WEBVTT 00:00:00.770 --> 00:00:08.659 - All right, it's 5 o'clock. I'm calling the Thursday, April 23rd meeting of the Bloomington Historic 00:00:08.659 --> 00:00:16.547 - Preservation Commission to order. Would staff please call the roll. Jack Baker, Commissioner Baker. 00:00:16.547 --> 00:00:24.831 - Excuse me, Vice Chair Baker. Treasurer Butler. Here. Commissioner Castaneda. Here. Commissioner Duesner. 00:00:24.831 --> 00:00:29.406 - Commissioner Duffy. Here. Commissioner Golden. Yes, here. 00:00:29.954 --> 00:00:37.657 - Chair Hackard? Here. Commissioner Hanson? Here. Commissioner Schlegel? Here. We have quorum. Excellent. 00:00:37.657 --> 00:00:45.508 - Next up is approval of the minutes. Would anyone like to make a motion on the minutes? I'll make a motion 00:00:45.508 --> 00:00:53.359 - to approve the minutes. All right. Treasurer Butler has moved to approve. Is there a second? I'll second. 00:00:53.359 --> 00:00:59.358 - Commissioner Duffy has seconded. Any discussion? All right. Let's call the vote. 00:00:59.810 --> 00:01:08.335 - OK. Motion to approve the minutes from April 9 has been moved. We'll take a roll call vote. Treasurer 00:01:08.335 --> 00:01:17.278 - Butler? Yes. Commissioner Castaneda? Yes. Commissioner Duffy? Yes. Commissioner Golden? Yes. Chair Hacker? 00:01:17.278 --> 00:01:24.382 - Yes. Commissioner Hanson? Yes. Commissioner Schlegel? Yes. The minutes are approved. 00:01:24.770 --> 00:01:32.330 - Excellent. Next up, we have certificates of appropriateness for staff review. Mr. Sandweiss, please. 00:01:32.330 --> 00:01:39.816 - So tonight we have two staff approved certificates of appropriateness. First one, COA 2622 for 2411 00:01:39.816 --> 00:01:47.526 - North Barbara Drive in the Matlock Heights Historic District. Petitioner is Micah Heath. This petition 00:01:47.526 --> 00:01:52.766 - is for the replacement of most of the windows and front and back door 00:01:52.866 --> 00:02:02.548 - at 2411 North Barbara Drive. This project will also involve the replacement of the asphalt shingle roof 00:02:02.548 --> 00:02:11.858 - with asphalt and the replacement of aluminum gutters with new aluminum gutters for which review was 00:02:11.858 --> 00:02:19.678 - not required. The windows are to be replaced with new windows of the same shape and 00:02:22.466 --> 00:02:31.490 - model. The exterior door in this case is going to be replaced with a fiberglass three window door. The 00:02:31.490 --> 00:02:41.127 - application itself would retain the proportions of the existing windows. The front door for which replacement 00:02:41.127 --> 00:02:49.976 - is proposed is a windowless wood composite door that does not appear to be original. The replacement 00:02:49.976 --> 00:02:52.254 - door selected would mimic 00:02:53.154 --> 00:03:00.946 - typical mid-century modern patterns with its creative window configuration. The back door for which 00:03:00.946 --> 00:03:09.050 - window replacement is also proposed is minimally visible from the street on North Fritz Drive, 250 feet 00:03:09.050 --> 00:03:17.310 - from the rear of the house and positioned behind 2420 North Fritz Drive. The roof and gutter replacements 00:03:17.310 --> 00:03:20.894 - do not require review. The three pane windows 00:03:22.082 --> 00:03:33.336 - Beside the entry to the garage will not be replaced as the petitioner could not find a suitable replacement. 00:03:33.336 --> 00:03:43.971 - That is approved. Next, staff approved COA 2624 for 923 West 6th Street in the Near West Side Historic 00:03:43.971 --> 00:03:47.998 - District. Petitioner is Malcolm Wolin. 00:03:48.930 --> 00:03:56.629 - This is a double penthouse with a full width front porch and a large rear addition. It's among the older 00:03:56.629 --> 00:04:03.961 - houses in the neighborhood. And the original section of the house, which you see here, is supported 00:04:03.961 --> 00:04:12.027 - on a handful of limestone piers. This request is for the installation of the split face foundation perimeter, 00:04:12.027 --> 00:04:18.846 - sorry, a split face cement block perimeter foundation around the north end of this building. 00:04:19.394 --> 00:04:25.886 - The house is currently sitting on stone piers with many improvised supports. Many of these piers are 00:04:25.886 --> 00:04:32.314 - failing, causing cracks in the walls, sticking doors, and failing floors. The owner also has a very 00:04:32.314 --> 00:04:38.870 - difficult time heating the house properly in the winter because of the lack of an insulated perimeter 00:04:38.870 --> 00:04:45.813 - foundation. If action is not taken in the near term, the house is at risk of further serious deterioration. 00:04:45.813 --> 00:04:47.998 - In order to execute this project, 00:04:48.802 --> 00:04:54.967 - The contractor must hand dig into the new foundation. Jack King is not possible because the rear of 00:04:54.967 --> 00:05:01.256 - the house is anchored to a perimeter foundation. This is a later addition. In order to gain access to 00:05:01.256 --> 00:05:07.668 - the perimeter, the floor and the existing, the floor of the existing porch needs to be demolished. Many 00:05:07.668 --> 00:05:14.141 - parts of this floor are already rotten. There's a tongue and groove pine floor. Staff approved COA 2624. 00:05:14.141 --> 00:05:15.806 - The stacks down foundation 00:05:16.706 --> 00:05:23.626 - supports for the house are currently hidden beneath vertical vinyl siding, which would be removed. 00:05:23.626 --> 00:05:30.686 - Regardless, the visibility of this foundation is very low. Much of it is hidden under the porch, and 00:05:30.686 --> 00:05:37.746 - a more substantial foundation would prevent further deterioration to the house. All right. Thank you 00:05:37.746 --> 00:05:45.086 - very much. Next up, we have certificates of appropriateness and demolition delays for commission review. 00:05:45.346 --> 00:05:50.794 - For each item on the agenda, the Historic Preservation Program Manager will first present a staff report. 00:05:50.794 --> 00:05:56.191 - We will then hear if the petitioner has any additional information about the request, followed by public 00:05:56.191 --> 00:06:01.845 - comment. Once public comment concludes, commissioners will be able to ask questions to staff, the petitioner, 00:06:01.845 --> 00:06:07.448 - and the public. We ask that petitioners, the public, and commissioners refrain from speaking until addressed 00:06:07.448 --> 00:06:10.686 - by the chair, unless a question is directly addressed to them. 00:06:10.818 --> 00:06:16.305 - Following commissioner questions, the chair will entertain a motion from a commissioner regarding the 00:06:16.305 --> 00:06:22.169 - petition. Once a motion is made, we will then open up a discussion of the item for members of the commission 00:06:22.169 --> 00:06:27.978 - only. Finally, once the commissioners have had a chance to speak, the commission will vote on the petition. 00:06:27.978 --> 00:06:33.412 - We encourage all commissioners, petitioners, and members of the public to be civil and respectful at 00:06:33.412 --> 00:06:36.478 - all times. All right, Mr. Sanweiss, please take it away. 00:06:37.442 --> 00:06:44.475 - Okay, so our first COA of the, or staff reviewed, sorry, commission reviewed. COA of the evening is 00:06:44.475 --> 00:06:51.508 - COA 2621, which was continued from our last meeting. 411.01 North Lincoln Street in the Garden Hill 00:06:51.508 --> 00:06:58.611 - Historic District. Petitioner is Sherry Hillenberg, who I see is in the audience today. Currently on 00:06:58.611 --> 00:07:06.066 - the site is a non-contributing 1948 minimal ranch. Their proposal, which you've seen previously, involves 00:07:06.066 --> 00:07:07.262 - the construction 00:07:08.162 --> 00:07:18.841 - of a one and a half story three unit building. Since the last meeting, several alterations were proposed 00:07:18.841 --> 00:07:29.011 - to this design, including an extension in the height of the windows on the rear of the house, which 00:07:29.011 --> 00:07:37.758 - will be increased on the upper level from 36 inches in height to 60 inches in height. 00:07:38.498 --> 00:07:49.188 - and the lower levels will be increased from 36 inches to 48 inches in height. Additionally, the revisions 00:07:49.188 --> 00:07:59.576 - to the proposal include a brick porch wall measuring 18 inches in height with a four-inch masonry cap, 00:07:59.576 --> 00:08:08.350 - bringing the total wall height, which you see here, proposed on the front of the house 00:08:09.090 --> 00:08:16.144 - to a height of 22 inches. The brick double wall will be tied together with metal ties every four to 00:08:16.144 --> 00:08:23.269 - six courses. The wall height is identical to the porch wall on the house immediately to the north at 00:08:23.269 --> 00:08:30.323 - 1119 North Lincoln. Treated four by four posts are going to be installed into the concrete slab for 00:08:30.323 --> 00:08:35.966 - stability. Each post will be surrounded with brick up to a height of 27 inches. 00:08:36.482 --> 00:08:46.687 - with a four inch masonry cap making the total height 31 inches. The remaining exposed portion of the 00:08:46.687 --> 00:08:56.791 - four by four posts will be wrapped with an aluminum square fluted wrap similar to the AFCO aluminum 00:08:56.791 --> 00:09:05.278 - columns. As when this petition was introduced at the last meeting, staff recommends 00:09:06.082 --> 00:09:15.822 - approval of COA 2621, revisions to the proposal from the last meeting, addressed some comments from 00:09:15.822 --> 00:09:26.049 - the commission, including questions about the rear facade facing west and the makeup of the front porch. 00:09:26.049 --> 00:09:34.718 - All right. Thank you, Mr. Sandweist. Petitioner, do you have anything you'd like to add? 00:09:34.818 --> 00:09:41.302 - Now just to emphasize what he said about the windows. All of the windows in the building will now be 00:09:41.302 --> 00:09:47.979 - 60 inches tall, except for the dormer, they're gonna be 42. And then the three windows on the back were 00:09:47.979 --> 00:09:54.527 - increased to 48 because they're above the kitchen sink. So we couldn't go until 60 there, but they're 00:09:54.527 --> 00:10:01.396 - increased to 48. I looked at the house directly to the north, 1119. I didn't measure, I literally measured 00:10:01.396 --> 00:10:04.478 - everything there. And then I went to the house, 00:10:04.802 --> 00:10:11.735 - further north of it, and just looked at it from the street level, which also has a very low brick wall. 00:10:11.735 --> 00:10:18.735 - So just tried to mimic what they have there. OK. Anything else? I think so. All right. Next up is public 00:10:18.735 --> 00:10:25.468 - comment. If you wish to make a public comment, I ask that you raise your hand, and you'll have three 00:10:25.468 --> 00:10:32.134 - minutes to address anything. So yes, go ahead, ma'am. You'll have three minutes. Does this proposal 00:10:32.134 --> 00:10:33.534 - include a front port 00:10:35.074 --> 00:10:44.009 - The plans that we saw were a recessed porch. So that's been added as a revision because of UDO requirements, 00:10:44.009 --> 00:10:52.206 - which I don't remember exactly how it works, but the porches have to be more similar to those found 00:10:52.206 --> 00:11:00.977 - on neighboring buildings on the block. So that's why a full length, or not full length, but three quarters 00:11:00.977 --> 00:11:04.830 - length front porch has been added to the plan. 00:11:05.538 --> 00:11:13.621 - Mm-hmm. Any other public comments? Ma'am, what's your name? Carrie Slough. Thank you. Thank you very 00:11:13.621 --> 00:11:21.625 - much. Thank you. Are there any members of the public online who would like to make a comment? Okay. 00:11:21.625 --> 00:11:29.788 - Well, we'll turn over to Commissioner questions. Commissioner Golden, do you have any questions about 00:11:29.788 --> 00:11:34.750 - this? Commissioner Duffy. No questions. Butler. No questions. 00:11:35.234 --> 00:11:41.437 - So I'm definitely not an architect, so I was trying to read these at the office and I thought maybe 00:11:41.437 --> 00:11:47.764 - I missed something. So the windows look the same in the revision attachment, but they are 60. Because 00:11:47.764 --> 00:11:54.340 - I know we talked about the bigger, and I know the petitioner put it in. They just looked on the pictures. 00:11:54.340 --> 00:12:00.915 - They look the same, but they're actually. So this is the same drawing from what we have for the revisions 00:12:00.915 --> 00:12:02.590 - was sent to me in writing? 00:12:13.218 --> 00:12:21.157 - Would someone like to make a motion? I move to approve COA 2621. Yeah, thank you. All right, Commissioner 00:12:21.157 --> 00:12:29.096 - Golden has moved to approve COA 2621. Is there a second? I'll second that. All right, Commissioner Hanson 00:12:29.096 --> 00:12:36.586 - has seconded approval. Commissioner Golden, you can start the comments. I think that the petitioner 00:12:36.586 --> 00:12:39.582 - has gone the extra mile to revise this. 00:12:39.906 --> 00:12:45.671 - so that it's acceptable to both the commission and the neighbors, and I'm gonna support it. 00:12:45.671 --> 00:12:52.001 - Okay, Commissioner Hanson? Yeah, I think that they made the adjustments to the windows and the brick 00:12:52.001 --> 00:12:58.393 - porch wall and have been working with us on this, so I'm happy to approve it. All right, Commissioner 00:12:58.393 --> 00:13:04.973 - Duffy? Just wanna thank the commissioner for their patience with us and for providing these refinements. 00:13:04.973 --> 00:13:08.670 - I think it's a much superior product. Commissioner Butler? 00:13:09.058 --> 00:13:15.477 - Yeah, I agree. I also want to thank the petitioner for taking the time to do all this. I know that that 00:13:15.477 --> 00:13:21.649 - adds to the cost and the hassle of the whole project, but I think you're going to get a much better 00:13:21.649 --> 00:13:27.821 - project after this is all done. And I also appreciate that the neighborhood seems to have gotten on 00:13:27.821 --> 00:13:34.116 - board with this more than before. Commissioner Schlegel. I appreciate the petitioner as well. I think 00:13:34.116 --> 00:13:38.622 - it's a good project, and I'm happy to support it. Commissioner Casamaya. 00:13:39.330 --> 00:13:45.922 - comments. For me, I'd like to thank the petitioner. My fellow commissioners, I appreciate you putting 00:13:45.922 --> 00:13:52.708 - in the time to make some adjustments to this. I think it turned out a lot better and would fit in better 00:13:52.708 --> 00:13:59.171 - with the overall neighborhood. So I appreciate it. All right. We are done with comments, so I think 00:13:59.171 --> 00:14:05.828 - we're ready to call vote. Great. So this would be for COA 2621 roll call vote, starting with Treasurer 00:14:05.828 --> 00:14:08.542 - Butler. Yes. Commissioner Castaneda. Yes. 00:14:08.962 --> 00:14:17.605 - Commissioner Duffy. Yes. Commissioner Golden. Yes. Commissioner Hafford. Yes. Commissioner Hanson. Yes. 00:14:17.605 --> 00:14:25.916 - Commissioner Schlegel. Yes. And the COA is approved. Seven zero. All right. Thank you very much for 00:14:25.916 --> 00:14:34.310 - the petition. Appreciate it. Thank you for the public comments as well. All right. Next up we have a 00:14:34.310 --> 00:14:36.222 - COA 2623. Mr. Samuels. 00:14:36.866 --> 00:14:46.130 - So this is Petition COA 2623 for 120 South Walnut Avenue in the Courthouse Square Historic District. 00:14:46.130 --> 00:14:55.670 - Petitioner is Layla Taylor. Is the petitioner or somebody representing the petitioner present? Are they 00:14:55.670 --> 00:15:05.118 - online? No. All right. OK. So we will move this to the end of the agenda to see if they might join us. 00:15:05.538 --> 00:15:13.297 - We will revisit this one. So let's move on to the next one. COA 2625. We're at COA 2625. Address 712 00:15:13.297 --> 00:15:21.748 - West 3rd Street in the Greater Prospect Hill Historic District. Petitioner is Dennis Birch. Is the petitioner 00:15:21.748 --> 00:15:29.430 - present or representative? Great. OK. 712 West 3rd Street is a turn of the century pyramidal roofed 00:15:29.430 --> 00:15:35.422 - cottage with two front openings onto a corner limestone porch from two sides. 00:15:36.386 --> 00:15:47.470 - The existing exterior windows are replacements. This request involves the extensive interior renovation 00:15:47.470 --> 00:15:58.554 - of the first floor and basement of the existing single-story residential structure, as well as a number 00:15:58.554 --> 00:16:06.334 - of exterior alterations, including the installation of a side staircase, 00:16:07.234 --> 00:16:17.458 - show you here. The construction of a wood deck at the back of the house. Oh geez, I'm having some trouble 00:16:17.458 --> 00:16:27.490 - seeing. As well as some alterations to the fenestration. You can see here on the east side of the house 00:16:27.490 --> 00:16:33.470 - some proposed changes to accommodate the new interior layout. 00:16:35.010 --> 00:16:47.105 - as well as alterations to this rear cantilever, I guess it's on pillars, this rear protruding addition. 00:16:47.105 --> 00:16:59.433 - Sorry to give you an idea, this is, no, this is basement, let's see, current floor plan, current basement 00:16:59.433 --> 00:17:04.318 - floor plan, as well as a demolition plan. 00:17:05.922 --> 00:17:20.340 - for both levels and proposed redesign. You can see alterations proposed to the front, the east side 00:17:20.340 --> 00:17:28.702 - of the building, and the southern addition. Additionally, 00:17:32.322 --> 00:17:38.665 - The recommendation from staff is conditional approval with the retention of both of the front doors, 00:17:38.665 --> 00:17:45.259 - which do not necessarily have to be both of them functioning. The proposed alterations to the building's 00:17:45.259 --> 00:17:51.665 - window proportions would take place on secondary elevations visible to the public way, will leave the 00:17:51.665 --> 00:17:58.070 - front portion of the house more or less as is. The sunroom for which the most substantial changes are 00:17:58.070 --> 00:18:01.022 - proposed is a later addition and less visible. 00:18:01.602 --> 00:18:07.975 - The proposed deck would not damage or obscure any historic materials. Replacement of materials would 00:18:07.975 --> 00:18:14.349 - be replaced in kind or with very similar materials. Aside from the front door and limestone, most of 00:18:14.349 --> 00:18:20.785 - the exterior materials have already been replaced. I had a discussion with the architect on the phone 00:18:20.785 --> 00:18:27.095 - about retaining the secondary front door, which was initially proposed to be removed and leaving it 00:18:27.095 --> 00:18:28.862 - as we've seen on some other 00:18:29.858 --> 00:18:36.945 - houses with this layout as non-functional. Is there anything that the petitioners would like to add? 00:18:36.945 --> 00:18:44.172 - That pretty much covers it. Footprint for the actual layout of the building itself stays the same. The 00:18:44.172 --> 00:18:51.258 - room on the back right now is, they use it kind of as a dining room, but it's non-functional. It has 00:18:51.258 --> 00:18:57.854 - about a six foot eight inch, six foot seven inch ceiling that's being taken off and made into 00:18:58.050 --> 00:19:07.033 - A functional dining room, sunroom on the back. The footprint stays the same, so it doesn't change at 00:19:07.033 --> 00:19:16.106 - all. Front entry stays the same. The stair is added to the east, northeast corner. And the only other 00:19:16.106 --> 00:19:25.534 - thing really that changes, there's additional administration on the west side for new bathroom locations. 00:19:26.882 --> 00:19:34.558 - So there are two windows in there that are new windows, transom lines, and the other windows remain. 00:19:34.558 --> 00:19:42.462 - The window to the, will be the north on this plan, facing the sun room, is being replaced with a window 00:19:42.462 --> 00:19:50.746 - to match the other bedroom windows. It's a kind of, it was added on at a later point in time, proportionally 00:19:50.746 --> 00:19:54.622 - it doesn't really match up with the other windows. 00:19:56.002 --> 00:20:05.130 - supposed to be changed out to match with that. Other than that, everything stays the same. It's primarily 00:20:05.130 --> 00:20:13.913 - located to interior renovation, basically. So that's the extent of the project. OK. Thank you for the 00:20:13.913 --> 00:20:22.955 - clarifications. Is there anybody in the room who wishes to make a public comment on the COA? I see none. 00:20:22.955 --> 00:20:25.022 - Is there anyone online? 00:20:26.018 --> 00:20:32.423 - All right, there's none online either. So we will go ahead and go to Commissioner Questions. Commissioner 00:20:32.423 --> 00:20:38.466 - Golden, you have any questions? No questions. Commissioner Duffy? No questions. Treasurer Butler? I 00:20:38.466 --> 00:20:44.509 - have a question about the staircase that I believe is going to be on the east side, if you could go 00:20:44.509 --> 00:20:50.673 - to that slide there. Is that staircase up against the building, or is it separated from the building? 00:20:50.673 --> 00:20:55.870 - It is actually facing the building, yes. OK, so it will obscure that window then, or? 00:20:56.418 --> 00:21:05.024 - No, the windows still function. What it is right now, they develop both of these properties, and they 00:21:05.024 --> 00:21:13.884 - have a very extensive garden that sits to the north of this. That's why they have so many and everything 00:21:13.884 --> 00:21:22.491 - else. And you want an access down from that. So it's just basically a small deck that they can access 00:21:22.491 --> 00:21:25.950 - down from. They're planning on, I think, 00:21:26.210 --> 00:21:32.100 - Right now, they live in a smaller house than I think they would move up to this house. And then when 00:21:32.100 --> 00:21:38.514 - it would be more functional, they would be able to move up and down and get down to the garden and everything 00:21:38.514 --> 00:21:44.346 - else. But it is tough right up against the house. It's not floating in space. I couldn't know if it 00:21:44.346 --> 00:21:50.177 - separated wasn't clear enough. That's it. Commissioner Schlegel. No questions. Commissioner Hanson. 00:21:50.177 --> 00:21:55.134 - No questions. Commissioner Castaneda. No questions. Thank you. Commissioner Duesner. 00:21:55.362 --> 00:22:06.804 - I don't have any questions. All right, I will entertain a motion on this COA. I'll make a motion to 00:22:06.804 --> 00:22:18.588 - approve COA 2625. Okay, so Commissioner Schlegel has moved to approve COA 2625. Commissioner Castaneda 00:22:18.588 --> 00:22:23.966 - has seconded. Commissioner Schlegel, comments? 00:22:25.122 --> 00:22:32.401 - I think it's a reasonable project to make the house more livable. I don't think anything. I liked Noah's 00:22:32.401 --> 00:22:39.403 - suggestion with the condition with the front, was it two front doors or front and back door? Oh, the 00:22:39.403 --> 00:22:46.335 - two front doors. Two front doors, okay. So can I clarify, so you're moving to approve COA 2625 with 00:22:46.335 --> 00:22:53.614 - the condition suggested by staff? Yes. Okay, just want to clarify. Yes, with the condition. Okay, right. 00:22:53.614 --> 00:22:55.070 - Sorry. Just clarify. 00:22:55.234 --> 00:23:02.310 - Thank you for that. No, I think it's reasonable. Okay. Commissioner Castaneda. Yeah, I think that project 00:23:02.310 --> 00:23:09.320 - looks really good. I think it was done tastefully. I really like how the new song room in the back looks 00:23:09.320 --> 00:23:16.196 - like, better than it was. It was really nice. So yeah, I think it's a nice project. Okay. Commissioner 00:23:16.196 --> 00:23:23.005 - Hanson. Yeah, I mean, I like that our motion is for going to staff suggestion, and so I would support 00:23:23.005 --> 00:23:23.806 - it as well. 00:23:24.514 --> 00:23:34.534 - I appreciate that the building maintains its basic size and shape. I think that's well done and also 00:23:34.534 --> 00:23:44.852 - worthless. Yes, and I appreciate the fact that the front will stay the same, so I will prove it myself. 00:23:44.852 --> 00:23:48.126 - Alright, I'm good with this, so. 00:23:48.418 --> 00:23:56.032 - That is my comment. I think we are ready to call the vote. It's been moved and seconded for conditional 00:23:56.032 --> 00:24:03.573 - approval of COA 2625. We'll take a roll call vote. Treasurer Butler? Yes. Commissioner Castaneda? Yes. 00:24:03.573 --> 00:24:11.114 - Commissioner Duesner? Abstain. Commissioner Duffy? Yes. Commissioner Golden? Yes. Commissioner Haggar? 00:24:11.114 --> 00:24:18.142 - Yes. Commissioner Hanson? Yes. Commissioner Schlegel? Yes. That motion passes 6-0-1 abstention. 00:24:18.370 --> 00:24:26.664 - All right. Thank you guys very much. Thank you. Clarification, please. So recusal. Oh, I didn't use 00:24:26.664 --> 00:24:35.207 - the right word. Is it a recusal because of a conflict? No. You're abstaining. I'm just abstaining. OK. 00:24:35.207 --> 00:24:43.500 - Thank you. All right. So next up, we come to COA 2626. All right. This petition is for 601 West 4th 00:24:43.500 --> 00:24:48.062 - Street in the Greater Prospect Hill Historic District. 00:24:49.090 --> 00:24:56.287 - Petitioner is Doug Bruce is the petitioner or somebody else? Okay. Or any of you? Yes, all three of 00:24:56.287 --> 00:25:03.844 - us. Okay, great. Thanks. The house at 601 West 4th Street is a free classical style house built in 1905. 00:25:03.844 --> 00:25:11.113 - Three houses to the west were built at roughly the same time and all four houses have the same plan, 00:25:11.113 --> 00:25:18.814 - although one of them has been mirrored. The front facade features a front gable wing with a closed cornice 00:25:19.202 --> 00:25:25.717 - and the central one over one wood sash window. To the east of the wing is a porch with wood columns 00:25:25.717 --> 00:25:32.297 - which wrap around the northeast corner. The porch shelters two doors when leaning to one wing of the 00:25:32.297 --> 00:25:38.877 - house, sorry, to each wing of the house in another wood sash window. The east elevation has a gabled 00:25:38.877 --> 00:25:46.174 - bay with a closed cornice and chamfered windows. The west elevation also has a gabled bay with a closed cornice 00:25:46.722 --> 00:25:53.455 - On north of this bay is a second porch, also on wood columns. This porch shelters a secondary entrance 00:25:53.455 --> 00:26:00.254 - to the house and a window bay. The rear elevation features a porch, historically enclosed and converted 00:26:00.254 --> 00:26:07.052 - into a widescreen porch. Sorry, not widescreen, into a screen porch. The sidewalk that runs to the east 00:26:07.052 --> 00:26:13.654 - of the house was added in the 1930s as a WPA project. A small shed stands to the south of the house. 00:26:13.654 --> 00:26:15.550 - It has a replaced steel roof 00:26:15.874 --> 00:26:24.793 - wood siding and hinged wooden doors. This proposal is for, I'll just read the request. Owners and the 00:26:24.793 --> 00:26:33.887 - applicant desire to extend a small room at the southern end of the house onto an existing concrete pad. 00:26:33.887 --> 00:26:42.806 - This room would be utilized as a family room and will continue to serve the main southern entrance of 00:26:42.806 --> 00:26:44.030 - the property. 00:26:45.250 --> 00:26:52.282 - The house will be utilized as the owners and applicants' primary residence. Please see drawings included. 00:26:52.282 --> 00:26:59.049 - The owners and applicants also intend to demolish the current shed at the southern end of the lot and 00:26:59.049 --> 00:27:05.949 - construct a two-car garage accessible via the alley. The garage will contain an accessory dwelling unit 00:27:05.949 --> 00:27:13.180 - on the second floor. It will be used as a third-story bedroom and may be used if home health care attendants 00:27:13.180 --> 00:27:15.038 - are acquired in the future. 00:27:16.162 --> 00:27:24.205 - The ADU may also be leased from time to time. The ADU will be a small studio apartment with one bathroom, 00:27:24.205 --> 00:27:32.095 - kitchenette, and closet. We see the enclosed drawings. So as you can see here, this is the current shed 00:27:32.095 --> 00:27:39.910 - at the south end of the property. This is a mock-up of what's being proposed. And then just to go back 00:27:39.910 --> 00:27:44.766 - to the rear addition, let's see if we got a good picture of it. 00:27:45.602 --> 00:28:11.486 - It will be slightly extended over an existing concrete pad. There you go. OK, great. 00:28:11.938 --> 00:28:18.870 - a written description of materials to be used. The extension of the house will utilize exterior finishes 00:28:18.870 --> 00:28:25.934 - consistent with the existing house. The construction of the two car garage slash ADU will utilize exterior 00:28:25.934 --> 00:28:32.734 - finishes consistent with the existing house. The owners and applicants presented the improvement plans 00:28:32.734 --> 00:28:40.062 - to the Prospect Hill Neighborhood Association meeting on April 7th, 2026. The plans were unanimously approved. 00:28:45.474 --> 00:28:51.113 - The recommendation of staff is for conditional approval of the rear addition for COA 2626. The small 00:28:51.113 --> 00:28:56.305 - room of the south end of the house is perhaps the only exterior part of the building to have 00:28:56.305 --> 00:29:02.223 - been considerably altered several times over the course of a building's history. The alterations proposed 00:29:02.223 --> 00:29:07.918 - are not out of keeping with the design guidelines or the style and massing of the house. It would not 00:29:07.918 --> 00:29:10.654 - result in the removal of any historic materials. 00:29:11.874 --> 00:29:17.643 - The vernacular salt box shed appears to have been built in the 1950s, judging from aerial photographs 00:29:17.643 --> 00:29:23.694 - and historic maps. Because it is a contributing structure, the criteria for demolition must be considered. 00:29:23.694 --> 00:29:29.463 - The proposed new construction resembles the existing accessory structure and shape and would make use 00:29:29.463 --> 00:29:35.232 - of some existing materials. Differences chiefly include an increase in height to accommodate a second 00:29:35.232 --> 00:29:41.566 - level, a small increase in footprint, and the addition of a shed dormer as well as some other new fenestration. 00:29:42.146 --> 00:29:47.901 - as well as the addition of a garage door and a change in the orientation of the siding from clapper 00:29:47.901 --> 00:29:53.829 - to board and batten. Overall, the design of the ADU is complimentary to the house and neighborhood and 00:29:53.829 --> 00:29:59.642 - references the existing structure while being clearly differentiated. Nevertheless, the criteria for 00:29:59.642 --> 00:30:05.685 - demolition will need to be considered. While the existing structure likely cannot be made to accommodate 00:30:05.685 --> 00:30:11.038 - a second story, it does not appear to meet the criteria necessary for permitting demolition. 00:30:13.314 --> 00:30:19.890 - Is there anything that the petitioners would like to add? Yeah. Thank you, Noah, for your report. Doug 00:30:19.890 --> 00:30:26.658 - Brooks with Table Bruce Architects. I have my clients Elizabeth and Stephen here that will speak a little 00:30:26.658 --> 00:30:33.425 - bit to their desires. A couple of things that Noah touched on. The addition at the back, it's an elevated 00:30:33.425 --> 00:30:39.810 - concrete slab. The concrete slab's existing, but it's fairly new. We're going to remove, if you see 00:30:39.810 --> 00:30:41.278 - one of the elevations, 00:30:41.858 --> 00:30:48.712 - very non-contributing, non-original, non-historic, high, small windows. We're removing those, those 00:30:48.712 --> 00:30:55.566 - are more modern in design, and putting in larger windows that match the rest of the house. And just 00:30:55.566 --> 00:31:02.625 - filling out, we're not increasing the footprint other than over the existing concrete slab. And trying 00:31:02.625 --> 00:31:09.822 - to keep in style with some of the other houses. There's, like Noah said, there's four of these that have 00:31:10.210 --> 00:31:17.431 - some of the same gables front and rear, so we try to mimic that as well, and use the same materials. 00:31:17.431 --> 00:31:24.724 - And then the garage, and I'll let my client speak a little bit, it's being held together. If you went 00:31:24.724 --> 00:31:32.017 - inside the garage, and I have pictures I could share, it has two by fours bracing running everywhere. 00:31:32.017 --> 00:31:35.806 - It has blocks on the foundation to hold it in place. 00:31:36.226 --> 00:31:43.316 - that we are going to reuse the sliding doors that are on it and place them over a door on the outside 00:31:43.316 --> 00:31:50.337 - to kind of cover the man door, the swinging door. And it's my understanding that there was something 00:31:50.337 --> 00:31:57.566 - similar to what we're asking for tonight that was approved a couple of years ago by the previous owners 00:31:57.566 --> 00:32:04.030 - that my clients bought the house from. And they started some of the renovations on the home. 00:32:04.130 --> 00:32:11.117 - but they didn't do anything to the garage. And it's really in its shape now. There's no way to really 00:32:11.117 --> 00:32:18.446 - use it for them. They're going to live in the house, have a place to park their cars, to make this livable 00:32:18.446 --> 00:32:25.433 - for them, and a house that they can age in place. So with that, I'll let my client speak a little bit 00:32:25.433 --> 00:32:32.557 - on their wishes on this and their background. Did a great job at covering it. So I don't know if I have 00:32:32.557 --> 00:32:33.790 - very much to add, 00:32:33.922 --> 00:32:40.445 - I'm originally from the area, grew up in Spencer, IU grad, so very excited to be retiring and coming 00:32:40.445 --> 00:32:47.032 - back here. So our plan is to find a place where we can walk downtown and really enjoy our retirement. 00:32:47.032 --> 00:32:53.491 - We needed the two car garage, so when we originally were talking with the owner, I accidentally met 00:32:53.491 --> 00:33:00.272 - her the very first time I went there, and she said, oh yeah, it's already been approved. We just focused 00:33:00.272 --> 00:33:01.822 - our money on the house. 00:33:01.922 --> 00:33:08.325 - renovation first, but it was definitely something we wanted to do. And she actually gave us the plans, 00:33:08.325 --> 00:33:14.728 - which we then later. Actually, I think my husband talked to Noah then just to make sure, yes, this had 00:33:14.728 --> 00:33:21.566 - been approved previously. So then we hired Doug, met with Noah again, and started meeting with our neighbors. 00:33:21.566 --> 00:33:27.845 - And our neighbors overwhelmingly would like to see the little shed go away. This would be seen as an 00:33:27.845 --> 00:33:31.326 - improvement. It's something nicer for the neighborhood. 00:33:31.970 --> 00:33:39.139 - And as far as how we're going to use it, our daughter lives in New York. We have a lot of my old classmates 00:33:39.139 --> 00:33:45.777 - from Oman Valley that come. It's a two-bedroom, two-bath house. So this would be the third bedroom. 00:33:45.777 --> 00:33:52.548 - And then if we need home health care at some point, that would be a great place to have somebody have 00:33:52.548 --> 00:33:59.451 - a private place so that we could live there. This is where we want to live. OK. Thank you. Did you have 00:33:59.451 --> 00:34:01.310 - anything you wanted to add? 00:34:01.442 --> 00:34:09.017 - At the neighborhood association, I was actually asked if I had life insurance by one of the other people. 00:34:09.017 --> 00:34:16.306 - I said, why? He said, well, if you go in that shed. So, I mean, we do have photos to share. It is not 00:34:16.306 --> 00:34:23.524 - something that I would even put my lawnmower in because it is in very, and when we actually, I mean, 00:34:23.524 --> 00:34:29.598 - we would have loved to have tried to save it and use a wall or do something with it. 00:34:29.762 --> 00:34:36.392 - But we did have a contractor come and take a look at it. And he shook his head no. So there's nothing 00:34:36.392 --> 00:34:43.151 - I can say. It takes up in the doors. And we're going to try to save it. All right. Are there any people 00:34:43.151 --> 00:34:49.716 - in the room that would like to make a public comment on this? All right. Seeing none. Anyone online? 00:34:49.716 --> 00:34:56.605 - None. OK. We'll turn to questions then. Commissioner Golden, any questions? We do not have any questions. 00:34:56.605 --> 00:34:58.750 - All right. Commissioner Duesner. 00:34:59.042 --> 00:35:09.154 - Mr. Duffy. Treasurer Butler. So a question for Noah. What is your recommendation on this? Is this recommended 00:35:09.154 --> 00:35:19.267 - approval? Approval for the barge of applications for extending the rear addition. But not for the replacement 00:35:19.267 --> 00:35:25.886 - of the chef. OK. Thank you. Commissioner Schlegel. Commissioner Hanson. 00:35:26.146 --> 00:35:32.985 - So it doesn't meet the criteria for demolition. What criteria is it not meeting? So there's four criteria 00:35:32.985 --> 00:35:39.437 - that are laid out in the district guidelines. These are generally the criteria that would apply for 00:35:39.437 --> 00:35:46.018 - most demolitions. Structure poses an imminent substantial threat to public safety as interpreted from 00:35:46.018 --> 00:35:52.599 - the state of deterioration, disrepair and structural stability. The condition of a building resulting 00:35:52.599 --> 00:35:53.502 - from neglect. 00:35:54.114 --> 00:36:00.211 - not be considered grounds for demolition, that's the first one. Second one, the historic or architectural 00:36:00.211 --> 00:36:06.020 - significance of the structure is such that upon further consideration by the commission, it does not 00:36:06.020 --> 00:36:11.312 - contribute to the historic character of the district. The third, demolition is necessary to 00:36:11.312 --> 00:36:17.063 - allow development, which in the commission's opinion is of greater significance to the preservation 00:36:17.063 --> 00:36:23.678 - of the district than is the retention of the structure or portion thereof for which demolition is sought. Or four, 00:36:23.874 --> 00:36:31.132 - of the structure of property cannot be put to any reasonable, economically beneficial use without demolition. 00:36:31.132 --> 00:36:37.797 - Okay. And then the fifth one. Fifth one? The structure is accidentally damaged by storms. Oh, right, 00:36:37.797 --> 00:36:44.528 - yes. If it's accidentally damaged by an act of God. Basically it does. Yeah. Does it have to meet all 00:36:44.528 --> 00:36:51.324 - of those criteria? It has to meet at least one of those criteria. Okay. And it doesn't meet the safety 00:36:51.324 --> 00:36:52.446 - threat criteria? 00:36:53.058 --> 00:37:01.678 - heard any reports about, you know, the safety or stability of the house, or sorry, not the house, 00:37:01.678 --> 00:37:10.739 - the shed. So I really can't speak to that unless I see otherwise. Commissioner Castaneda. I guess it's 00:37:10.739 --> 00:37:19.799 - a question for the petitioner. Have you guys reached out to a structural engineer? We had a contractor 00:37:19.799 --> 00:37:22.526 - that actually just refurbished 00:37:23.426 --> 00:37:31.339 - property for her in Spencerville in 1890. And it was really his repair. And we, in turn, had him out 00:37:31.339 --> 00:37:39.251 - there. And he saved the place in Spencer that we rethought about. We were going to have to bulldoze. 00:37:39.251 --> 00:37:47.164 - And she's restored it to just fantastic. The floors aren't straight. But he came in there. And we've 00:37:47.164 --> 00:37:53.118 - got some photos for you if you want to see it. All the raptors are rotting. 00:37:53.378 --> 00:38:01.505 - termites, you name it. I mean, it might not be for public safety, possibly, if somebody's walking on 00:38:01.505 --> 00:38:09.230 - a sidewalk and not going to get hit. But anybody who walks into it is taking their life at war. 00:38:09.230 --> 00:38:17.276 - And that, of course, is me. No, I'm just responding to Noah's point that if it poses a safety issue 00:38:17.276 --> 00:38:23.070 - for public or private, typically, you will find, as part of the packet, 00:38:23.394 --> 00:38:30.442 - structural report from an engineer that in this case will help you make your case that is not safe. 00:38:30.442 --> 00:38:37.631 - They do an inspection, they report on the structure if it's salvageable or not. I think we were under 00:38:37.631 --> 00:38:44.750 - the impression because it had been approved before for demolition that that wasn't necessarily going 00:38:44.750 --> 00:38:52.010 - to be required. I get it. I'm just responding to Noah's report about that specific point. The approval 00:38:52.010 --> 00:38:52.926 - was in 2022. 00:38:54.050 --> 00:39:04.878 - I get it. No, I understand. I'm just. We did meet with Noah twice and it felt like we were all aligned 00:39:04.878 --> 00:39:16.022 - at that time. These are the photos of the interior that have. Thank you. Foundation and plenty of bracing 00:39:16.022 --> 00:39:22.014 - and plenty of rot. I think they said they had a neighbor 00:39:22.850 --> 00:39:31.554 - that somebody had come along to one of the previous owners. Somebody had used a pickup truck and a come 00:39:31.554 --> 00:39:39.924 - along to kind of straighten it up a bit so it wouldn't fall over. Did you have any other questions? 00:39:39.924 --> 00:39:48.628 - No, I did not. I have something. When did you purchase the property? November. This past November? Yes. 00:39:48.628 --> 00:39:50.302 - OK. That's helpful. 00:39:50.882 --> 00:39:58.512 - Mr. San Luis, for the previous approval, was it for the demolition of that back shed in addition to 00:39:58.512 --> 00:40:06.372 - work on the house? Let's see. I can check that. I just want to clarify that. OK. I hope you don't mind 00:40:06.372 --> 00:40:14.307 - if I look this up real quick. OK. Is it appropriate to add some personal experience with this property? 00:40:14.307 --> 00:40:18.046 - I think when we read the comments. Comments. OK. 00:40:24.386 --> 00:40:38.672 - West 4th Street. In 2022, you say? Yeah, yes, yeah, that was. I think I recall October of 2022. I. You 00:40:38.672 --> 00:40:52.958 - found it. No, when we talked on the phone, but you had a hard time finding it. The drawings that were. 00:40:53.602 --> 00:41:01.283 - Given to me, the preliminary drawings that were part of the approval set are dated 3-29 of 22. And we 00:41:01.283 --> 00:41:09.190 - pretty much have the same design, except we're reusing the doors that weren't. And we've made the dormer 00:41:09.190 --> 00:41:16.946 - a little larger, and maybe the building a foot or two taller. I was just wanting to clarify if in that 00:41:16.946 --> 00:41:23.422 - thing that was previously approved, it was also the demolition. Oh, is it demolition? 00:41:23.650 --> 00:41:32.367 - These drawings are a complete new world. Yeah. Because it has a different setback, et cetera. Right. 00:41:32.367 --> 00:41:41.171 - Yeah. Yeah. Well, while he's looking for that one, I think I had one other question. Well, I guess it 00:41:41.171 --> 00:41:48.766 - was kind of for him, but I guess I'll make it as a comment. So I will hold off on that. 00:41:48.962 --> 00:42:04.223 - As I see an application for this site that was approved for removal of a section of sidewalk, I know 00:42:04.223 --> 00:42:17.822 - I remember talking about this with you on the phone. Actually, maybe I'll check my email. 00:42:29.666 --> 00:42:36.958 - I'm going to put you on the spot. 00:43:03.234 --> 00:43:09.953 - I see. Approved application for replacement of back deck. Approved application for window replacement. 00:43:09.953 --> 00:43:16.542 - Approved application moving entry. There it is, 2021 barn demolition and garage construction. It was 00:43:16.542 --> 00:43:23.131 - previously approved? It was previously approved, that's right. Okay, thank you very much. And then I 00:43:23.131 --> 00:43:29.915 - guess the other things are comments, so never mind. So I will entertain a motion on COA 2626. Actually, 00:43:29.915 --> 00:43:31.742 - can I ask a question first? 00:43:32.578 --> 00:43:40.452 - Did I not? Yes. You did. No, you gave me a chance. But I have a question. OK, yes. Noah, does finding 00:43:40.452 --> 00:43:48.481 - that new approval change your staff recommendation? I would really like to be consistent from a program 00:43:48.481 --> 00:43:56.432 - manager to program manager. But I would have to look back at the facts of the case from back then. And 00:43:56.432 --> 00:44:00.446 - I'm really sorry. I know we had spoken in the past. 00:44:01.378 --> 00:44:08.906 - It was a bit of a process between when we last spoke and when I received this application. And I should 00:44:08.906 --> 00:44:16.290 - have gone back and double-checked. I had unfortunately forgotten that there had been a prior approval 00:44:16.290 --> 00:44:24.180 - for new construction over the side of this garage. So there might be more information there that's pertinent 00:44:24.180 --> 00:44:28.958 - to the argument for taking it down for the sake of public safety. 00:44:34.818 --> 00:45:04.670 - If you just want to approve a non amended, you can just say motion to approve. If you want to approve it, 00:45:05.026 --> 00:45:12.459 - amended as the staff suggestion, then you would say motion to approve, amended, blah, blah, blah, blah, 00:45:12.459 --> 00:45:19.749 - blah. So and you're moving to approve? As is. As is. Is there a second? I'll second that to start the 00:45:19.749 --> 00:45:26.967 - discussion. All right. Treasurer Butler has seconded it. So Commissioner Golden, please. Time for my 00:45:26.967 --> 00:45:34.686 - comments. Yes. So I have personal experience with this property. I've been in that barn two or three times. 00:45:34.914 --> 00:45:44.940 - And it's not safe, period. And it has no use other than looking at. The foundation is bad. It's being 00:45:44.940 --> 00:45:54.868 - held up by, as Doug indicated, by things just to keep it together. And I wouldn't suggest it be used 00:45:54.868 --> 00:46:02.142 - for anything else other than to pretty up the site, which it does not do. 00:46:02.914 --> 00:46:13.775 - My other comment is, as one of the original writers of these particular neighborhood guidelines, I lived 00:46:13.775 --> 00:46:24.533 - in Prospect Hill and I was part of that, raising that into a full historic district. I always described 00:46:24.533 --> 00:46:31.774 - what we did as historic light and that the intent of those guidelines 00:46:32.162 --> 00:46:42.067 - We're going to allow change while retaining the feeling of a neighborhood. And I think that this fulfills 00:46:42.067 --> 00:46:51.692 - that purpose. OK. Anything else? Nope. Richard Butler. I was wondering if maybe it would fall into the 00:46:51.692 --> 00:47:00.382 - second category that you listed for demolition, in that it was built after the original home 00:47:00.898 --> 00:47:07.897 - Um, and you know, from apparently a 1950 or after date, so it's not historically contiguous. Um, and 00:47:07.897 --> 00:47:14.688 - so if you could just read the second condition for me, please. Um, that historic or architectural 00:47:14.688 --> 00:47:21.686 - significance of the structure is such that upon further consideration by the commission, it does not 00:47:21.686 --> 00:47:26.814 - contribute to the historic character of the district. I would go by that. 00:47:27.682 --> 00:47:34.728 - this shed necessarily contributes to the overall historic character of the district, especially since 00:47:34.728 --> 00:47:41.706 - it was added at a later date. That's my comment. All right. Thank you. Commissioner Duesner. I think 00:47:41.706 --> 00:47:48.821 - my only concerns here are just a matter of procedure. So I guess I just want to make sure we're ruling 00:47:48.821 --> 00:47:53.726 - on these things consistently. If we usually need an engineer's report, 00:47:54.434 --> 00:48:01.295 - to make this kind of decision, I would want to stay consistent with that. But I don't know off the top 00:48:01.295 --> 00:48:08.423 - of my head how we typically handle this. I don't know if that's necessarily required. Yeah, we've approved 00:48:08.423 --> 00:48:15.351 - demolitions without an engineer's report. It's helpful. It just helps to make your case. Yeah, but it's 00:48:15.351 --> 00:48:22.013 - not a requirement. Although I say we have had cases where they have bring the structural report and 00:48:22.013 --> 00:48:23.678 - we still have denied it. 00:48:24.130 --> 00:48:36.334 - Just because different circumstances around it. Yeah. Commissioner Duffy. I like the shed. I don't see 00:48:36.334 --> 00:48:48.183 - it as an eyesore myself, but the condition of it concerns me. And so I'm leaning towards supporting 00:48:48.183 --> 00:48:53.278 - the demolition. OK. Commissioner Schlegel. 00:48:55.330 --> 00:49:01.379 - I think Commissioner Duffy kind of summed up what I was thinking, but couldn't put into words yet. So 00:49:01.379 --> 00:49:07.310 - thank you for that. I agree with what you said, so. Yeah, I'm compelled by a couple things. I mean, 00:49:07.310 --> 00:49:13.241 - Neighborhood Association unanimously supporting it is a pro. Yeah, I am curious about the condition 00:49:13.241 --> 00:49:19.290 - of it since it doesn't necessarily meet the criteria for demolition, but it does seem to be in rather 00:49:19.290 --> 00:49:24.094 - sorry shape and it was approved for demolition before. So I know last meeting we 00:49:24.322 --> 00:49:32.346 - took time for research and then are bringing things back. So you could do that with this. I've opened 00:49:32.346 --> 00:49:40.369 - other thoughts, but I think there are some merits to approving. Yes, I agree with commissioners here. 00:49:40.369 --> 00:49:48.235 - I agree with you. I really like the barn. The shape of it, the proportions are beautiful, actually. 00:49:48.235 --> 00:49:50.910 - Unfortunately, it's in bad shape. 00:49:51.906 --> 00:49:58.524 - So I think that, for me, that fits one of the criteria that we just read. So it would be, I would support 00:49:58.524 --> 00:50:05.017 - demolition, unfortunately. I mean, as much as, yes, that's it. Okay. For me, there's a couple different 00:50:05.017 --> 00:50:11.322 - things. One, you recently just bought the house. So this is an issue where you've let this thing rot 00:50:11.322 --> 00:50:18.127 - and you failed to do anything. The fact that you're already here in April, you bought the thing in November, 00:50:18.127 --> 00:50:18.814 - you moved. 00:50:19.234 --> 00:50:26.146 - So I don't think that can be held against you. But Treasurer Butler indicated the structure that they're 00:50:26.146 --> 00:50:32.860 - talking about demolition. It was built in 1950s. The house is built in the 19Os, whatever you want to 00:50:32.860 --> 00:50:39.640 - call them. So I can see there's a difference there. I drove by the place from the outside. I could see 00:50:39.640 --> 00:50:43.326 - from the outside some of the issues that were going on. 00:50:43.970 --> 00:50:51.549 - And then I find those pictures to be particularly compelling and that the commission previously approved 00:50:51.549 --> 00:50:58.840 - demolition in the past. So given all of those things, I think this meets demolition criteria for the 00:50:58.840 --> 00:51:06.130 - architectural significance is such that under further consideration does not contribute the historic 00:51:06.130 --> 00:51:13.854 - character just given the different time frame. And then I think just the condition of the structure itself 00:51:14.210 --> 00:51:20.335 - Those are both reasons to move forward with that. In addition to, I think, what you're wanting to do, 00:51:20.335 --> 00:51:26.400 - the addition on the back, on the concrete slab, that seems totally fine to me. I have no issues with 00:51:26.400 --> 00:51:32.405 - that at all. It's a beautiful house. I think it'll be perfectly fine with what you've suggested. So 00:51:32.405 --> 00:51:38.470 - those are my comments. Okay. Does anybody want to have a second round of comments? Does anybody want 00:51:38.470 --> 00:51:43.454 - to add anything else you are allowed? No? Thanks for leaving that wonderful porch. 00:51:44.386 --> 00:51:51.462 - Yeah, that's it, yeah. It is great. And so I believe what this is, if you were voting yes on this, this 00:51:51.462 --> 00:51:58.266 - is for the addition on the backside of the house and the demolition of the barn behind it, just for 00:51:58.266 --> 00:52:05.342 - clarification. What was the construction of the new garage? Yeah, and the construction of that as well. 00:52:05.342 --> 00:52:12.350 - Does that make sense to everybody? Yeah, just the question, what was the original staff recommendation 00:52:12.770 --> 00:52:19.484 - It was for conditional approval of the expansion of the rear addition. But not the demolition of the 00:52:19.484 --> 00:52:26.331 - structure. All right. I think we're ready to vote. Great. And thank you for clarifying what the motion 00:52:26.331 --> 00:52:33.311 - is. I was going to ask that question. All right. So there is a motion on the floor that's been seconded. 00:52:33.311 --> 00:52:41.022 - We'll go ahead and take a roll call vote. Treasurer Butler? Yes. Commissioner Castaneda? Yes. Commissioner Duesner? 00:52:41.890 --> 00:52:51.250 - Commissioner Duffy? Yes. Commissioner Golden? Yes. Commissioner Hackert? Yes. Chair Hackert, my apologies. 00:52:51.250 --> 00:53:00.347 - Commissioner Hanson? Yes. Commissioner Schlegel? Yes. And that motion is approved 8-0. All right. Thank 00:53:00.347 --> 00:53:09.269 - you very much. Thank you. Thank you. OK, so I think let's go back up to COA 2623. Are the applicants, 00:53:09.269 --> 00:53:10.494 - Layla Taylor, 00:53:11.458 --> 00:53:20.390 - Ms. Layla Taylor doesn't look like in the room online. Only person online is our petitioner, Alan Singh. 00:53:20.390 --> 00:53:29.237 - Okay, so I guess we will... Our process is to continue to the next meeting. All right, we will continue 00:53:29.237 --> 00:53:37.913 - this to the next meeting. All right, so next up we are shifting over into demolition delays. First up 00:53:37.913 --> 00:53:39.870 - is DD2605, Mr. Sanlis. 00:53:44.066 --> 00:53:52.737 - This is Nazi OI, this is DD. Demolition delay 2605 for 1214 and 1214 and a half South Lincoln Street. 00:53:52.737 --> 00:54:01.833 - Built in 1925, 1214 South Lincoln is a one-story California bungalow with a brick front porch, replacement 00:54:01.833 --> 00:54:10.760 - windows, and a rear carport. To the west along Driscoll Street stands a one-story two-by-three bay gable 00:54:10.760 --> 00:54:13.310 - front accessory dwelling unit 00:54:14.146 --> 00:54:21.584 - likely built in the 1930s. Aside from its form, little original detail remains on the small vernacular 00:54:21.584 --> 00:54:28.805 - building. The bungalow at 1214 was first owned by Teamster and World War I veteran Arthur Haddon as 00:54:28.805 --> 00:54:36.316 - his wife, Lola. They sold the house in 1934 to another Teamster, John Lucas, and his wife, Sarah. Sarah 00:54:36.316 --> 00:54:42.526 - came from Elkinsvale, the town vacated for the damming of Lake Monroe, and John Lucas 00:54:43.202 --> 00:54:50.240 - would take work with the Works Progress Administration during the Great Depression. While the Lucas's 00:54:50.240 --> 00:54:57.486 - lived at 1214 South Lincoln, they had the ADU built behind their house and rented it to Schuyler Fender, 00:54:57.486 --> 00:55:04.662 - a county road worker and his wife Lucille. From 1937 to 1958, the properties were owned by Emery Berry, 00:55:04.662 --> 00:55:11.701 - a general contractor and his wife Ida. From 1948 through 1963, their daughter Dorothy, a caregiver at 00:55:11.701 --> 00:55:13.150 - the National Armory, 00:55:13.698 --> 00:55:20.421 - and her husband, Ernest, a National Guard veteran of the Pacific Theater and hospital record keeper, 00:55:20.421 --> 00:55:27.144 - lived in the unit. After Emory's death in 1960, the primary house went to his eldest daughter, Esta. 00:55:27.144 --> 00:55:34.001 - A former school teacher, Esta, worked as a bookkeeper at Woolworths and lived in the house until 1971. 00:55:34.001 --> 00:55:40.990 - The recommendation for staff is the release of demolition delay 2605. All right. Is the petitioner here? 00:55:43.458 --> 00:55:49.671 - mine or definitely not in here. They don't have to be here for demolition and delays. I just wanted 00:55:49.671 --> 00:55:56.195 - to see if they wanted to say anything. All right, so we'll turn to public comment. Does anybody publicly 00:55:56.195 --> 00:56:02.719 - want to comment? Okay, ma'am, can you state your name and you have three minutes. My name is Diane Sorby 00:56:02.719 --> 00:56:09.181 - and I live in the Bryant Park neighborhood, not that far from this little house. And I want to add that 00:56:09.181 --> 00:56:13.406 - the house itself is a contributing house and it's all intact except 00:56:13.506 --> 00:56:21.690 - for the windows. I know we are not a historic district. And I know that this is not a standalone. I'm 00:56:21.690 --> 00:56:29.874 - aware of that. At the same time, I have to say that we just saw a little bungalow over in our view to 00:56:29.874 --> 00:56:38.058 - scope down. And there are not that many California bungalows in the city. So it makes it a little bit 00:56:38.058 --> 00:56:39.262 - more precious. 00:56:41.474 --> 00:56:51.490 - I also want to say that this is an example of two affordable units. The house itself, it rented for 00:56:51.490 --> 00:57:01.807 - 1,400 a month. And it's two bedrooms that make 700. The back unit, it rented for 1,200. And I see this 00:57:01.807 --> 00:57:11.422 - as an epidemic that's starting to happen all across the city. Bryan Park has had something like 00:57:11.810 --> 00:57:19.525 - This year, so far, we've had four different affordable houses put on the chopping block. Last year, 00:57:19.525 --> 00:57:27.162 - we had something like three. And so I just wanted to put my two cents in there that this is truly, 00:57:27.162 --> 00:57:34.877 - I feel, a really sad case. It's an epidemic, and we really have to consider these. And as I said, I 00:57:34.877 --> 00:57:37.886 - know it is not in a historic district. 00:57:38.498 --> 00:57:45.148 - That's my two cents. Okay. No, thank you for coming in and sharing. I really do appreciate that. Is 00:57:45.148 --> 00:57:52.064 - there anyone online who would like to speak about this? No. Okay. We'll turn to Commissioner questions. 00:57:52.064 --> 00:57:58.980 - Let's go the other way around. Commissioner Castaneda. No questions. Commissioner Hanson. No questions. 00:57:58.980 --> 00:58:06.494 - Commissioner Schlegel. And Noah, this we directed at you. I don't know if you know off the top of your head, but 00:58:08.130 --> 00:58:17.463 - Do you know how many California bungalows are left with some of the demolitions we've seen? Like, 00:58:17.463 --> 00:58:27.272 - is this? They're more common in this neighborhood. Obviously, Jan's been in the city doing this longer 00:58:27.272 --> 00:58:36.510 - than I have. I never thought they were particularly uncommon. Treasure Butler. This is sort of a 00:58:36.898 --> 00:58:45.833 - Question about process. Why wouldn't demolition delay require the petitioner to be present, whereas 00:58:45.833 --> 00:58:54.857 - the COA does? I just don't understand the logic behind that. Pretty random. That is what it is. It's 00:58:54.857 --> 00:59:03.970 - not required, and it says clearly that in no instances a demolition delay considered to be a petition 00:59:03.970 --> 00:59:05.310 - requires that. 00:59:06.626 --> 00:59:15.134 - What is it considered to be a demolition delay? I'd just like to know why this house is being considered 00:59:15.134 --> 00:59:23.966 - for demolition. I guess that's my question. Commissioner Duffy. I don't have any questions. OK, Commissioner 00:59:23.966 --> 00:59:32.312 - Duesner. No questions, but I hate these. Yeah. Commissioner Golden. No questions. I have no questions. 00:59:32.312 --> 00:59:36.606 - All right, I'll entertain a motion. Move to approve. 00:59:36.866 --> 00:59:49.060 - All right. Commissioner Golden has moved to approve. Demolition delay 2605. Is there a second? All right. 00:59:49.060 --> 01:00:01.023 - Commissioner Schlegel has seconded. Commissioner Golden comments. I hate to see this go and it's a high 01:00:01.023 --> 01:00:06.430 - bar. A single designation and I don't see this 01:00:06.562 --> 01:00:15.613 - Going that far. Those are my thoughts as well. Unfortunately, I mean, I hate knocking down houses for 01:00:15.613 --> 01:00:24.842 - the sake of knocking down houses, but I'm not sure what else. I mean, we don't have many other options. 01:00:24.842 --> 01:00:33.982 - Commissioner Dugan. Yeah, I really hate it that we don't have any other options, and I'm glad that the 01:00:34.402 --> 01:00:44.665 - point was raised about affordability and not wanting to lose affordable units. And I just want to use 01:00:44.665 --> 01:00:55.029 - my comment time to say that I really want to see Bryant Park take some action toward forming some kind 01:00:55.029 --> 01:01:03.582 - of historic preservation program. Yes, I agree with the Bryant Park situation there. 01:01:04.482 --> 01:01:14.826 - This house appears to be very solidly built and attractive, and I hate to see it go. I mean, I think 01:01:14.826 --> 01:01:26.398 - the public comment that this is part of an epidemic is correct, and I think it's really sad that I can't vote on 01:01:26.626 --> 01:01:32.216 - all the things that I hate about this, that we're losing affordable housing. This is a well-built home 01:01:32.216 --> 01:01:37.643 - that actually has the ADU in the back that everybody is really hot about right now. I mean, it does 01:01:37.643 --> 01:01:43.232 - so many things, and it's done so well for so long. It's a crying shame that I am forced to essentially 01:01:43.232 --> 01:01:48.985 - vote for its destruction. Commissioner Hanson. Yeah, I would echo a lot of the comments that have already 01:01:48.985 --> 01:01:54.466 - been made, and I would just thank the member of the public for coming in and giving some comments as 01:01:54.466 --> 01:01:56.094 - well. Commissioner Castaneda. 01:01:56.642 --> 01:02:05.070 - Yes, thank you, Jim, for coming and giving some more context. And I think today was particularly interesting 01:02:05.070 --> 01:02:12.957 - because we have two cases, one where we had the license, the leverage, or give the permission to them 01:02:12.957 --> 01:02:20.844 - or something that we saw that it has some value, at least on the outside, but it was neglected for so 01:02:20.844 --> 01:02:25.406 - many years. And that also the petitioners show good intent 01:02:26.018 --> 01:02:32.969 - They're showing good intent, they're showing good architecture, replacing what is there, neglected. 01:02:32.969 --> 01:02:40.129 - So I thought the case was a lot easier. It wasn't easy, but it's easier, right? But when you see this, 01:02:40.129 --> 01:02:47.219 - this house that seems to be in fairly good shape. It's very solid. Right? We've seen cases where it's 01:02:47.219 --> 01:02:53.822 - in really, really bad shape, and people make the effort to restore those houses. And this one, 01:02:54.754 --> 01:03:03.535 - would qualify it like that. But the process is such that it won't let us do anything else. So it's very 01:03:03.535 --> 01:03:11.979 - frustrating. As much as we can spend hours here talking about it, nothing we can do almost. I think 01:03:11.979 --> 01:03:21.182 - I share the general lament of all the commissioners in here about the decision that we have to face on this. 01:03:23.010 --> 01:03:29.127 - can't take those other things into consideration. Architectural and historical significance is what 01:03:29.127 --> 01:03:35.121 - we can weigh in on. I just don't think we have the ammunition for this one to be able to save it. 01:03:35.121 --> 01:03:41.421 - All right, that's my comment. Anybody have any secondary comments that they'd like to make? All right, 01:03:41.421 --> 01:03:47.721 - we're ready to call the vote. This would be motion to release the demolition delay of 26.05. It's been 01:03:47.721 --> 01:03:52.798 - moved and seconded. Roll call vote. Treasurer Butler? Yes. Commissioner Castaneda? 01:03:53.090 --> 01:03:59.499 - Commissioner Duesner. Yes. Commissioner Duffy. Yes. Commissioner Golden. Yes. Chair Hackard. 01:03:59.499 --> 01:04:06.391 - Yeah. Commissioner Hanson. Yes. Commissioner Schlegel. Yes. And that motion is approved to be zero. 01:04:06.391 --> 01:04:13.490 - All right. Thanks for coming in. I do hope maybe, you know, partarian might be able to go forward with 01:04:13.490 --> 01:04:20.520 - this. So yes, Treasurer Butler, you need to read the release at the top. Today regarding the property 01:04:20.520 --> 01:04:21.278 - located at 01:04:21.634 --> 01:04:28.422 - Can you put the address up for me? 1214 and 1214 and a half south Lincoln Street, the Historic Preservation 01:04:28.422 --> 01:04:34.958 - Commission declares that it got notice of the proposed demolition, partial demolition, or I guess whole 01:04:34.958 --> 01:04:41.368 - demolition. And after today's discussion, sees no need to review the plans any further and waives the 01:04:41.368 --> 01:04:47.590 - rest of the demolition delay waiting period. The HPC may later recommend the property for historic 01:04:47.590 --> 01:04:49.790 - designation to the common council. 01:04:51.490 --> 01:05:01.352 - OK, next up we have demolition delay 2603. Mr. Samuels. Right. Demolition delay 2603 for 1331 Atwater 01:05:01.352 --> 01:05:11.408 - Avenue. Petitioner is Allenson. Request here is for full demolition. 1331 East Atwater Avenue is a 1938 01:05:11.408 --> 01:05:17.790 - two-story brick colonial revival house with a pedimented portico. 01:05:18.466 --> 01:05:26.992 - Supported by four door columns, other features include line of dentals beneath the cornice and arched 01:05:26.992 --> 01:05:35.768 - gable windows. At the last meeting, the vote was for staff to conduct further research into the building 01:05:35.768 --> 01:05:44.545 - to determine its eligibility for listing. Staff found that 1331 East Atwater may be eligible for listing 01:05:44.545 --> 01:05:46.718 - under criteria 1A and 2C. 01:05:47.650 --> 01:05:54.752 - For criteria 1A, that is, has significant character, interest, or value as part of the development heritage 01:05:54.752 --> 01:06:01.723 - or cultural characteristics of the city, state, or nation, or is associated with an individual who played 01:06:01.723 --> 01:06:08.760 - a significant role in local, state, or national history. And then 2A, architecturally worthy for embodying 01:06:08.760 --> 01:06:13.758 - the distinguishing characteristics of an architectural or engineering type. 01:06:21.250 --> 01:06:28.755 - By and large, this building exhibits a high degree of integrity with some alterations, including the 01:06:28.755 --> 01:06:36.186 - replacement of the front door. Actually, really, that is the one conspicuous exterior change. While 01:06:36.186 --> 01:06:43.691 - the survey rating of the property is contributing, the property does compare favorably to some other 01:06:43.691 --> 01:06:50.750 - notably rated colonial revival houses from around the same time, including 1709 North Phelane, 01:06:51.266 --> 01:06:58.181 - 509 West Allen, which we saw at a previous meeting, and 311 East 1st Street. It's located across the 01:06:58.181 --> 01:07:05.028 - street from Elm Heights Local Historic District. The house was owned by Gladys and Joseph B. Black, 01:07:05.028 --> 01:07:11.875 - Sr., co-founder of Black Lumber Company. Born to a Kentucky farmer, Joseph moved with his family to 01:07:11.875 --> 01:07:18.654 - Sullivan, Indiana in 1907, where he and several of his siblings found employment in a lumber yard. 01:07:19.490 --> 01:07:25.714 - After moving to Bloomington in 1928, Joseph went into business with Roy Metzger, as well as his brother 01:07:25.714 --> 01:07:31.817 - John and Roger Black, founding what at the time was known as the Metzger Black Lumber Company. Joseph 01:07:31.817 --> 01:07:37.981 - owned a majority share of the business, which at its peak managed six lumber yards and stores in South 01:07:37.981 --> 01:07:43.965 - Central Indiana. The Black Metzger Lumber Company owed its success in part to the aggressive buying 01:07:43.965 --> 01:07:46.718 - of lumber stock after the stock market crash. 01:07:47.266 --> 01:07:53.193 - and subsequent contracts with the Civilian Conservation Corps, providing lumber to work camps. This 01:07:53.193 --> 01:07:59.121 - residence was built at a time in 1938 when very little residential construction was taking place in 01:07:59.121 --> 01:08:05.167 - Bloomington or around the country more generally. Gladys had been a school teacher prior to moving to 01:08:05.167 --> 01:08:10.916 - Bloomington, and the couple were active in the Bloomington Country Club and First Baptist Church 01:08:10.916 --> 01:08:15.006 - Congregation. The couple's son, Joseph Jr., was raised in this house 01:08:15.746 --> 01:08:23.315 - and went into the family business following his return from World War II. Joseph Black Jr. would go 01:08:23.315 --> 01:08:31.034 - on to serve as Dean of Ball State School of Business and as a member of the Bloomington City Council. 01:08:31.034 --> 01:08:39.587 - Gladys and Joseph Sr. sold the house in 1955. Regarding the potential historic significance, during Joseph Sr.'s 01:08:39.587 --> 01:08:45.566 - tenure in this house from, or sorry, no, his tenure with the company from 1938 01:08:46.338 --> 01:08:52.718 - To 1950, Black Lumber was not the only lumber company in Bloomington, though it would grow to become 01:08:52.718 --> 01:08:59.098 - the largest. While Joseph's brother Roger was more involved in other local causes, Joseph's time was 01:08:59.098 --> 01:09:05.793 - dedicated almost entirely to the business. An ardent Democrat and strong believer in Franklin Roosevelt's 01:09:05.793 --> 01:09:12.236 - New Deal, Joseph Black would take out advertisements in the local paper supporting relief efforts and 01:09:12.236 --> 01:09:13.310 - war bond drives. 01:09:14.050 --> 01:09:20.349 - His contract to supply the CCC in Indiana is perhaps his most enduring legacy, as this program saw the 01:09:20.349 --> 01:09:26.892 - widespread expansion and improvement of Indiana's state parks and forests, constituting scores of projects 01:09:26.892 --> 01:09:33.313 - and camps around the state, particularly in the wooded south. The construction of this substantial house 01:09:33.313 --> 01:09:39.489 - in the waning years of the Depression was made possible in part by the Black family's involvement in 01:09:39.489 --> 01:09:42.302 - this New Deal project. Now, I guess regarding 01:09:43.170 --> 01:09:50.977 - Potential historic significance, so that would be under criterion 1A. There are more documents, I think, 01:09:50.977 --> 01:09:58.636 - in the possession of the Indiana State Park Service that relate to this contract, which I was not able 01:09:58.636 --> 01:10:06.667 - to get access to while conducting this research. So this is largely based on information that was available 01:10:06.667 --> 01:10:12.318 - in Bloomington. So I have to admit that further research may be required to 01:10:12.738 --> 01:10:21.985 - really verify some of this. The petitioner is online. The petitioner is online, and also both the petitioner 01:10:21.985 --> 01:10:30.723 - and another party have mentioned they're having some difficulty hearing, some inconsistent volume. I'm 01:10:30.723 --> 01:10:38.782 - not sure about the audio if there's something that we can do to assist with that. Those don't? 01:10:38.978 --> 01:10:46.920 - Those are just for recording. That's the owl. That thing. OK. Thank you very much. So the petitioner 01:10:46.920 --> 01:10:55.019 - is online virtually. OK. Would the petitioner like to comment on the demolition delay? I know it might 01:10:55.019 --> 01:11:03.196 - have been hard to hear staff or maybe even me. Yeah. It's just kind of coming and going for some reason 01:11:03.196 --> 01:11:07.678 - today. I apologize for that. Oh, that was nice and loud. 01:11:07.842 --> 01:11:18.211 - Okay, well, do you do you have any comments that you'd like to share with the Commission? Well, I guess 01:11:18.211 --> 01:11:28.182 - my comments are, I don't know, probably pretty brief. But okay, again, I currently, I'm the trustee 01:11:28.182 --> 01:11:36.158 - of my mother's trust or estate. So as we, we meet my three sisters and brother, 01:11:37.122 --> 01:11:45.836 - go into the future here, we might put this property up for sale with some others that we own. We own 01:11:45.836 --> 01:11:54.723 - six properties in there where we rent student rooms. Not houses, but we rent rooms. So that's how this 01:11:54.723 --> 01:12:03.006 - one and also the one next door, which is another something coming up after this one, I believe. 01:12:04.162 --> 01:12:12.823 - And then Tom Bunger owns one next to this as well. So we've talked to Tom. And these lots might all 01:12:12.823 --> 01:12:22.177 - be sold at the same time to the same entity, whether that be IU or perhaps a developer. So I was interested 01:12:22.177 --> 01:12:31.098 - in talking to Noah and the city planning department before we try to market these and potentially sell 01:12:31.098 --> 01:12:32.830 - them in the future. 01:12:33.250 --> 01:12:41.622 - find out what we could and could not do. The UDO has them listed as MM, which under that we have, there's 01:12:41.622 --> 01:12:49.520 - quite a bit of flexibility, but obviously we would have to be able to potentially tear this down in 01:12:49.520 --> 01:12:57.892 - order to do something different there with that land. So that's what I'm here for, just kind of a, again, 01:12:57.892 --> 01:13:02.078 - I don't currently have a plan to demo this unit, but 01:13:02.434 --> 01:13:12.750 - If I could say that the demolition delay has been approved to potential buyers, that might affect the 01:13:12.750 --> 01:13:23.166 - money that we can get out of the property. OK. Any other comments? I think that's where I'll leave it. 01:13:23.166 --> 01:13:31.358 - OK. Thank you very much. Are there any public comments on this demolition delay? 01:13:32.418 --> 01:13:38.969 - Yes? Go ahead. Well, I'm here. Can you state your name again? Jan Sorby. Thank you. And Steve Wyatt 01:13:38.969 --> 01:13:45.520 - from Limited Restoration couldn't come tonight. And we were talking. Oh, hold on just a second. You 01:13:45.520 --> 01:13:52.070 - might want to come up to a microphone, because I'm sure he can't hear. Yeah. But these don't affect 01:13:52.070 --> 01:13:58.752 - that. That's true. They speak to this. You can do it. That's what they say. OK. OK. You need to speak 01:13:58.752 --> 01:14:01.438 - up into this thing that's hovering here. 01:14:01.698 --> 01:14:10.253 - You mean blocking the view? So anyway my name is Jan Sorby and Steve Wyatt the director of 01:14:10.253 --> 01:14:19.841 - limited restoration could not make it this afternoon and so we had discussed this at BRI so I thought 01:14:19.841 --> 01:14:29.054 - that I would step in and come here tonight. I don't know if you've had a chance to see any of the 01:14:29.250 --> 01:14:37.814 - Photos from the interior. It's a beautiful house. I know no purview on the inside, but I decided to 01:14:37.814 --> 01:14:46.379 - give you that information. Everything's original inside. Anyway, I think that it does merit. I came 01:14:46.379 --> 01:14:54.686 - here to support you all and just to add another voice to the fact that this is a fabulous house. 01:14:55.106 --> 01:15:02.635 - I think it could be saved and I think it could go into the future to have other families and other people 01:15:02.635 --> 01:15:10.307 - like the petitioner grow up in it and enjoy it. And it seems to be a really important part of Bloomington's 01:15:10.307 --> 01:15:17.552 - history as blacks is a very important part of the history. How many houses did they supply the lumber 01:15:17.552 --> 01:15:21.246 - for? Doors, windows, et cetera, and still do today. 01:15:21.762 --> 01:15:29.899 - So that's my two cents, and I really am happy that you're considering saving this house. So thank you 01:15:29.899 --> 01:15:37.956 - very much. Thank you for the comment. Appreciate that. Any other public comment inside the room? No? 01:15:37.956 --> 01:15:45.455 - Comment online. I'm checking to see if Richard Lewis would like to make a public comment. OK, 01:15:45.455 --> 01:15:51.358 - thank you. All right. Hearing none, at least for the moment, let me know. 01:15:51.714 --> 01:16:00.712 - Let's turn to Commissioner questions. Commissioner Golden, do you have questions? I have a question 01:16:00.712 --> 01:16:09.800 - about both of these demolitions. I'm in support that we move this forward, this particular house. Is 01:16:09.800 --> 01:16:19.518 - context an issue? Something that we can consider? You mean... The house next door, I'm just thinking ahead. 01:16:20.386 --> 01:16:28.537 - I guess what do you mean by context? That there's these three houses in a row. Right. I'm trying to 01:16:28.537 --> 01:16:36.771 - think. I mean, if it's, I guess, particularly significant to the viewshed, or if they're in some way 01:16:36.771 --> 01:16:45.493 - related to each other, I guess you could consider that context. You know, about the specific circumstances 01:16:45.493 --> 01:16:50.302 - of why they came to demolition delay, then no. OK. Uh-huh. 01:16:50.434 --> 01:17:01.445 - So the historical and architectural context of the area. Exactly, if that's relevant. Commissioner Duesner, 01:17:01.445 --> 01:17:11.845 - questions? No questions. Commissioner Duffy? I have a processual question for Mr. Sanlis. Based on my 01:17:11.845 --> 01:17:19.390 - understanding that if there was no demo delay situation, we could propose 01:17:20.386 --> 01:17:29.962 - two houses or more together as a small district, right? I mean, theoretically, we could. When it's a 01:17:29.962 --> 01:17:40.201 - demo delay, do they have to be, does that automatically just put blinders on earth that we have to consider 01:17:40.201 --> 01:17:46.174 - them separately? Do you know that? It's hard for me to imagine 01:17:47.106 --> 01:17:54.556 - how a motion would be made to consider two items together for designation. Yeah. I mean, I don't know 01:17:54.556 --> 01:18:02.226 - if Anna could think something up on the fly, but I'm not sure. It might be worth something looking into. 01:18:02.226 --> 01:18:09.896 - Yeah. I really just want to know if it's possible. Right. No, I see your point. You see what I'm saying? 01:18:09.896 --> 01:18:17.054 - Does the particular process that we're seeing this in change our options? That's a good question. 01:18:17.602 --> 01:18:24.780 - Might be good to know definitively though. I think that would be good to know. I have to say I haven't 01:18:24.780 --> 01:18:31.888 - read anything that kind of takes that into consideration where if you had two abutting that you could 01:18:31.888 --> 01:18:38.857 - decide to hold and delay both of them and then take them together. But why don't you let Noah and I 01:18:38.857 --> 01:18:44.990 - look into that a little bit and see if that's procedurally available to you. Thank you. 01:18:46.306 --> 01:18:52.635 - question uh treasurer butler and just to sort of follow up on that i can phrase it as a question if 01:18:52.635 --> 01:18:59.090 - you really need me to but um would it be possible uh to forward them individually through our process 01:18:59.090 --> 01:19:05.545 - but then combine them before the city council portion if you know what i mean right so we'll consider 01:19:05.545 --> 01:19:09.342 - the demolition delays separately but maybe the if they were 01:19:09.666 --> 01:19:16.055 - I think that's what we're going to try to do. Is there any way where they benefit from their proximity 01:19:16.055 --> 01:19:22.444 - to each other? Commissioner Schlegel. So just to go off of those two, because I can't. In all honesty, 01:19:22.444 --> 01:19:28.709 - I was trying to look at this on a map earlier, and I just wasn't able to get to that this week. If I 01:19:28.709 --> 01:19:35.036 - remember correctly from the last meeting, these are across the street from historic district. And I'm 01:19:35.036 --> 01:19:39.006 - just asking because I did not have a chance to read up on this. 01:19:39.490 --> 01:19:45.381 - Is that district able to absorb them? I don't know if a part of- I think it would have to be like a 01:19:45.381 --> 01:19:51.567 - vote by the majority of the property owners in the district for alteration of the- Yeah, yeah. But yeah, 01:19:51.567 --> 01:19:57.576 - that would be something else if they wanted to open up their map and include this on the map. They're 01:19:57.576 --> 01:20:03.526 - currently going over their neighborhood guidelines right now, and that's taking up a lot of time, so 01:20:03.526 --> 01:20:09.182 - I don't know if they would be- Adding that onto the- Yeah. I don't want to speak for them, but- 01:20:09.314 --> 01:20:16.277 - Just for context of that. I was hoping it wasn't that district, but it is that one. That's what I was 01:20:16.277 --> 01:20:22.489 - afraid of. Commissioner Hanson questions. No additional questions. Commissioner Castaneda. 01:20:22.489 --> 01:20:29.451 - I have a question. Mr. Sanweis, just for clarification, you were also wanting to have some time to do 01:20:29.451 --> 01:20:36.551 - some additional historical research to verify some of the information that you found. Yes, I would feel 01:20:36.551 --> 01:20:38.462 - more comfortable with that. 01:20:39.042 --> 01:20:46.497 - OK. That was my question. All right. One further question. Where are we on the clock on this? See, this 01:20:46.497 --> 01:20:54.024 - came up on March 30, is when the delay period started. So we're not quite a month yet. And we have three 01:20:54.024 --> 01:21:01.193 - months. Yes. And we could ask for an extension, can we? Well, potentially, it could exceed its past 01:21:01.193 --> 01:21:07.358 - number of days. Yeah, we could ask the director of camp for another 30-day extension. 01:21:07.490 --> 01:21:14.814 - but we've got plenty. Okay, does any other question is just real? Okay. I have a question. Please. Is 01:21:14.814 --> 01:21:22.282 - anyone from the Historic District across the street aware of what's going on with these lots? They were 01:21:22.282 --> 01:21:30.037 - here last time. They are aware. Okay, that's true. I can't remember the other one's name. Okay, I remember. 01:21:30.037 --> 01:21:35.422 - They are aware. Okay. I would entertain a motion on this demolition delay. 01:21:36.642 --> 01:21:44.431 - another question about that. So how do we continue? Move to continue. So all right, Commissioner Golden 01:21:44.431 --> 01:21:51.996 - has moved to continue. Demolition delay 2603. I'll second that. Okay, Treasurer Butler has seconded. 01:21:51.996 --> 01:21:59.486 - Commissioner Golden. No further comments. Treasurer Butler. Which one of these am I supposed to- Oh 01:21:59.486 --> 01:22:06.302 - no, I'm not reading it. Sorry about that. No comments. Commissioner Dues, no comments. No. 01:22:06.978 --> 01:22:13.706 - Duffy. Commissioner Schlegel. Commissioner Hanson. Commissioner Castaneda. For me, I think it is important 01:22:13.706 --> 01:22:20.183 - to continue this for two main reasons. Verify some of the historical information that Mr. Sandweis has 01:22:20.183 --> 01:22:26.472 - uncovered and to answer and address some of the questions that we have asked procedurally about can 01:22:26.472 --> 01:22:33.326 - these be merged together in some fashion or how could we possibly move them together. I think it's important 01:22:33.326 --> 01:22:36.030 - to have all of those facts available to us 01:22:36.194 --> 01:22:42.878 - before we make any sort of determination. If it were to go forward, I want to make sure we have all 01:22:42.878 --> 01:22:49.829 - of our ducks in a row. So that is my comment. Any secondary comments from anyone? No. OK. Hearing none, 01:22:49.829 --> 01:22:56.512 - I think we are ready to vote on this. The motion is to continue demolition delay 2603. OK. We'll go 01:22:56.512 --> 01:23:03.998 - ahead and take a roll call vote on that motion to continue. Treasurer Butler. Yes. Commissioner Castaneda. Yes. 01:23:04.194 --> 01:23:12.540 - Commissioner Duesner? Yes. Commissioner Duffy? Yes. Commissioner Golden? Yes. Chair Hacker? Yes. Commissioner 01:23:12.540 --> 01:23:20.355 - Hanson? Yes. Commissioner Schlegel? Yes. And that motion to continue passes 8-0. All right. Thank you, 01:23:20.355 --> 01:23:28.171 - everyone. Next up, we have we don't read anything on this because we just continued it. So we're good. 01:23:28.171 --> 01:23:33.406 - Next up is demolition delay 2604. Mr. Sanay, over to you. All right. 01:23:35.170 --> 01:23:42.147 - Demolition Delay 2604 at 326 South Eagleson. Petitioner is Alan Sin. This is for a full demolition. 01:23:42.147 --> 01:23:49.263 - 326 South Eagleson is a two-story 1940s colonial revival house with a flat-roofed portico and squared 01:23:49.263 --> 01:23:56.728 - columns. The first floor is brick and the second story is clad with aluminum siding with a slight garrison 01:23:56.728 --> 01:24:03.774 - overhang. The property is rated contributing on the Indiana Historic Sites and Structures Inventory. 01:24:04.578 --> 01:24:11.187 - as an intact example of a post-war colonial revival house. In the opinion of staff, while this house 01:24:11.187 --> 01:24:18.254 - maintains a good deal of integrity, its lack of particularly distinctive architectural detail craftsmanship 01:24:18.254 --> 01:24:24.993 - or technical innovation fails to meet the threshold for architectural significance. The house's design 01:24:24.993 --> 01:24:30.686 - is fairly typical of two-story traditional houses from the post-war construction boom. 01:24:31.618 --> 01:24:39.635 - This house is a block away from the northern boundary of the Elm Heights Historic District. The first 01:24:39.635 --> 01:24:48.202 - owners of this property were from 1946 through 1964 were Harold and Olivia Pennington, who owned a furniture 01:24:48.202 --> 01:24:56.690 - workshop, Pennington's Wood Products, from the 1940s through 1960s. The best known and documented residents 01:24:56.690 --> 01:25:01.406 - of 326 South Eagleson Avenue would likely be David Randall, 01:25:02.914 --> 01:25:09.470 - who lived at this address with his wife Mary from 1964 through 1975. He presided as head of the Lilly 01:25:09.470 --> 01:25:16.027 - Library from its founding in 1960 until his death in 1975. During this time, Randall greatly expanded 01:25:16.027 --> 01:25:22.712 - the library's rare book and manuscript collection. And Mr. Randall's contributions to the Lilly Library 01:25:22.712 --> 01:25:29.332 - are well recognized, have been summarized in a New York Times obituary. According to Randall, his down 01:25:29.332 --> 01:25:31.582 - payment on this house was paid for 01:25:32.290 --> 01:25:39.442 - in part by the sale of a letter written by Thomas Jefferson to the University of Virginia. When applying 01:25:39.442 --> 01:25:46.252 - criteria of eligibility for significant individuals, and this is generally how it'll be handled for 01:25:46.252 --> 01:25:53.063 - national register applications, property must be compared with other extant properties to determine 01:25:53.063 --> 01:25:57.150 - those that best represent the individual's productive life. 01:25:58.850 --> 01:26:04.940 - While this is the only standing residence of Randall from his time at Indiana University, his career 01:26:04.940 --> 01:26:10.970 - was most closely associated with Indiana University's Lilly Library, a building that stands several 01:26:10.970 --> 01:26:17.060 - blocks to the north of his property where he worked for the entirety of his time in Bloomington. The 01:26:17.060 --> 01:26:23.452 - significance of Randall's residence to his career is uncertain and may require further research, although 01:26:23.452 --> 01:26:27.070 - it makes scant mention in his memoir. Outside of the Lilly, 01:26:27.266 --> 01:26:36.711 - Randall most frequently met with donors and collectors at their own homes. Staff does not believe that 01:26:36.711 --> 01:26:46.431 - this property is eligible for individual local designation. Does the petitioner have anything that they'd 01:26:46.431 --> 01:26:55.326 - like to add? All right. Any comments in the room? All right. Please come on up. State your name. 01:26:55.586 --> 01:27:02.947 - talk toward the thing hovering in the middle of the room. I'm Jan Sorby. And again, I'm here. Steve 01:27:02.947 --> 01:27:10.382 - Wyatt and I were talking this afternoon about this. And like you all are thinking about, clumping it 01:27:10.382 --> 01:27:17.818 - together as a small historic district, I'm really excited to hear that you're thinking about that. I 01:27:17.818 --> 01:27:24.222 - think that more research would be really wonderful to find out more about Mr. Randall. 01:27:24.642 --> 01:27:31.974 - If the New York Times is, you know, sort of looking at him, then maybe there's something that we should 01:27:31.974 --> 01:27:39.307 - be looking at as community as well. So I just want to encourage you to look into that further and maybe 01:27:39.307 --> 01:27:46.709 - clump them together in a small historic district. Thank you. Any other comments in the room? No. Online, 01:27:46.709 --> 01:27:48.190 - any public comments? 01:27:53.090 --> 01:28:01.622 - We'll turn to Commissioner Questions. Commissioner Castaneda, any questions on this? No questions. 01:28:01.622 --> 01:28:10.844 - Commissioner Hanson? No questions. Commissioner Schlegel? No. Treasurer Butler? No questions. Commissioner 01:28:10.844 --> 01:28:19.980 - Duffy, questions? I have a couple of questions. Well, for either the petitioner, but probably Mr. Sanlis. 01:28:19.980 --> 01:28:22.910 - About the building of this house. 01:28:23.106 --> 01:28:32.013 - Do we have a specific date? It looks like it was built in 46 or 47 by the Penningtons. By the Penningtons. 01:28:32.013 --> 01:28:40.587 - Do we know if they were involved as, you know, local carpenter builders? They were furniture builders. 01:28:40.587 --> 01:28:48.911 - So Harold was a former showers employee who went into business by himself. I remember that. And I'm 01:28:48.911 --> 01:28:52.990 - wondering if there's any way to find out because 01:28:53.538 --> 01:29:05.239 - I'm thinking, and I mean, are there many named local carpenter builders associated with particular houses 01:29:05.239 --> 01:29:16.389 - in Bloomington? Maybe this is an avenue to pursue here. My question is, if in your further research, 01:29:16.389 --> 01:29:21.246 - you might see if there's... So relating his 01:29:21.858 --> 01:29:33.233 - to the building itself? Yes. Commissioner Duesner? I don't have any questions. I thought it was a further 01:29:33.233 --> 01:29:44.179 - question. Last meeting, someone asked about what's underneath that siding at the top. Did we ever get 01:29:44.179 --> 01:29:51.262 - any answers on that? He didn't know. No, I'm not sure. All right. 01:29:52.706 --> 01:30:01.521 - Any other questions? All right, I'll entertain a motion. I'll move that we continue. All right, Commissioner 01:30:01.521 --> 01:30:10.256 - Duesner has moved to continue, DD 2604. Commissioner Schlegel has seconded. Commissioner Duesner, comments? 01:30:10.256 --> 01:30:18.505 - It makes sense to me to move to continue so that program managers can continue to do more research on 01:30:18.505 --> 01:30:20.446 - people who lived there, 01:30:20.802 --> 01:30:29.125 - as well as that we both can pursue the possibility of grouping this with the other house. And I think 01:30:29.125 --> 01:30:37.937 - that's what we need to continue. Thank you. Commissioner Schlegel. I fully agree with Commissioner Duesner. 01:30:37.937 --> 01:30:41.854 - All right. Commissioner Cassidy, anything else? 01:30:42.562 --> 01:30:49.721 - I think this is a good approach. We need more time to do more research on it. I think it's worth it. 01:30:49.721 --> 01:30:56.526 - I like the kind of the line that you want to follow if this is something that extends more and, 01:30:56.526 --> 01:31:04.039 - you know, try to make our case about it. So, yeah. Commissioner Hanson? No additional comments. Pleasure, 01:31:04.039 --> 01:31:11.198 - Butler. I would like to know more about the architectural conditions, significance of the materials, 01:31:12.098 --> 01:31:19.798 - of the structure. So taking more time and allow us to do that in addition to the other things people 01:31:19.798 --> 01:31:27.574 - brought up. Commissioner Duffy. Yeah. When I see this house, I see it as a little sister to the house 01:31:27.574 --> 01:31:35.350 - next door. It's later. And it's very close together. I didn't measure it when I, but I walked around. 01:31:35.350 --> 01:31:40.382 - I mean, it's really just at one point, it's just a few feet away. 01:31:40.706 --> 01:31:51.233 - I find it impossible to think that the person who ever built it didn't take the neighboring house into 01:31:51.233 --> 01:32:01.658 - account. It's made of brick, it's got pillars, it's got a simpler but nice little portico. I think it 01:32:01.658 --> 01:32:06.462 - was deliberately built to reference the house. 01:32:06.626 --> 01:32:16.331 - next door and that got me thinking about this woodworker and the fact that I'm always looking for named 01:32:16.331 --> 01:32:26.410 - builders or creators of things and that's very unusual and it's something I'd really like to see a support, 01:32:26.410 --> 01:32:35.742 - I'd like to support it if it's there, if it's possible to find out but my eye tells me that whoever 01:32:36.130 --> 01:32:46.176 - Whoever built it was referencing the house next door. I don't think they had blinders on and I can't 01:32:46.176 --> 01:32:56.421 - put blinders on either. That's my comment. I think for me, I'm a little bit interested in getting some 01:32:56.421 --> 01:33:03.582 - more detail about the first director of the Lilly Library and seeing if 01:33:03.810 --> 01:33:09.612 - you might be able to find anything else about his, how he operated it and if he did more stuff at the 01:33:09.612 --> 01:33:15.414 - house. Um, I feel like that's a pretty significant thing of he helped build that library up into what 01:33:15.414 --> 01:33:21.386 - it is now. And I don't want to overlook that of if there's a combination of this and maybe the carpenter 01:33:21.386 --> 01:33:27.074 - or something else, um, I think would be particularly interesting. And that I just want to note that 01:33:27.074 --> 01:33:32.990 - the house directly north of this house is notable. I don't know who owns it. It's really, I mean, it's, 01:33:33.090 --> 01:33:38.667 - than like, you know, I use like right there. I think there's a convenience store and there's IU, maybe 01:33:38.667 --> 01:33:44.298 - the university owns it. I don't know, but there's this string of houses there. And that's where I think 01:33:44.298 --> 01:33:49.713 - the combination of how can we, if we can put demolition delays together and something else, I think 01:33:49.713 --> 01:33:55.290 - it's just helpful to explore those options to understand what we might be able to do and what we can't 01:33:55.290 --> 01:34:00.705 - do. I mean, we need to know our parameters. If we're limited by stuff, I understand. I just want to 01:34:00.705 --> 01:34:01.950 - know fully what we can 01:34:02.370 --> 01:34:09.603 - and cannot do. So I, long way of saying, I support continuation of this. Any other second comments anybody 01:34:09.603 --> 01:34:16.363 - would like to add? All right, hearing none, I think we're ready to call the vote. I just been moved 01:34:16.363 --> 01:34:22.717 - in second to continue demolition delay 2604. We'll take the roll call vote. Treasurer Butler? 01:34:22.717 --> 01:34:29.950 - Yes. Commissioner Castaneda? Yes. Commissioner Duesner? Yes. Commissioner Duffy? Yes. Commissioner Golden? 01:34:30.050 --> 01:34:37.081 - Yes. Chair Hacker. Yes. Commissioner Hanson. Yes. Commissioner Schlegel. Yes. That motion to continue 01:34:37.081 --> 01:34:44.043 - passes eight zero. All right. Thank you very much. Um, we're moving on to, uh, old business. Uh, Mr. 01:34:44.043 --> 01:34:51.074 - Sandweiss. You have a few pieces of old business I'd like to share. Um, this first one comes from the 01:34:51.074 --> 01:34:57.967 - city, uh, parks department. So as you may recall in 2024, the Banneker center, which is in the near 01:34:57.967 --> 01:34:59.966 - west side historic district. 01:35:00.642 --> 01:35:10.649 - received historic preservation grant funding to restore the limestone steps. Doug Bruce, who was here 01:35:10.649 --> 01:35:20.949 - earlier this evening, was the supervisor for that project, which is now complete. So if you are stopping 01:35:20.949 --> 01:35:27.326 - by the Banneker Center, those steps have recently been restored. 01:35:28.258 --> 01:35:36.743 - her conversation or ongoing conversation. Anna Holmes has been looking into further revision to our 01:35:36.743 --> 01:35:45.397 - rules and procedures to allow votes on COA petitions when the petitioner does not attend and does not 01:35:45.397 --> 01:35:53.881 - tell staff that they are not attending so that they can be voted down without prejudice so that the 01:35:53.881 --> 01:35:56.766 - COA isn't automatically approved. 01:35:57.282 --> 01:36:05.428 - on expiration of a 30-day period. So I'm hoping to have that for you guys at the next meeting. Can I 01:36:05.428 --> 01:36:13.494 - have a question about that? Sure. We might need that for the next meeting. Would we be able to look 01:36:13.494 --> 01:36:21.801 - at that and schedule a vote on that and then implement it later in the meeting? I mean, as soon as you 01:36:21.801 --> 01:36:24.382 - change your rules of procedure, 01:36:24.514 --> 01:36:29.626 - I mean, I guess as the chair, you can change the order of the meeting. You could change the order of 01:36:29.626 --> 01:36:34.687 - the agenda. I think one of the things I saw, I emailed my draft to these guys today just to look at 01:36:34.687 --> 01:36:40.204 - it. And it's not really very many changes in our rules of procedure themselves, which don't have definitions 01:36:40.204 --> 01:36:45.367 - or explanations in it. And so one of my concerns is this is a huge change for a petitioner who thinks 01:36:45.367 --> 01:36:50.479 - that like, if they can't make it and they forget to call Noah, they're just going to be able to show 01:36:50.479 --> 01:36:51.390 - up the next time. 01:36:51.810 --> 01:36:58.682 - So I think that would be my only concern. And I guess it's not terribly disadvantaging a person because 01:36:58.682 --> 01:37:05.356 - they just get denied without prejudice and they can just call Noah and say, oh my gosh, I'm sorry, I 01:37:05.356 --> 01:37:11.964 - forgot to come. Please put me back on the agenda. They don't need to refile, right? They don't have 01:37:11.964 --> 01:37:17.118 - to put together a new application. But I think I would just say that like we, 01:37:17.250 --> 01:37:23.205 - We do need to find a way where since the change and the impact of that is not going to be super clear 01:37:23.205 --> 01:37:29.335 - in the rules and procedures that we are messaging that with our process and how we explain things online 01:37:29.335 --> 01:37:35.290 - about what to expect when you're a petitioner in a historic preservation case. So yes, you could pass 01:37:35.290 --> 01:37:39.902 - it. You could reorder the agenda. You could pass it and then you could use it. 01:37:40.418 --> 01:37:46.261 - if you needed to. And since we do have one case that now has already had to be continued, if they don't 01:37:46.261 --> 01:37:52.161 - show up again, then we end up in that same boat, right? With a case that we can't consider on the merits 01:37:52.161 --> 01:37:58.005 - because the petitioner isn't available and you do need to have some way to dispose of it. So, and right 01:37:58.005 --> 01:38:03.230 - now you are required to continue it according to your own rules. Yeah, with their agreement. 01:38:04.322 --> 01:38:10.304 - I know it says continue with their agreement, which we never do. So in one place it says continue. If 01:38:10.304 --> 01:38:16.403 - the petitioner isn't there, it will be continued to the next time. And then there's another place where 01:38:16.403 --> 01:38:22.267 - it says continued with the agreement of the petitioner, right? But we always have just continued it 01:38:22.267 --> 01:38:28.542 - to the next time, because that's what the rules say, at least in one place that you have to do. So anyway. 01:38:29.762 --> 01:38:35.583 - I think that's the only thing I would say is that I'm a little bit concerned about making sure that 01:38:35.583 --> 01:38:41.520 - people are aware of what's happening. I would think it would be beneficial to them because then, like 01:38:41.520 --> 01:38:47.341 - you said, they don't have to refile anything. It's just we'd be like, OK. You aren't here. We can't 01:38:47.341 --> 01:38:53.628 - consider it. We'll do it next time. I think it's good. Don't think that anyone would be unfairly prejudiced 01:38:53.628 --> 01:38:58.750 - by putting the rules into motion and then applying them at the same meeting. Thank you. 01:38:59.266 --> 01:39:09.353 - Also old business, I know I've brought this up before there are a couple of events coming up one is 01:39:09.353 --> 01:39:19.440 - a Weatherization workshop with electrify, Indiana that's going to be taking place here at City Hall 01:39:19.440 --> 01:39:29.022 - on April 30th At in City Council chambers that I believe 5 30 p.m. And so that is somebody who 01:39:29.794 --> 01:39:37.850 - or an organization that I've invited to come to teach people about how to weatherize their homes. Oh, 01:39:37.850 --> 01:39:45.827 - awesome, details, thank you. Yeah, okay. That's from 6.30 to 8 p.m., so don't show up an hour early. 01:39:45.827 --> 01:39:53.883 - You can. There'll be food and apparently something for kids to do if you bring kids. Secondly, on May 01:39:53.883 --> 01:39:56.094 - 20th from 5 p.m. to 6 p.m., 01:39:56.802 --> 01:40:05.248 - There's going to be a historic rehabilitation tax credit presentation at the Monroe County Public Library 01:40:05.248 --> 01:40:13.375 - in room 2A. The presenter is going to be from the Indiana Department of Natural Resources. And if you 01:40:13.375 --> 01:40:21.422 - own a property that's in a national register district or may be eligible for listing on the national 01:40:21.422 --> 01:40:25.406 - register or state register for state tax credits, 01:40:26.114 --> 01:40:33.953 - This presentation will give you a little more information on how to do that. So the state tax credit 01:40:33.953 --> 01:40:42.026 - is for homeowners, and the national tax credit is for income-producing properties. So I'm more familiar 01:40:42.026 --> 01:40:49.942 - with the federal one. They both have sort of different rules. But it's essentially if you're going to 01:40:49.942 --> 01:40:54.910 - be doing a faithful or Secretary of Interior standards approved 01:40:55.682 --> 01:41:02.523 - renovation of a building. You could be able to get money back for that, so. Uh-huh. A question about 01:41:02.523 --> 01:41:09.499 - the event. Uh-huh. Is that being billed as the preservation month event for? It is preservation month. 01:41:09.499 --> 01:41:16.340 - It did not include that language, though. Perhaps I should. Can you do that on social media? Because 01:41:16.340 --> 01:41:22.910 - you usually have something. It is on social media. I didn't use the preservation month language. 01:41:25.314 --> 01:41:33.920 - Maybe chuck it in. Just curious. Yeah. Yeah, that's a good point. Like, I might not go. It's preservation 01:41:33.920 --> 01:41:42.119 - month. I'm there. Well, we could still have a movie or a lecture or something else. What time is it, 01:41:42.119 --> 01:41:50.644 - boys? Is it preservation month already? OK. New business. I have some new business. First of all, former 01:41:50.644 --> 01:41:54.622 - Commissioner Renard Cross, who you may remember, 01:41:55.074 --> 01:42:02.579 - is going to be rejoining us as a council appointee. So that will be in a non-voting position. 01:42:02.579 --> 01:42:11.122 - Did he accept? I actually don't know if he's accepted yet. I would assume that he's. Well, I can't assume. 01:42:11.122 --> 01:42:19.505 - The council voted to appoint him as one of their non-voting members. So we'll see if he actually accepts 01:42:19.505 --> 01:42:20.862 - it or not. Yeah. 01:42:21.186 --> 01:42:29.607 - Also, Abby Hansen is going to be leaving us so unexpected housing change. So we'll be living in Bloomington 01:42:29.607 --> 01:42:37.716 - anymore. So we'll be able to serve. Well, that brings us to commissioner comments. Commissioner Hansen, 01:42:37.716 --> 01:42:39.198 - would you like to. 01:42:39.554 --> 01:42:44.553 - at anything else? Yeah, all I'll say is that even though I've been a part of this for a short time, 01:42:44.553 --> 01:42:49.602 - it's been a really rewarding experience. I wish I could be here longer. When I was speaking to Chair 01:42:49.602 --> 01:42:54.651 - Haggard about it, he said that if I ever move back to Bloomington, I should reapply. So I absolutely 01:42:54.651 --> 01:42:59.750 - will do that. And just thank you all for what you do. Thank you. Thank you. Yes, thank you. Any other 01:42:59.750 --> 01:43:04.799 - comments from the commissioners? I have a follow-up comment. So the houses that we're talking about, 01:43:04.799 --> 01:43:07.998 - the three houses on Fugelson, that third house is owned by you. 01:43:08.418 --> 01:43:19.866 - We don't have any. Okay. Thank you. Any other commissioner comments. Oh I'm sorry. This is also very 01:43:19.866 --> 01:43:31.995 - important old business which I should have brought up earlier. Apologies. Cottage Grove has been scheduled 01:43:31.995 --> 01:43:37.662 - for a first potentially second hearing or reading 01:43:38.242 --> 01:43:46.214 - So that's going to be on May 6th. May 6th meeting of the Bloomington City Council. Just they changed 01:43:46.214 --> 01:43:54.266 - their rules this year so that they can vote during a first hearing. So I'm going to treat that as far 01:43:54.266 --> 01:44:02.317 - as I'm concerned as though it may be the only reading. However a second reading is also scheduled for 01:44:02.317 --> 01:44:05.790 - May 20th in case they don't vote that time. 01:44:08.322 --> 01:44:14.647 - So if this is something that you're interested in showing up for, plan on showing up for that first 01:44:14.647 --> 01:44:20.972 - reading. I would encourage everybody to show up. What time is it? Speak out. It starts at 630. Yes, 01:44:20.972 --> 01:44:27.360 - it starts at 630. And it will probably be long, because it usually is. Yes. Well, I think they still 01:44:27.360 --> 01:44:34.191 - have the Hopewell that they're dealing with. Yes. It's a long agenda, though. Yeah. Yeah, it'll be probably 01:44:34.191 --> 01:44:35.582 - later in the meeting. 01:44:35.842 --> 01:44:47.245 - I mean we'll see will we know ahead of time or when does the council post their agenda how far in advance 01:44:47.245 --> 01:44:58.432 - is it like us keep an eye out yeah for council posting the agenda so you see where that's gonna be okay 01:44:58.432 --> 01:45:01.982 - yeah so keep an eye out for that 01:45:02.082 --> 01:45:11.363 - encourage everybody to attend that, speak out, hopefully, and support. Any other commissioner comments? 01:45:11.363 --> 01:45:20.287 - Any public comments in the room? Additional public comments? I will add two cents again. Excellent. 01:45:20.287 --> 01:45:30.104 - I remember Nancy Hiller telling me about Pennington's products, wood products. And so maybe that's something, 01:45:30.104 --> 01:45:31.710 - and it has an 8-1 01:45:32.066 --> 01:45:39.231 - two numbers. So I knew it was here locally somewhere. Is it a family that is related? But I don't know. 01:45:39.231 --> 01:45:46.257 - But I remember that she said their products had been featured, like, on HGTV and places like that. So 01:45:46.257 --> 01:45:53.284 - there's a connection there to the Pennington family that owned the house, built the house. I was just 01:45:53.284 --> 01:46:00.862 - thinking. When I thought about the name, I thought about that. And I thought, there might be something there. 01:46:01.250 --> 01:46:08.466 - They're an Indiana company. I think they might be in Johnson County, but I'm not for sure. All right. 01:46:08.466 --> 01:46:15.965 - State name? James Ford of Cottage Grove. And I don't have a comment or a question. Is the voting decision 01:46:15.965 --> 01:46:23.039 - made on the fly when the council decides in the first reading, or is it something you'll know ahead 01:46:23.039 --> 01:46:28.062 - of time? It is their prerogative to make that decision at the meeting. 01:46:28.322 --> 01:46:34.052 - So they've just updated all of their bylaws and their procedures, which I think are still just on the 01:46:34.052 --> 01:46:39.837 - landing page of the code. I don't think they've been integrated into the code yet, so you can probably 01:46:39.837 --> 01:46:45.791 - find them pretty easily. The ordinance, it's Title II amendments in the code. But I think they can decide 01:46:45.791 --> 01:46:51.633 - at the time whether they want to go ahead and take a vote or if they want to just go ahead and schedule 01:46:51.633 --> 01:46:53.150 - it for the second hearing. 01:46:53.346 --> 01:46:59.951 - I think Councilperson Piedmont-Smith gave an overview of it at the meeting last night. So if you find 01:46:59.951 --> 01:47:06.491 - the video, I know she was talking a little bit on it, you might be able to see there, but they would 01:47:06.491 --> 01:47:13.031 - move to consider, to vote at the meeting. So you don't know ahead of time. So you need to go to that 01:47:13.031 --> 01:47:19.636 - one. Yeah, you might need to go to both. All right. That's it for public comments in the room. Public 01:47:19.636 --> 01:47:23.198 - comments online. I asked and there's been no response. 01:47:23.298 --> 01:47:28.222 - Okay, seeing that there are no other comments, we are at the end of their agenda. This meeting is adjourned.