OPENPUBLICA · PUBLIC MEETING RECORD
Record of Proceedings

Metropolitan Board of Zoning Appeals Division One Hearing - May 12, 2026

Board of Zoning Appeals I — Tuesday, May 12, 2026
BodyIndianapolis, Indiana
SessionBoard of Zoning Appeals I
DateTuesday, May 12, 2026
StatusFILED
Video Record
0:00 / 2:08:17

Transcript — Verbatim
0:01

All right.

0:02

Good afternoon, everyone.

0:03

Gonna call this meeting to order.

0:05

This is a public hearing of the Metropolitan Board of Zoning Appeals Division One.

0:10

I am Peter Nelson, Chairperson of Division One, other board members present today.

0:15

David Duncan, John Walski, and Jennifer Witt.

0:18

Legal counsel for the board today is Chris Steinmetz.

0:22

Staff members present today from the division of planning are Bryce Patts, current planning administrator.

0:27

Jeff York, current planning manager.

0:30

Michael Weigel, Principal Planner 1, Robert Uhlenhag, Senior Planner, Josh LaVesk, Senior Planner, and Marty Weistie, Senior Board Specialist and Secretary to the Board.

0:44

The Board has copies of the zoning ordinances that will be incorporated by reference into the record of each case heard today.

0:49

The proceedings of this hearing are governed by the board's rules of procedure.

0:53

The expedited cases will be heard immediately after all requests for continuances or withdrawals.

0:58

As each non-expedited case is called, petitioners and remonstrators interested in that particular case will please stand.

1:05

Those who intend to testify will please remain standing and be sworn.

1:08

Petitioners should be on your left and remonstrators on your right as you face the board.

1:13

Those who testify will state their name and address for the record before beginning to testify.

1:18

Petitioners and persons appearing in support of the case being heard shall have a maximum of 15 minutes for the presentations of evidence statements and arguments in support of the petition.

1:26

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.

1:36

Staff will then present the administrators' comments regarding the petition.

1:39

The petitioner will then be allowed five minutes for rebuttal and a summation of the case.

1:44

Rebuttal must be limited to the subject matter of the initial presentations.

1:48

Remonstrators will then be allowed a five-minute uh time period for rebuttal of the petitioner's rebuttal evidence and a brief closing statement.

1:55

No further evidence statements or arguments will be heard unless it is at the discretion of the board.

1:59

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.

2:07

If the petitioners have failed to comply with all notice requirements as stipulated by the board's rules of procedure, including posting of the notice sign on subject property at least 23 days prior to the hearing, the board may continue the petition.

2:19

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.

2:29

The board may impose various conditions or commitments as amendments before reaching a decision on certain petitions.

2:35

The installation of landscaping and screening, the paving of parking area, and the dedication of rights away are examples.

2:40

These conditions and commitments are an integral part of the board's decision and must be met for a granted variance to be valid.

2:46

Compliance with conditions imposed by the board must be proved by an affidavit of compliance submitted by the petitioner within 30 days of completion.

2:53

Unless otherwise specified, an improvement location permit must be obtained prior to the establishment of the authorized improvements.

3:00

Failure to comply with any conditions or commitments of a variance grant is a violation enforceable by the Department of Business and Neighborhood Services.

3:07

A person may file a written work request to receive notice of filing of a petition for judicial review of a decision of the board.

3:14

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 petition number.

3:25

Forms are available and may be obtained from the board secretary.

3:28

Please be advised that contacting members of the board regarding a matter pending before the board outside of this public hearing process is prohibited.

3:35

Please be courteous and orderly at all times, and please be sure all cell phone ringers are turned off.

3:41

We do have four members present today.

3:43

It does take three votes to request an or to take action on any item.

3:48

So we'll take this into consideration when hearing continuances.

3:57

If your petition does receive an indecisive vote or a two-two vote, your petition will be automatically continued to the June 2nd hearing.

4:05

Alright, board members, you've been provided minutes for the April 7th hearing.

4:11

If there are no deletions or additions, I'll go ahead and take a motion for their approval.

4:16

Duncan so moved.

4:17

And do we have a second?

4:19

Sorry.

4:20

All right, motion and second.

4:21

I'll call for a vote.

4:22

Duncan.

4:23

Duncan, yes.

4:24

Wolski?

4:24

Yes.

4:25

And Witt.

4:27

And Nelson votes yes.

4:29

All right.

4:32

Is there anyone in the audience?

4:34

Thank you, who does not who anyone in the audience have any questions regarding our procedures?

4:41

Alright, seeing none, uh, before we hear special requests, I will ask for a waiver of our rule of procedure to allow the board the board to vote for all of the expedited petitions and adopt their findings of fact without any additional testimony from the individual petitioners.

4:57

Is there a motion?

Discussion Breakdown — Share of Meeting
Zoning and Land Use█████████████████████████████████████████████47%
Land Use Regulation████████████████████21%
Sign Regulation███████████████████20%
Procedural███████████11%
Public Safety█1%
Summary of Proceedings

Metropolitan Board of Zoning Appeals Division One Hearing - May 12, 2026

The Metropolitan Board of Zoning Appeals Division One convened on May 12, 2026, at approximately 6:15 PM, chaired by Peter Nelson, with members David Duncan, John Wolski, and Jennifer Witt. The board handled continuances, an expedited docket of 11 variance cases, and four public hearing cases. All expedited petitions were approved unanimously by a 4-0 vote. Three of the four public hearing cases were also approved; one (sign variance) passed 3-1.

Consent Calendar

  • Minutes Approval: The board unanimously approved the minutes from the April 7, 2026 hearing (motion by Duncan, second by Witt, vote 4-0).
  • Waiver of Rules: A motion to waive procedural rules for expedited petitions (allowing group voting without individual testimony) passed unanimously (4-0).

Continuances and Transfers

  • 2026-DV1-012 (3675 W 11th St): Continued to June 2, 2026, to obtain an AES encroachment letter. No opposition. Granted (4-0).
  • 2026-DV1-014 (9200 Keystone Crossing): Transferred to Board 2 on May 19, 2026, due to incorrect neighborhood presentation materials. Granted (4-0).
  • 2026-UV1-011 (3922 E 26th St): Continued to June 2, 2026, to re-notice property owners. Staff request. Granted (4-0).
  • 2026-DV1-013 (2440 Lafayette Rd): Continued to June 2, 2026, to amend notice for additional fence variance. Staff request. Granted (4-0).
  • 2026-UV1-006 (8798 Moore Rd): Staff noted petitioner agreed to six additional commitments and a plan change. No opposition present. Petition moved forward for hearing.
  • 2026-UV1-008 (1852 Shelby St) and 2026-UV1-009: Acknowledged automatic continuances to June 2, 2026, filed by registered neighborhood organizations.

Expedited Docket (11 Cases)

All eleven expedited petitions were granted unanimously (4-0). Cases included:

  • 2025-SE3-003: Special exception and variance for outdoor advertising sign relocation at 4555 S Harding St.
  • 2026-DV1-003: Variance for a two-family dwelling at 602 Prospect St (multiple setback deviations).
  • 2026-DV2-009: Variance for open space deficiency in Grayson Subdivision at 7320 E Hannah Ave.
  • 2026-DV2-007: Variance for rear setback at 1025 Dawson St.
  • 2026-DV3-007: Variance for building addition at 5990 Tuxedo St.
  • 2026-DV3-012: Variance for construction in floodway fringe at 4200 S Harding St.
  • 2026-UV1-006 (amended): Use and development variance for wellness center at 8798 Moore Rd (with commitments).
  • 2026-UV1-007: Use variance for second-floor apartment and deck at 5282 E 65th St.
  • 2026-UV1-010: Use variance to legally establish 118 multifamily units at 4020 Monaco Dr.
  • 2026-UV3-001: Use variance for excavation contractor at 11011 Brookville Rd.
  • 2026-UV3-002: Use variance for financial services at 7900 Shelby St (YMCA).
  • 2026-UV3-004 (amended): Use and development variance for transitional living quarters at 2705 Shriver Ave.

Public Comment & Testimony

No general public comments were made. Testimony was limited to specific cases (see Discussion Items).

Discussion Items: Public Hearing Cases

Case 2026-DV1-001 – 445 Sanders Street (Two-Family Dwelling)

  • Petitioner: Josh Smith (RG Development) sought variances for encroachment into the clear site triangle at Sanders and East Streets. He acknowledged an earlier drafting error that placed the home in the DPW decision site triangle, now corrected. The home would align with the block's 10-foot setback. The Bates-Hendricks Neighborhood Association (Clark Math, 727 Lincoln St) expressed support, stating the home fits the neighborhood. Staff recommended approval conditioned on remaining outside the DPW decision site triangle and adhering to the site plan with larger porches/windows. Outcome: Variance granted (4-0).

Case 2026-DV1-010 – 2606 Northview Avenue (Fence Height/Opacity)

  • Petitioner: Sandra Palumbi (432 W Hampton Dr) requested a variance for a 53-inch, 50% opacity fence (max 42 inches and 30% opacity) for her autistic son's safety after neighbor attacks. She argued the fence enhances community interaction. Staff recommended denial, citing lack of site-specific practical difficulty and noting compliant alternatives (e.g., chain link). Members expressed sympathy but questioned the hardship. Outcome: Variance granted (4-0).

Case 2026-DV1-015 – 5607 West 38th Street (Monument Sign)

  • Petitioner: Ed Williams (Palmetto Indianapolis) requested a variance for a fourth primary freestanding sign along the frontage (8 ft tall, 34 sq ft) at a drive-through coffee shop (Dutch Rose). He argued that the sign is needed for visibility to transient traffic and that similar variances had been granted for other sites. Staff recommended denial, citing sign clutter, safety, and the availability of alternatives (wall signs, Google Maps). Member Witt expressed concern about nighttime light impact on nearby residences; petitioner agreed to consider dimming. Outcome: Variance granted 3-1 (Nelson dissented).

Case 2026-DV1-016 – 141 East Pleasant Run Parkway South Drive (Fence in Clear Sight Triangle)

  • Petitioner: Tyler Oaks (Bose McKinney & Evans) sought a variance for a fence obstructing the clear sight triangle of a rear alley. He argued the alley is functionally a driveway due to permanent structures blocking passage, with no safety issue. Remonstrators: Laura Piercefield (South Village Neighborhood Association) opposed on grounds of development code adherence; Kristen Jadendolstrom (151 E Pleasant Run) noted the fence encroaches on her property and the public right-of-way, and that the fence line differs from previous. Staff recommended denial, citing active alley use, right-of-way obstruction, and lack of site-specific practical difficulties. The petitioner offered a commitment: if the alley becomes passable, the fence will be removed from the right-of-way (including the clear site triangle). Outcome: Variance granted (4-0) with the stated commitment.

Key Outcomes

  • All 11 expedited petitions were approved unanimously (4-0).
  • Public Hearing Case 2026-DV1-001 (Sanders St): Approved (4-0) with conditions.
  • Public Hearing Case 2026-DV1-010 (Northview Ave): Approved (4-0).
  • Public Hearing Case 2026-DV1-015 (38th St sign): Approved (3-1; Nelson no).
  • Public Hearing Case 2026-DV1-016 (Pleasant Run fence): Approved (4-0) subject to commitment to remove fence if alley becomes passable.
  • The board adjourned after instructing petitioners to comply with conditions and submit affidavits of compliance within 30 days of completion.

Meeting Transcript

All right. Good afternoon, everyone. Gonna call this meeting to order. This is a public hearing of the Metropolitan Board of Zoning Appeals Division One. I am Peter Nelson, Chairperson of Division One, other board members present today. David Duncan, John Walski, and Jennifer Witt. Legal counsel for the board today is Chris Steinmetz. Staff members present today from the division of planning are Bryce Patts, current planning administrator. Jeff York, current planning manager. Michael Weigel, Principal Planner 1, Robert Uhlenhag, Senior Planner, Josh LaVesk, Senior Planner, and Marty Weistie, Senior Board Specialist and Secretary to the Board. 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 to testify. Petitioners and persons appearing in support of the case being heard shall have a maximum of 15 minutes for the presentations 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 administrators' comments regarding the petition. The petitioner will 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 a five-minute uh time period 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 of the notice sign on 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 and screening, the paving of parking area, and the dedication of rights away 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 proved by an affidavit of compliance submitted by the petitioner within 30 days of completion. Unless otherwise specified, an 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 work request to receive notice of 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 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. We do have four members present today. It does take three votes to request an or to take action on any item. So we'll take this into consideration when hearing continuances. If your petition does receive an indecisive vote or a two-two vote, your petition will be automatically continued to the June 2nd hearing. Alright, board members, you've been provided minutes for the April 7th hearing. If there are no deletions or additions, I'll go ahead and take a motion for their approval. Duncan so moved. And do we have a second? Sorry. All right, motion and second. I'll call for a vote. Duncan.

SUMMARIZED BY OPENPUBLICA AI
TRANSCRIPT VIA PUBLIC VIDEO
openpublica.com