City of Bloomington, Indiana Historic Preservation Commission, 22 Oct 2020

Previous Meeting Next Meeting

⏯

youtube image

►

From YouTube: Bloomington Historic Preservation Commission, October 22, 2020

Description

meeting packet: https://bloomington.in.gov/onboard/meetingFiles/download?meetingFile_id=7764

A

All right, good evening, everybody it's five o'clock and I'd like to call the order. The bloomington historic preservation, commission meeting.

A

For thursday october 22nd, thank you for everybody uh coming this evening,.

A

All right connor, uh we need to do call of order. So d, are you with us? I'm here, hey bruce.

B

Sam desaler, here susan dyer, here jeff golden here tim hutton here, lee san wise.

B

John saunders, yes, chris durban.

A

Chris, I'm here that's very good.

A

And we have ernesto with us- yes here and jenny.

A

Derrick or duncan all right, we need an approval of our minutes. Go moved just check perfect.

B

C

Yes, susan dyer, yes, jeff golden! Yes ebb hutton! Yes, sorry for getting that order. uh Lee san wise.

B

John saunders, yes, chris sturbaugh, yes, great, okay, let's move on to uh coa and this will be uh 20-45.

A

326 south fairview street greater prospect hill district, so uh the request is for the demolition.

D

Of an ancillary structure on the lot research indicates, it is historically used as a stable.

D

The primary structure is uh raiders contributing. However, when I was reading the the survey entry on.

D

The shard it doesn't make any mention of this of this ancillary structure, so that was interesting.

D

um So I believe it was built circa 1910, and that is because the 1907 sanborn map, which you see.

D

On the left here shows a vacant lot. The 1913 sanborn map has the primary structure and the.

D

Ancillary structure the x the cross indicates uh a stable, um so the sample maps do show us uh what.

D

These structures were used for and if you can't, you might be able to see, there's a d on this one.

D

Which means dwelling uh so that's where I came to that conclusion. So uh the structure is part of the.

D

Neighborhood fabric that survives from a time that, before the automobile transforms society um and.

D

As such, it really is a curiosity and part of the heritage of the district's built environment that.

D

Said the dilapidated nature of the structure means restoration would be expensive. uh The current.

D

Owner has no use for the structure and believes its poor condition could eventually cause bodily.

D

Harm staff would recommend approval of cua 2045, which, by the way, is a demolition of this structure.

D

While the preservation of the structure would contribute towards the pre-automobile history,.

D

Of the neighborhood, the dilapidated condition of the structure would make such a project.

D

Extraordinarily expensive and very unlikely to actually happen. I did get feedback from.

D

The neighborhood design review committee, um all in favor of four of them three of.

D

Them in favor of uh supporting the demolition of this structure is uh jenny. Janice price with us.

A

Yes, I am oh great, do you have any uh additional information for us for any other questions? No.

E

um I've only lived here a year and a half and I moved from california. So I wasn't really even.

E

Aware of the barn, like you said, I don't have a great use for it. It's nice to have an area to park.

E

And I don't know whether there's a way to preserve that sort of side structure.

E

Or whether I could put a carport in there or something like that,.

E

Oh there's my house. Yes all right, thank you. Chris, do you have questions? Yeah could.

F

Connor show a few more of the pictures from the those are the best pictures of it right.

E

I have a really great one with sunflowers. um There are a few that really show its condition.

E

You see the south wall is.

A

D

A

Okay, chris any more questions.

F

um No all right great uh jeff. Do you have questions.

G

No question deb: do you have any questions? No questions. Are we questions all right? Susan.

H

No, no questions, uh sam, no questions, I I don't have any questions. uh I've never actually seen.

A

This structure and I I knew the condition of it. um So, let's move on to comments uh correctly in.

F

It's historically interesting and I hope everyone got to see it.

F

We used to store in this barn and filled it to the gills and we repaired it while we were using it.

F

But we've been out of there for years and the roof failed. The ridge is sagging and you'd basically be.

F

Building a new barn, if you tried to save it and that could be cool but where's. The budget right.

A

Right yeah, so I own the house across the street from this house and I've walked by that barn.

G

Many a time and over the years, it's just gotten worse and worse,.

G

So I'm going to support the demolition of this all right. Thank you. Jeff.

A

Do you have any comments, no comment and lee. Do you have any comments? No, I do not.

H

No, I don't either.

I

Damn no comments.

A

J

No comments, john. Thank you thank you and I don't have any comments on this.

A

Do we have any uh public comments.

A

Okay, as I said, I I've seen this building in. Unfortunately, it really does have to go away.

A

So I will leave a motion boom to approve coa 20-45.

K

Yes, susan dyer, yes, jeff golden, yes ebb hutton. Yes,.

L

B

Sean saunders, yes, chris, yes, motion carried 700.

D

Thank you. Can I ask that whoever's, not speaking, mute, your mic, we're getting some feedback from an.

D

Unmuted mic, so please check to make sure your mic is muted. Thank you.

A

All right, so, let's move on to uh demolition, delay and we'll start out with uh 20-23.

A

uh Sorry 20-24: this is 702 east maxwell lane. uh The request is a substantial demolition.

D

It's actually uh the proposal to add a shed roof edition. On top of the existing structure, you can.

D

See it here in this graphic, so I got together with planning. We decided to submit the definition of.

D

A substantial demolition, which is why we're seeing it today this is a contributing home.

D

Staff would recommend releasing demo delay 2024, while the addition is quite.

D

Radical and not something that would be compatible in a historic district.

D

Staff does not find the project merits historic, designation of property all right.

D

I did want to point out also: I was there to photograph it. Here's a side view of it.

D

There is a ancillary building in the back the petitioner plans to keep that that will not be.

D

Demolished or altered and then I found two other structures that were architecturally um twins.

D

Just behind this one 905 southfast 904, south fest, which I thought was was quite.

D

Interesting, these are what we call the minimal traditional or the american small house that were.

D

You know a lot of these went up uh post world war. Two, as part of you know, fha loans and things.

D

Like that, um so that's what this structure is in itself, so I just wanted to have that.

A

Okay, thank you connor. um So let's uh move the questions. Chris.

A

Excuse me chris you're, on the me: is this uh individual residence.

D

uh uh Is this an individual resident? Does someone live here currently? Is that the.

D

Question no, is it going to be a individual's home, or is this something else that that's going.

F

To be an apartment or something, I believe, the zoning uh requires single family home.

F

Okay was: was there any discussion of of compatibility when, when this came up.

D

Discussion between who, between planning between preservation uh did that word come up at all.

D

um No, um the original addition was going to be to the rear to the side, but that didn't meet setback.

D

Requirements so to get the extra space uh he had to go on top um and as far as I know, planning.

D

This is, this is okay in their book. It meets all requirements uh from the planning perspective.

D

I spoke briefly with the practitioner um on the design um he's proud of it. I didn't.

D

See in my place to disparage the architectural merits of the project, so the idea of compatibility.

D

The the discussion there um did not take place because this is a demolition delay.

D

This is not a design review. Sure. Okay, thank you. Thank you, chris um jeff, no questions. Thank you.

A

Yeah so just confirming it's contributing a has been designated contributing, but it's not.

M

In a historic conservation or historic district right, that's correct. Okay, thanks all right lee.

L

I don't have any questions all right, susan. No, I don't either sam no questions.

A

Ernesto no questions. Thank you. Okay. I haven't got anything to add to this. So let's read the comments.

A

Yes, I find I find it tragic that planning couldn't figure out a way to allow them to build in back.

F

Which was their initial desire and there was no offer to go to the bca. There was no offer to.

F

Work things out, I don't know if they were under, was it two feet that they needed or five feet or.

F

Is there a planner here that could answer that question keegan should be with us.

D

Although I don't see him so, there is not currently a player in the meeting.

F

It's just that sometimes those well-intended rules drive things in a way that.

F

Have unintended consequences you know maybe you're saving.

F

Some square footage of absorption ground, but exceptions really should be much more easy to get.

F

Than planning driving this to be built on top, which is probably more expensive, and it disrupts.

F

The architecture of the house and the neighborhood and all because of some lot coverage rule that.

F

Could have been waived in a condition of of uh one lot, so I just find this unfortunate.

F

And I I'm sorry that I can't get an answer from from a planner. Maybe the owner knows.

F

What it was that the planners wouldn't allow.

F

And I'd be interested if anyone knows that answer paul, are you with us? uh Yes, I'm here.

D

Do you have an answer to chris erbaum's question yeah? I think the issue was.

N

The main issue there was there was a rear setback that was within a few feet, and then there was.

N

There was a garage where the existing garage is at. There was going to be a new garage.

N

Attached to the house and that garage had to sit, I think it was 10 feet back from the existing.

N

House, which pushed it back too far to make the design uh feasible. So that's how we ended up here.

F

Well, my sympathies, I'm sorry. It had to go that way. um I see what you're doing and I understand it.

F

But those are my comments I would like. I would like there to be a way for us to communicate.

F

Better with planning, so we could possibly advocate for the homeowner when they run into these.

F

Unintended consequences of well-intended zoning rules.

A

Absolutely chris all right, uh jeff uh comments, uh no comments, okay and uh comments. Thanks lee.

L

I uh I agree with chris and I live around the corner from this house and I've seen very.

L

Sensitive expansions of of houses on maxwell, lane east maxwell lane and uh it's unfortunate that.

L

We weren't able to uh work with planning to make something else happen.

A

Thank you lee susan.

H

No, I don't have any comments. Thank you sam. I guess the only comment I have is from a constructability.

K

Standpoint and that you're so close to coming to the edge of that gable. uh And just in terms of.

K

Waterproofing and the structural gymnastics you have to go through to get where you are. I might.

K

Encourage you to just go the extra two feet and lop off the the gables on each side, um because.

K

There's not that much left there and then that opens up a lot of fenestration possibilities on.

K

The short elevations because I don't think, there's a setback issue with the scheme as it is now.

A

Thank you, sam ernesto. Yes, I agree with both last comments. I wish there would be some more.

J

Flexibility in those cases from planning for a project like this, because this is gonna cost.

J

Probably more than if you expand towards the back and lastly, which is sam mentioned, I would.

J

Suggest why not just use the entire footprint to preserve that little sliver at each end?.

J

It represents just from the construction perspective. It's going to be just a challenging.

J

Thing to resolve uh water leaking all kinds of things, just for saving that little roof.

J

I don't know that's, that's all. I have to say thank you all right. Thank you. Ernesto.

A

Unlike you guys, I kind of like this design, I think kind of helps, change the look in a lot of ways.

A

That I think, we'll probably see more coming up when people can't expand they're going to need.

A

To go up um so I'm not opposed to the demolition on this project, um so we're going to need a motion.

G

I was going to do it, but I can't find it.

A

I'll go ahead and read it then. Today regarding the property at 702, east maxwell lane the search.

A

Preservation, commission declares that it got noticed and proposed a motion pressure, demolition.

A

And after today's discussion sees no need to review the plans any further.

A

And where's the rest of the motion link waiting period.

A

The hpc may better recommend the property proper designation to the common council.

G

Second, thank you.

B

Hey sam desaler, yes, susan dyer, yes, jeff golden.

B

Christopher sterbaum.

F

I will pass just in the hope of sending a signal that we need to communicate more with.

F

With planning on these issues and offer ourselves, even as advocates for uh board.

F

Of zoning appeals as needed- um I understand things aren't design guidelines, but I do think.

F

That we can help make things work a little better if we are.

F

If we are willing to uh try and break that bridge between planning and preservation,.

A

Thank you, chris all right. uh Let's move on to uh new business.

G

John, yes, before we move into the first item of business in new business, I'd like to say that I've.

G

Got some information today of a very sensitive nature that could have a substantial effect.

G

On this designation, historic designation and I'm hoping that you guys will trust me.

G

And I'd like to table this until the next meeting I was hoping I would get some more substantial.

G

Support for this information, I don't want to reveal it because it is very sensitive um and.

G

I would like to wait another two weeks before we talk about this.

A

All right so I'll just say that if we wait two weeks then this demolition delay will be released.

D

Because it'll meet the 90-day threshold and we, this is our last opportunity unless we want to.

D

Call a special meeting before october 30th to place the property under interim protection.

A

So chris that puts me in a very difficult situation, because.

G

This could um sully some reputations.

D

uh Well, you know our role if we forwarded to the council for designation today.

D

Perhaps that information would be unfolded a little more by the time council gets to it and.

D

The council can take that into their consideration on whether or not they're going to designate.

G

And everybody will know.

D

I don't see how they won't know yeah. I think everybody.

A

Well, like meetings yeah, our meetings are public. We'd have to publish it anyway,.

A

Whichever way we go right, but we're not quite as public as the council meetings are public.

G

I understand the rules, so I I guess we don't have a choice in that matter.

G

I'm not sure how to move forward.

A

um You want a private conversation jeff with phoning connor on your cell phone.

M

Out of the room I talked to john about, he knows what it is.

G

I'm assuming that john talked to connor. We have, and um I think that for us to move forward.

A

We need to have something um more solid, something that's actually in writing, uh not just and then.

A

I trust jeff, don't get me wrong, but I think we need right right and that's the reason. I'm not.

G

Saying it because it's hearsay right exactly so, you know if it's the commissioner's desire.

A

To postpone it for two weeks, we could, but I kind of agree with conor. On the other hand, that we.

A

Should move it forward and then let city council make that decision, because we've already made the.

A

Decision to to send it to city council to come and cancel now, we've only made the decision to start.

D

The official designation proceedings, I've written a staff report, which I hope you guys are able to.

D

Read I outlined the exact historic criteria that this building and architectural criteria this.

D

Building meets, and I explain why it meets those criteria, that's what I'll bring to council if.

D

You decide today to forward it to council. um I also sent uh property owner notification to the.

D

Adjacent property owners and the property owner themselves uh that we will be having this meeting.

D

Today, uh where we may be taking that action, we may be sending it to council and placing it.

D

Under inner protection, so all of our legal bases have been covered, um we're fueled and ready to go.

A

So let's get some commissioner comments.

A

Curious commissioner comments: I I recommend that we move to send this to the council and initiate.

F

uh Interim protection: I agree with chris uh move to council interim protection. Okay, susan.

H

Yeah I'd say with the information we have sorry jeff. I do trust you um if it were less.

H

Than the two weeks or if we had more time I'd, be happy to table it. Okay, thank you. Susan deb,.

G

Well, I didn't support this in the first place and now I'm very uh leery of this whole.

G

Deal and what it could do to the boxman's reputation, but- and- and this is a big part of this.

G

um You know the historic nature of this. This uh appeal is the restaurant and the boxing themselves.

G

Yeah, so I'm not going to support I'm going to support, not support forwarding this.

A

All right, thank you, yeah, uh I'm with the others, and how susan uh laid it out that, in the absence.

M

Of more concrete information from you, jeff or whatever other sources, in spite of totally.

M

Trusting you but needing to see it. I do support our decision and vote that we made last time until.

M

There is further information thanks, terrific sam. I have no comments. Ernesto no comments. Thank you.

A

um I think that at this point we should go ahead and move it forward to the common council and.

A

Let them make our decision hey guys. This is uh josh alley. I do have uh a couple of questions.

C

um Am I allowed to talk yeah absolutely.

C

My business partner, craig, is here as well with me, we're in the same room or whatever.

C

And um a couple of things we we did find the original deed to this building and the original.

C

Owner wasn't the mitchell family at all? It was a fella named fred, w rumple and he was the original.

C

Owner of the building he's the one that had the building constructed and then he sold it to an.

C

Ira mitchell in 1929, so I know we have the picture up on the screen right now. The 1928 picture there.

C

And the the mitchells didn't even own: it's an ira mitchell that purchased the property from.

C

Mr rumple, um he purchased it in 1929, and so uh I just got this deed today and so.

C

I'll forward it to you conor that way you have it, but um I think it adds further.

C

Further evidence that the mitchells weren't, the original constructors of the building.

C

And if you look at the deed, they only owned it for six years. Ira mitchell did and then.

C

They sold it to, uh they either sold it or it got foreclosed on and it went to a bank.

C

And so uh we'll share that with you guys to have and then the only other request that we ask.

C

From the attorney's comments earlier, the the city attorney that this had to be an all or nothing.

C

Process, even though we were willing to work with you guys, that's that's kind of the way we went.

C

On this- and we just asked if you move it to the council and you're going to afford something for.

C

Designation that you take it back to the front facade of the 1928 building, because the things.

C

Changed so much and if we're going to be asked to to take a building back to its original look.

C

We we'd request that it be the front facade of the 1928 picture. That's on the screen now.

D

I think you misunderstand how this process works, so if this building is designated by the council.

D

There is no uh ordinance or law. In effect, that's going to force you to restore the building back to.

D

Any time period whatsoever we're just designating the building as it's you know as a whole, and not.

D

A facade so, and also to add to your comment about the deed. I also have deeds that show. The lot was.

D

Purchased by stanley mitchell in 1922 and then ira mitchell in 1924 has actually purchased one.

D

Half of the lot and then he subsequently bought the other half a lot um for five thousand dollars.

D

A piece so I mentioned I'd, love to share you, know, notes and stuff and see what our deeds look like.

D

And what the information looks like at yeah, we have our deed from our attorney. He sent it in.

O

Just a little bit ago, and it shows that that they paid 7 500 for it back in 1929. We already know.

O

The building was existing in 1928 at the time and we know that rumple owned it back in 1928.

O

So I'm not sure how we get that information to you, but uh are we designating this based.

O

On a restaurant that was there for 30 years, are we basing this on the fact that the mitchell's.

O

Actually owned it or built it, and that that's what you're trying to save. I think all of that.

O

Okay, so you can, will this be the first restaurant ever designated his historic in monroe county.

O

Just based on the fact that that was a restaurant that was standing, I do not know that. Well, that's.

O

What we're asking? Because you said you had multiple reasons to designate this historic.

O

One of them was based on the mitchells. We believe that we have enough proof here to debunk that.

O

That it was a mitchell building, so then it sounds like you guys are designating this due.

O

To a boxman's restaurant, which has never took him to my best, my knowledge has never happened.

O

In monroe county before, based on someone's uh owning a restaurant in town tagging, that historic.

O

Is that correct? I did note that in in my previous presentation at the october 8th meeting, you know.

D

And I said that, that's a shame that maybe this is something that we we should recognize.

D

um Moving forward, did you guys understand our situation? I mean we, never it's not in a historic.

O

Community, it was never tagged historic, we go ahead and buy the building never has ever in the history.

O

Been a building tagged, historic based on a restaurant. So now you guys are tagging this.

O

Something new- that's never happened before without uh without us being able to know that before the.

O

Before our purchase- and we now believe that the building never belonged to or was never a mitchell.

O

Building so now it's it's on new grounds of being something that has never happened before and again.

O

We're not builders we're just two working guys in bloomington. We've never built a thing in our lives.

O

We never knew in a million years that we'd be the first time that this would ever happen to.

O

A a place based on a restaurant that happened to be here for 30 years, because there's so many.

O

Restaurants have been around for over 30 years to base one. That means that you're going to be.

O

Able to attack a ton of restaurants in bloomington, based on the fact that they've been here 30 years.

O

Yeah, I mean part of the point. Part of the point is the architecture.

G

So so the history of the building is important. The architecture is important.

G

And it's a lot that's on the books that protects buildings that have been architecturally.

G

Architecturally designated as at least contributing, so that's why that this.

G

All came up and, and that law is uh you know it is in effect, and it affects real estate.

O

Yeah, I understand that it's just we're we're in a new place where we've never been. We we agree. You.

O

Know I think chris durbaum was wanting us to to do something a couple meetings ago and we agreed.

O

That we would be willing to do that, but then you guys brought it to your. I think your attorney city.

O

Attorney and at that time your city attorney said it's all or nothing you either have to to tag it.

O

Historically, you have to let them tear it down, so that kind of took away what we are willing to.

O

To work with you guys on, because if it's all or none, if you guys are saying hey, we're willing.

O

To work with you guys on the front, we're willing to do we'd like to stay with the 1928.

O

But I think we, I think most of you guys all agreed that the inside of the building.

O

And the majority of the building was pretty bad shape and multiple times I heard somebody.

O

Many of you guys say if we could just do something with the front of the building, even.

O

Even boxman's, grandson or son said the same thing if we could say part of just a little part.

O

Of it that would be awesome, but he understood that the building in itself was in bad shape.

O

I'm sorry, I talked too long and I'm done, but josh is perfectly fine because we.

A

Really do want your input uh deb. You uh have some questions or comments.

A

Yeah uh yeah, sorry um a question probably for connor and those who know stuff better.

M

If um can a building be have built been built by one person.

M

Or one group like the mitchells and yet owned by another like the rebels.

A

Yes, that is a possibility the mitchells could have been. The rebels could have hired.

A

The mitchells to build the building that could have happened. I don't see that likely in this.

D

Case, though, because if the rebels merely hired the mitchells as construction hands, then why is the m.

D

On the top of the building connor, you said in the in the last meeting that boxman's.

C

Son said to him even stood for mortgage yeah, it was a joke. It was in jest that was.

D

In his email, he jokingly said that that that's something his dad joked about.

D

But then in the picture in the lower left-hand corner, there's obviously no in there.

C

Yeah it could have been painted. I don't know in that picture, I mean that's convenient.

D

So um yeah right sam, do you have any uh comments.

A

I have no comments all right. Any other commissioners want to bring up some points.

A

Okay, hearing, none wait, wait! Wait. I didn't. I don't think I had a comment yet all right. Chris um there.

F

Are many ways to do many things and before there was a local designation in the downtown the? um If.

F

I remember right: the princess theater uh worked with indiana landmarks and preserved their facade.

F

And that indiana landmark still preserves the facade of the indiana theater and everything.

F

Behind it, when that theater had burned was rebuilt, so even if this is heading to the council.

F

um Petitioner could work something out with indiana landmarks with a facade and that.

F

Facade could possibly be protected and it might influence how the how the council responds to an.

F

All-Or-Nothing you know ultimatum, which may not be the right answer for this building like again.

F

Rules force some things to happen that nobody really wants to like in our last.

F

In our last situation, there are ways to work around some of these things and that's.

F

I'm throwing that out there I'm going to support sending this to council, but there are ways to.

F

Get this still happening. Thank you. Thank you. Chris. uh I was into the same impression with the.

A

Theater as well so um hearing more objections and and our commission's in favor of moving.

A

Forward uh common council so um resolution to a recommendation for property to get historic.

A

Designation to the public council today, the hbc declares that the property located at 424.

A

424 and a half meets the following criteria for local designation refer to the staff report.

A

Which is the history of the property, the whatever? Obviously,.

A

Heritage or cultural characteristics of the city, state or nation, or is associated with a.

A

Person who plays a significant role in long-term state or national history number two architectural.

A

Embodies embodies distinguished characteristics of their architectural or engineering type or.

A

Is a work of a designer whose individual work has significantly influenced the development of the.

A

Community, or is the work of a designer of such prominence that such word gains its value from.

A

The designer's reputation or contains elements of design, detailed materials or craftsmanship, which.

A

Represents a significant innovation or contains any architectural style detail or other element.

A

In danger of being lost or owning its unique location, physical characteristics represents an.

A

Established infamous visual feature of the city, exemplifies, exemplifies the built environment.

A

In an area of history, characterized by distinct, distinctive architectural style,.

A

And we don't, I don't see and uh historical.

A

Yeah, uh consequently, the hpc recommends it's the sort of designation under title.

A

Eight for the bloomington municipal code to the common cancel with the attached map.

A

And we need that, as as a motion which I made d, can you call the raw to approve okay, sam desaler.

F

I'll second, if we need a second yeah sam, are you awake.

B

Sam desaler, no.

B

Susan dyer, yes,.

B

Jeff golden no.

B

Ebb hutton: yes,.

B

D

Leave one more time.

B

Yes, yeah. Yes, yes, okay, john saunders, yes, chris sterbum, yes, motion carries.

A

Resolution to place inner protection on a property that has been sent to the common council.

A

The recommendation of local historic designation today after a vote, the hpc recommends that the.

A

Common council locally designate the property of 424 424 and a half as a strength and places.

A

The property and our interim protection pending action by the county council under bmc 8.08.215.

A

I'm sorry 424 424 and a half south bluewood street.

K

No susan dyer, yes, jeff golden no deb hutton. Yes, lee san wise.

L

Yes, john saunders, yes, chris sterbaum, yes, motiongary520.

B

Thank you all right. Let's move on to near west side design, guidelines.

D

Yeah, so um I've been meeting uh and deb as well deb. Thank you so much for all these thursdays. It's.

D

The every other thursday we don't have a commission meeting we've been meeting with the.

D

Neighbors of the near west side, the design guideline committee and we've been working.

D

On these design guidelines for going on about 10 months, so we really came to a conclusion here and.

D

Then I wanted to get them polished up and sent to you guys that they're happy with them. um They.

D

Sent them out to the neighborhood to get feedback or objections. None was hurt, um so you know I think.

D

This this gets the green line unless uh one of you found something egregious as you were reviewing it.

D

Okay good to approve the guidelines. I have some issues. I'd like to talk through.

K

Sure um this looks to me to be the most restrictive set of guidelines we've seen since elm.

K

Heights um so there's there's a couple of places in here where I I'm afraid I marked them all up.

K

Some of the some of it's legibility issues, some of it's like the the.

K

um The the intention of the guidelines- there is one part in here that says that the guidelines.

K

Don't apply to any existing building uh underneath the purpose somewhere. Is that.

K

I I don't know if it's worth doing this here or if I should send these comments to connor.

K

And uh get them resolved that way, I don't know if it's worth taking up to.

K

The time of the entire um um commission- but there are a bunch of some of them- are nitpicky things.

K

But some of them are like issues like you know. Can you use the the the type of roofing that are.

K

um Approved or only metal and uh asphalt, shingle, which precludes doing sort of.

K

Additions in the back with a rolled roof stuff like that, so is that, okay, with these guys, have.

K

They sort of looked at that, um but I I I you know do do you want? How do you want to run this? I guess.

K

Is the question I think if you have any questions um about things like that, I could answer those.

K

All right, um so one larger sort of uh structural issue is that these reference, the the zoning.

K

And if the zoning changes, all the references in this document are become confusing. So what was the.

K

What was the impetus behind referencing specific uh current zoning? That's the zoning that the.

D

Design guideline is it's, r3 is what you're talking about it's. What the neighborhood is currently.

D

Zoned, um at least the majority of it there's some different zoning along kirkwood. That.

D

The guidelines do address. um I know the current proposal uh wants to rezone it r4 the committee.

D

Members were highly against the r4 zoning and wished that their districts would uh maintain.

D

The standards set forth in r3, which is why you see those zoning standards in the guidelines.

K

Right, I guess I guess that my big concern here is that these are neighborhood guidelines.

K

Which don't necessarily want to be referencing zoning? I think they should reference particular.

K

Areas within the neighborhood like they talk, they call out, you know the transit corridors and.

K

Wanting to treat those differently than the core of the neighborhood, but pulling out the zoning.

K

As a direct reference concerns me- and I don't know if it, if that resonates with anybody else,.

K

If it doesn't, then I'll not worry about it, it does with me and I withdraw my emotions.

A

Very good any more questions. Sam.

K

So I I marked this sucker up and uh I lost my markups because of a lovely electronic blah blah.

K

Blah so just a sort of a graphic concern on page nine of 46, um the legibility of what buildings are.

K

Notable what are outstanding, what are contributing, what are non-contributing the key is very legible.

K

The buildings themselves are outlined in a color, but the cl the colors are close enough- that it's.

K

Very difficult to tell what buildings are what on that, and so I think that could.

K

Lead to some confusion- and I think that's worth addressing before we approve them.

K

So so, sam, that's really kind of working within limitations as far as size.

D

And image quality and um if you look at the other guidelines, you know none.

D

Well, certainly, no other districts are as large as this one, so producing an image that can fit.

D

On a page and produce the quality you're speaking of uh has proven so far to be almost impossible.

D

You know I, I hope that the main point of the the map is so people understand where the district.

D

Is if they have questions about the individual ratings? That's something that you know they can.

D

uh Call me, or you know, go to the website. The city website has the table on there as well.

K

I I hear that I'm just saying, if you're, if you're not going to reference that information.

K

On the map pull it because it's frustrating looking at this thing, I get the boundary.

K

uh You know, there's it's it's just graphically uh confusing, and uh so I have issues with that.

A

You know sam, I think, you're, probably right. Maybe we should just table this for today and bring it.

A

Up at our next meeting, when you have a chance to get the documentation over the counter and to tap.

A

So they can review it as well. Okay, I'm happy to write this up and I'll, send it to uh connor and.

K

If you want to distribute it around, that's um I appreciate that. Thank you is that an agreement.

A

With the rest of our commissioners, I also find it's a good, an interesting argument that sam makes.

M

About not referencing current past or unknown future zoning, because things can change, but rather.

M

Referencing uh areas of their neighborhood that can will bypass any new zoning or pass zoning.

M

uh References- and so I I think, that's a good point, thanks sam chris yeah, they they could easily.

F

Just talk about compatibility and with the existing neighborhood.

F

And have the same effect and transcend the zoning which I understand is much of the core.

F

Much of the core is proposed to go to r4. I think nobody knows that yet, but that's the new map.

F

And it's just in contradiction to what the council did and what the public spoke to uh before in the.

F

Last meeting when the udo was adopted, but that's uh they could do it in a more graceful way. So I.

D

Just want to speak to why they did that. You know I was at all these meetings. I think one of the big.

D

Complaints that people have about guidelines is they're a little too subjective a little too.

D

Easy to manipulate and so for property owners. They like to see these hard numbers, like you know, six.

D

Foot side, setbacks, and this air, like that is is, is, is palatable for them and easy to understand.

D

When you take all that out of the guidelines, it leaves too much subjectivity up to the commission.

D

um Which is why the neighborhood one of these in there right. But I I hear what you're saying.

K

But there's none of those numbers in there. It references the zoning, but you don't say.

K

Oh, I want a six-foot fence I want to so. If you want those numbers put them directly in there.

F

A reminder: it's a conservation district, which means everybody can do about anything with.

F

Existing structures, but if you tear down something and want to build new, you face the guidelines.

K

That's not how they read to me so and that's another one of my concerns so I'll I'll write.

K

It up, I think, that's factual by by ordinance all right. I didn't hear what you said chris.

F

Did you hear what did you say you didn't hear what I said correct? Could you repeat it.

F

Yeah conservation district guidelines only apply to new construction yeah. It's a weakness of the.

F

Conservation district that you can add a hundred giant pumpkins to your house. If you want to.

F

um It only reviews new construction. After d, I mean, if you demolish, and.

F

You're going to build new, these guidelines will come into effect correct, but that's not.

K

How they read right now? Well, you don't see them on page 22.. They do have the setbacks.

A

On here for the r3 designation.

J

Can I say something real quick? Yes,.

J

I do agree that.

J

Well, I was, I read the document. I agree with sam about how the guidelines are presented.

J

As you read through.

J

It would seem that this applies to, of course, new construction. There's no question about that, but it.

J

Looks it feels that this is also for for anything else that you might be willing to do there.

J

So that's number one. The other is the one that I quickly went to see.

J

And check was the setbacks because it makes reference to r3 under the new udl.

J

And that is the side setbacks. The current udo is based on a lot that is 50 feet wide.

J

And if you in this case in the near west side, you have a lot that is under that number. There.

J

Is a small clause that says that you can reduce the side setback to four feet instead of six feet.

J

The same for as you go up, if you add another story, the udo wants you to do 10 feet.

J

And you can reduce that too to two feet.

J

One of the things that the udo lacks is that there is no.

J

Clear definition, when you have a story and a half what happens when you have that condition.

J

What do you do? It's not a full story, it's half a story, but in this case, for the near west side.

J

Has the farther you go to the west, the lots get narrower and narrower and narrower so.

J

It was going to be very hard to find those 50-foot wide lots, for the most part are 40s even 32s.

J

So there's a lot of those that doesn't comply with that. So it's very helpful to add a note here.

J

That the set the setback, the site setback should have that class too, when you are under 50 feet,.

J

Because you see it makes reference to that udl that we're talking about.

J

So what happens when that changes right so either they either? They establish their own setbacks.

J

And knowing that you know a good number of their lots are very narrow, so the well. The udo proposes.

J

It doesn't fit with this, so it's just very we. I feel that that's very important.

J

uh Those setbacks, uh it doesn't talk about um also that you have to align to the rest of the.

J

Houses that are on a medium block so that you're not too far back or too too much to the front.

J

Anyway, I just want to make sure that that's taking a note of that on the side setback. Okay, thank.

J

You thank you. I I think um I don't know how big analysis feels, but maybe we should just revisit.

A

This at our next meeting and give an opportunity for the comments to send over to founders.

A

And then we'll move from there again, but just a comment to answer some queries there that this.

M

Is just a conservation district which would only apply to new construction. However, that.

M

Came about um uh and conor can correct me if my if my impression is incorrect, but my impression.

M

Of the group coming up with the design with the guidelines, they knew that about conservation.

M

District, but they knew that in the time before, a vote for historic district would come about.

M

There would be people who would be doing additions and adjustments to their homes.

M

And therefore they wanted to put some guidelines in that. If someone looked and said, I don't have.

M

To but if I'm going to do new siding new door new front new offense, whatever they would have a few.

M

Guidelines, uh it couldn't be controlled, but it would be there as a gentle guideline for people.

M

In the meantime, before a historic district could or would come about, connor, that's exactly right.

D

Deb- and you know I initially resisted that idea- I kept repeating that like what sam was saying, this.

D

Is a conservation district we're only looking at new construction, but the more they talked.

D

About that I thought you know it made sense and it wouldn't hurt to put in the guidelines.

G

It needs to be clear in the guidelines that that's the case then, and how so jeff spelled out at the.

G

Beginning that there are two two different sets of commentary in these guidelines. It says one.

G

These are the required items and two: these are what we'd like to see. Also, I think there's it.

K

Can be that you're, anticipating the elevation of a conservation district to an historic district.

K

And that it makes some sense to you know: do your do your work beforehand, but I also agree with.

K

Jeff and that if it's a conservation district and no uh existing construction uh guidelines.

K

Apply then that's that I do agree. That's got to be clarified. So the only thing I'm missing from this.

D

Conversation and I understand what you're saying is maybe after the meeting you guys can let me.

D

Know this section, you know, doesn't belong in news construction because I'm just hearing a very va a.

D

Lot of bakery and I'd like some concrete um things to work with, that's what we told you I would do.

K

Right perfect, thank you. uh Karen duffy has a question yeah I just haven't. I just have.

P

A comment that we did use the language, um the two verbs we used were required. These things are.

P

Required and these other things are recommended um and we thought we made the distinction.

P

um Clearly to the neighborhood, but we did want to give them some um guidance of of what.

P

Kinds of things were more appropriate if they are putting up a fence or doing a porch or.

D

Okay, the whole format is just recommended and not recommended. That's the way. I guess I'm thinking.

G

Of more like a forward that says that, as as you're delving into the to the guidelines that it's clear.

G

You know that that's the case right. New construction requires some things and the.

M

Rest are recommended for um additions. Adjustments in the conservat context of conservation, district.

M

I think that's a good idea: jeff yeah, maybe a simple fix, but we do need a little more time. Thank.

A

You chris all right, we'll just bring it up at our next meeting. Thank you. Okay. Let's move on to.

A

Full business- and we don't have anything uh how about some commissioner comments.

F

Yeah, my only comment is the zoning change is going to be radical and it's going to go into the.

F

Single-Family west side uh core neighborhoods, in a way that the public generally did not approve of.

F

And that will go to plan commission and go to council and will it be on zoom will it will.

F

Anybody notice, you know that I just wanted to say it affects our historic neighborhoods.

A

Thank you, chris. Any more comments. Yeah. I have have one it's more about just putting some feelers out.

G

So I've been talking to steve wyatt um around the property on smith, avenue and prospect hill.

G

And they're having some issues they want, they have money allocated and they're ready to move.

G

Ahead on this house, which is in serious disrepair, it at least has a new roof. Now.

G

And so I'm what steve is asking is he's had a couple bids for.

G

The interior part not not particularly mechanicals but drywall and framing of the interior of the.

G

House I mean he's, had some he's had two bids that were very high um and it just won't work.

G

With their budget, so if you guys have any ideas around that, if you think of somebody that maybe.

G

um Understands the mission is willing to uh work with.

G

You know with bri to to make that a more affordable project, because they want to make.

G

An affordable housing project. You can forward that information to me or to steve so jeff.

A

I've been there that that probably needs a lot of a lot of work done to it.

A

Gosh, I'm not sure where we could find some contractors.

A

They can come up and do some stuff for us right right and that's the the difficult thing that's.

G

Going on now is not only are they in high demand materials or through the roof? Oh yeah.

G

So I'm just looking for ideas. I don't have a good answer to this question.

G

All the neighbors want that have to be done. Yeah, I know I'll take a look and see if we can help.

F

Any but it's hard to work for free and we we do want to be realistic about what can be done.

F

But I haven't given an estimate or looked at it in that way. Yet I was hoping I wouldn't have to.

A

Well, you are in the neighborhood chris yeah for the good of your marketability of your property.

A

Yeah and you do have some neighbors, who might even throw in some extra help. I hear it.

A

Do we have any public comments.

A

All right we're learning announcements. So let's go to.

A

I

I