in that rendering but not the site plan yeah i mean but the rendering also doesn't show the backyard and the parking lot doesn't show the connection so i just you know i just want to know what's going on where why don't we just table it come back in two weeks and show us what the revisions are we deal with two weeks all right i will mention a motion to table and then the petitioner come on a table or form sorry that's the thing sorry i keep i'm meeting you don't have to have a motion to open it back up yeah but if you table it you got to have a motion yeah so to be clear you would like to see in two weeks or whatever the next meeting is a crawl space a porch that expresses upwards and then a side plane that's accurate with that cycling it's accurate uh i would like to see the porch express how you make that happen we have no purview under what happens on the inside of the building so generally happens because of a basement or crawl space but but i just want to be clear on the the things that you are wanting to specifically see so that we really capture that i'm also happy to meet with petitioners to chat if you would like to chat so put that out there too may i comment please do um all that's fine but it's not paying any attention to massing and hype i i hear that i acknowledge that renard you have oh my i i was just trying to figure out if we would not raise the height of the house so so is that a motion to time i'm a motion to continue second okay we have a motion on the table to continue coa 2515 to the next hpc meeting um we'll go ahead and take a vote again a yes vote would be to table it to the next or to continue for comments sorry i i have a question about the motion yes what will be the consequence of this motion you asked we're going to see them again in two weeks right and they are going to modify these documents to reflect what we have requested if you would like to meet with the petitioners with me or they're welcome but nobody else is welcome because then we'll be over that sure time please okay so in response to jack's comment i would like to see him see what they can do to bring the roof roof line down i think they can get a two-story building here you know bedrooms upstairs with them and make the building lower yeah i wouldn't complain at all about that and at least that's responding to you know one of the primary complaints i don't you know i would like to see it closer to a one and a half story building yeah personally that might mean some cathedrals as opposed to some trusses it is possible to say it if they're going to be revising that's something i'd like to see so one of the issues with it being on this quarter log within this ms zone is because of the setbacks on the two fronts it really allows for a very skinny house that doesn't allow as well for a one and a half story plan it can definitely be done there's just a lot more wasted space because it's so narrow given that the trusses are running in the short direction in terms of a you know a stick framed one and a half story definitely open to exploring that it's just the downside is that footprint would naturally grow in order because of this lost second story in my mind i don't think that's what i don't think that's what duncan is saying he's talking about so how can you take this lowering the pitch and also maybe dropping this first story to an eighth of the wall instead of a nine that's my initial thoughts the lower the ceiling or the roof peak uh specifically is that what you're kind of thinking duncan keeping it a two story but lowering the pitch to lower the i think you could i think you could alter the roof line to still allow bedrooms upstairs yeah and i'm not gonna do it for you yeah but i think it could be done i would be happy to meet with you guys if you want do we have any other commentary before we vote on this motion and we have a second we have clarification though this is a motion to continue this item to the next meeting it is okay so we'll go ahead and take that vote on the motion to continue jack baker yes jeremy hackard yes ernesto castaneda yes renard cross sam de solar yes melanie dusner yes okay that passes with six yes votes thank you next item on the agenda i want to make sure that the petitioner or somebody representing the petitioner is present because um she had contacted me saying that she would like this item to be continued until she can come up with a new plan um but it's still in the powerpoint and the packet um in case she changed her mind so is there anybody present to represent the petitioner here so nobody is here for this item and we are required to have the petitioner present right yes it is commission review okay so the clock on that one is okay isn't it well we were available to hear it so the clock's not going to run out it would be if the commission is unable to meet to hear it i mean it right within the next the scope of the next meeting it will not no and i mean this i mean the 30-day clock is not going to run out thank you okay oh 2514 passed okay um violations so this is catching up on some of the past violations uh revisiting some of these sites and talking about um some of the new ones as well well um i'm happy to say that most of the violations from between 2020 and 2023 have been resolved i can talk about some of these in more detail if you'd like um a couple of them to highlight here which i will bring up in some subsequent slides um the let's see what are the porch columns on here valentine 620 valentine 620 that should be on here see 507 yeah okay well um we do have okay um going over the ones of these that are still open at this point um 605 south fest willow terrors apartment building they had met with us approximately six months ago and had received approval for installing um a ludovici spanish tile roof to replace one that was removed in 2020 um from what we had heard from the property owner it would be approximately six months for the tiles to arrive so um that is being it's about time to check back in on that um another outstanding one uh sign in the greater restaurant row historic district that had not been applied for um that needs to be checked off on as well yes that would be a staff approval that one was august 2023 um there was another one to highlight here because it's been asked about 925 north jackson street in the maple heights historic district a asphalt shingle roof was replaced with a standing seam metal roof um maple heights was still using its conservation district guidelines at the time even though it was a historic district so that falls under the purview of what should be reviewed by the commission however there were no guideline there was nothing in the guidelines um describing preferences for roof materials and the pack sorry the uh design guidelines packet for the neighborhood uh showed contributing buildings with standing seam metal roofs as well so um it seemed like a case where they would come to us to get probably approval for something that rules didn't exist for so um that was just a somewhat complicated situation but they have to come if there's any change in material right so it's still it's a violation right i mean whether there's a guideline or not mean means more specifically that they have to come to me in my mind so what's what's the resolution there hasn't been one yet so they're going to be contacted that's a follow-up no but i mean what's the request for resolution from our side is there have you requested that they come in for a cfa will either be for cla or for reversing i think they're going to get the letter that describes their two options a retracted coa so it's in the pipeline i love this keeping in mind that okay uh some of the newer ones 1300 east first street um this one has been partially some action has been taken um there were two issues here one was the installation of an unscreened parking area in the rear that has been screened now um with a vertical board fence um also however the original or historic front door had been switched out and um the wrought iron railings on either side of the steps had been removed um the property owner had come back and received a certificate of appropriateness for installing a new wrought iron railing and a six panel colonial door with or without two top windows of their choice um that part has not been done yet but they have the approval they have the approval to do it what's the uh timeline on that margie with the sorry would the timeline for um approval for retroactive coa after a violation be the same as the timeline for approval of an ordinary coa yeah i think so um what is there a reason why you think it'd be different i don't know except for the fact that it's a violation and that's a way to you know keep stalling yeah and i don't have i don't know that i've been particularly involved in this case is it legal um you were present for those meetings which one is this one this one is 1300 east first street it's a do story great colonial the front door off and in the process of that and they put a parking lot in the back you're changing a residential to a student rental and they also removed some original cast iron railing i do remember that one um and what was the last contact we had with them um last on this issue is when they received the first they received the retroactive coa then i've subsequently received an email from the property manager confirming that she would confer with me about choices of railings and doors and that was when that was shortly after um this retroactive coa was received so that would have been august of last year and they haven't done not yet i mean i don't know that the timing changes and when you say the timing what i'm trying to ask is after what window of time that there's been a violation can we say you need to do something or you will incur some penalties oh okay so that's a different question so the historic preservation uh code says and it's really discretionary so it's a the answer to your question is it's discretionary it's on a case by case basis so our code related to uh notices of ordinance violation says that it follows the what we follow the um procedures of the hand department um enforcement this section took the first using personnel and policies designated by the director of housing and neighborhood development so i think and anakin correct me if i'm wrong here but um i think that you handle those on a case by case basis i don't think you have a set prescribed time period right so and i think we kind of talked about this before so prosecution of ordinance violations is something that um departments handle for you know their department and then the legal department comes in and you know prosecutors like a like prosecutor would for criminal cases we prosecute these for civil violations so i think this is a conversation for staff to have in terms of what they think is the appropriate next step i don't want to find them i would like to get the railing back and i want to know how to incentivize them to get the railing installed yeah and so that's something that i think you know i think an appropriate next step would be for legal to send a letter that says hey by the way this was the last contact we had with you haven't heard from you what's your plan just apply a little pressure yeah i think that's a way and and i don't know if you know anna who's typically in staff in this commission i don't know if that's something that you and she've already talked about doing but if not i think that that's yeah i've sent her all of the past notices of violations in the past couple years and i think that you know we're doing this for example i'm another attorney who's doing it for sort of title six and title 16 violations so i think we can work on you know you guys flag the ones that you want sort of a letter sent out to and we can send those letters out you know my grass gets too tall i get a nice little notice in my mailbox with a fine telling me that if i don't pay the fine the fine increases and all of these really nasty things the city is going to do to me because my grass is too high but yet i i do appreciate it but what i'm trying to say is that the height of my grass seems to be of greater issue to the city than somebody floating the historic preservation code i i really don't see where that's what i would think the other one would be more important and the city would be a lot more dogged about pursuing these matters than the fact that my grass is nine inches and would fine me 150 dollars even though my lawn is a swamp and i can't run a lawnmower through it but the city is unyielding in its purse i'm sorry prosecution of the issue of my nine inch grass but these things can sit and linger for years and the best we can do is possibly send a letter at some point asking them nicely to do something i i okay i hear your point thank you but i beg to differ that that's not what all we can do no sorry and and i think we are trying to get the wheels turning on a proper escalation and hopefully de-escalation of uh communications that get what we want and what we want is the restoration of historic materials and if that doesn't happen then we have other things we can do but i i agree historically i mean willow terrace is a fantastic example that this has been going on for over what three four years now and that is not okay yeah and i hear you loud and clear i do think that we should take this list and work anna work with anna and send send notices start working with these people and they may not sit well with this group but i'll tell you the city gets a lot more complaints from people driving by uh unknown lawn than they do from somebody noticing that the railing is missing very few people are going to drive by this property and be like oh my gosh the door is different and that railing is missing but i'll tell you the city gets new reports on for neighbor complaints on grass a lot there's also a category for neighbor complaints on there is no category for historic preservation or even building permit violations so yeah i think i think that's something we can talk about you know it has a very prescribed path for violations it says specifically what happens with title 8 historic preservation it does not so that is the difference we also have code compliance officers that are in the neighborhoods that are looking specifically for title 6 violations as opposed to a crew looking for title 8 so there there is some difference yeah we even took a care ass case after the court appeals in 2014 so i do appreciate all of that but this is what we know it's not like you know there is a there's not a list there's not a box up here not people these are things that we have identified already but the thing we have the piece of public we don't have i think this is your point is okay we've identified these how do we go forward in other cases like brass there's a prescribed way that you go forward and we are working that out right now but the devil is always in the discretion i'm sorry details i have a question about the one that we're we were talking about 1300 1300 this this as far as i can tell has a has an approved c of a for this work yeah that was and that was approved in august yeah and they have a year to to complete a c of a they're not they're not out of that was my question okay so that right so there's they're not out of compliance you can't send them a letter well i think we can certainly send them a letter and ask where what their status is because we haven't had any communication i don't know that we send a letter and say hey your violation also this was conditional on staff approval of the new railing and doors so it sounds like that we need to contact it so that's contact them so but they do have a coa yeah and they've got a year yeah so they're they're okay in my world they're in the plans yeah okay until they don't have something but we you know we can say you have until s day we notice progress as a committee tell us your plans that's totally fine okay yes okay so moving on to some of these new ones um 906 west sixth street um more than removal of a chimney that was what i was told about there was also removal of a door and some windows um there's not been a building permit for any of those um also the property owner it looks like maybe being delisted from the state of indiana as a business um that shoot the llc status might be being revoked so i did manage to find a property owner address um which two notices of violation had been sent to but i had not heard back from them about that and so that is outstanding violation and additionally um the building department was not aware so did they say that they were going to do anything yeah they said that they were going to post notice on the building yeah thank you and when was that um i had a call with the building department yesterday although they're working on a slightly different timeline so this has been out there for us is that on the corner uh yes you familiar with the building yeah okay okay um subsequently last month um i received two new complaints um both of these people have gotten back to me after i sent them notices of violation um in the second case 702 west kirkwood um the property owner had asked me if they could send in an application this week i said yes i have not received one yet so there you go what was that violation for this one was for a replacement of front facing windows right okay um the previous one 608 west eighth um was replacement of two screen doors okay is that what we got i'm gonna run through some pictures as well if you'd like to see them so these are some of our some of our w's if you will um 620 south valentine north south valentine um stucco and the columns restored um also restoration of columns at this is i have to go back but this is in uh greater prospect hill i believe um yes 621 b west fourth street uh restoration of removed columns on a side porch this one here is from last year 630 west sixth street where a side door had been removed and uh vertical sliding siding had been installed um those changes have been undone and so much nice here yeah uh bottom here what you call that mansion um kirkwood manor historic building um there were a couple of signs that were not in compliance that have been removed and i've since heard back from um the parlor donut franchisee who is going to submit a request for new signage so at some point we may have the chance to review that um as for some of the outstanding violations here um on the right 1300 east first street they have a coa uh good for a year um bottom left uh you can see the banana sign down here uh this was one that was not applied for um so they're going to need approval for that and then the two outstanding violations in the near west side um you can't see the chimney well obviously you can't see the chimney because it's gone um it's not obvious where the chimney was but you can see uh missing doors um 741 west kirkwood um so that middle picture is of where they had a door question mark with what's the middle one they had had a different window which they removed installed a new window with a transom light directly above it yeah okay that's gonna be fun and that's the second street property on the right where the railing was removed and right the door okay thank you so i don't have a picture of the screened parking area on the rear um it's screened there's a fence not much to see also um next week um at the monarch county history center uh on thursday at 4 p.m going to be the first meeting of the historic district subcommittee um so among the things that are going to be discussed in addition to what is the subcommittee and what are we going to be doing um there are going to be the proposed maple heights historic district guidelines so anybody who's interested in that i would encourage attending and you sent out a draft yes or the i sent out the draft that's going to be next thursday 4 p.m at the history center they're going to be the first thursday of every month at 4 p.m at the Monroe county history center so the people that i included in the email from the commission so that's in addition to the public noticed and people with city of bloomington are the people who had expressed interest in uh being involved in the subcommittee if there's anybody who did not receive that email who would like to receive it you can let me know and i can forward it to you okay do i have a pen on i believe you had expressed interest yeah write the comments comments i think we got some procedures to work through um i and i am looking much forward to working with handed legal to get our reporting mechanism in our uh notice of violation mechanisms in place yeah i just sent animals who couldn't be here tonight because she had that kind of funeral but i uh just sent her an email and said we need to start sending some letters out so to get with noah and um and yeah we'll tell you that thank you all right okay that's all we got so if we can meet to discuss that sometime next week that would be great um i'll talk with anna when she gets back to town and if you want to drag me into that just give me a shout i will say both annas and margie have been incredibly helpful with us good thank you all right um public any public comment you guys want to come in we will call us adjourned then thank you for coming ("Pomp and Circumstance" by Edward Elgar) ("Pomp and Circumstance" by Edward Elgar) ("Pomp and Circumstance" by Edward Elgar) ("Pomp and Circumstance" by Edward Elgar) ("Pomp and Circumstance" by Edward Elgar) ("Pomp and Circumstance" by Edward Elgar) ("Pomp and Circumstance" by Edward Elgar)