WEBVTT 00:00:00.258 --> 00:00:07.934 - All right, it's five o'clock. I'm calling the Thursday, March 12th, 2026 meeting of the Bloomington 00:00:07.934 --> 00:00:15.149 - Historic Preservation Commission to order. Tanda, would you call the roll, please? Certainly. 00:00:15.149 --> 00:00:23.208 - Duncan Campbell? Here. Drew Heron? Jack Baker? Here. John Butler? Here. Ernesto Castaneda? Here. Melanie 00:00:23.208 --> 00:00:29.886 - Dusner? Karen Duffy? Here. Jeff Golden? Here. Jeremy Hafford? Here. Abby Henson? Here. 00:00:30.626 --> 00:00:38.264 - Daniel Schlegel. We have quorum. All right, next up is approval of the minutes. Does anybody have a 00:00:38.264 --> 00:00:46.207 - motion on the minutes from February 26? I'll move approval. All right, Jack has a motion. Second. Jeff. 00:00:46.207 --> 00:00:53.922 - It's been moved and seconded to approve the minutes from the February 26 meeting. We'll go ahead and 00:00:53.922 --> 00:01:00.414 - take a vote. Jack Baker? Yes. John Butler? Yes. Ernesto Castaneda? Yes. Karen Duffy? 00:01:00.514 --> 00:01:07.548 - Yes. Jeff Golden. Yes. Jeremy Hacker. Yes. Abby Hanson. Can I abstain? I wasn't here. Absolutely. That 00:01:07.548 --> 00:01:14.924 - motion passes. All right. Thank you very much. Next up is staff review for certificates of appropriateness. 00:01:14.924 --> 00:01:21.822 - Noah. So we have two staff approvals for tonight. The first at 521 West Wiley in the McDole Historic 00:01:21.822 --> 00:01:27.422 - District. The petitioner is Nathan Harmon. This request is for the replacement of 00:01:28.226 --> 00:01:34.647 - Most of the windows in the house, as well as the front and rear doors. 521 West Widely is a slightly 00:01:34.647 --> 00:01:41.195 - altered California bungalow that actually has replacement windows throughout. If you look at the state 00:01:41.195 --> 00:01:48.061 - historic architectural and archaeological survey entry for this house, it describes three over one windows. 00:01:48.061 --> 00:01:54.482 - The windows that are in there right now are wood, but they're one over one. So unless there was some 00:01:54.482 --> 00:01:57.470 - sort of error in the survey, it does look like 00:01:57.730 --> 00:02:03.986 - The existing windows are replacements. Um, the request that I received, uh, dear commission short version, 00:02:03.986 --> 00:02:09.832 - we would like to replace the original windows with new vinyl replacement windows and the front door 00:02:09.832 --> 00:02:15.971 - with a more secure and well insulated front door. The original windows are double hung with single paste 00:02:15.971 --> 00:02:21.934 - pain glazing, uh, no mountains, single pain box ash windows with weights and pulleys. The replacement 00:02:21.934 --> 00:02:26.494 - windows would be in the same orientation as the originals and the same style. 00:02:27.170 --> 00:02:34.295 - in the original unaltered opening. This is likely considered replacement in kind. This is not replacement 00:02:34.295 --> 00:02:41.150 - in kind. The door is a single light with no muntins, wood frame, very simple and plain style, and may 00:02:41.150 --> 00:02:48.073 - not be original. There is no longer enough solid wood available to properly attach latches and locking 00:02:48.073 --> 00:02:54.795 - mechanisms. The door must be replaced for safety. Most of the old windows are repairable, but would 00:02:54.795 --> 00:02:55.870 - be inefficient. 00:02:56.354 --> 00:03:02.310 - The replacement windows would be indistinguishable from the street and fit the character of the house 00:03:02.310 --> 00:03:08.675 - and the neighborhood as per the McDowell Gardens design guidelines, as there is no design change whatsoever. 00:03:08.675 --> 00:03:14.690 - The existing frame and trim will be used. In fact, the windows and door in question are all but hidden 00:03:14.690 --> 00:03:20.588 - due to the aluminum storm windows a previous owner added, which would be removed, bringing the house 00:03:20.588 --> 00:03:22.398 - closer to its 1925 appearance. 00:03:23.618 --> 00:03:30.391 - Both houses to the north and south have already replaced their windows with a near identical type. Tommy 00:03:30.391 --> 00:03:37.163 - Dees has already measured and manufactured customer placements before we knew that historic preservation 00:03:37.163 --> 00:03:43.742 - requirements may pertain. So we sincerely hope that the commission allows us to make use of them. The 00:03:43.742 --> 00:03:50.644 - back of the house was added on to long ago and is thus already has more modern windows, as do both windows 00:03:50.644 --> 00:03:51.934 - on the upper level. 00:03:52.738 --> 00:03:59.427 - Those are not intended to be replaced. There's one unique window on the west side of the house facing 00:03:59.427 --> 00:04:05.985 - the alley above the kitchen sink. It is a multi-pane hinged cabinet opening style window, has charm 00:04:05.985 --> 00:04:12.609 - and is not going to be removed. Andy Mahler and Linda Lee have owned this property for decades. They 00:04:12.609 --> 00:04:19.364 - rented it out as an affordable two bedroom home and have made no significant changes. In recent years, 00:04:19.364 --> 00:04:21.790 - they put the house under the care of 00:04:22.402 --> 00:04:28.179 - town man or real estate who handled the basic upkeep and leasing. Unfortunately, Andy died late last 00:04:28.179 --> 00:04:34.299 - year, and in the course of settling his estate while the house was between tenants and before the Hopewell 00:04:34.299 --> 00:04:40.304 - neighborhood, which this house faces, gets underway, Linda decided it was a good time to put some effort 00:04:40.304 --> 00:04:46.024 - into repairs. She is still the primary owner of the house, but has assigned a trustee who has hired 00:04:46.024 --> 00:04:50.142 - me, Nathan Harmon, as a primary contractor handling repairs and upkeep. 00:04:50.882 --> 00:04:57.596 - I have, over the last three months, made a number of improvements, including basic maintenance, efficiency 00:04:57.596 --> 00:05:04.058 - in hand requirements, including ensuring the banisters are secure, cleaning vents, caulking, and draft 00:05:04.058 --> 00:05:10.396 - sealing, replacing faucet and vanity, minor plumbing repairs, new sump pump, landscaping, et cetera. 00:05:10.396 --> 00:05:16.733 - The interior has received cosmetic improvements like cleaning, lots of drywall repairs to cracks and 00:05:16.733 --> 00:05:19.870 - holes, all new paint, repairing and refurbishing, 00:05:20.290 --> 00:05:26.952 - existing kitchen cabinets, some new trim and light fixtures, et cetera. No changing to framing, structure, 00:05:26.952 --> 00:05:33.552 - major appliances, sheathing. Two new electrical services have been permitted, green tagged and installed. 00:05:33.552 --> 00:05:39.965 - The primary goal was to bury the electrical so it would not be heard anymore for all the good reasons. 00:05:39.965 --> 00:05:46.565 - The reason for the second service was with separate meters for a potential future ADU, garage or electric 00:05:46.565 --> 00:05:49.118 - car charger at the current shed. Intran, 00:05:49.442 --> 00:05:55.556 - dug the underground service lines on January 27th, and the house is currently awaiting a connection 00:05:55.556 --> 00:06:01.854 - by Duke. A completely new electrical panel and some new electrical circuit work has been permitted and 00:06:01.854 --> 00:06:08.030 - installed, awaiting final inspection and clarification. This new panel is ground faulted and has arc 00:06:08.030 --> 00:06:14.633 - fault circuit breakers so that most of the house's old wire did not have to be replaced. All the electrical 00:06:14.633 --> 00:06:18.302 - work was done by certified master electrician Doug Taggart. 00:06:18.562 --> 00:06:24.291 - Sorry, David Tigert. So none of that work required a certificate of appropriateness. New windows and 00:06:24.291 --> 00:06:30.190 - doors, the purpose of this request. The 100-year-old originals have been normally abused over the years 00:06:30.190 --> 00:06:36.032 - and are past due for overhaul. They are inherently inefficient, leaking air, heat, and sound. We would 00:06:36.032 --> 00:06:41.987 - like to replace them with near-identical modern versions to improve the quality of life for inhabitants, 00:06:41.987 --> 00:06:47.659 - increase privacy and safety, and reduce the environmental impact going forward. Respectfully yours, 00:06:47.659 --> 00:06:48.510 - Nathan Harmon. 00:06:50.242 --> 00:06:57.142 - Staff approved COA 2614. The replacement of windows proposed would match the size and design of the 00:06:57.142 --> 00:07:04.042 - existing windows, and the proposed replacement door would be of the same size and similar design to 00:07:04.042 --> 00:07:11.356 - the original, although a visibly alternative material is proposed. Rear windows and doors on the addition 00:07:11.356 --> 00:07:17.566 - are of a lesser concern, and windows with more unique characteristics will be maintained. 00:07:18.338 --> 00:07:24.744 - Staff does take exception to the characterization of historic windows and doors as past due for replacement 00:07:24.744 --> 00:07:30.793 - and normally abused. Although this is a rental property and likely subject to more wear, the existing 00:07:30.793 --> 00:07:36.724 - storm doors and windows work to preserve older materials along with other maintenance will improved 00:07:36.724 --> 00:07:42.774 - insulation, which is why they are often recommended instead of as a window, sorry, why they are often 00:07:42.774 --> 00:07:47.934 - recommended as a window treatment and the existing windows appear to be in good shape. 00:07:48.930 --> 00:07:58.664 - Nevertheless, the replacement windows and doors proposed would be similar in appearance to the existing 00:07:58.664 --> 00:08:08.399 - materials to the extent recommended in the district guidelines. Let's see, next up is for staff review, 00:08:08.399 --> 00:08:16.542 - COA 2615. Okay. This one here is for the Kirkwood Manor building at 322 East Kirkwood. 00:08:17.250 --> 00:08:24.956 - petitioner is Misty Collins. This building is rated outstanding. It's a free classical house slash commercial 00:08:24.956 --> 00:08:32.241 - commercial building built in 1895 designed by Bloomington architect John Nichols. It's a two and a half 00:08:32.241 --> 00:08:39.457 - story free classical limestone building listed individually as a notable build sorry as an outstanding 00:08:39.457 --> 00:08:46.462 - building. The request that you'll see here is for the installation of gold stick on vinyl lettering 00:08:46.690 --> 00:08:54.223 - inside two windows and a glass door on the north side of the building, uh, which you can see here, uh, 00:08:54.223 --> 00:09:01.682 - where there's sort of a turn corner on the front of the building. So two window graphics are proposed 00:09:01.682 --> 00:09:09.361 - and additional window graphic for the door, um, which staff approves, uh, since the new signage proposed 00:09:09.361 --> 00:09:15.358 - is of a modest scale and we're not damaged or detract from any historic features. 00:09:16.962 --> 00:09:22.959 - Thank you, Noah. Okay, so moving on to the more commission involved part of the evening. Yeah, so if 00:09:22.959 --> 00:09:29.015 - you're here for those two staff approved COAs, they've been approved, so congratulations. Next up, we 00:09:29.015 --> 00:09:35.071 - have COAs for commission review. I'm going to read the procedure for how we will deal with these. For 00:09:35.071 --> 00:09:41.127 - each item on the agenda, the Historic Preservation Program Manager will first present a staff report. 00:09:41.127 --> 00:09:46.174 - We'll then hear if the petitioner has any additional information about their request 00:09:46.370 --> 00:09:51.664 - followed by public comment. Once public comment concludes, commissioners will be able to ask questions 00:09:51.664 --> 00:09:57.061 - to staff, the petitioner, and the public. We ask that petitioners, the public, and commissioners refrain 00:09:57.061 --> 00:10:02.200 - from speaking until addressed by the chair, which is me, unless a question is directly addressed to 00:10:02.200 --> 00:10:07.546 - them. Following commissioner questions, the chair will entertain a motion from a commissioner regarding 00:10:07.546 --> 00:10:12.788 - the petition. Once a motion is made, we will then open up a discussion of the item for members of the 00:10:12.788 --> 00:10:13.662 - commission only. 00:10:13.858 --> 00:10:19.709 - Finally, once the commissioners have each had a chance to speak, the commission will vote on the petition. 00:10:19.709 --> 00:10:25.232 - We encourage all commissioners, petitioners, and members of the public to be civil and respectful at 00:10:25.232 --> 00:10:31.137 - all times. All right, now I have to go ahead. All right, first of all, I'd like to check, is the petitioner 00:10:31.137 --> 00:10:36.879 - present? All right, we've got him. This is for 206 North Walnut Street in the Courthouse Square Historic 00:10:36.879 --> 00:10:42.347 - District. Petitioner is Han Chong. This is for the Princess Theater, an outstanding rated building. 00:10:42.347 --> 00:10:43.550 - The Princess Theater. 00:10:43.810 --> 00:10:49.682 - is an outstanding building located in the Courthouse Square, local and national historic districts. 00:10:49.682 --> 00:10:55.965 - Bloomington Restorations, Inc. has a facade easement on the property. In 2025, a new owner of the property 00:10:55.965 --> 00:11:02.190 - undertook repairs of the terracotta facade and is still undergoing a replacement of second storey. That's 00:11:02.190 --> 00:11:08.414 - no longer current. The second story windows have been replaced, as described in the previous application. 00:11:09.922 --> 00:11:18.605 - The ground floor will be reopening for a new restaurant and the restaurateur is applying to install 00:11:18.605 --> 00:11:27.288 - new signage over the entrance on existing mounting. So you'll see two signs being proposed. Uh, one 00:11:27.288 --> 00:11:35.710 - on existing mounting, uh, over the storefront entrance. And then additionally in the alcove, um, 00:11:37.442 --> 00:11:47.618 - a new aluminum sign has already been installed on a racking system that spans between those wooden spandrels 00:11:47.618 --> 00:11:57.233 - over the fan light. Staff recommends approval of COA 2607. The proposed signage is similar of the same 00:11:57.233 --> 00:12:05.822 - scale as previous storefront signage on the Princess Theater building and would be attached 00:12:05.922 --> 00:12:12.324 - using existing mounts. While the design is plastic, as some new signs that have been approved in the 00:12:12.324 --> 00:12:19.106 - district are, its measured color and design complement the building's terracotta facade and do not detract 00:12:19.106 --> 00:12:25.699 - or distract from the building's significant architectural features. It's come to the attention of staff 00:12:25.699 --> 00:12:32.798 - and the planning department that an additional electric bulb signage has been added in the street-facing alcove 00:12:33.378 --> 00:12:40.259 - that has not yet been submitted for review to either the Planning Department or Historic Preservation 00:12:40.259 --> 00:12:47.343 - Commission. That may no longer be current. I don't know if Planning now has these materials. Yes, great. 00:12:47.343 --> 00:12:54.157 - Sorry, I was just saying. So we have the to date materials for the one that's on the screen. But for 00:12:54.157 --> 00:13:01.308 - the one that's in the ALCO, I don't think we ever reviewed it. Send it in. I don't know. Because I didn't 00:13:01.308 --> 00:13:02.590 - do the portal. OK. 00:13:02.818 --> 00:13:09.269 - I can check. Can we send it to you if he's not? OK. Thanks. I mean, you can certainly do us first, and 00:13:09.269 --> 00:13:15.594 - that's what's going on now, so that's fine. On March 10, Bloomington Restorations, Inc., which holds 00:13:15.594 --> 00:13:21.857 - the facade easement on the Princess Theater, sent the following response to the petitioner and city 00:13:21.857 --> 00:13:28.308 - staff. And I quote, Bloomington Restorations, Inc., as facade easement holder on the Princess Theater, 00:13:28.308 --> 00:13:30.750 - approves the new signage for Japanese. 00:13:31.490 --> 00:13:40.248 - The main sign would be a 64-inch by 36-inch front light box sign in place of the previous tempo signage 00:13:40.248 --> 00:13:48.754 - to be installed on existing wall mounts. The secondary sign is an electric bulb signage in the entry 00:13:48.754 --> 00:13:57.344 - alcove. Staff agrees with this opinion. The storefront new sign would be similar in scale to previous 00:13:57.344 --> 00:14:01.470 - signs in its place and meet district guidelines. 00:14:02.274 --> 00:14:09.451 - The light bulb sign in the alcove does not cover a damage significant historic features spanning the 00:14:09.451 --> 00:14:16.770 - spandrels over the entrance and is evocative of the building's original use as a theater. Um, is there 00:14:16.770 --> 00:14:24.088 - anything that the petitioner would like to add? No. All right. Is there any public comment on this COA 00:14:24.088 --> 00:14:26.078 - both in the room or online? 00:14:30.530 --> 00:14:38.744 - All right, we'll go to the commissioner questions. Jack, do you have questions? Just for clarity, we're 00:14:38.744 --> 00:14:47.116 - moving on two signs, one exterior, one interior here. I'm asking that question because with this previous 00:14:47.116 --> 00:14:55.488 - discussion, we're trying to decide whether to separate out those two or to move. But I think we're moving 00:14:55.488 --> 00:14:59.358 - ahead, apparently, with both of them on one COA. 00:14:59.458 --> 00:15:08.782 - Bulb sign looks like multiple small bulbs. Is that what I'm seeing there? That's right. Very low wattage. 00:15:08.782 --> 00:15:17.666 - That's all I have. Yeah, if you've ever seen it lit up, it's kind of low wattage. Maybe halogen? OK. 00:15:17.666 --> 00:15:26.814 - John, questions? No. Karen, do you have any questions? No questions. Abby? Jeff? Nope. Ernesto? Duncan? 00:15:27.490 --> 00:15:34.721 - I have a question. How is this lit-up sign actually put onto the facade? Like, how is it connected? 00:15:34.721 --> 00:15:42.314 - Has it been drilled into things? Oh, this whole mount on the side? Yeah, how did you do that? Basically, 00:15:42.314 --> 00:15:49.545 - they have, you know, it's a frame wall and has, I think it's an OSB. And then we found the existing 00:15:49.545 --> 00:15:56.414 - frame and then the mounting of the signs mounted right on the existing frame part of it. Okay. 00:15:57.090 --> 00:16:05.311 - So there is a two-penetration of the hole in there. All right. Good to know. I don't have any other 00:16:05.311 --> 00:16:13.614 - questions. All right. I'll take a motion on the COA. I'll move to approve. All right. Karen moves to 00:16:13.614 --> 00:16:22.000 - approve. Do we have a second? I'll second that. All right. John's second. Comments? Jack, do you have 00:16:22.000 --> 00:16:26.110 - any comments? No. John, do you have any comments? 00:16:26.402 --> 00:16:35.670 - I've seen this site in the interior alcove, and I think it looks very nice. It's not too bright, and 00:16:35.670 --> 00:16:45.029 - I think it's a good sign, so I'm going to vote to approve it. Okay. Karen? I don't have any objection 00:16:45.029 --> 00:16:54.481 - to these signs. They don't damage the building, and they are removable eventually. You know, they lead 00:16:54.481 --> 00:16:55.582 - no trouble. 00:16:56.706 --> 00:17:05.288 - OK. Happy. No comment. Jeff. No comment. Ernest. Duncan. No comment. All right. I don't have any comments 00:17:05.288 --> 00:17:13.465 - either, so I guess we're ready for a vote. OK. It's been moved in motion on the floor to approve COA 00:17:13.465 --> 00:17:21.399 - 26-07. We'll go ahead and take a vote. Jack Baker. Yes. John Butler. Yes. Ernesto Castaneda. Yes. 00:17:21.399 --> 00:17:26.014 - Karen Duffy. Yes. Jeff Golden. Yes. Jeremy Hackard. Yes. 00:17:26.146 --> 00:17:32.838 - Abby Hansen. Yes. That motion passes 7-0. All right. Thank you very much. It's been approved. Thank 00:17:32.838 --> 00:17:40.132 - you very much. Yeah, I appreciate it. All right. Next up, we have COA 2611. Oscar Sibendi is the petitioner. 00:17:40.132 --> 00:17:46.891 - Is the petitioner here? I'm the owner of the house. You're the owner of the house? He's on Zoom. OK. 00:17:46.891 --> 00:17:53.717 - Is he on Zoom as iPhone? I've been trying to communicate with whomever is iPhone, and I'm not getting 00:17:53.717 --> 00:17:54.654 - any response. 00:18:02.178 --> 00:18:15.387 - I mean there's no further questions I'd be happy to take this off. Yeah go ahead. Yeah sure. 708 West 00:18:15.387 --> 00:18:29.502 - 12th Street in the Maple Heights Historic District. The petition here is for a new ADU. The primary building 00:18:29.634 --> 00:18:36.100 - Building on this property is a slightly altered folk Victorian home with classical features and a wraparound 00:18:36.100 --> 00:18:42.031 - porch. In 2026, an initial proposal for a two-story garage slash ADU was denied over concerns about 00:18:42.031 --> 00:18:48.378 - the visual compatibility of the shallowly pitched roof and sparse fenestration. The applicant has returned 00:18:48.378 --> 00:18:51.166 - with a design meant to address these comments. 00:19:06.658 --> 00:19:13.056 - The staff recommendation is for approval of COA 2611. The existing house is approximately 20 feet tall, 00:19:13.056 --> 00:19:19.392 - as is the proposed carriage house. The property is located on a double-wide corner lot, though the new 00:19:19.392 --> 00:19:25.605 - construction would be set back from the primary 12th street facade and accessed from an alleyway and 00:19:25.605 --> 00:19:32.126 - a lot width away from North Fairview. The materials proposed are compatible with the district guidelines. 00:19:33.122 --> 00:19:41.327 - The new design addresses the commission and neighborhood comments about the roof pitch with the addition 00:19:41.327 --> 00:19:49.455 - of second story dormers and adds additional windows. Note that the elevation drawings, in the elevation 00:19:49.455 --> 00:19:57.348 - drawings, the labels for the south and west facades have been swapped. Do you have a recommendation? 00:19:57.348 --> 00:19:59.614 - Oh, it's for approval. Yeah. 00:20:00.738 --> 00:20:09.345 - staff recommends approval. Did I not say that? No, you couldn't stop. So you recommend approval? Yeah, 00:20:09.345 --> 00:20:18.203 - I recommend. Okay. Does the owner, do you have any comments that you'd like to add to this? I'm intrigued 00:20:18.203 --> 00:20:26.643 - by you why you wanted me to put dormers because my original house has no dormers. But if this gets a 00:20:26.643 --> 00:20:30.654 - pass, then that's what I want. Okay. Do we have 00:20:32.418 --> 00:20:42.195 - online as well. Did Oscar get through to you? There's nothing I've just been corresponding with, trying 00:20:42.195 --> 00:20:52.160 - to correspond with the person listed as iPhone. I've asked them to unmute. Hello? Hi, there we go. Oscar? 00:20:52.160 --> 00:20:56.766 - Oscar? Yes, how are you? I'm doing well and you? 00:20:57.890 --> 00:21:07.139 - That's okay. Do you have any other comments that you would like to add on to Noah's proposal 00:21:07.139 --> 00:21:17.084 - or recommendations? Do you have anything to add that you want to add to what Noah has already said? 00:21:17.084 --> 00:21:25.438 - Okay. All right. Thank you very much. Are there any other comments from the public? 00:21:30.530 --> 00:21:37.835 - OK. Jack, do you have any questions? Was a question raised about the reveal of the clapboard, about 00:21:37.835 --> 00:21:45.725 - the six inches versus four inches or some such thing? Right. I had received a comment from the neighborhood 00:21:45.725 --> 00:21:53.176 - saying that they would prefer, or this neighborhood committee would prefer, a six inch clapboard with 00:21:53.176 --> 00:21:59.678 - a four inch reveal over the eight inch clapboard with a six inch reveal that's proposed. 00:22:02.530 --> 00:22:09.534 - So this is a comment that I received from the Neighborhood Design Review Committee. And who's 00:22:09.534 --> 00:22:17.655 - the Neighborhood Design Review Committee? I believe it's comprised of people in the Neighborhood Association 00:22:17.655 --> 00:22:25.330 - who decided to volunteer for it basically. Okay, what is it that we're discussing? Let's let them have 00:22:25.330 --> 00:22:29.726 - their conversation right now. We'll hold on just a second. 00:22:31.490 --> 00:22:38.701 - That was my only question, is whether we put it to commissioners, whether we feel like it would be more 00:22:38.701 --> 00:22:45.704 - in line with neighborhood rules to do the smaller reveal rather than the larger reveal. That's all I 00:22:45.704 --> 00:22:52.776 - have. OK. All right. No questions. OK. Karen? No questions. Abby? No questions. Jeff, do you have any 00:22:52.776 --> 00:22:57.214 - questions? Oh, questions. Or not so. Do you have any questions? 00:22:57.986 --> 00:23:10.497 - Duncan, anything? I really don't have any questions about this either. Okay, I'll entertain a motion 00:23:10.497 --> 00:23:23.503 - on the COA. I'll move to approve. Where are we here? COA, I'm sorry, which COA? This is... 26-11. 26-11. 00:23:23.503 --> 00:23:27.838 - Okay, dash 11. Sid, move approval. 00:23:28.354 --> 00:23:39.042 - with stipulation that the sidewall reveal go to the four inch as recommended by the Neighborhood Association. 00:23:39.042 --> 00:23:49.535 - All right, do we have a second for that? I'll second that. Okay, we have a motion, a second, Abby seconded. 00:23:49.535 --> 00:23:57.502 - So we have comments. Jack? I don't have strong feelings about it, but I wanted to 00:23:57.826 --> 00:24:10.082 - Just get it on the record and have commissioners make comments about the size of the reveal before we 00:24:10.082 --> 00:24:22.578 - go to a vote. Okay. John? So the... I'm fine with the way the roof pitch has been changed. I think that 00:24:22.578 --> 00:24:25.342 - complements the house. 00:24:25.474 --> 00:24:32.969 - I think that's a good change that's been made. Just to address a couple of questions she raised. I was 00:24:32.969 --> 00:24:40.465 - on the commission at the time, but I do not believe they were requiring you to have dormers. What they 00:24:40.465 --> 00:24:47.742 - were asking you to do is make the roof pitch match the roof pitch of the original structure. And so 00:24:47.742 --> 00:24:52.254 - by making the roof pitch a little steeper, then that resulted 00:24:52.482 --> 00:25:00.614 - in the dormers. So they weren't necessarily wanting the dormers, they were just wanting the pitch of 00:25:00.614 --> 00:25:08.665 - the roof to match. And so this does that now. And so I think that addresses that concern. As to the 00:25:08.665 --> 00:25:16.877 - reveal and the clapboard siting, I don't have an opinion on that. Although I would wonder, would that 00:25:16.877 --> 00:25:22.110 - change the cost of the project? And if it would, then I wouldn't 00:25:22.242 --> 00:25:33.876 - necessarily require that. So those are my comments. Karen? I don't have an opinion on the siding either. 00:25:33.876 --> 00:25:45.288 - It's always nice to go with the neighborhood's recommendation when possible. But the pitch of the roof 00:25:45.288 --> 00:25:52.158 - is a huge improvement. And so I'm in support for that reason. 00:25:52.514 --> 00:26:02.610 - Okay. Abby? Yeah, I agree. I think it looks like it complements the house. I have no further comments. 00:26:02.610 --> 00:26:12.510 - Jeff? I would have supported the original COA. So I'll probably vote no on this. Okay. Ernesto? Yes. 00:26:12.510 --> 00:26:21.822 - Appreciate the effort on trying to complement the original house. I do have comments regarding 00:26:22.850 --> 00:26:30.384 - About the siding, I would agree about the exposure of the siding not doing eight but four inches. I 00:26:30.384 --> 00:26:38.596 - also have some issue with the proportions of the windows for the dormers. I think they're out of proportion. 00:26:38.596 --> 00:26:46.281 - I know why they're doing it. If I understand this correctly, they're using double homes and they need 00:26:46.281 --> 00:26:47.486 - to meet egress. 00:26:48.578 --> 00:26:58.659 - So when you use double hung windows, the size of those windows get really big. So one thing that we 00:26:58.659 --> 00:27:08.741 - have done before is, in my case, to meet egress, you use casements that look like double hungs. And 00:27:08.741 --> 00:27:17.310 - you meet egress, and it looks good too. Also, the two windows above the garage door, 00:27:17.634 --> 00:27:27.490 - Basically the opposite, they're just too small to squat. So if you want to get them proportionally right, 00:27:27.490 --> 00:27:37.440 - it would be taller. And lastly, the windows along the side, typically you wouldn't find horizontal windows 00:27:37.440 --> 00:27:46.366 - in this type of architecture. You would either find square or rectangle. Those are my comments. 00:27:48.258 --> 00:27:58.649 - Do you have comments? Now you got me thinking. Yeah, I mean, I basically agree with all the things you 00:27:58.649 --> 00:28:08.838 - said. I've been staring at it, wondering what was bothering me about it, particularly the horizontal 00:28:08.838 --> 00:28:17.918 - windows and those upper proportions. Which is just to say it could be better, but it does 00:28:18.018 --> 00:28:25.853 - complement the existing house better than the original, I think, better than the original proposal did. 00:28:25.853 --> 00:28:33.612 - But in changing the roof, they created some additional issues, design issues that I'm troubled by, but 00:28:33.612 --> 00:28:41.598 - unless they're willing to sit down and actually take some hard advice that has just been offered to them. 00:28:44.610 --> 00:28:52.303 - to do about it. In the siding issue, it doesn't trouble me that the house and the garage aren't the 00:28:52.303 --> 00:29:00.534 - same in particular. Anything else? I think for me, I would just support the original COA. I'm not troubled 00:29:00.534 --> 00:29:08.381 - by the difference in the size of the siding. They're not connected. They're separate from each other. 00:29:08.381 --> 00:29:13.150 - So that is not really a concern for me at all. And so I think 00:29:13.634 --> 00:29:21.251 - But the motion on the table is to approve the COA with the condition that they match the size of the 00:29:21.251 --> 00:29:29.095 - siding for this new to the house. So that's what we're actually voting on. Just want to make sure we're 00:29:29.095 --> 00:29:36.863 - clear for everybody. And so, yeah. That's all the comments. So I guess we're ready to go for the vote. 00:29:36.863 --> 00:29:43.198 - OK. So it's been motioned and seconded to approve this with a conditional change to 00:29:43.714 --> 00:29:52.572 - to change the siding. The size of the siding. Size of the siding. So a vote on yes for this would be 00:29:52.572 --> 00:30:00.992 - to agree to change the side of the siding versus what was proposed in the COA. Jack Baker? Yes. 00:30:00.992 --> 00:30:09.850 - John Butler? No. Ernesto Castaneda? Yes. Excuse me, Melody's not here. Karen Duffy? No. Jeff Golden? 00:30:09.850 --> 00:30:13.534 - No. Jeremy Hackard? No. Abby Hanson? Yes. 00:30:14.306 --> 00:30:22.967 - OK, so that motion does not pass. It was 3 yay, 4 no. All right. So I'll entertain another motion. I'll 00:30:22.967 --> 00:30:31.545 - make a motion to approve the COAs originally written. Is there a second? Second. All right. Do we want 00:30:31.545 --> 00:30:40.206 - to have any further comments on this? Any comment? John? Karen? Further comments? Abby? Jeff, any other 00:30:40.206 --> 00:30:43.454 - ones? No. Ernesto, any other comments? 00:30:44.546 --> 00:30:52.617 - No. Duncan? No. I don't have any other comments either. So we're ready for a vote. Great. So now this 00:30:52.617 --> 00:30:59.896 - motion is for COA 26-11 as proposed in your packet. Mhm. Jack Baker? Yes. John Butler? Yes. 00:30:59.896 --> 00:31:08.046 - Ernesto Castaneda? Yes. Karen Duffy? Yes. Jeff Golden? Yes. Jeremy Hacker? Yes. Abby Hanson? Yes. That 00:31:08.046 --> 00:31:13.822 - motion passes 7-0. All right. Thank you very much. It has been approved. 00:31:14.018 --> 00:31:28.101 - Next up on our agenda, we have old business next, which is the reading of changes to rules and procedures. 00:31:28.101 --> 00:31:41.790 - So from what I understand from my last conversation with legal, and you can correct me if I'm wrong, is 00:31:42.242 --> 00:31:50.157 - I wanted to present this as a first reading because it's a series of amendments that I proposed that 00:31:50.157 --> 00:31:58.072 - I know people may need to take some time to read. And also I wanted to make sure that everything was 00:31:58.072 --> 00:32:06.144 - kosher by the legal department. So this is a series of amendments to our rules and procedures that I'm 00:32:06.144 --> 00:32:07.006 - proposing. 00:32:07.906 --> 00:32:15.212 - order to meet new changes that City Council has made to Title II which handles boards and commissions. 00:32:15.212 --> 00:32:22.376 - So if you don't mind I'll just read them off and we can handle this like a COA or if you decide that 00:32:22.376 --> 00:32:29.540 - you want to continue this to a future meeting and treat this like a first reading then we could also 00:32:29.540 --> 00:32:32.094 - do it that way. Okay so whereas the 00:32:32.354 --> 00:32:38.135 - Bloomington, Indiana Common Council voted on Thursday the 18th to amend Title II of the Bloomington 00:32:38.135 --> 00:32:44.032 - Municipal Code entitled Administration and Personnel to Consolidate and Amend Boards and Commissions, 00:32:44.032 --> 00:32:50.044 - whereas changes made to the rules governing boards and commissions impose differences from the existing 00:32:50.044 --> 00:32:55.941 - Historic Preservation Commission rules and procedures involving the rules of officers and calling for 00:32:55.941 --> 00:33:01.086 - special meetings, whereas language amended to Title II of the Bloomington Municipal Code 00:33:01.474 --> 00:33:07.752 - as general provisions for commission procedures, including parliamentary procedure removal for cause 00:33:07.752 --> 00:33:14.029 - and vacancies. The Bloomington Historic Preservation Commission shall adopt the following amendments 00:33:14.029 --> 00:33:20.245 - to its rules and procedures. Article one, amend to read, see special meetings. A special meeting of 00:33:20.245 --> 00:33:26.647 - a board commission or council may be called by the chairperson, the mayor, or by a majority of members 00:33:26.647 --> 00:33:29.630 - then serving on the board commission or council 00:33:30.242 --> 00:33:37.135 - requesting such a meeting in writing. Upon receiving such a request, the chairperson shall thereafter 00:33:37.135 --> 00:33:43.488 - call a special meeting to be held within 20 days. Three days notice is required. Amend to add 00:33:43.488 --> 00:33:50.381 - M, parliamentary procedure. Meetings shall be conducted according to procedures set forth in Robert's 00:33:50.381 --> 00:33:57.342 - Rules of Order and N, removal for cause. Except for appointees who serve at the pleasure of the mayor, 00:33:57.858 --> 00:34:04.781 - a member of a board commission or council may be removed for cause. Cause shall include but not be limited 00:34:04.781 --> 00:34:11.445 - to violation of the code of conduct specified in subsection three and excessive absenteeism. Excessive 00:34:11.445 --> 00:34:18.368 - absenteeism is a failure to attend three consecutive meetings scheduled of the board commission or council 00:34:18.368 --> 00:34:25.290 - or four regularly scheduled meetings in any 12 month period provided that any member may submit in writing 00:34:25.290 --> 00:34:27.102 - to the appointing authority 00:34:27.394 --> 00:34:34.150 - any extenuating circumstances. Such written submission shall be made within five business days before 00:34:34.150 --> 00:34:40.973 - the formal declaration to remove is reached. Acceptance of extenuating circumstances by the appointing 00:34:40.973 --> 00:34:47.796 - official or body puts the member on notice that further excessive absenteeism shall result in removal. 00:34:47.796 --> 00:34:52.830 - And oh, vacancies by death. Let's hope not. Resignation failure to appoint. 00:34:53.730 --> 00:35:00.107 - In the event that a vacancy opens in the membership of a board commission or council through resignation 00:35:00.107 --> 00:35:06.242 - or death, the appointing authority shall appoint a person to fill the unexpired term of the resigned 00:35:06.242 --> 00:35:12.498 - or deceased member. If a member's term has expired but the appointing authority has failed to act, the 00:35:12.498 --> 00:35:18.815 - appointment of the member whose term has expired carries over until the appointing authority reappoints 00:35:18.815 --> 00:35:22.398 - or appoints a successor. And then Article 2 amend to read, 00:35:22.722 --> 00:35:30.119 - a annually at its first meeting of the year. The commission shall select by majority vote of its members, 00:35:30.119 --> 00:35:37.236 - a chair, vice chair, secretary and treasurer who shall serve for one year and who may be reelected to 00:35:37.236 --> 00:35:44.424 - second one year terms. The commission may not, sorry, the commission may appoint a non-member to serve 00:35:44.424 --> 00:35:52.030 - as secretary and add E duties of the secretary. The secretary shall keep for every meeting written documents 00:35:52.674 --> 00:36:00.898 - in which the result of any vote are recorded and, when appropriate, specific findings of fact and conclusions 00:36:00.898 --> 00:36:08.748 - are set forth. Does anybody, if you ask, does anybody have any questions? We'll go around. Yeah, Duncan, 00:36:08.748 --> 00:36:16.523 - go ahead. This three-day notice, does that comply with open door? It seems awfully sure. I believe open 00:36:16.523 --> 00:36:22.654 - door is a 48-hour notice. Oh, really? Yeah. Legal, do we have an opinion on that? 00:36:23.842 --> 00:36:31.941 - After talking with Anna Holmes today, it sounds like she gave you guys the proper advice. But say the 00:36:31.941 --> 00:36:39.247 - question again one more time. Sorry. So it's a three-day notice. Does that comply with open 00:36:39.247 --> 00:36:47.902 - door requirements? The three-day notice should be in compliance with open door law. OK. Any other questions? 00:36:53.634 --> 00:37:00.857 - Most of it seems to be pretty perfunctory. I'm not sure what we've got to do with a treasurer. He may 00:37:00.857 --> 00:37:08.293 - open another door. Well, I guess if anybody wants it on their resume. Ernesto, do you have any questions 00:37:08.293 --> 00:37:15.870 - about this? No. Thank you. Jeff? No questions. Abby, do you have any questions? Karen? No questions. John? 00:37:16.418 --> 00:37:22.995 - Does it even matter what we say, right? This is sort of going to happen anyway. Not that I oppose it 00:37:22.995 --> 00:37:29.637 - in any way, but yeah, exactly. No questions. Jack, do you have any questions about it? So just to add 00:37:29.637 --> 00:37:36.344 - onto that, typically it's 48 hours. So three days is plenty of time for the notice. Melody, I know you 00:37:36.344 --> 00:37:43.051 - just dropped in. Do you have any questions about the revisions that Noah had put together on this? No. 00:37:43.051 --> 00:37:46.046 - I don't have any questions either, so I think 00:37:46.242 --> 00:37:52.784 - I'm maybe just wondering from everybody here, would you like more time to think about this, or do you 00:37:52.784 --> 00:37:59.327 - think there's any need to? I'd do it. Yeah, exactly. It's just like, what can we do anyway? Well, no, 00:37:59.327 --> 00:38:05.869 - I said that this hadn't, at some point, this hadn't been passed the purview of legal yet. So it seems 00:38:05.869 --> 00:38:12.347 - like we want to wait for that. Has that already happened? No, I thought you talked to Anna about it. 00:38:12.347 --> 00:38:13.566 - I sent it to Anna. 00:38:13.986 --> 00:38:21.925 - and he hadn't received any sort of red line version of it. So. Did she give you any feedback on it yet? 00:38:21.925 --> 00:38:29.635 - She said that the commission can go ahead and vote. I mean, that sounds pretty clear to me. If I get 00:38:29.635 --> 00:38:37.345 - too few comments on it, I get nervous. No, yeah. I did speak with her briefly. She wasn't able to be 00:38:37.345 --> 00:38:42.078 - here, but she seemed confident that you were in line with the 00:38:43.266 --> 00:38:50.276 - rules of procedures and open door law and all of that. OK. Excellent. So I guess, I mean, we treat this 00:38:50.276 --> 00:38:57.016 - like the COAs where I take a motion on this from a commissioner. I motion to approve it as written, 00:38:57.016 --> 00:39:03.959 - I guess. Is that for the proof? What is the name of this? To approve the resolution to amend the rules 00:39:03.959 --> 00:39:10.699 - and procedures. That's exactly what I wanted to say. OK. Let's say. OK. So John's got a motion, and 00:39:10.699 --> 00:39:11.710 - Jack's second. 00:39:12.450 --> 00:39:19.544 - Any further comments from anybody who can go around Duncan Dude? The only thing that occurred to me 00:39:19.544 --> 00:39:26.993 - was we have had some conversations about revisiting these rules and procedures in general, because under 00:39:26.993 --> 00:39:34.300 - normal circumstances, these are up to us to determine. I'm not even sure why we're voting on ones that 00:39:34.300 --> 00:39:42.174 - seem to be mandated. But unless we want to try to do more, I guess we could just amend it at any time we want. 00:39:42.562 --> 00:39:49.563 - Yep. Let's just take care of this and get it out of the way. Ernesto, do you have anything else? 00:39:49.563 --> 00:39:57.214 - No comments. Thank you. Jeff. No. Abby. No comments. Karen. No. John. Jack. Just to remind commissioners, 00:39:57.214 --> 00:40:05.009 - we do have to have a treasurer and a secretary. So think about if you would like to have or would entertain 00:40:05.009 --> 00:40:10.206 - that position, even though it implies minimal effort. Melody, anything? 00:40:11.330 --> 00:40:19.145 - For the secretary position, it can be a staff person. So when we come around to doing the folks on that, 00:40:19.145 --> 00:40:26.662 - we can, I think city needs to work through some stuff on their end to see if a staff person would be 00:40:26.662 --> 00:40:32.542 - able to do that, which would be great. So we'll see what's going on with that. 00:40:32.738 --> 00:40:38.909 - And I would be curious, Noah, maybe if, depending on how that goes, if we can have the election for 00:40:38.909 --> 00:40:45.080 - those two, the treasurer and secretary, either at the next meeting or the meeting after that. Yeah, 00:40:45.080 --> 00:40:51.313 - I don't see why not. So maybe if we can turn that on the agenda for the next meeting, unless there's 00:40:51.313 --> 00:40:57.546 - some kind of weirdness that's going on behind the scenes for the city, go ahead and consider that at 00:40:57.546 --> 00:41:01.310 - that time, perhaps. All right, any other comments? I'm done. 00:41:02.146 --> 00:41:10.236 - All right, so I guess we'll call the vote on the adoption of these. OK, so that has been moved and seconded. 00:41:10.236 --> 00:41:17.732 - We'll go ahead and take a roll call vote. Jack Baker? Yes. John Butler? Yes. Ernesto Castaneda? Yes. 00:41:17.732 --> 00:41:25.154 - Melanie Dusner? Yes. Karen Duffy? Yes. Jeff Golden? Yes. Jeremy Hackard? Yes. Abby Hanson? Yes. And 00:41:25.154 --> 00:41:29.310 - that motion passes 8-0. Excellent. Thank you very much. 00:41:29.890 --> 00:41:36.629 - related to that and what Duncan kind of led into something I was going to say encouraged everybody to 00:41:36.629 --> 00:41:43.435 - take a look at the rules and procedures last time in preparation for this meeting. I do think it would 00:41:43.435 --> 00:41:50.174 - be nice if you take a look at that and you see anything that you think maybe we might need to adjust. 00:41:50.174 --> 00:41:56.979 - It would be great to bring to the commission for discussion. I went through and I've redlined a couple 00:41:56.979 --> 00:41:59.358 - of things. I shared some ideas with 00:41:59.554 --> 00:42:06.007 - and maybe we can talk about it next time, but there's a couple of places where it's just trying to get 00:42:06.007 --> 00:42:12.397 - some clarity, especially like when we have meetings. Currently, under the rules and procedures, we're 00:42:12.397 --> 00:42:18.975 - supposed to meet on Thanksgiving every year. We don't do that. So it's kind of like amending those sorts 00:42:18.975 --> 00:42:24.926 - of stuff and just trying to be a little bit more consistent about who is doing certain things. 00:42:25.634 --> 00:42:32.450 - places in here where it's talking about a notice is sent. Who's sending the notice? Well, the hand liaison. 00:42:32.450 --> 00:42:38.761 - So just being a little bit more clear about that sort of stuff. So I went through and made some red 00:42:38.761 --> 00:42:45.134 - line changes and stuff. I'd be happy to share with other folks if you'd like to take that as maybe a 00:42:45.134 --> 00:42:51.445 - starting point to thinking about that sort of stuff. But I'm open to other comments regarding that. 00:42:51.445 --> 00:42:55.358 - But it just was trying to clean up the language a little bit. 00:42:55.842 --> 00:43:02.132 - and make sure it's kind of aligning with how we're doing stuff and taking some things like, I think 00:43:02.132 --> 00:43:08.547 - keeping a roster of the commissioners and things like that is technically like the vice chair's duty, 00:43:08.547 --> 00:43:14.899 - even though that's really what like staff does. And so just trying to adjust those sort of things to 00:43:14.899 --> 00:43:21.377 - better reflect the reality of how we're operating. So I can do that and maybe we can have a discussion 00:43:21.377 --> 00:43:25.214 - about that at the next meeting if that would work for folks. 00:43:27.682 --> 00:43:36.095 - All right, so Noah, any other old business that we need to discuss? Any new old business? Let's see. 00:43:36.095 --> 00:43:44.675 - Any other old business? We're going to be seeing somebody in for a past violation coming up next week. 00:43:44.675 --> 00:43:53.004 - This is 4301 East Glendora, if any of you remember that. Yeah, this is from last year, yes. This is 00:43:53.004 --> 00:43:57.086 - an installation of a window and a basement. Yes. 00:43:58.722 --> 00:44:06.350 - That's right. So they'll come at the next meeting. Yeah, they're going to be at the next meeting. Okay. 00:44:06.350 --> 00:44:14.125 - I also, yeah, I did want to bring up that we're going to have to elect some new positions now that we've, 00:44:14.125 --> 00:44:21.459 - you know, ratified these changes to rules and procedures. So that's something that everybody has to 00:44:21.459 --> 00:44:28.574 - look forward to. Those are really the main points that I have right now. Okay. Any new business? 00:44:34.370 --> 00:44:42.802 - anybody wants to introduce any? Commissioner Comets. Does anybody want to speak on anything in general? 00:44:42.802 --> 00:44:51.233 - I'm happy to take feedback or anything else. All right. Public comments. Are there any public comments? 00:44:51.233 --> 00:44:59.422 - We had a couple people leave. Is there anybody online? Wow. Okay. Well, that brings us to the end of 00:44:59.422 --> 00:45:00.638 - our agenda. So 00:45:01.282 --> 00:45:04.638 - All right, this meeting is officially adjourned.