- All right, I'm calling to order this meeting of the Bloomington Historic Preservation Commission for
- Thursday, June 25, 2026. Would the staff please call the roll? Commissioner Cross? Yes. Commissioner
- Baker? Yes. Commissioner Butler? Here. Commissioner Castaneda? Commissioner Duesner? Commissioner Duffy?
- Here. Commissioner Golden? Yes. Chair Hacker? Here.
- Commissioner Schlegel. We have one. Excellent. Next up on the agenda is approval of the minutes. Does
- anybody have any changes to the minutes? Is there a motion on the minutes? All right, Commissioner Golden
- has moved to approve. Is there a second? I'll second that. Commissioner Butler has seconded. Go ahead
- and call the roll. Certainly. Co-chair Baker? Yes. Treasurer Butler? Yes.
- Commissioner Duffy? Yes. Commissioner Golden? Yes. Chair Hacker? Yes. Commissioner Schlegel? Sorry,
- he's not here. The minutes are approved. All right. Next up, we have a staff review of two COAs. Mr.
- Stanwyce, take it away. All right. There is an error on this first COA report for COA 2636. The survey
- description is not correct here.
- Limestone veneered Gabledale house in the Mabel Heights Historic District. Address is 907 North Jackson.
- Property owner is, sorry, petitioner is Liberty Flora. 907 North Jackson Street is a limestone faced,
- pure middle-roofed cottage with a front corner porch and a later rear addition corner porch slash carport.
- There's a 1950s garage at the rear of the property. This request
- as I received it. The proposed project consists of the installation of a new decorative black metal
- fence along the property line. The fence will be approximately four feet in height and will include
- a pedestrian access gate near the front entry. The existing mailbox will be relocated as necessary to
- accommodate the gate location and maintain accessibility. I propose the mailbox be moved outside of
- the fence next to the gate.
- Continuing the proposed fencing will consist of brown finished wood fence posts with fence panels between
- them. Fence posts will be installed in concrete footings in accordance with the manufacturer specifications.
- Gates will utilize matching materials finishes and decorative details to maintain a consistent appearance
- throughout the project. The gate will be over the existing sidewalk. There's a private sidewalk as you
- see here in the rear of the property.
- and will be of similar material. Staff approve COA 2636. The proposed fence meets district guidelines
- for new fences. Next, staff approve certificate of appropriateness COA 2637 for 918 West House Street
- in the Greater Prospect Hill Historic District. Petitioner is Bonnie Estelle.
- In 2025, the Bloomington Historic Preservation Commission approved an application for new construction
- of a primary residence at 918 West Half Street. While the former residence has been demolished,
- a non-contributing alley adjacent garage remains. This request is for the installation of rooftop solar
- panels on that garage and staff approves COA 2637. The proposed alterations to this non-contributing
- backyard structure
- would not have a significant impact on the historic streetscape of Greater Prospect Hill. All right.
- Next up are COAs for commission review for each item on the agenda. The historic preservation program
- manager will first present a staff report. We will then hear if the petitioner has any additional information
- about the request, followed by public comment. Once public comment concludes, commissioners will be
- able to ask questions to staff, the petitioner, and the public.
- We ask that petitioners, the public, and commissioners refrain from speaking until addressed by the
- chair unless a question is directly addressed to them. Following commissioner questions, the chair will
- entertain a motion from a commissioner regarding the petition. Once a motion is made, we will then open
- up a discussion of the item for members of the commission only. Finally, once the commissioners have
- all had a chance to speak, the commissioners will vote on the petition. We encourage all commissioners,
- petitioners, and members of the public to be civil and respectful.
- at all times. First up we have COA 2635 is the petitioner present. Are they online? They're not online.
- Okay we will move that to the end of the agenda then. Next up we have demolition delays. Demolition
- delay 2608 is
- Mr. Sanlis, take that away. All right. Demolition delay 2608. This is for 422 slash 424 South College
- Avenue. The petitioner is Bill Rigert. And this request is for full demolition. 422 slash 424 South
- College is a commercial slash residential building.
- with modernist features, including metal corner windows on the second story, large first floor picture
- windows, glass block windows, and limestone piers that tilt outward supporting an awning. The front
- portion of the building is three stories tall with a two-story warehouse portion in the rear and a large
- one-story garage attachment in the back. The front facade is clad with rough cut ashlar limestone, while
- most of the building is cement block.
- This commercial residential building was completed in 1955 by Ralph O. Deckard. In 1943, after graduating
- from Indiana University, Deckard and his partner, Woody Stogsdale, acquired the Full of Pep Auto Part
- Company located at 220 South College. Under the management of Ralph Deckard and his wife Alma, Full
- of Pep's business continued to expand to include furniture, appliances, and prefabricated structures
- for sale and rent.
- This new building is served as a furniture store for virtually its entire history, hosting apartments
- as well as additional businesses. When Folopeps sold the original location, this address absorbed the
- auto supply inventory. A charter member of the Southern Indiana Soil and Water Conservation District,
- Deckard was awarded the title of Sangamore of the Wabash by Governor Robert Orr.
- Several apartments at 422 South College have historically served workers and young families.
- In the 1950s, many worked for the nearby electronics factories and Johnson's Creamery. And a few during
- this time stayed for longer than several years. Staff recommends the release of demolition delay 2608.
- All right. Thank you very much, Mr. Samuels. The petitioner here, Bill Rigger, would you like to say
- a few words?
- answer any questions you may have this I'm here with John White Cart and Doug Bruce from the CIB and
- this is part of the Convention Center expansion project so anybody has any questions I'll try to answer
- those and if not John White Carter Doug might help me out okay thank you are there any members of the
- public who wish to comment on this demolition delay in the room
- Are there members of the public who wish to comment on this demolition delay? Yes. All right. Would
- you please state your name for the record? And you have three minutes. Hello. My name is Sarah St. John
- Wilford. And we are making the request. I represent Bloomington Homes for All. And I'm also the Housing
- Solutions Director at Habitat for Humanity. We're making the request that you please do not release
- these delays.
- Instead, do what produced the Cottage Grove District in March. One, initiate Seminary Point as a conservation
- district. Two, impose interim protection. And three, send it to common council. You can do this on your
- own motion. Owner consent isn't required. You have done so previously with North Morton Street. Both
- buildings meet your criteria.
- Ralph Deckard built them in 1954 and 1955 as full of pet business with worker apartments above. The
- limestone and glass block storefronts may be an intact piece of post-war commercial architecture that
- could be added to Bloomington's historical designations. In the 1950s, these apartments housed the workers
- who built this city and worked at the RCA electronics plant and Johnson Creamery. 70 years later, they
- still hold 21 units
- of incredibly affordable housing. That historical continuation is what your social and economic heritage
- criterion protects. Your demolition criteria asks you to weigh alternatives. Under Bloomington Homes
- for All Plan, Avalon Community Land Trust holds the land. Seminary Point Cooperative owns and operates
- the building. We have a feasible $1.6 million rehabilitation plan, setting rents at $700 per month and
- serving households around 45% area median income.
- This plan to conserve the character of downtown Bloomington and this incredibly affordable housing for
- our residents, workers, and artists was unanimously endorsed by the City Council on June 3rd. We ask
- that you consider our conservation district proposal and allow for the full demolition delay extension.
- Thank you. Thank you very much. Very good on time. Anybody else from the public wish to comment on this
- demolition delay in the room?
- So you know, is there anyone online who would like to comment? There is not. There's not, okay. I think
- we will turn to Commissioner questions. We'll start with Commissioner Baker. Do you have any questions
- about this demolition delay? No questions at the moment. Commissioner Cross. Would it be fair to say
- that at least one
- aspect of your petition sent us around this gentleman, Deckard, and his association with these buildings.
- Yes, he also won what I recall to be an award that is a distinction from the state or for, I believe
- it's called the Wabash. Sagamore the Wabash. Sagamore the Wabash, thank you. Yes. Tell me more.
- I don't know what this award is, why he was awarded, you know, what we do, what's his claim to fame,
- so that his association with these buildings would meet the criteria. I mean, I could fill you in a
- little bit on that. So I believe he was awarded, I was saying more to the Wabash for his work in establishing the
- It's the Southern Indiana Soil and Water Conservation District. So in addition to his regular businesses,
- he was also a gentleman farmer with sort of an interest in conservation. OK. And about the award, that's
- the highest award that the governor can bestow upon an individual in the state. OK. Any other questions?
- Yeah, so I just want to make it clear. What criteria are you hoping to satisfy with regards to awarding
- historic protection? Perhaps, Amber, can you answer the question of what exact statute we're trying
- to apply? I have the proposals right here.
- If I can pull them out really quickly, sorry. Do you guys need extra chairs here? Do you mind if I pass
- out proposals? Is there a particular part, like section, for historic or architectural significance
- that you are advocating for? That's part of what we can consider. I mean, I have several codes.
- I'm advocating for, so. He has the question. Yeah, my question is, there are certain criteria that have
- to be met to support your petition for not releasing the demolition delay in order to apply for protections.
- And I'm just trying to figure out which specific criteria. So 808010E1.
- is the first and major one. It's the economic and social heritage code. Okay. It's exemplifies the cultural,
- political, economic, social, or historic heritage of the community. Yes. Okay. Thank you. Yeah. And
- if you'd like, I can make my full comment to whenever
- Yeah, sure. I mean, in answer to my question, if you could just explain to us how it is that you believe
- these buildings satisfy the requirements under these sections that you are. Yeah. So we're wanting to
- do the conservation district to save the block.
- designating it under IC 36711. And it's for both the buildings, the 2022 West Second and 424. They were
- both built in 1954-55. The person in particular is Ralph O. Decker. The business is Full O. PEP.
- He is a IU graduate and started the first business that was bringing electric generators to the rural
- community. He has many awards. He got the Sagamore Wabash Award, which is the highest honor that the
- governor awards in Indiana.
- There is a couple of architectural significance as well under 808-010-E2. The buildings exemplify a
- distinctive era of post-war commercial design, rough cut ashler limestone storefronts, metal corner
- and glass block windows, outward candid limestone piers. But mostly,
- I'm wanting to argue under the cultural social significance, specifically that the buildings were originally
- built for worker housing and that today we are still trying to save it for affordable housing. And let's
- see what else particularly that you may want to hear in this moment. Can I help speak to this a little bit?
- So my name is William Morris and I'm an attorney in town and I've helped Amber with this and
- The economic socio part of this building and these buildings is very interesting. I don't have all of
- the history behind me, but I do know that there's worker housing there, there's inventor housing there,
- there's musical studio that was there at one time in the 1950s, and there are two or three other things
- that give these buildings really historical importance in Bloomington. And you know, I lived in Chapel
- Hill, North Carolina
- And there's a community right next to Chapel Hill that's called Carrboro. And Carrboro is a lot of older
- houses like Westside here. But it's also this idea that there was a large part of how Chapel Hill was
- set up with workers and the organic history of the town that is a big part of that. Now, this is not
- as big as Carrboro, clearly. But it does have the same kind of history. It is a part of the history
- of bringing Bloomington into
- manufacturing age when when the buildings like it showers were important and rca were important and
- the other buildings that used to be here the people that worked there lived there and it does have that
- importance and i don't know about any of you all i don't know any of you all really personally i don't think
- But you know, when you're going back to look into the history of things, I happen to be very fascinated
- by the history of things, because I like to know how were we layered. Every place you go, I tell students,
- because I used to give students tours, international students of these areas, is there's a layering
- of one thing on another that creates a neighborhood. And this neighborhood has been layered a couple
- times. And the history is really fantastic. And it is legitimate. And I really wouldn't stand here for one.
- But there's a legitimate history there. And if you gave us, gave me, gave Amber a couple days, we could
- really, she has it in her papers. And I don't know it exactly, but I know it's there. This brother,
- Decker, he was given this high award, which relates to the Wabash River. Back in the time when people
- in Bloomington
- related to the Wabash River. We don't talk about the Wabash anymore. If you live in Terre Haute, they
- talk about it. But we don't really talk about it anymore. But that guy won this award, which is very
- high and prestigious, the Sagamond of the Wabash. There was a prominent recording studio that was there
- at that time as a part of the Bloomington musical history, which I think is quite substantial. And I
- think it's something that all of us here celebrate. It was also worker housing on the second stories.
- Um, that was very significant, like I say, related to the showers building, et cetera. And there are
- some other things that my mind's not getting to right now, but I do think that there are substantial,
- um, economic socio history there that is really worth preserving. All right. Thank you. Yeah.
- Thank you. Any follow up questions? Yeah. Um, I find this part intriguing. The commission's demolition
- criteria, BMC eight,
- And I'm going to ask Noah just to explain that to me. Require a weighing of alternatives to demolition
- in the public interest, against public interest in preserving these buildings. It's on... Right. Last
- paragraph.
- Oh, this is referring to demolition in public safety. Okay, let's see. Oh yes, this is where for where
- this generally
- This actually generally refers to, um, buildings that are located, um, in a historic district. Um, demolition
- delay for the most part is hiddled handled under, uh, which title is, uh, I'm sorry, I'm blanking on
- it. Um, the unified development ordinance. Um, so I mean,
- When demolition delay comes up, the things that the commission is allowed to consider are about the
- significance of the existing buildings, but not the future use of the site. OK, any other? Well, I'm
- a bit puzzled.
- Puzzle is probably the wrong word, but could you explain why it is, on what basis did you include this
- in your submission? Because of the current political situation around the property, and that we are
- trying to save it from demolition. And that we have an alternative plan, Homes for All has an alternative
- plan for the property, and that
- would entrust it to the Avalon Community Land Trust and the Seminary Point Cooperative would own and
- operate the buildings. We have a $1.6 million rehabilitation plan that has been looked over and signed
- off from four major CFI lenders. And we set the rents at $700 a month.
- which is reaching households at 45% AMI. May I add to that, please? Do you want him to? Sure. I think
- after this one, we'll need to move on to other components. Also, the idea is that demolition, once it's
- demolished, it's irreversible.
- So we're not asking you to make a permanent decision. We're just asking you to put a delay on it while
- other things get sorted out. And there is a very high possibility, I say likelihood, that things will
- be sorted out. We're in the process of trying to do that. But if it's demolished, you can't reverse
- it. It's like chopping down trees and you're trying to save the trees. So while you're making a decision,
- you leave the trees there because it's not harming anybody to have it there.
- We made a point about the economic socio-history of it, and we can add more to that. So those two pieces
- are in place. And I work with Ethan all the time. I thought that was Ethan. I was like, oh, jeez, that's
- not Ethan. That's not Ethan. Yeah. Thank you. Commissioner Duffy, do you have any questions? I don't
- have any questions. Commissioner Butler, do you have any questions? Yeah, I do.
- And I kind of need to frame my question so that it makes sense. Normally, we deal with the vast majority
- of cases are houses that are being demolished. And houses, we have a huge inventory of houses and of
- house types. So there's lots of California bungalows. There's lots of gabled elves. This is different.
- This is commercial building in a public space.
- And so I don't know what our inventory is of this type of building. And Noah, if you could find that
- out, I would like to know of, you know, built in roughly the same time period, 1950s, commercial, two-story
- buildings, because it strikes me that this might be a rather rare type for Bloomington.
- And it also strikes me that this may be one of the best examples of this rare type, because it has the
- corner windows, it has those wonderful front projections on the diagonal. This building really speaks
- to me for this moment in time, sort of this mid-century history. And so I would be hesitant to vote
- to demolish it.
- Yeah, you're right. So anyway, I want to know about the inventory. That's my question. Sorry. That's
- something that I could run a search for. Off the top of my head, there's not a whole lot of these mid-century
- commercial buildings in Bloomington. I know that there's a few on this block and then mostly up and
- down Walnut, which was sort of the big commercial corridor. Any other questions?
- So he needs to look it up. Commissioner Golden, do you have any questions? I have just a couple.
- One for Noah. So the process of making this a conservation district, can that be initiated by this body
- or does it have to be initiated from the outside? I'm going to pull up Title 8 again.
- Because essentially, they're asking us to. Right, because it's a conservation district. Yeah, that could
- be recommended by the commission. And then I'd like the gentleman back here to respond to what's been
- said so far. That's my question. Do you have a response? Yeah, Doug Bruce, I could certainly respond
- to a couple of things here.
- I was trying to take some notes. First, I'd say the Sagamore, the Womash is not all that rare. It's
- also a political award that depending on who your governor is, and I think if you look up the number
- of people that have it, there's quite a few people. So I'm not talking to you, I'm talking to Jeff.
- So it isn't as rare. If you want to frame it around that, and I'll also say,
- I worked here at one time when it was Fulipep. Arco Motors was where Jim Register's office is now. And
- Fulipep was the other big auto parts store. So I know the building pretty well. A couple of things.
- I'd say that some of the buildings right now, there are spaces that are uninhabitable because I believe
- it's demolition by neglect. I think there are parts of these buildings that have needed repairs that
- it hasn't happened. So there's a lot of work to be done there.
- I'll also add that in my 20 years of serving on this board up until eight years ago or so, if a building
- wasn't in a district and it was only contributing, it meant that it didn't have enough historic fabric
- to be designated. So that's what you would be asked to do and designate the building. Does it have that
- historic fabric? And then the third thing I would say is that I think
- you would be surprised. I like the question on the commercial. And I started thinking right off the
- bat of some of the buildings. I think where Atlas Bar is, is this type of structure. I renovated that
- building. Stalls, furniture around the corner. So I think you'd find there's a lot more of this type
- of structure. So it's about one story, though. Sure, sure. But the same era and the same kind of commercial
- use. Actually, Stalls has a second story. It's in the back.
- because I've recently been in the building. So again, that's answering some of the questions that have
- been brought up. I'm trying to think if there's anything else to address it. I don't really have any
- more other than that right now, but. All right, let's go back to Commissioner questions. Do you have
- any other questions, Commissioner Golden? Can I ask him to respond to Mr White Carton? Yeah, thank thank you.
- First let me say, and I've said this publicly and I've said it to advocates, I respect the advocates
- and I respect their position. What I believe you've heard tonight, and I believe some of these words
- were even mentioned, is that they are working towards a political solution to solve an affordable housing
- issue in our community.
- They are not addressing the historical significance. I mean, I've heard evidence presented about why
- they want you to consider it historic, but I've heard talk about how there is a solution afoot to save
- all this in some momentum that's building in our political environment. As president of the Capital
- Improvement Board, I find no evidence of that. I am standing here tonight having made five requests
- the Mayor and the Redevelopment Commission to exchange land for affordable housing development. And
- I've been denied on all five occasions. So the idea that, I began to use the metaphor with Bryce Green,
- that I'm beginning to feel like Lucy in the football and Charlie Brown.
- I'm asked to come back again and again and ask about land exchanges for these properties. I've made
- five attempts to kick this football and all five times it's been pulled out from under me. I respect
- the advocacy to try to save these properties for affordable housing. The Capital Improvement Board,
- as the owner of these properties, is not going to use them for affordable housing. We are not a property
- manager. We've made that clear.
- It seems to me, and I don't want to tell you your business, that the question at hand is, are these
- buildings historically significant? And not whether you should be asked to help solve a political problem
- about affordable housing in our community. I don't believe it's your role. It's certainly not my role.
- It's the role of the mayor and the city council and the county council and the county commissioners
- and the redevelopment commission. And I don't believe this is the appropriate form for that political
- argument to be made.
- I'm here to simply with Mr. Rickards as the petitioner to say, are these structures historic by your
- definitions of historic structures? Not, will you help be part of the political solution to affordable
- housing in our community? So thank you for your time. Thank you. Thank you very much. Commissioner Schlegel,
- do you have any questions? Yeah, I think I have two right now. I think you just, I just wanted to confirm.
- You said currently CIB
- owns the property? Yes, these properties, the Capital Improvement Board is the owner of this land and
- these parcels and these properties. So it owns the building and the land? Yes. Okay, I just wanted to
- check. I just wanted to make sure I understood because I was... Yes, they were transferred to the Capital
- Improvement Board, but these properties were owned by the county. They were purchased in 2010 by the
- Convention of Visitors Commission.
- with innkeepers' tax money solely for the purpose of being used for the convention center expansion.
- So we are the owners of the property. Okay, I just wanted to check. I'm sorry, I did not catch your
- name. Amber. Amber. I was trying to read, but I was trying to also pay attention to what everyone's
- saying. I just had a question. You had mentioned about the common council letter, and I saw something
- in here about the vote. Could you just explain? Because I'm not going to try to read that while everyone's talking.
- It's a little bit complicated. Yeah, so the council wrote a letter a couple years back stating that
- they wanted a full return on investment for what they paid on the North College property, which at this
- time is considered by most of the community where the host hotel should go instead of Seminary Point.
- So that's across from Atlas.
- empty building, empty lot, you're not gonna displace anyone, either residents nor commercial tenants,
- right? So, homes for all, requested from common council, can we please review our proposal and write
- a letter saying that if the land was going to a mission-based entity looking to
- save the land and the buildings for affordable housing, would you essentially retroactively say we now
- support that land going for less than the $7.5 million? And they did so, and it was unanimously voted
- for approval, and it was sent to the RDC on June 3rd. Thank you. I just wanted clarification on that.
- That's all I had. I don't have any questions before we go into Commissioner. Oh, sorry, Commissioner
- Duffy. I did come up with the question. Actually, I thought of this just before Mr. Bruce also mentioned
- the issue. I would like to confirm with Noah that these buildings, how are they rated? They're both
- rated as contributing. Thank you. I don't have any questions. I do want to remind everyone
- For the consideration of the demolition delay, we are considering the historical and architectural
- significance of these buildings only. Just want to remind everybody of our purview here. We need to
- stay in our lane. All right, so I guess at this moment, I will entertain a motion on demolition delay
- 2608. All right, Commissioner Golden has moved to release demolition delay 2608.
- Commissioner Baker has seconded. We'll go into discussion since you made the motion. Commissioner Golden,
- you can speak first. I appreciate the discussion that's happening here today, but as you just stated,
- it's kind of out of our purview. And I just don't think that they're worth saving as far as architecturally
- and historically. OK. Thank you very much. Commissioner Baker.
- Yes, I also appreciate what you're saying and what you're going through. I've been on that side of the
- fence before, too, in terms of neighborhood fighting for conservation districts and historic districts.
- I know some of what you're up against. You make some good arguments. But again, I think we have to be
- very strict in what we do. We're a historic preservation commission.
- We can only evaluate these on their significance and historic value and apply certain criteria to them.
- And in my reading, all I know about them at the moment is that they just don't meet the threshold. That
- would give them enough significance to go through and be designated.
- I just don't think that they have that historic value that would carry them through. So I will be voting
- to release. OK. Thank you very much. Commissioner Schlegel, comments? Can we come back around? Sure.
- Commissioner Butler. I absolutely disagree with both of those characterizations. I think this building
- is architecturally worth
- looking into at least and I think we would be wise to delay this at least until the next meeting when
- we can get the survey that I asked for. It is exactly our job to
- think very carefully about these structures in a historic way. And I think if we do that, then we have
- to wonder if they might meet the cultural criteria and if they might meet the architectural criteria.
- And I, for one, think they absolutely do meet the architectural, especially this building, the architectural
- criteria. And also, I think the building's design is such that it is
- unique for the time period. I think it really nails the time period. Before this, it's brick front commercial
- buildings. After this, it's strip malls. This is a moment in time, and this building exemplifies it.
- And so I don't think it would be unreasonable to ask for a delay to look into this more fully, because
- as some of these people have pointed out, when a building is torn down, it's lost forever.
- So two weeks, I would hope, is not asking too much. Thank you very much. Commissioner Cross. I am intrigued
- by this one. There are two issues which are giving me pause.
- is the opinion of our commissioner, who is an expert and who has had experience in matters like these,
- and also the presentation given by persons who are hoping to delay or
- certainly stop the demolition of these buildings. And again, thirdly, by the gentleman who made the
- point that you can't undemolish a building. And I would be willing to give this some time
- and deliberate further on the matter. How are we for time, Noah? On this one? The demolition.
- Let's see. Start date. Got a while, I think. I believe so. Oh, shit. I don't want to hold everyone up.
- Okay, yeah, the demolition delay date started 15 days ago.
- So it's 90 days or 75. I'm not sure they have two and a half months. I would advise, as is my role,
- that we take some time and look into this matter. I will say that in full appreciation of what our role
- here is to make a decision on the historic nature of the building,
- based on criteria, the fact that there are so many other issues surrounding this matter where in another
- month this whole process could be moot because I'm hearing that organization and the city and RDC and
- all these people have going back and forth trying to find other solutions
- that may render this whole issue, as I said before, I think we should take some time, look into this,
- and make sure that when we make a decision, there is research that can back it up. Because the credibility
- of this commission would also be brought into question if we seem to be making a decision
- ill-informed. And with two and a half months left, I don't see any reason to not allow for
- that investigation, interrogation of the issues to take place. And all stakeholders be given for time
- and opportunity to present their case fully. Thank you. Commissioner Duffy.
- Like everyone, I appreciate the intentions of the position of the people who are wanting to deny this
- request rather than release the properties. And week after week,
- so to speak, meeting after meeting, we sit here and have our hearts broken because we're constrained
- under the demolition law to not consider other uses for perfectly good houses, for example, that have
- to get torn down. But we are bound by law not to consider other uses.
- there has to be historical value and there has to be architectural value. I'm not convinced by the historical
- connection with Mr. Deckard personally. I'm not and I'm not sure that there'd be any more that the staff
- hasn't already found on that.
- And as far as architectural significance, there are other examples in town. And I don't see
- it as outstanding. So I feel compelled to vote to release this demolition delay.
- I think this is one of the tough ones, but I think after what Commissioner or Treasurer Butler had mentioned,
- let me make sure I address it properly since he has the title, but just that request to find out more
- about the quantity of structures and what Advisor Cross said. I would be in favor of at least postponing
- two weeks just to gather more information.
- from that and have that, I feel like I can go either way, but I think just a postponement of two weeks
- or so I think would be fair, and I'd be in favor of that, but I know that would be, yeah, there'd be
- a couple more steps on that to get there. As I mentioned earlier, what we are here to consider is the
- architectural and historical significance of the building
- It is rated as contributing. So the architecture has not been found to be anything of particular note.
- Other people have noted there are similar buildings or buildings of that area still around. We have
- the staff report that has recommended release of the demolition delay. The information that they have
- there I don't think is necessarily
- rising to the level of significance to where I think we need to hold up demolition. So I would be voting
- in favor of release. Any secondary comments? Hearing none, I think we're ready to vote. Hey, there's
- a motion on the floor that's been seconded regarding DD 2608 on a motion to release the demolition delay.
- We'll take a roll call vote. Voting members only. Co-chair Baker.
- Yes. Treasurer Butler? No. Commissioner Duffy? Yes. Commissioner Golden? Yes. Chair Baker? I'm sorry,
- Chair Hackard, my apologies. Yes. Commissioner Schlegel? No. That is a 4-2 vote in favor to release
- the delay. All right. Thank you everybody for your comments.
- Next up, we have Demolition Delay 2609. Mr. Sandweiss, please take it away with your report. Same petitioner.
- Oh, I forgot. I'm sorry. Yes, please read the statement for release. Today regarding a property.
- At 422 slash 424 South College Avenue, Historic Preservation Commission, HPC declares that it got notice
- of proposed demolition slash partial demolition and requests that staff prepare a formal report. Am
- I in the wrong paragraph? I'm sorry. I'm sorry. All right. Take that back.
- Today, regarding the property located at 422 slash 424, the Historic Preservation Commission, HPC declares
- that it got notice of proposed demolition slash partial demolition. And after today's discussion, sees
- no need to review the plans any further and waives the rest of the demolition delay waiting period.
- The HPC may later recommend the property for historic designation to the Common Council.
- All right, Mr. Sandweiss, your staff report. DD-2609. 222 West 2nd Street is a two-story cement masonry
- commercial building with rough cut ashlar limestone storefront, five days wide, facing 2nd Street. The
- ground floor is dominated by large picture windows. The second story windows are a mixture of older
- divided light metal casement windows and replacement vinyl windows.
- Several garage bays and secondary entrances front the sides of the building facing the beeline trail
- and valley to the east. This commercial residential building, they gave you the background on Ralph
- Deckard. So I'm going to skip ahead to some of the things that are particular to this building.
- Let's see. For this one, I did find
- Several more mentions of residents who lived here. I guess they were made during the time they reside
- in this building. A couple instances including a Westinghouse engineer, Olson Robert Harm, who received
- a company award at this time for one of his patents, as well as Donny Abram, an aspiring country singer
- who released one LP
- With the help of local country star Bobby Helm, who wrote Jingle Bell Rock, I believe. Recommendation
- here is for the release of Demolition Delay 2609. All right. Does the petitioner have anything they'd
- like to add? No, we don't. Unless, John, I don't think there's time. Anything to add back there for
- the petitioner? No, not over the staff room.
- Okay, thank you very much. Now it's time for public comment. I'll go to folks in the room. Does anybody
- wish to make any comments? Yeah, I just like to add a couple more things. So we aren't proposing this
- just to save the buildings for a political reason. We are wanting to save
- the buildings because we do see them as historically significant. They were built 70 years ago, and
- to most of the advocates, that is historical for us. And a lot of the art and cultural things that have
- gone on there over the last many years mean something to us.
- that you can understand that we're not just doing this as a political boy. And then I was gonna say
- something else and now I'm forgetting what I was gonna say. That's how my brain works. But at least
- I said that. So thank you. I would like to add,
- that in reference to some of the deferred maintenance, deferred maintenance isn't necessarily a reason
- that something deserves to be torn down. There are plenty of buildings, and I can think of many that
- the Cooks, for example, have poured a lot of money into that I think the majority of people would agree
- had a lot of deferred maintenance, and that it probably would have been
- more cost effective to go ahead and tear them down. But just like it's not necessarily relevant what's
- happening with the buildings in the future, that deferred maintenance is not necessarily a reason for
- them to go ahead and be demolished. And they are currently housing people. So Hand, the city itself,
- has determined that they are
- are certainly livable to the standard that the city holds. So there's that comment that I want to make.
- The other thing that I would just like to draw attention to and kind of say and echo some of what Amber
- said is things don't need to be saved until there is an external threat.
- And so part of why this hasn't come up before is because demolition delay wasn't relevant, which is
- one of the reasons why we're now here advocating. And so that's it. Okay. Thank you very much. I remember
- I was gonna say, can I say it? Yes, you still have some time. Okay, great. Conservation, making it a
- conservation district,
- is also important to this group because we're going to be granting it, if we get the land, to a land
- trust that will hold the land and preserve it, and then to a co-op whose whole point is to keep it out
- of the speculative market and keep it safe. So just know that the whole point is that we want to conserve
- the land. Thanks. All right. Thank you. Do you have a comment, if you don't mind? I don't know if that counts.
- No, not right now. Is there anyone online who wishes to speak? We don't have anyone online. All right,
- we'll turn to Commissioner Questions next. Commissioner Schlegel, do you have questions? No. Commissioner
- Golden, do you have questions? No. Commissioner Butler. I have the same question that I had last time.
- I would like to know how.
- many of these mid-century commercial buildings we have left. I happen to know that we have one less
- than we did a moment ago, which is too bad. And so I would beg the commission to give us enough time
- to answer this question. Okay. Commissioner Duffy, do you have any questions? No. Commissioner Cross?
- No questions. No questions. Commissioner Baker? No.
- I have a question for Mr. Sandweiss, the patent. Did he get this patent after he lived there? As far
- as I can tell, he had two patents. I found a reference to one that he acquired there for Westinghouse.
- I couldn't find what that patent was. Maybe if I looked a little deeper, he acquired a later patent
- that I was able to find when he moved to a different company.
- That brings us to the end of questions. So we'll entertain a motion. Move to release demolitions by
- 26-09. Commissioner Golden has moved to release demolitions by 26-09. Is there a second? I'll second.
- Commissioner Baker has seconded. We'll go to Commissioner Comments next. Commissioner Golden. No further
- comments. No further comments, Commissioner Baker. Just to repeat a few of the comments I made.
- So they appreciate you coming out and doing what you're doing. It's good work. I think though that we
- are under such strict, under such stricture here that we have to consider it in a far more strict way
- than you are presenting in the opposite. We have to look at historic value and
- While we do consider some of the social aspects of it, it's a rarity that the social aspects become
- enough to become significant. And I don't think they do in this case. And I don't feel like that the
- building meets the threshold of historical significance. So again, I'll be voting for release.
- Thank you. Commissioner Cross.
- comments aren't really about the building, and it's more about what I've come to accept as normal operating
- practice for this commission, certainly from what I've seen over the last five years that I've been
- associated with it. And I'm trying to think of a time where, with two and a half, almost the entirety
- of a demolition delay,
- What do you call it? Period of consideration where a commissioner has asked for more information and
- notwithstanding that request, when there's so much time available, a decision was made and that request
- has not been entertained. I can't recall ever seeing that happen.
- I do not see where the petitioners are going to do. There's a need to have these buildings for some
- purpose that needs to happen within the three months. I don't think there's a plan to demolish these
- buildings probably for months or years in the future. We have two and a half months remaining. Not one,
- but two commissioners have asked for time to consider.
- And we've not been granted it. And I believe that the reason we're asking for time are legitimate reasons
- that can be accommodated. And I've never seen, certainly in the last five years, that I've been here.
- And I can't help but see it as a lack of regard for members of the commission.
- I would like to hear a reason why our requests for what three actually three commissioners have asked
- for time and for research to be done. And it has not been entertained. I'm disappointed.
- I would like somebody to explain to me what other way I am to take the actions of this commission in
- view of a request for more information and to delay the process for about two weeks so that we can satisfy
- ourselves that we've exhausted avenues for consideration. It's my comment.
- Thank you. Commissioner Duffy, comments, sorry. Well, I have two comments by way of response to the
- two comments that the two ladies gave. And to say I agree with both of you. One, the buildings
- are historical. They just don't reach the level of significance that we have to meet, a very high level of
- of historical significance in terms of the rest of the community that we're bound by law to meet. And
- then secondly, you're absolutely right that maintenance is irrelevant to our consideration, unless the
- building is so bad that it presents a public danger, which is not the case. So I'm sympathetic.
- to your presentations. But again, I just have to say that as Commissioner Baker said, the standard is
- so strict and high. And from all evidence, I don't see these buildings meeting the level of significance.
- Mr. Beller.
- I find it disappointing. I second what Commissioner Cross said about asking for more time and
- more information and not receiving it. I think that that is part of our job and I think that to do our
- job well and to do it thoroughly, we have to be careful and we have to take our time. So I am disappointed
- that there seems to be some sort of rush in this case. I think this building is also interesting to
- me and I would like
- to know more about it. Someone mentioned that there's a recording studio, but it's not clear which of
- the two buildings the recording studio was in. I would like to know about that. But I guess I probably
- won't get to. I think this building on its own merits has architectural significance and could be saved.
- And so I'm going to vote against releasing this.
- I think I'll just second what Commissioner Butler said. I would like to know a little bit more especially
- with this one having a resident that had a patent. Noah can just get two more weeks or a little time
- to find out what that was if it is a big deal or if it's more common one. I don't think two weeks is
- in the grand scheme of things, gonna hurt anybody or anything unlike this chair. So I'm not gonna lean
- back. But that's my only comment is that just two weeks just to find out more, just to have a more informed
- opinion before voting to permanently tear this down or potentially not. So. Okay, thank you. Yeah,
- for me, based on the information that we've received,
- The rating of this building, I'm satisfied with the conclusion of the staff recommendation.
- That is my right, and I can vote in that direction. It speaks no ill will toward anyone else on this
- commission. Respect everybody here. And sometimes we have differences of opinion, and that's okay. That's
- why we vote. We find out where we stand. So that's where we're at. All right, I think we are ready to
- call the vote.
- OK, there's a motion on the floor that's been seconded regarding demolition delay 2609. We'll take a
- roll call vote on the release. Chair Baker? Vice Chair Baker. Vice Chair Baker, sorry. You get all of
- the titles today. Vice Chair Baker. Yes. Excuse me, we have our prior petitioner joining.
- Going on with the roll call vote, Treasurer Butler? No. Commissioner Duffy? Yes. Commissioner Golden?
- Yes. Chair Hacker? Yes. Commissioner Schlegel? No. So that is a four in favor and two against. That
- passes the delay to release the delay. Mr. Baker, would you please read the release?
- Today, regarding the property located at 222 West 2nd Street, the Historic Preservation Commission declares
- that it got notice of proposed demolition, partial demolition, and after today's discussion, sees no
- need to review the plans any further and waives the rest of the demolition delay waiting period. The
- HPC may later recommend the property for historic designation to the Common Council. Thank you very much.
- understand that the we will go back up to commission review of certificates of appropriateness I believe
- the petitioner omnarla is available online is that correct all right so we'll move over to COA 2635
- Mr. Sandweiss please take it away
- Hold on, Steph's going to read the report first. All right, but I'm glad to see that you're here. Application
- for certificate of appropriateness 2635 for 1112 East 3rd Street. This is the Fleener Building. Petitioner
- is Omnarla. This request, we'll get into the description first.
- The Fleener building is an individually listed 1928 or 1927. It says 1927 on the transom, but I think
- it might be 1928. Commercial building. The building uses a textured block with vertically scratched
- segment bordered by two smooth segments. In the summer of 2026, a car hit the west end of the facade
- damaging the window and brick wall. This proposed request is to repair the accident damaged brick areas
- and replace the damaged brick only where necessary. A significant amount of the original brick has been
- retained and salvaged for reuse. The intent of the work is to preserve and reinstall the existing original
- brick wherever it is serviceable and appropriate for reuse.
- The proposed new replacement brick will be used only in areas where the original brick from the accident
- cannot be reused due to breakage, loss, or severe damage or unsuitable condition. No wholesale replacement
- of existing brick is proposed. Because this project is subject to historical society review, the repair
- approach prioritizes preservation of existing brick. A salvaged original brick will be reused first.
- The replacement brick identified in the submittal is proposed as a supplemental material only for locations
- where the restored original brick is not available and cannot be used safely or properly. The installation
- will be performed to maintain the existing wall appearance to the greatest extent practicable, including
- brick alignment, coursing, affected locations, and the blended
- with the surrounding existing brickwork as field conditions allow. So I'm going to get into the staff
- recommendation here. Since this application was submitted, there have been a few sort of reiterations
- of the proposal, which is why this is being, or part of the reason why this is being presented for commission
- review when it's using mostly in-kind materials.
- The staff recommendation is for approval of COA 2635, beginning to the rationale. The Fleener building
- uses a very unusual type of brick, likely a limited run from the 1920s. There's a few buildings built
- by this pair of contractors from the 20s, and they all use sort of weird limited edition bricks. The
- distinctive segments of scratched and smooth brick
- on this building's particular texture. Having searched through new and salvaged brick available in the
- state, staff has unfortunately not been able to find a matching replacement. Some portions of the brick
- on secondary facades have been replaced with an alternative make, but the primary facade on 3rd Street,
- particularly in the damaged area, is much more conspicuous and uses an unusual bond pattern. The design
- cannot be matched exactly with either scratched or smooth brick,
- although patterns of brick themselves can be replicated with either. Considering the apparent unavailability
- of a more suitable replacement brick and the need to stabilize and seal the building that's currently
- being rented, staff recommends the approval of the proposed combination of salvaged original brick and
- new smooth red brick for the repairs. Does the petitioner have anything to add?
- still there. Yes, I'm on the call. Thank you very much. You've done a really good job explaining. I
- really have nothing to add. Okay. All right. Public comment. Is there anyone in the room who wants to
- speak on this? Looking like no. Anyone online? No. All right. We'll move over to Commissioner questions.
- Commissioner Schlegel, the chair got me earlier too. It's dangerous.
- Yeah, it's not just you. Noah, thank you very much for the presentation. The only additional question
- I had based on what was in the packet is it looks like on some graph paper, one of the, is it windows
- are supposed to be replaced with limestone or just the part below? That's the original plan that I received.
- And part of the reason why I continue to include that, even though the proposal is for brick replacement
- now is because that shows where repairs are going to have to be made.
- which, you know, we additionally have this picture here of the damaged storefront, but this is sort
- of at an angle, so. Yeah. Mm-hmm. OK. So the window stays. Yes, the window's going to stay. It's going
- to be blended instead of having limestone put in there. Yes. My understanding, that's going to be a
- combination of salvaged brick and the smooth red brick. OK. I just want to be 100% sure that you know.
- Commissioner Golden. I have a comment on that. Hold on. Hold on, please. We do have those windows restored
- and they're out of the property.
- when we start installing, if we feel that really bad, can we replace the windows? Well, that's a separate
- thing. That's a whole new request. Got it. OK. Commissioner Golden. No questions. Excuse me, sir. Can
- you please hold on? We're doing questions right now. Commissioner Golden. No questions. Commissioner
- Butler. No questions. It wouldn't matter if I did. Commissioner Duffy. No questions. Commissioner Cross.
- No questions.
- Commissioner Baker? Yes. How many square feet or how many brick are we talking about? These replacements.
- Is that for Noah or the petitioner? Whoever can provide an answer. Mr. Samwise, do you know? I don't.
- Do you have the sketch pulled up? I have this.
- It doesn't have measurements, does it? Unless the grab is to scale. For the petitioner, do you know
- how many square feet this takes up for where the bricks need to be replaced? No, we are not 100% sure.
- But I can tell you, we will need quite a few. A lot of bricks have been damaged. And also,
- When we walked with the contractor last week, we also found that around the door also would require
- some work. We don't have a count on it, but we are assuming it's going to be significant.
- Would you be willing to make a guess as to how many brick are involved? Is it on the order of 10 bricks?
- Is it on the order of 100 brick, 200 brick? I'm trying to get an idea of the significance of it, how
- it's going to show. I would say 100 plus bricks. Okay, thank you. And as to the type of brick, I'm hearing
- it's a red
- Is it a glazed brick, or is it a dull brick? We found that it's a red clay called brick. I'm not 100%
- sure. I'm not an expert in this. But this brick we thought was reasonably good. We're being shown two
- different things.
- on the graphic we have up, one is a dull red sort of rough surfaced brick, and the other one appears
- to be more of a glazed red. And what I'm trying to get at is how this is going to blend with the...
- Oh, exactly. I'm sorry? We will, the motor will be, we will try to keep the motor same as what we have
- right now. Yes, I understand that.
- That's a good point that you made because the mortar's obviously part of this. But anyway, I think,
- all right, I think that's the only questions I have right now. Thank you. For me, this question is for
- the petitioner. You said there might need to be some work on the door. When would you know that?
- waiting to do some of the brick work before you figure out if the door needs something? Right, right.
- Once we start opening up all the areas, that's when you identify that. OK. Thank you. But that is also
- part of this damage. So the door is damaged as part of this? It's cracked. It's not fully damaged. I
- see it crack.
- Any secondary questions from anybody? No? Okay. All right. I guess now we'll entertain a motion on this.
- Anybody want to make a motion? I would move approval with the condition that the replacement bricks match
- closely as possible to the existing brick in terms of color and texture. And of course, the mortar lines
- should be as close as possible to the existing mortar color. Okay, so you've moved to approve with the
- condition of the brick condition and color and the mortar? Yes. Okay, is there a second? I'll second.
- Okay, Commissioner Schlegel is seconded. Commissioner Baker, you made the motion, so you can go first.
- It's important that it be as close as possible to the original design. And we obviously can't get there,
- but we could get further from it. If we used a glazed red brick, for example, it's going to show and
- not going to be something people, I think, want to look at. We want to blend it to make it just as close
- as possible. And that's why I put in my motion
- Since we can't find an identical brick, it should be at least a close in color and texture. Okay. You
- second it. So Commissioner Schlegel, do you have any comments? I'll second what Vice Chair Baker just
- said as well on that, because it was so well said. So thank you. Okay. Commissioner Gold. So my comment
- is more like a question. What's the process of approval of the brick?
- Does it go to NOAA? Does it come back here? I mean, there have been instances in the past where more
- specific details were requested as part of a conditional approval, in which case, as opposed to sending
- it back to the commission, it would be staff approval of a proposed material. And that's your sense
- of how this will work? Yeah. That's it.
- Commissioner Beller? No. Commissioner Deff? No. Commissioner Crotty? Comments? This is comments. Comments,
- no comments. Comments. A comment for me. In general, I'm in favor of this. It's a shame what happened
- to this building. I mean, it just got absolutely obliterated. I appreciate the petitioner trying to
- blend in whatever bricks that they can salvage in with newer bricks that match as close as they possibly can.
- in addition to the mortar. If there's any, as the work is being done, if there's any substantial issues
- with the door or the windows, I think we need to make sure, talk to NOAA and see if there needs to be
- an addendum to the COA or a new COA just to make sure any future work is matching up with the historic
- preservation standards we have set up. So that is my comment. Any other secondary comments from anybody?
- No, seeing none. Okay, I think we're ready to vote.
- been motioned and seconded for the conditional approval of COA 2635. We'll take a roll call vote. Vice
- Chair Baker? Yes. Treasurer Butler? Yes. Commissioner Duffy? Yes. Commissioner Golden? Yes. Chair Hacker?
- Yes. Commissioner Schlegel? Yes. That motion is approved 6-0. All right. Thank you very much for the
- petitioner.
- for coming in. Next up, we have old business. We already hit demolition delay. Mr. Sanweiss is their
- old business. Oh, yes. So the limestone, sorry, Vinegar Hill limestone walking tour, which I believe
- I brought up at the last meeting. It was supposed to be tomorrow. It's going to be raining all day tomorrow.
- So it's been postponed for two weeks. Also, I'm going to wait for new business.
- Anything else. What about training. That's right. Good point. So a while back I sent out an email to
- everybody from deputy clerk Jennifer Crosley about training for required training for commissioners.
- Some of you have attended so thank you for doing that.
- I think this only works if everybody attends. And if not, she's going to have to come in here and give
- a presentation. And I really like Jennifer and talking to her. But it's going to add some time onto
- the end of the meeting. So if you need that link again so that you can sign up for one of those sessions,
- I can resend the email. OK. Excellent. Yes? What was the training about? I didn't get a sense of it. Oh, OK.
- characterized very broad, general, somewhat vague terms. And I didn't get up. It was difficult for me
- to figure out how to respond when I didn't know what I was being trained to do. So I mean, some of the
- people have taken it and speak to what they saw there. My understanding is it's basically two things.
- It's a standard, what do you call it, code of conduct for commissioners, and then some information about
- adhering to Robert's Rules of Order.
- which we have started doing pretty well. It's pretty straightforward. Is there a take-home version of
- this training? You can do it online, which is what I would do, and then put a cardboard you in front
- of the screen and go live your life.
- It's for the lawyers, it's not for us. Yeah, but come on. It's for the lawyers. We have to do it. Democracy
- is a hell of a thing, as I've been informed very recently. And I'm kind of averse to solutions that
- don't have a problem they're trying to solve.
- I think we were interviewed for the job and we got it because those persons who interviewed us believed
- that we had the competence and the professionalism and the judgment and bearing to do the job. Then
- now to come and have us spend time in front of a screen or have somebody give us a presentation to ensure
- that we have those qualities that we were found and judged to have had
- to get this job makes no sense to me. Now, if it is that there's some specific requirement, let's throw
- Robert's Rules, for example. I read very well. You could just say, read Robert's Rules and make sure
- that you know it before your first meeting, and that works for me. Again, we're all grown-ups here.
- Does that ordinance pass by the city council that's requiring it?
- Do the city councilors have to do this training? They do some form of training. Okay, well, I can pass
- the ordinance. Cardboard, you said that works? I didn't do that. We do not advocate. Again, solutions
- must, again, if that's what it requires that I turn it on, I go mow the lawn and I come back and I go
- check, then why? I don't think there is that option. I think it's really,
- intended for people to listen. So I can listen to it while I'm mowing the lawn? Sure. Why not? Or I
- can just have it sat there on a table while I mow the lawn. Is there an online version? Yeah. Unfortunately,
- I was foolish not to do that. Almost everyone at the training session I went to was online. And so there's
- like six people in the room. And then just all these names on the screen, which maybe they were there,
- maybe they weren't.
- You see, sometimes you have to be careful what you say yes to, because that says a lot about you and
- your values. And if somebody's going to treat you like an infant, and you allow them to treat you like
- an infant, you're in essence saying that I accept that I'm an infant. But again, that's just one person's
- opinion. All right. New business. Questions? Oh, sorry.
- No, you sent me a link. Unfortunately, the link listed all of those that were passed. I didn't see any
- coming in the future. And then there were a couple of sign-ins to get to the form that just completely
- baffled my computer. So again, I've been having trouble with technology lately, but this was one of
- those where it just wanted a password or something, and it just didn't work at all.
- I'm looking for a little help saying that the deputy clerk hasn't shown up to one of our meetings yet.
- I don't think it's out of the question that there might be more meetings so I can check with her new
- business. Anything new business. OK. Something I wanted to bring up is the state historic preservation
- conference has been announced. I mean we knew the dates and location but the agenda has been announced.
- So in addition to everything else that you might find useful or interesting there, there is every year
- a program called CAMP that's commissioner something and mentorship program, which is specifically for
- members of historic preservation commissions. Every year, a couple of scholarships are given to each
- preservation commission that's
- a member of this National Alliance of Preservation Commissions, which we're a member of. Those scholarships
- are not usually given out until later. But if you're interested in going to the state conference or
- camp, have this on your radar. It's going to be the end of September in, gosh, what's that town? Franklin,
- Indiana. It's a good conference. I went last year.
- Got one of those scholarships. It was great. Got to learn about some of the commission stuff, but then
- there's a lot of other sort of things about historic preservation going on. So if you're interested,
- please let me know. Let me see. I think it's September 28th or 29th through October 1st. Yep. So yeah.
- Let Noah know if you're interested so he can kind of loop you in when, when they make those available
- and see how to distribute those out. Um, I went last year, so I won't go this time around to make sure
- somebody else can, uh, take, take advantage of that. So, um, anything else on new business, uh, Mr.
- Sam Weiss? Not that I can think of. Okay. Uh, commissioner comments is next. Anyone wish to make any
- further comments? Yes.
- Commissioner Cross. Sometimes it might seem facetious when I make reference to democracy, but I'm not.
- I'm very serious. And not just as a member of the public, but certainly as a commissioner in my standing
- as advisory.
- I believe that every commissioner has an equal right to make their positions heard on any issue.
- I like rules, I like regulations, I like things in black and white because it keeps me centered and
- focused as to what my role is. I also believe that bodies like this should be deliberative.
- and take every opportunity to make the best decision, having availed themselves of all the information.
- The persons who were asked to be or were invited to be on this body have skill sets that are broad and varied.
- listen to very carefully the opinions of my commissioners. Whenever we make a decision, it affects the
- lives of all the members in our community, or the members in our community in a very significant way.
- And if it is that I'm going to make a decision and there's more information out there, I'd like to hear it.
- I've been here long enough to see that even though we may disagree, we're more collegiate than competitive
- or adversarial. Because despite our ways of doing things and our proclivities, I believe that there
- to be a general respect and regard for the opinions of others.
- know personally, I'm not going to speak for anybody else, where I've been in position to something or
- been in support of something and have been swayed by one person on this commission. I'm not an architect,
- so I listen to the architects. I'm not a historian, so I listen to the historian. I'm not a contractor
- or skilled in construction, so I listen to these people. And if someone says, hey, I believe this, give
- me an opportunity to go do some research and come back
- I make a presentation. I have always been inclined to allow that. And my experience here, and I would
- even use the word precedent setting, that that is the way we do things. There is no downside to that.
- I can only see an upside.
- And if it is that hearing all the information, my position doesn't change, it makes me feel better knowing
- that I made the decision with all the information, hearing all the opinions properly ventilated. This
- is the only place legally that we can discuss among ourselves anything related to matters that come
- before us. It's usually the first time and a lot of times the only time.
- We cannot meet outside of this body and discuss anything. And even though it's not written
- in the regulations, maybe a lawyer in here could say that there certainly have been rules or process
- established by common law, by common practice.
- Whenever we make a decision, not only do we need to be able to defend it credibly, but it should stand
- to historical scrutiny. And one of the ways of ensuring that happens is to avail ourselves of all the
- information, listening to all the opinions. I've seen us sit in this room
- for five hours, half of which was spent on one issue. I have seen where matters that are seemingly
- insignificant have captured the time and the attention of this body for hours, for weeks. We've sent
- for samples, we've sent for this,
- gone report, we've redone drawings, we've done all of these things. And it's tedious, it's time consuming.
- But I come back here every single sitting of this board because I believe that it's important. And I
- need to be able to go out there and face every single member of this community. And if challenged about
- a decision that I have made, I can say, listen,
- We ventilated this over X amount of hours, X amount of meetings, even if I personally have acquiesced.
- When I'm certain of how I was gonna vote, but I believed it was important to give the other members
- of this commission the opportunity to make their case. Sometimes it swayed me, sometimes it hasn't.
- I have never left.
- commission feeling that I have not been given an opportunity to fully express and vent my opinion and
- position on a topic ever until today. And it is sad. I will say that I hope this is an anomaly because I believe
- ourselves and our community and our mandate at this service. This wasn't an arbitrary request for time.
- We had three commissioners out of six, six, seven, 50% asking, pleading on two separate occasions and
- two separate votes for an extension.
- on a three-month matter when we're less than 20% in on the time allowable. I don't believe that should
- have even been a matter to be considered for a vote. If it were up to me, that would have been written
- in our rules. That is how significant I believe it is. We were not at the end of our time allowed. There
- was no overriding reason that the decision had to be made today
- And we had three commissioners asking for additional time to explore other matters brought forward.
- It is my opinion that in this consultative process, that the least that could have been done is to allow
- for this matter to be tabled for two weeks.
- Thank you. Commissioner Baker, you had your hand. Just a little bit of rebuttal. It wasn't a matter
- for rebuttal. It was just an opinion. No, I'm going to make a comment. I'm making a comment. That's
- all I'm doing. But seek not to rebut my comment. If you have an independent comment to make,
- you make it. Mr. Cross, please let Commissioner Baker speak, but please also make sure this is not directed
- at anyone. I am simply going to state procedure.
- The procedure played out. A motion was made and seconded and voted on. And while you have a motion ongoing,
- you don't make other motions. I agree that there were comments made that worked against the motion.
- People didn't want to, but the motion was made. The motion was passed.
- Basically, that's it. If a motion had been made to transfer to another meeting or ask for additional
- information at a later meeting, that could have been done, but it wasn't. There was a time period when
- our president asked for a motion. There was a delay, I noticed. There wasn't anyone who,
- immediately jumped to make a motion. In fact, I seconded a motion that somebody made, but there was
- a time lapse there. And so the opportunity was there to make a motion to delay. But that motion wasn't
- made. A motion was made and carried out. That's the simple politics, not the politics. That's the simple
- dynamics of the way the commission works. There's nothing wrong with that.
- that's just the way that's just the way it works and that's the way it will continue to work. Thank
- you commissioner Baker again commissioner Butler again please make sure we're just. Just a question
- I'm not sure about the procedure so if the motion is already on the table if we're considering a demolition
- delay is that what then is on the table or is it so in other words nothing else could have been voted
- on until so the fact that there was a
- pause wouldn't have mattered. Nothing else could have been voted on until the demolition delay was voted
- down. Is that right? And then a new thing could be brought up? And I think you also the you can make
- a motion before the to release to say, you know, request to move on if before that had occurred or if
- that request or motion to
- release had been voted down, then a subsequent motion could be made. So there was no opportunity to
- present a separate motion. So I don't understand what the point is. We're all making comments. We're
- not having a cross common argument here. So Commissioner Butler has the floor. I just had a question.
- Thank you. Anybody else have any comments? If I may be allowed to.
- make one more comment, and I really have to leave. I learned very early in my schooling a phrase, comment,
- idiom, what you call it. And it goes, the rules are meant for the guidance of the wise. Guidance of
- the wise. And I'll leave the rest of that comment hanging lest somebody believe I'm calling them a fool.
- which that's not my intention. But it's the first part of that comment. And this is why we make rules
- can be changed. If we recognize in a process that the rules that govern that process do not serve the
- ends, we are not slaves to that rule. And as intelligent people, we should be able to sit back and go,
- hold on. If we go this way, it gets us to an end that
- We probably don't want to, let's figure out a way because rules are contextual. They're made for a time,
- for a set of circumstances. And those circumstances may change or different factors present themselves
- where the purpose of these rules may not suit the ends for which these rules were designed.
- And like I said, we're a deliberative body.
- We're meant to sit here and argue, and argument must be based on information. And all I'm saying is,
- for us to do our best job at what we were brought here to do, we should seek to avail ourselves of all
- the available information, documented opinions of experts, different perspectives,
- from different people. That is, maybe I'm spoiled. That is what I've grown used to. That is what I thought
- I signed up for. That is what I believe is the best way to go about our business. And I really hope
- that that is the way we move forward. Mr. Chair, I really need to go. Thank you very much for allowing
- me to ventilate my issues, gentlemen.
- have a good evening. Two more weeks. I'll see you. All right. My comments are thank you all very much
- for coming here today, participating in this. I know we didn't all agree on this. That happens. And
- that's okay. That's part of what this is. We had a vote. We had a motion. We had a discussion. I know
- some people are upset about that. That's okay. We took a vote.
- and the majority of people voted how they did. And then we move on. That's how this commission works.
- That's how it will always work. That's also democracy. Sometimes you're not happy with the end of the
- vote, and that's okay. I think it's important here that we all retain our respect for each other and
- understand and not call into question people's motives. I do not question any of your motives for how
- you voted one way or the other, and I would hope and expect that you would do the same for everyone
- else here.
- So that is my comment. Is there any public comment? Is there anyone online? All right, we've come to
- the end of our meeting. This meeting is adjourned. Thank you.