uReport

City of Bloomington, Indiana

Search

Fields to display

Search Results: (9)

open #212899

Nuisance Lights

1203 S Palmer AVE

Case Date:
8/5/2026

Extremely bright light with exposed and unguarded element left on 24/7. Illuminates rooms in neighboring homes at night.

open #213314

Trash

1860 S Walnut ST

Case Date:
8/21/2026

I am requesting an inspection of the property at 1800 S. Walnut Street, Bloomington, Indiana, where approximately 63 used/discarded tires are currently being stored outdoors on the grassy area behind the automotive repair facility. The tires are being stored uncovered and directly on the ground/grass, with numerous tires positioned open-side-up. Several tires are stacked together while others are scattered individually around the area. Based on their condition and the manner in which they are being stored, I am concerned that these may constitute discarded or waste tires rather than properly stored usable tire inventory. I am particularly concerned about the potential for the tires to collect standing rainwater. The open tires can act as containers for water and potentially create breeding habitat for mosquitoes and other disease vectors. The tire pile is also located immediately adjacent to a wooded/vegetated area and a creek/drainage corridor, which raises additional concerns about rodents, insects, snakes, and other wildlife using the tire pile for shelter or nesting. The accumulation is also located very close to neighboring business property and appears to be immediately adjacent to the creek/drainage area. I am requesting that the City determine whether the storage area complies with the Bloomington UDO provisions governing vehicle-repair uses and outdoor storage of discarded tires/materials, as well as any applicable riparian-buffer, drainage, stormwater, floodplain, or environmental requirements. I am also requesting that the City evaluate whether the manner in which these tires are being stored creates a nuisance, fire hazard, mosquito/vector concern, or other health or environmental concern, and whether the property owner/operator is required to remove, relocate, cover, or otherwise properly manage the tires. I have photographs documenting the current condition and location of the tire accumulation. I am not asking the City to assume that the tires are waste tires; I am requesting that the appropriate department inspect the property and make that determination based on the applicable Bloomington and Indiana requirements. Thank you for investigating this matter.

open #213834

Temporary Signage w/o permit

2211 E Covenanter DR

Case Date:
9/5/2026

'Faded Lawns' sign in the grass, possibly in the ROW.

open #212606

Business

300 W Country Club DR

Case Date:
7/24/2026

Follow up to report # 211915 Thank you for reviewing my report. I appreciate the time Planning and BPD took to look into my concerns. I understand BPD's explanation that noise from vehicles operating at a business is not something they can cite as an ordinance violation. However, I don't believe that fully addressed the questions raised in my original report. I understand the property dates back to 1980 and that there may not be an approved site plan on file. However, if the intensity or nature of the business's operations has changed significantly since that time—particularly with increased semi-truck traffic, early morning unloading activities, or the regular use of residential neighborhood entrances—I was wondering whether those changes would require any additional review, approvals, or compliance with current zoning or development standards. I also noticed my question regarding truck circulation was not addressed. Specifically, are semi-trucks permitted to routinely access the property through the Broadview neighborhood entrances, or are they expected to use the primary entrance on Country Club Drive? If there is no site plan, is there another document or approval that governs truck access and circulation for the property? I recognize that businesses have a right to operate and that some level of noise is expected. My concern is not with the existence of the business itself, but whether its current operations and traffic patterns remain consistent with applicable City regulations and whether there are reasonable ways to reduce the impact on the surrounding residential neighborhood. I would appreciate any clarification you can provide regarding these questions. Thank you again for your time.

open #213623

Temporary Signage w/o permit

3535 W 3rd ST

Case Date:
8/30/2026

Tropical smoothie cafe signs at multiple intersections in ROW and feather flag display

open #213483

Sidewalk Requests

3962 E 10th ST

Case Date:
8/26/2026

Google Maps believes E 10th St is entirely walkable, but in fact there is a stretch from the intersection at N Smith until the sidewalk starts at Fountain Park Apartments without any sidewalk. It is not safe to walk, and it also means many directions given online are dangerous.

open #212982

Nuisance Lights

425 E Wylie ST

Case Date:
8/10/2026

Porch light is bright, piercing bulb that casts shadows through the windows of neighboring properties. Tenants (who change most years) tend to leave it on for days/weeks at a time. The fixture is unshielded glass and the bulb sits below that fixture anyway.

open #212497

Parking on Unimproved Surface

702 W 4th ST

Case Date:
7/18/2026

White non operational BMW parked on grass behind house off of Fairview.

open #208993

Biking & Walking

Case Date:
3/4/2026

Gravel overflowing from tree plot into 7-line and sidewalk. This photo is at the parking lot for 215 N Washington St, but the problem exists along the whole block between walnut and washington. This is my 3rd report of this exact problem. Most recently, #205849. One of the property managers keeps adding more gravel even though it has been overflowing for several years already. The mythical street sweeping did not even remove the gravel already in the 7 line! It certainly cannot do anything about the continuin flow of gravel. Historical photos on google street view show that the properties on the eastern half of the block did not used to have loose gravel -- this is a new development and not grandfathered in. Regardless of what the original zoning mistake was, OVERFLOWING WAS NEVER AUTHORIZED. and: IF PLANNING CANNOT DO ANYTHING ABOUT THIS, ENGINEERING AND PW HAVE AN AFFIRMATIVE DUTY TO MAINTAIN A SAFE ROW REGARDLESS OF THE FAILURES OF P&T. thanks!