Indianapolis Metropolitan Board of Zoning Appeals Division One Hearing - October 6, 2026

On October 6, 2026, the Metropolitan Board of Zoning Appeals (BZA) Division One convened a public hearing chaired by Acting Chairperson David Duncan, with board members Jennifer Witt and John Wolski and legal counsel Chris Steinmitz. Because three members were present, three votes were required to take action; an indecisive vote automatically continues a petition to the November 10, 2026, BZA Division One hearing. The board handled continuances, two withdrawals, one administrative dismissal, an expedited docket of three variances, and four non-expedited petitions.

Continuances, Withdrawals, and Administrative Actions

• 2026-DV1-044 (2674 Shirley Drive): Jesse Martinez requested and received a 30-day continuance to November 10, 2026, with additional notice.
• 2026-DV1-047 (2502 North Delaware Avenue): staff-requested one-month continuance to November 10, 2026, with additional notice, to amend the petition based on new information from the petitioner.
• 2026-DV1-042 (1039 Kessler Boulevard East Drive): withdrawal acknowledged; staff confirmed the garage is complete per approved plans and meets zoning regulations.
• 2026-DV1-035: withdrawal acknowledged.
• 2026-UV1-026 (3434 Garden Avenue): continued to November 10, 2026, to continue staff-petitioner discussions.
• 2026-UV1-028: continued one month to November 10, 2026, with new notice because a notarized affidavit is not on file.
• 2026-DV1-036 (6317 Askin Avenue): two-month continuance to December 1, 2026, to allow the petitioner to obtain written easement-holder consents or amend pool plans to move the pool out of the easement.
• 2026-UV1-002 (5301 West 56th Street): dismissed 3-0; the petitioner was not in attendance, fire code matters should be addressed before zoning matters, a three-month waiting period applies before refiling, and a fee-reduction request must be made in person.
• 2026-UV1-020 (3503 North College Avenue): 30-day continuance to November 10, 2026; the petitioner's representative was out of town.

Expedited Docket

• 2026-DV1-031 (amended; 4850 West 78th Street): six-foot front-yard fence in an I-2/I-3 district (three-and-a-half-foot maximum), partially within the clear site triangle and easements. Granted 3-0.
• 2026-DV1-043 (820 West 54th Street): detached garage in the front yard of an existing D-5 single-family residence. Granted 3-0.
• 2026-DV1-046 (6145 North Ewing Street): detached accessory structure, garage, and secondary dwelling unit with an eight-foot side-yard setback (15 feet required). Granted 3-0.

Discussion Items

2026-DV3-011 - St. Rock Catholic Church (3603 South Meridian Street)

• Request: variance to allow an eight-foot front-yard fence (four feet is the maximum) and fence improvements within the clear sight triangle; the fence was installed in 2024 without a variance.
• Petitioner (Attorney John Cross for the Archdiocese of Indianapolis, with Eric Bangert) proposed a modified compromise: move the corner fence inward 16 feet (about 22 feet along both Sumner and Meridian), remove 16 inches of concrete block within the clear sight triangle to add visibility, and install guardrails behind the relocated fence. The petitioner argued that strict compliance would shrink the parking and drop-off area and increase street congestion, and that the fence had existed in some form for over 20 years.
• Jill Palmer, program manager of multimodal for the Department of Public Works (DPW), opposed the clear sight triangle portion. She stated DPW supports partial relief of the zoning clear sight triangle but holds firm that the intersection decision sight distance must be free of obstructions over 30 inches. She cited 45 right-angle crashes and 24 crashes where a traffic signal was disregarded over 20 years, one reported 2019 crash involving the fence, and a December 26, 2024, crash attributed by the crash report to the wall and fence combination blocking drivers' view of northbound traffic on Meridian Street.
• Neighbor Ann Shott (3660 South Meridian Street) opposed the petition as presented, citing lack of communication with parish and school families, renderings submitted only five days before the hearing, an absent public notice sign on Meridian Street, and unsafe pedestrian conditions at school dismissal.
• Staff recommended denial of the clear sight triangle variance, stating the encroachment obstructs sidewalks, stop bars, and turn lanes, and that compliance would remove roughly 3 percent of the more-than-36,000-square-foot parking and play area. Staff recommended approval of the fence-height variance only if the fence is kept out of the clear sight triangle.
• The board split the request. Part A (improvements within the clear sight triangle): Wolski yes, Witt no, Duncan yes - 2-1 indecisive, continued to November 10, 2026. Part B (fence height outside the clear sight triangle): granted 3-0 subject to commitments (existing fence not altered but may be repaired; guardrails installed behind the relocated fence).

2026-UV1-022 - 3441 West Washington Street

• Request: variance of use for an automobile, motorcycle, and light-vehicle sales or rental facility, not permitted in the I-3 (FF) transit-oriented development (TOD) district.
• Petitioner Jesus Ivani Barra Tamayo, a tenant running a mechanic shop, said a rezoning to C5 was approved by the Metropolitan Development Commission but not finalized after the district councilor objected; he is seeking this variance instead. He wants to sell vehicles alongside repair work and agreed to commitments including no flashing lights or electronic variable message signs.
• Staff recommended denial, finding the request does not meet the statutory criteria: another dealership would harm the TOD corridor and adjacent Eagle Creek; nothing makes the property unique; there is no unnecessary hardship because the I-3 district allows 45 permitted and 23 accessory uses; the comprehensive plan calls for C3 while a dealership needs C5 or C7; and the TOD overlay (with a half-acre use limit on a three-quarter-acre site) promotes pedestrian connectivity and human-scale uses along the Blue Line corridor under construction. Staff requested commitments limiting any grant to the petitioner and requiring the site to be kept free of trash.
• Vote: Wolski yes, Witt yes, Duncan no - 2-1 indecisive. Continued to November 10, 2026.

2026-DV1-045 - 4634 West Naomi Street

• Note: the docket lists petitioners Vicky McLean and Heather Rashall, but the new owner who testified identified herself as Heather Warren; the transcript contains this name discrepancy.
• Request: variances for an eight-foot fence (six feet permitted) and a one-foot side-yard setback for a carport and garage addition (seven feet required). The carport addition was built without permits.
• Petitioner said she moved the fence back to a 22-foot setback, has 14 letters of support, and needs the extra two feet for privacy and safety: I-70 is 227 feet away and about 15 feet higher, nine registered sex offenders live within a half-mile radius, and she described a personal safety situation involving a neighbor.
• Remonstrator Tabitha Grab (4613 West Naomi Street) said she has no problem with the eight-foot fence now that it is set back, but opposes the carport's one-foot side-yard encroachment and fears it will encourage new homes to encroach. Remonstrator Brian Moore (4618 West Naomi Street, renter next door) opposed the eight-foot fence, stating it blocks afternoon sunlight, killed his garden, and blocks his surveillance views; he said he already has a small-claims judgment against the petitioner for a spite fence and disputed the petitioner's stalker account.
• Staff recommended denial of the side-yard setback variance because the structure was built without permits and should be reduced to the seven-foot setback; staff found no practical difficulty because a six-foot fence is permitted and the taller fence creates a wall and canyon effect. Staff also noted the petitioner had not submitted findings of fact, which alone would require a continuance.
• Note: after the petitioner began rebuttal, the board took a five-minute recess. The transcript then moves to the next docket item; no completion of rebuttal or vote on this petition is recorded in the transcript.

2026-UV1-024 - Ivy Way Plaza (5699/5701 East 71st Street)

• Request: variance of use to keep a 200-square-foot (20-by-10), eight-foot-tall outdoor portable storage unit; outdoor storage and operations are not permitted in C3, and portable storage units are limited to 30 consecutive days per calendar year.
• Petitioner Ivy Way LLC (attorney Jason P. Lucking; owner Jeff Hamill present) said the unit has been on site since about 2018 for winter salt, shovels, and maintenance supplies, is screened from public view, is locked and secure, and contains no flammable materials. Letters of support were received from the Greater Allisonville Community Council and the Benford Redevelopment and Growth Neighborhood Organization; Councilman Boots offered no negative comments. The petitioner said removal would be expensive and difficult but agreed to commitments to improve the unit's appearance.
• Staff recommended denial, stating long-term outdoor storage undermines the intent of the C3 community commercial typology and the unit is a transport container rather than a permanent structure.
• Vote: granted 3-0 subject to commitments, including an administrator-approved plan to paint and finish the unit so it appears as a permanent maintenance structure rather than a storage container.

Key Outcomes

• Three expedited development-standard variances were granted 3-0.
• 2026-DV3-011: fence-height variance outside the clear sight triangle granted 3-0; the clear-sight-triangle portion received only two yes votes (2-1 indecisive) and was continued to November 10, 2026.
• 2026-UV1-022: 2-1 indecisive; continued to November 10, 2026.
• 2026-UV1-024: granted 3-0 with appearance-improvement commitments.
• 2026-DV1-045: no recorded vote in the transcript; the hearing proceeded to the next case after a recess.
• Eight continuances were granted (to November 10 or December 1, 2026), two withdrawals were acknowledged, and one petition was dismissed.