[{"_1":2,"_123":-5,"_124":-5},"loaderData",{"_3":4,"_26":27},"root",{"_5":6,"_17":10,"_18":19,"_20":21,"_22":10,"_23":-5,"_24":-5,"_25":10},"user",{"_7":8,"_9":10,"_11":10,"_12":-5,"_13":-5,"_14":15,"_16":-5},"roles",[],"isAuthenticated",false,"isPremium","planName","subscriptionStatus","featureFlags",{},"insightsBudget","isDevelopmentHost","userPreferences",{},"recaptchaSiteKey","6LcvOJcUAAAAAHsB-gPGfGktcRlKpH7OTIU_dMTD","isImpersonating","impersonation","affiliateStatus","isFreedomPortal","routes/v2/article/layout",{"_28":29,"_30":31},"notFound",true,"relatedArticles",[32,75,87,99,111],{"_33":34,"_35":36,"_37":38,"_39":40,"_41":42,"_43":44,"_45":46,"_47":48,"_49":50,"_51":52,"_53":54,"_55":56,"_57":58,"_59":60,"_61":62,"_63":64,"_65":66,"_67":68,"_69":70,"_71":68,"_72":73,"_74":73},"mediaId",6150099,"mediaKeyId","5509455-3cad2a4450cd2832186b579f7cfabd28","parentId",5509455,"title","Board restores stricter review for historic wood window changes, adopts updated staff language","audioSeconds",1136,"startMs",6061000,"endMs",7197000,"viewUrl","/Search/View?dp=1&key=5509455-3cad2a4450cd2832186b579f7cfabd28&start=6061&end=7197","thumbnailUrl","https://assets.pipeline.soar.com/5509455-3cad2a4450cd2832186b579f7cfabd28/thumbnail_6061000.jpg","articleUrl","/articles/6150099/Madison-City/Jefferson-County/Indiana/Board-restores-stricter-review-for-historic-wood-window-changes-adopts-updated-staff-language","mediaUrl","https://secure.pipeline.soar.com/6150099-eae98ee18a08f07a27284b1afb683ebc/orig.mp4?Expires=1776156262&Signature=CuLXVtwq8svatRiOZCcEmHBtN8bnH0-wWD4oiIYZNYVph2z~HIst880qSTDcFP163Zk5un93RZv2AIjMTmHaw88fi6BQG8LhAlksVKDLs7iGlqVR0XLSv~OFz8qRTPg0kwDSr0WFiv95AgRh6MrKWgkZm~rwnvgb6Lemw4KNghCVU5mAc-JDpiiw81zlEYf0-ttYVfiQnTxR5jc2C~5JAlqXQ7LUDGMfIymYd98626wKCr~JuYSA~f15rQg4vFby1Jg4WxqqogFQ3yUAqdnyTT5zqsHMa8p0SGnAIcODKzxIj1RtgSQj1Ap7vlbJs3iyYkfaTWcEtNV85EILm8uRIg__&Key-Pair-Id=KUT5TJCACFTXG","author","City Council of Madison IN","date","2025-07-28T23:40:36Z","article","The Madison Historic District Board of Review voted to adopt revised language clarifying how window replacement applications are reviewed and to emphasize board review for historic wood windows. The action was prompted by recent community concern about removal of older windows and by staff proposals to allow limited staff review in narrow safety cases.

Board member Happy Smith and other members proposed language that would require board review for removal and replacement of windows considered “historic” (defined in the proposal as bare or painted wood windows with traditional glass and true‑divided lights or equivalent historic character). Staff proposed an amendment to allow staff to approve replacement in narrowly defined safety or egress situations and to allow replacement where vinyl or aluminum windows already existed on a building and the new windows match existing materials and openings.

During discussion members urged clearer criteria and documentation for staff approvals, suggested adding cut‑sheets in applications, and asked that staff present an itemized packet of staff‑approved window projects in advance of meetings so the board can monitor outcomes. Board members ultimately approved the revised language as presented by staff after deleting a specific reference to building‑inspector‑only determinations; the board asked staff to provide monthly summaries of staff‑handled window approvals to the board packet.

Board members said the aim is to preserve the district’s significant wood windows while creating a practical pathway for safety‑driven replacements and for already‑altered façades. The board’s action restores clearer oversight by the HDBR over changes to windows judged to be historically significant.","mediaType","Video","parentTitle","Historic District Board of Review - July 28, 2025","oneSentenceSummary","After extended discussion, the Madison Historic District Board of Review approved revised language clarifying when staff may approve window replacements and affirmed the board’s role in reviewing changes to historic wood windows.","taxTitle","Madison City, Jefferson County, Indiana","taxId",52166,"location","headline","","shortSummary",{"_33":76,"_35":36,"_37":38,"_39":77,"_41":78,"_43":79,"_45":80,"_47":81,"_49":82,"_51":83,"_53":84,"_55":56,"_57":58,"_59":85,"_61":62,"_63":64,"_65":86,"_67":68,"_69":70,"_71":68,"_72":73,"_74":73},6150103,"Board retroactively approves porch/roof repairs at 502 West Second after applicant completed work",782,5266000,6048000,"/Search/View?dp=1&key=5509455-3cad2a4450cd2832186b579f7cfabd28&start=5266&end=6048","https://assets.pipeline.soar.com/5509455-3cad2a4450cd2832186b579f7cfabd28/thumbnail_5266000.jpg","/articles/6150103/Madison-City/Jefferson-County/Indiana/Board-retroactively-approves-porchroof-repairs-at-502-West-Second-after-applicant-completed-work","https://secure.pipeline.soar.com/6150103-cca096a7196f45e6c6183852198efdd6/orig.mp4?Expires=1776156262&Signature=Qd3UyjFkhBcqTmXGAR5j8D8g5WKcClbvEKVk-qC4BGVEHmnFgOYpRHUQy-7xOKwu2LSlpFTPBv3synUkUMMgsObyfYms-GBorkmfcIVWwqwLQDbrxCyVSAjyv~Ub2wYiKiYCBWLgl4Y~9UmRYVv5-sLYChxcn4inbYbwAaEGw26KZX3-egTeQw42TUzlKxZ3LzVsci6WLFlRzIph3sIUc73SxRgtZwEQMDzeuaIFRyqV7p-CkZdDDMXRvM49a-Qma4IfXTWVRxUPNsvTQdrMaNPmhRhsmvEB8UKtLcXyja~KpAtpRfumR257zv9y9N-Chc1sAzAdAZayW6Zx2FUmyw__&Key-Pair-Id=KUT5TJCACFTXG","The Madison Historic District Board of Review granted a certificate of appropriateness for work recently completed at 502 West Second Street, a contributing Second Empire building, after reviewing the repairs and roof‑pitch change the owner reported were necessary to address rot and water infiltration.

Owner Pat Heights told the board he contracted work to remove decayed porch elements and to change the porch roof pitch after discovering severe rot; the owner said he had checked informally with contractors before proceeding. Staff presented Sanborn map evidence showing the flat‑top porch was not original to the 1875 house. Board members inspected photographs and site observations and several said the finished work represented an improvement in water management and overall condition.

While some board members said details of traditional profiles and gutter connections were lost in the repair process, the board balanced that against the completed nature of the work and the public‑safety and stabilization benefits. After discussion the board moved and seconded a motion to grant a certificate of appropriateness for the completed repairs; roll call returned a majority in favor and staff told the owner to collect permit paperwork.

Board members reminded the owner and the public that consulting staff and the board before starting visible exterior work on contributing structures is the preferred process; they recommended applicants contact staff early to avoid post‑fact approvals.","The board approved a certificate of appropriateness for repairs and roof‑pitch changes at 502 West Second Street after the owner completed the work, noting the house is a contributing Second Empire structure and that the work improved water management.",{"_33":88,"_35":36,"_37":38,"_39":89,"_41":90,"_43":91,"_45":92,"_47":93,"_49":94,"_51":95,"_53":96,"_55":56,"_57":58,"_59":97,"_61":62,"_63":64,"_65":98,"_67":68,"_69":70,"_71":68,"_72":73,"_74":73},6150109,"Board approves new porch and slightly larger outbuilding at 124 Wall Street",608,4536000,5144000,"/Search/View?dp=1&key=5509455-3cad2a4450cd2832186b579f7cfabd28&start=4536&end=5144","https://assets.pipeline.soar.com/5509455-3cad2a4450cd2832186b579f7cfabd28/thumbnail_4536000.jpg","/articles/6150109/Madison-City/Jefferson-County/Indiana/Board-approves-new-porch-and-slightly-larger-outbuilding-at-124-Wall-Street","https://secure.pipeline.soar.com/6150109-2110268b58bab5d6b1843e996ab241af/orig.mp4?Expires=1776156262&Signature=UhwgGqlQLp4wt2JVGP9IZTcDhkZwOI39eSq3AvEn1dX~IncXIZYWjnkA3YEnRleHuhqqxHmrG60oXZdM3sCg8cAH8dChXK0SefyGf3mHSO83gBhlYAL--1FYmn0RiZhxdTYi0yqFJrvuqcwgF-ZtGTu16H~40SqojL4Zt9zhW3k2wfpdU8I3Gg~OQExn-LV2xiaUExpYjZDOwDZSVlnEUhxksaJH6urK7Kt1PmHJw0LIbkdqHPxe~EKb2p-ame9dbiacBuohxI2Rwr5ruzto4FG8l3HhZskD2K9jkOHg7yUpm5a-MczBNQXdXBQdVW3xk6YFDlvs9FsovhMTcVG91g__&Key-Pair-Id=KUT5TJCACFTXG","The Madison Historic District Board of Review granted a certificate of appropriateness for work at 124 Wall Street that replaces a deteriorated 10x10 shed with a 10x14 outbuilding and adds a full‑width front porch. The structure is non‑contributing (built 1985), and members noted that guidelines are applied less strictly for non‑contributing properties but still recommended designs that harmonize with nearby historic houses.

The applicant told the board the shed was in disrepair and the porch was intended to improve the property’s aesthetics. Board discussion addressed railing style, materials and exposed fasteners. Some members said the proposed spindles and pressure‑treated materials were acceptable on this non‑contributing building; others urged paintable or more historic‑looking options. Staff confirmed the proposed project met the outbuilding and porch sections of the guidelines for a non‑contributing structure.

On roll call the motion to grant a certificate of appropriateness for the porch and the outbuilding passed. The applicant was told to pick up permit paperwork from the city.","A non‑contributing property at 124 Wall Street received board approval to replace a deteriorated shed with a slightly larger outbuilding and to add a full‑width front porch; members treated the project more flexibly because the structure is non‑contributing.",{"_33":100,"_35":36,"_37":38,"_39":101,"_41":102,"_43":103,"_45":104,"_47":105,"_49":106,"_51":107,"_53":108,"_55":56,"_57":58,"_59":109,"_61":62,"_63":64,"_65":110,"_67":68,"_69":70,"_71":68,"_72":73,"_74":73},6150114,"Board declines to approve second‑story deck at 126 Wall Street; applicant told to revise",1476,2982000,4458000,"/Search/View?dp=1&key=5509455-3cad2a4450cd2832186b579f7cfabd28&start=2982&end=4458","https://assets.pipeline.soar.com/5509455-3cad2a4450cd2832186b579f7cfabd28/thumbnail_2982000.jpg","/articles/6150114/Madison-City/Jefferson-County/Indiana/Board-declines-to-approve-secondstory-deck-at-126-Wall-Street-applicant-told-to-revise","https://secure.pipeline.soar.com/6150114-6847d13246ef9e2f33a22361da25c84b/orig.mp4?Expires=1776156262&Signature=MYEqQqRt-1E7TeSkunMiQ20VyYM4I~Ui1F~f302gS826rrKI1Sd3Ma9PoEhEQikziuavdpQmhkpYKoKSnnTKwPzZIofh6Mab1WPbTh0eGuHHCV0hnK7ahVL0SxcwFNzpOIpB~339K8sA1xBZNIWVp-IkT8uTUn5mH71isyxh4hAiuOGkuSKSmaZBzSEZCGYCmRjK-tkF-x5eQAfJcIHw0m8oivhHxHYmDC5d91WjzdHEcgQGeadXxizCpzSASOoSj5NywpOmUPrLoGdaV5c-Tnc1UHmFvLeH~u7xo0Kf0AW9Xm6hZqY8Piwp6nUZFP1wQUWWD6eFhHgR6gCOKBxXQQ__&Key-Pair-Id=KUT5TJCACFTXG","The Madison Historic District Board of Review did not approve a certificate of appropriateness for a proposed second‑story walkout deck at 126 Wall Street, citing guideline language that discourages decks visible from public rights of way and that warns against adding new doors where none existed historically.

The applicant, Mike Estes, proposed a second‑floor deck and a new door opening above an existing porch. Staff and board members noted section 27 of the district guidelines, which advises locating decks on rear or side elevations to preserve historic streetscapes, and section 9.6, which discourages adding doors where none previously existed. Several board members and written public comment argued that the materials proposed — pressure‑treated decking and metal spindles — would not meet the porch guidelines unless they were reworked as a historically appropriate porch with painted materials and turned wood spindles.

Board members discussed whether the work could be considered a “porch” rather than a “deck”; several said that if the applicant revised materials and detailing (painted members, enclosed porch ceiling, covered band boards and no exposed fasteners), staff and the board could find a path to approval. Staff also offered to research historic evidence such as Sanborn maps to determine whether historic second‑floor openings previously existed at the address; that evidence could change the application’s classification.

The applicant declined to table the application and asked for a vote on the submitted plan. The board moved to deny the application based on the findings; after roll call the motion to deny did not carry. The board recorded that the application as submitted did not meet guidelines for decks and doors on primary elevations and recommended the applicant work with staff to resubmit with revised materials and documentation.","An application by Mike Estes for a second‑story walkout deck at 126 Wall Street did not receive board approval after members cited guidelines that discourage new visible decks and new door openings on primary facades.",{"_33":112,"_35":36,"_37":38,"_39":113,"_41":114,"_43":115,"_45":116,"_47":117,"_49":118,"_51":119,"_53":120,"_55":56,"_57":58,"_59":121,"_61":62,"_63":64,"_65":122,"_67":68,"_69":70,"_71":68,"_72":73,"_74":73},6150119,"Madison board approves brick house and attached garage at 116 Elm Street",2673,262000,2935000,"/Search/View?dp=1&key=5509455-3cad2a4450cd2832186b579f7cfabd28&start=262&end=2935","https://assets.pipeline.soar.com/5509455-3cad2a4450cd2832186b579f7cfabd28/thumbnail_262000.jpg","/articles/6150119/Madison-City/Jefferson-County/Indiana/Madison-board-approves-brick-house-and-attached-garage-at-116-Elm-Street","https://secure.pipeline.soar.com/6150119-1754ed18b01b934968d5082c0cd83fa7/orig.mp4?Expires=1776156262&Signature=L3QAS3KeINFtOGY3GeUesy9HeKUudJjfhDKp077u~BAa8Ht7fBbmFtASpULsE1cpx4HGsD1VpJ0389BT5X3lhOLHltivFUqhQ-EvOQPeqjTXisn49-LuV4gMWRqpk1rhIbkg9bua5lEvt1JO-qrWkP9lYevs88cqDBqzwd5eFk-drG8cwiGQ6EdG7DFtuFVWYL2CVRTN9OJR2T8-Nn~QtqbiPYIufiaG-WEIRG0-CGqgxBi4Q17H6r~4DP7VI1qeOhop6spUHJgQNOr5gJyqkZ7YlofnKtPbCA8HBmQ-1mrgBzjge5EX7OK9eW8BaQCfKx7-g7GnH3g~uH5WgOsONA__&Key-Pair-Id=KUT5TJCACFTXG","The Madison Historic District Board of Review on a July 2025 meeting approved a certificate of appropriateness for new construction at 116 Elm Street after the applicant revised plans to use brick and stone and provided material details requested by the board. The vote followed extended discussion about orientation, setbacks and massing for the corner lot and a late rendering submitted at the meeting.

The board approved the application by motion that specified exterior materials: brick on all four elevations, a stone foundation, LP Smart siding for soffits/rake/gutter boards where needed, architectural asphalt shingles for the roof, aluminum-clad windows with simulated divided lights (SDLs), solid wood entry doors, wood porch columns and a poured concrete porch slab. The approval included the final rendering presented at the meeting.

Board members and the applicant emphasized the site’s sensitivity: the lot is within Madison’s National Historic Landmark District and sits across from the Lanier Mansion. The applicant, speaking for the owner, said the family prefers brick and stone and had adjusted a pre‑existing off‑the‑shelf plan after reviewing the district guidelines. The board required the approval to reference the submitted exterior-materials list and the rendering introduced at the meeting so inspectors and contractors can verify compliance.

Members pressed the applicant for specifics about foundation exposure (stone was proposed where grade drops), dormer materials (applicant said possibly different cladding only on a dormer), window type (aluminum‑clad with SDLs), roofing (architectural shingles), and front‑porch construction (poured concrete with wood columns). The applicant said the house footprint and setbacks were set to align with adjacent corner properties and explained sewer and easement constraints that influenced garage placement and orientation.

Some board members and a written commenter urged stricter adherence to multiple guideline sections that address orientation, massing, and outbuildings on corner lots. The board acknowledged those concerns but said the applicant’s switch from vertical siding to brick and the submitted details reduced the number and severity of guideline conflicts. One board member noted that while new construction rarely meets every guideline, the presented changes made the proposal acceptable.

The formal motion to grant a certificate of appropriateness named the owner as Sherry Emlen and listed required materials and the rendering submitted that day. On roll call the majority voted in favor; one member recorded a dissenting vote. The board directed staff to include the adopted materials list and the final rendering in the permit packet to guide the building inspector and contractor.

The owner’s representative was told the permit paperwork would be available from the city the next day.","The Madison Historic District Board of Review granted a certificate of appropriateness for new construction at 116 Elm Street after the applicant changed siding to brick and agreed to materials the board requested.","actionData","errors"]

Article not found

Board restores stricter review for historic wood window changes, adopts updated staff language

Board retroactively approves porch/roof repairs at 502 West Second after applicant completed work

Board approves new porch and slightly larger outbuilding at 124 Wall Street

Board declines to approve second‑story deck at 126 Wall Street; applicant told to revise

Madison board approves brick house and attached garage at 116 Elm Street