Board of Zoning Appeals Division I Meeting - March 5, 2019
STREAMING COPY IN PREPARATION — RECORDING AVAILABLE FROM THE ORIGINAL SOURCE
Board of Zoning Appeals Division I Meeting - March 5, 2019
The Board of Zoning Appeals Division I met on March 5, 2019, at 6:15 PM with Chair Joanna Taft and members Roderick Bohanan, Peter Hanscom, and Brian Robinson (four members present). Legal counsel Leonette Pierce and staff from the Division of Planning were in attendance. The board heard several special requests, expedited cases, and regular docket items, including variances for a cell tower, a tattoo parlor, a duplex, and a garage.
Consent Calendar
- Withdrawals: Petition 2018-DV1-058 (withdrawn by petitioner); Petition 2019-DV1-001 (withdrawn).
- Continuances:
- 2019-SE-1001 (cell tower) – petitioner requested continuance due to new material; denied, case heard (see below).
- 2018-UV-1024 – continued to April 2, 2019, without notice (staff no objection).
- 2018-DV-1044 – continued to April 2, 2019, with new notice.
- 2018-DV-1047 – continued to May 14, 2019, without notice (staff noted only one more continuance allowed).
- 2018-UV-1045 – continued to April 2, 2019, due to lack of full board and remonstrator opposition.
- 2019-SE-1002 – continued to April 2, 2019.
- 2019-SE-1003 – continued to April 2, 2019.
- 2018-DV-1055 – continued to April 2, 2019, without notice.
- Waivers of Notice:
- 2018-DV-1056 – six-day waiver granted.
- 2018-DV-1061 – one-day waiver granted.
Public Comments & Testimony
- 2019-SE-1001 (cell tower): Richard Clayton (2416 E. Edgewood Ave) objected, arguing the Perry Township Multi-School Building Corporation lacked authority to lease land, that Verizon’s own insurance excludes radiofrequency pollution, and that alternative sites exist. Michael Thomas (2746 E. Edgewood Ave) raised property value concerns, citing a certified appraisal predicting 5–20% depreciation.
- 2019-DV-1006 (tattoo parlor): Eric Hoagland (6202 Sheridan Ave) opposed, claiming he received no hearing notice, that the statute strictly requires 1,000-foot separation from residential districts, and that the proposed use would lower property values. He noted a prior attempt to place a tattoo parlor nearby and that he had vocally objected.
- 2019-DV-1007 (fire-damage rebuild): Jen (2027 Wellcock St) opposed reconstruction, citing a fire in April 2018 that damaged over 20 homes because fire trucks could not navigate the narrow streets. She argued rebuilding would perpetuate fire risk.
Discussion Items
- 2019-SE-1001 – Verizon Wireless 130-foot monopole tower at 2215 Country Club Road (Perry Township school property): Petitioner David Pike presented expert reports on structural safety, radio frequency need (capacity overload in the area), and property valuation. Staff recommended approval, noting all local requirements met. Remonstrators challenged authority and need. Board approved 4-0.
- 2018-UV-1045 – Bus company variance: Petitioner requested continuance due to only four board members and split neighborhood support. Remonstrators (Eagledale Neighborhood Association) objected, stating they had taken time off work. Board granted continuance to April 2, 2019.
- 2018-DV-1061 – Garage variance at 606 Weghurst St: Petitioner Bob Abbott explained the garage was built inadvertently too close (1.5 ft side setback vs. 3 ft required). Neighbor Robert Roller and Bates Hendrix Neighborhood Association supported after agreement. Staff recommended denial citing drainage and maintenance concerns. Board approved 4-0.
- 2018-UV-1048 – Duplex at 5670 N. College Ave: Petitioner Mark Demerley argued the lot (40 ft wide, 9,670 sq ft) is similar to nearby duplex lots and has neighborhood and councilwoman support. Staff recommended denial, citing lot width deficiency and open space reduction (65% vs. 70% required), and that a single-family dwelling could be built without variance. Board approved 3-1 (Bohanan dissented).
- 2019-DV-1006 – Tattoo parlor at 6127 E. Washington St: Petitioner Brent Schlemmer described a private, appointment-only studio with low walk-in traffic, noting 20+ supporter signatures from within 1,000 ft. Staff recommended denial because lack of a tenant is not a practical difficulty. Board denied 1-3 (Bohanan voted yes; Hanscom, Robinson, Taft no).
- 2019-DV-1007 – Rebuild of fire-damaged home at 2023 Wellcock St: Petitioner Amanda Fow Smith requested variance to rebuild on existing foundation with reduced side setbacks (6 ft and 7.5 ft vs. 10 ft required). Remonstrator Jen opposed due to fire safety and narrow streets. Staff recommended approval, noting the new footprint is smaller. Board approved 4-0 with condition of fire-rated walls.
- Expedited Cases (approved unanimously):
- 2018-DV-1056 (sunroom replacement with easement encroachment) – approved.
- 2019-DV-1004 (signs for warehouse) – approved.
- 2019-DV-1005 (432 sq ft dwelling with reduced setbacks) – approved.
- 2018-DV-1057 (window signs and dumpster enclosure – withdrawn window sign portion) – approved.
Key Outcomes
- 2019-SE-1001 – Approved (4-0) for wireless communications tower with conditions.
- 2018-DV-1061 – Approved (4-0) for garage setback variance.
- 2018-UV-1048 – Approved (3-1) for duplex with reduced open space; board to adopt findings of fact.
- 2019-DV-1006 – Denied (1-3) for tattoo parlor; board to adopt findings of fact.
- 2019-DV-1007 – Approved (4-0) for fire-damage home rebuild with fire-rated wall condition.
- All expedited cases approved as noted.
- Several continuances granted as detailed above.
- Board adjourned after approving findings of fact for previously continued cases.
Meeting Transcript
This is a public hearing of the Metropolitan Board of Zoning Appeals, Division 1. I'm Joanna Taft, Chairperson of Division One. Other board members present to my left is Roderick Bohanan. To my right, Peter Hanscom and Brian Robinson. Legal counsel for the board today is Leonette Pierce. Recording these proceedings today is Ron Hampton. Staff members present today from the Division of Planning are Heather Stefan, Senior Board Specialist and Secretary to the Board. Larry Callaway, Principal Planner 2, Robert Eulenhague, Senior Planner, Paige Story, Senior Planner. Keith Holdswork is the current planning administrator. The Board has copies of the zoning ordinances that will be incorporated by reference into the record of each case heard today. The proceedings of this hearing are governed by the Board's rules of procedure. The expedited cases will be heard immediately after all requests for continuances or withdrawals. As each non-expedited case is called, petitioners and remonstrators interested in that particular case will please stand. Those who intend to testify will please remain standing and be sworn. Petitioners should be on your left and remonstrators on your right as you face the board. Those who testify will state their name and address for the record before beginning the testify. Petitioners and persons appearing in support of the case being heard shall have a maximum of 15 minutes for the presentation of evidence, statements and arguments in support of the petition. Remonstrators and persons appearing in opposition to the petition shall have a maximum of 15 minutes for the presentation of evidence, statements, and arguments in opposition to the petition. Staff will then present the administrator's comments regarding the petition. The petitioner would then be allowed five minutes for rebuttal and a summation of the case. Rebuttal must be limited to the subject matter of the initial presentations. Remonstrators will then be allowed five minutes for rebuttal of the petitioner's rebuttal evidence and a brief closing statement. No further evidence, statements or arguments will be heard unless it is at the discretion of the board. Please limit your testimony and evidence to the matters covered in the statutory requirements, which must be met in order for the board to grant a variance. If the petitioners have failed to comply with all notice requirements as stipulated by the board's rules of procedure, including posting the notice sign on the subject property at least 23 days prior to the hearing, the board may continue the petition. Anyone at this hearing who thinks complete and proper notice has not been given and would like the petition continued due to lack of proper notice must bring this matter to the board's attention at the beginning of the hearing. The board may impose various conditions or commitments as amendments before reaching a decision on certain petitions. The installation of landscaping screening, the paving of parking area, and the dedication of rights of way are examples. These conditions and commitments are an integral part of the board's decision and must be met for a granted variance to be valid. Compliance with conditions imposed by the board must be approved by an affidavit of compliance submitted by the petitioner within 30 days of completion. Unless otherwise specified, an approval improvement location permit must be obtained prior to the establishment of the authorized improvements. Failure to comply with any conditions or commitments of a variance grant is a violation enforceable by the Department of Business and Neighborhood Services. A person may file a written request to receive notice of a filing of a petition for judicial review of a decision of the board. The written request must be filed within five days of the board's decision and must include the person's full name and correct mailing address and a reference to the board's petition number. Forms are available and may be obtained from the board secretary. Please be advised that contacting members of the board regarding a matter pending before the board outside of this public hearing process is prohibited. Please be courteous and orderly at all times, and please be sure all cell phone ringers are turned off. Is there anyone in the audience who has questions about our procedures? Come up to the podium, please. State your name and address. My name is Richard Clayton, 2416, East Edgewood Avenue, Indianapolis. My question is: I've just learned that there's some new critical material submitted on the petition I'm here to voice against. And I want to know if we can get a continuance so my lawyer will have a chance to review this new material before uh going any further. So I guess we can go ahead and this is our our our normal time for um asking for special requests, so I'll go ahead and treat it that way. So you need the state. The petition numbers 2019, SD101. And I uh I emailed Paige Story this morning. She said the material was submitted directly to the board, and she didn't have a chance to send me a copy, and likewise I don't have a chance to send a copy to my attorney. Um is there anyone in the audience? So you're looking for a continuance?
openpublica.com