Bloomington Common Council Deliberation Session with Historic Preservation Commission - October 16, 2025

The Bloomington Common Council held a deliberation session on October 16, 2025, to discuss historic preservation issues with members of the Bloomington Historic Preservation Commission (HPC). The meeting included a presentation by Program Manager Noah Sandweiss, a moderated discussion led by Councilmember Zulik, and public comment. Key topics included the design review process, repair costs, demolition procedures, and the need for better notification of historic district status.

Public Comments & Testimony

• Elizabeth Cox Ash (McDoel Gardens) shared her neighborhood's inclusive process for creating guidelines, with committees representing landlords, homeowners, and business owners. She emphasized that Bloomington's unique kit homes and stone-mason homes should be preserved to maintain the city's character.
• Richard Lewis (Prospect Hill) described his neighborhood's transition from a conservation district to a historic district, highlighting a committee of 15 volunteers who reached consensus on all guideline items. He praised the partnership between the HPC and homeowners and thanked the council for facilitating the conversation.
• Bill Bowles (Near West Side) noted his neighborhood's guidelines were designed to avoid making preservation unaffordable, and that historic designation has helped protect affordable housing from speculative development.
• Wendy Grist (Elm Heights) expressed support for historic designation as a way to slow rental creep and preserve smaller, affordable homes. She raised concerns about a rental agency replacing original windows without permits in a historic home.
• Christopher Emgie (Sunny Slope) cautioned that not all architecture is equally valuable and that some trade-offs may be necessary for growth. He suggested preserving representative examples of architectural styles rather than every building.
• Jeff Richardson (Elm Heights) argued that preservation and affordable housing are not mutually exclusive, citing his own conversion of a basement into a studio apartment. He supported intervention to prevent neglect of older homes.
• John Butler (potential Cottage Grove conservation district) explained that property owners seek historic designation for stability against demolition. He noted that tear-downs are replacing affordable units with much more expensive ones, exacerbating the housing crisis.
• Matt Sutton (former HPC member) identified four issues: (1) the process for forming a neighborhood group to request designation is vague; (2) cost and affordability questions are outside HPC expertise; (3) the demolition delay process offers no middle ground between approval and designation; (4) the code lacks incentives ("no carrot").
• James Ford (Cottage Grove) asked how the city expects guidelines to treat out-of-town owners, LLCs, and short-term renters who may not be invested in the neighborhood.
• Tonda Radowan (uncategorized neighborhood) noted that many renters are not students, and that out-of-town landlords often neglect repairs while converting homes to Airbnbs, destabilizing neighborhoods.

Discussion Items

• Repairs and Code Impact: Commissioners explained that the state code requires historic buildings to be maintained to prevent loss of historic material, but ordinary repairs that do not conspicuously change appearance are allowed. The HPC aims to process certificates of appropriateness (COAs) quickly, meeting twice a month (except November and December). Staff can review minor alterations; four categories (demolition, moving buildings, additions, new construction) require commission review by state law.
• District Standards: Each historic district writes its own guidelines, which are ratified by the HPC. This decentralized approach allows neighborhoods to tailor rules. Elm Heights has more restrictive guidelines; McDoel Gardens has lighter rules. The commission encourages neighborhoods to rewrite guidelines if they become onerous, but noted that the process for initiating rewrites is not always clearly defined. Commissioner DeSeller stated that the HPC leaves guideline writing to neighborhoods, with commissioners serving as advisors to ensure clarity and legality.
• Economic Hardship: Councilmembers asked whether the defined term "economic hardship" is ever applied. Commissioner Cross recalled three instances where cost was considered; in one case an allowance was made, in another it was not. Commissioner Campbell added that cost is only one factor; the commission gives more latitude for contributing structures versus outstanding ones. The lack of city incentives was noted as a gap.
• Demolition and Neglect: Commissioners expressed concern about the high volume of demolition requests (4-5 per meeting, nearly all approved). The demolition delay process only offers two outcomes: permit demolition or refer the property to the council for possible designation. There is no middle option. Commissioner DeSeller stated that neglect leading to demolition is a major issue, and the commission feels it lacks tools to intervene. Commissioner Duffy noted that many new demolition applications are for full demolition due to real estate pressure. New commissioner Deusner said this is her least favorite part of the job, as small, character-rich homes disappear.
• Notification of Historic Status: Commissioner Cross proposed a formal system to inform buyers at the time of sale that their property is in a historic district, so ignorance is no longer an excuse. Sandweiss concurred and noted that 90% of COAs are approved, indicating most applicants comply after learning the rules.
• Commissioner Qualifications and Appointments: Commissioner Campbell read the ordinance requirement that members have demonstrated expertise in historic preservation disciplines. He urged the council to ensure qualified appointments, and Commissioner DeSeller asked for faster appointments to achieve a full slate and avoid quorum issues.
• Affordable Housing Connection: Several commissioners noted that historic preservation often aligns with affordable housing goals, as older, smaller homes provide entry-level housing. Commissioner Deusner highlighted the tension between zoning allowing higher-density development and the loss of these homes.

Key Outcomes

• Councilmember Zulik listed four action items from the discussion: (1) develop a more consistent approach for reporting at-risk houses (e.g., a U-Report option on city website); (2) create an alternative to the demolition delay process beyond full approval or council designation; (3) establish a formalized system to inform potential homebuyers of historic district status; (4) press the mayor to appoint qualified voting members promptly.
• The HPC invited council members to attend their meetings (second and fourth Thursday at 5 p.m.) to observe the process.
• Councilmember Rallo asked for specific zoning code concerns that might affect historic preservation and affordability, to be shared via email for a future discussion.
• Councilmember Munt Smith noted the need to include long-term renters and others who live in neighborhoods but may not be property owners in the guideline process, and suggested engaging the city's neighborhood liaisons.
• No formal votes were taken; the session was an information-sharing and deliberation meeting.