Metropolitan Board of Zoning Appeals Division Two Meeting - November 12, 2019
STREAMING COPY IN PREPARATION — RECORDING AVAILABLE FROM THE ORIGINAL SOURCE
Metropolitan Board of Zoning Appeals Division Two Meeting - November 12, 2019
The Metropolitan Board of Zoning Appeals Division Two convened on November 12, 2019, at 6:00 PM, under the chairmanship of Mark Young. The board considered several petitions for variances of use and development standards, as well as requests for continuances. All votes on the day's petitions were unanimous (5-0). Legal counsel was provided by Chris Steinz, and staff from the Division of Planning supported the proceedings.
Continuances
- Petition 2019 DV2-033 (8160 Lafayette Road): Continued to December 10, 2019, without additional notice. Staff had no objection.
- Petition 2019 UV2-009 (6401 Zionsville Road, AT&T Mobility): Continued to January 14, 2020, without additional notice. Petitioner cited ongoing negotiations with nearby property owners for relocation of a cell tower site; this was the second continuance request. Staff had no objection.
- Petition 2019 AP2-001 (1300 North McKinley Avenue): Continued to December 10, 2019, without additional notice, to allow the petitioner to provide additional information requested by staff.
Public Comments & Testimony
- Christy Agnes, address 1820 Carrollton Avenue, spoke in opposition to Petition 2019 DV2-032 (1819 Carrollton Avenue). She expressed concern that allowing a six-foot building separation between dwellings (rather than the required ten feet) would set a precedent for other new construction in the neighborhood. She noted she had less concern after the petitioner withdrew the request for a variance regarding carriage house size.
Discussion Items
- Petition 2019 DV2-029 (714 East 20th Street): Petitioner Nick Burrow requested a variance to build a single-family dwelling with a 6-foot front setback, 3-foot rear setback, and main floor under 660 square feet (required: 18-foot front setback average, 15-foot rear setback). Staff had no additional comments. The board approved the variance unanimously (5-0).
- Petition 2019 DV2-030 (7415 West 10th Street): Petitioner Garrett Poorman requested a variance to replace a freestanding pole sign for an Arby’s restaurant with a sign of lesser square footage but exceeding height (31.7 ft vs. 20 ft max) and separation requirements. Staff had no additional comments. The board approved the variance unanimously (5-0).
- Petition 2019 DV2-031 (6360 Guilford Avenue, Broad Ripple): Petitioner Mary E. Soliday, through attorney Kyle Russeter, requested a variance to build a one-story office building with reduced setbacks (5 ft from Main Street, zero-foot steps, etc.) and encroachments into the clear side triangle. The request was similar to a 2018 variance but for a different building design. Staff recommended approval subject to substantial compliance with the submitted site plan and elevations. The board approved the variance unanimously (5-0).
- Petition 2019 UV2-019 (3 Beachway Drive): Petitioner SBP Properties, LLC, through attorney Charles Neblick, requested a variance of use to expand a stock room on the north side and add a freestanding cooler/freezer on the east side of an existing convenience/grocery store. The property previously held a variance for a gas station and convenience store. Staff had no additional comments. The board approved the variance unanimously (5-0).
- Petition 2019 DV2-032 (1819 Carrollton Avenue): Petitioner Eric Stovel, through Joseph Lisi, initially sought variances for a single-family dwelling and detached garage including a six-foot building separation and a carriage house. After discussion with the neighborhood land use committee, the petitioner withdrew the carriage house size variance (reducing it to 720 sq ft to comply). The remaining request was for a six-foot separation between the dwelling and the adjacent building to the south; the required separation is ten feet. Staff noted the neighboring building sits on the property line, and the lot is only 38 feet wide (D8 standard requires 50 feet), creating practical difficulty. Staff recommended approval, citing similar reduced separations in the area. The board approved the variance unanimously (5-0).
Key Outcomes
- All five substantive petitions (2019 DV2-029, DV2-030, DV2-031, UV2-019, DV2-032) were approved by a vote of 5-0.
- Three petitions were continued to future hearings without additional notice.
- The board adopted negative findings of fact for a previously denied petition (2019 DB1-052) from the October 8, 2019 hearing.
Meeting Transcript
So are you just the two? Um, are you here in support or can you go on? Okay. Are we ready, Heather? Nick. Hi. Yes, no. Call to order. This is a public hand of the Metropolitan Board of Zoning Appeals, Division Two. I am Mark Young, Chairperson of Division Two. The other board members present are to my left, Alicia Ruder and Margaret Banning. To my right, Mary Kelly and James Duke. Legal counsel for the board today is Chris Steinz recording these proceedings today. Is Ron Hampton? Staff members present today from Division of Planning or Heather Stefan, Senior Board Specialist and Secretary to the Board. Larry Callaway, Principal Planner Two, Robert Ullenhake, Senior Planner, and Marlena Aretta, Senior Planner. Keith Holesworth is the current planning administrator. The board has copies of the zoning ordinances that will be incorporated by reference reference into the record of each case heard today. The proceedings of this hearing are governed by the board's rules of procedures. The expedited cases will be heard immediately after all requests for continuances or withdrawals. As each non-expedited case is called, petitioners or remonstrators interested in that particular case will please stand. Those who intend to testify, please remain standing and be sworn. Petitioner 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 a case being heard so 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 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 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 matters covered in the statutory requirements, which must be met in order for the board to grant a variance. If petitioners have failed to comply with all notice requirements as stipulated by the board's rules of procedures, including posting of notice signed 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 is not being given and would like the petition continued due to a 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 pavement of parking areas, and the dedication of rights of way are examples. These conditions and commitments are an integral part of the board's decisions 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 to 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 condition 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 the filing of petition for judicial review of a decision of the board. This 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 must be attained and may be obtained from the board secretary. Please be advised to contact the members of the board regarding the 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 that has any questions regarding our procedures? If not, we will consider special requests and continuances at this time. Our petition number is 2019 DV2-033. Just like to request a continuance at this time. Okay, thank you.
openpublica.com