Metropolitan Board of Zoning Appeals Division II Meeting - November 15, 2022
STREAMING COPY IN PREPARATION — RECORDING AVAILABLE FROM THE ORIGINAL SOURCE
Metropolitan Board of Zoning Appeals Division II Meeting - November 15, 2022
The Metropolitan Board of Zoning Appeals Division II met on November 15, 2022, at 1:00 PM in the Public Assembly Room of the City-County Building to hear and decide on multiple variance petitions. The board consisted of Chairperson Craig E. Von Dalen, Members James Duke, Patrice Ducett Brown, and Kirk Farmer. The meeting covered expedited petitions, transferred petitions, and new petitions, with a focus on variances for fences, signs, residential conversions, and commercial uses.
Consent Calendar
- Expedited Petitions (Approved Unanimously):
- 2022-DV1-049: Variance for lot line adjustment and barn legalization at 5720/5724 East Southport Road. Approved subject to conditions.
- 2022-DV2-040: Variance for three-foot side setbacks for a detached garage at 1517 Ringgold Avenue. Approved.
- 2022-DV2-041: Variance for three-foot side setback for a detached garage at 5939 Winthrop Avenue. Approved.
- 2022-UV1-039: Variance of use for a jewelry store or yoga studio at 6331 Carrollton Avenue. Approved.
- 2022-UV2-021 (Amended): Variance for duplex construction on each of two parcels at 5822/5824 Norcroft Drive. Approved with conditions.
- 2022-UV2-025: Variance for addition to existing dwelling with a 3.1-foot side setback at 1129 Worcester Avenue. Approved.
- 2022-UV2-026 (Amended): Variance for addition to existing dwelling with reduced side setbacks at 1603/1605 Bates Street. Approved.
Public Comments & Testimony
- 2022-DV1-036 (Meridian Hills Fence): Petitioner Jacob Cox argued for a five-foot wrought iron fence in the front yard along Meridian Street for child and pet safety due to high-speed traffic and a steep hill. The Town of Meridian Hills approved a variance and supported the request. Remonstrance: None present.
- 2022-DV1-048 (Lutheran High School Sign): Petitioner Zach Akers (school senior and then Zach Akers) presented the need for a digital electronic variable message sign to replace an aging monument sign, citing improved safety, reduced illumination, and community support from the Franklin Township Civic League and Councilor Brian Mowry. No public opposition.
- 2022-UV1-014, 015, 016 (Reagan Outdoor Advertising Digital Billboards): Petitioners Michelle Noppenberger and John Campbell argued for converting three existing static billboards to digital displays, emphasizing public service features (Amber Alerts), safety studies, and economic necessity. Remonstrators included Pat Andrews (Marion County Alliance for Neighborhood Associations), Gary Chaluffo (Historic Urban Neighborhoods), Councilor Dan Boots (District 3), Jordan Dillon (Broad Ripple Village Association), Paula Brooks (Hoosier Environmental Council), and others. They cited staff recommendations, the city's ban on digital billboards, potential driver distraction, light pollution, and negative precedent. Councilor Keith Potts (District 2) opposed the Broad Ripple petition. Multiple neighborhood organizations submitted opposition letters.
- 2022-UV1-037 (977 Roache Street Apartments): Petitioners Joseph Cirillo and Anthony Mormon sought a variance to convert a former commercial building into a four-unit apartment, highlighting the property's deteriorated condition and similar multi-unit properties nearby. Remonstrators Mauna Wadud and Hadiah Wadud Amit (Northwest Landing Neighborhood Association) opposed, citing concerns about parking, traffic, safety, incompatibility with the neighborhood's revitalization plan, and distrust of the petitioner's background.
Discussion Items
- 2022-DV1-048 (School Sign): Staff classified the proposed sign as a pylon sign (not monument) due to structural interpretation, but the board and petitioner argued it fell under monument sign definitions. Staff opposed the digital display due to proximity to protected districts and lack of practical difficulty. The petitioner emphasized the sign's low height (5 feet), decreased illumination, and support from local officials.
- 2022-UV1-014, 015, 016 (Digital Billboards): Staff detailed that the requested variances violated the 2019 sign ordinance (ban on off-premise digital billboards) and failed to meet statutory requirements for practical difficulty, self-created injury, and feasible alternatives. Petitioners provided traffic accident data from Fall Creek Parkway and I-465 locations, showing no increase in accidents after digital installations. Remonstrators pointed to studies indicating increased driver distraction and the city council's unanimous decision to ban such signs.
- 2022-UV1-037 (Roache Street Apartments): Staff recommended approval, noting the adaptive reuse of a structure with residential character and consistency with nearby D-5 zoning that permits multi-unit houses. The board questioned apartment sizes (studio/one-bedroom) and potential for low-income tenants. The petitioner stated rents would follow HUD guidelines ($900-1200 per month). Remonstrators argued the building should remain commercial or serve as a community center.
Key Outcomes
- 2022-DV1-036 (Meridian Hills Fence): Approved 4-0. Variance granted for a five-foot wrought iron fence in the front yard.
- 2022-DV1-048 (Lutheran High School Sign): Approved 3-1 (Member Farmer dissenting). Variance granted for a 58.2-square foot sign with a 23.14-square foot digital component, located 80 feet from a protected district.
- 2022-UV1-014 (I-465 Billboard): Denied 4-0. Petition continued for adoption of findings of fact.
- 2022-UV1-015 (Sam Jones Expressway Billboard): Denied 4-0. Continued for adoption of findings.
- 2022-UV1-016 (Broad Ripple Billboard): Denied 4-0. Continued for adoption of findings.
- 2022-UV1-037 (Roache Street Apartments): Denied 3-1 (Member Farmer in favor). Petition denied.
- 2022-UV2-024 (Minnesota Street – Indecisive): Continued to January 10, 2023, without additional notice.
- 2022-UV3-022 (River Avenue – Transferred): Continued to January 10, 2023, without additional notice.
- 2022-UV3-025 (Sherman Drive Daycare): Continued to December 13, 2022, without additional notice.
- 2022-DV2-039 (Keystone Avenue Sign): Transferred to Division III hearing on November 22, 2022.
- 2022-DV2-042 (Chester Avenue Third Story): Continued to December 13, 2022, without additional notice.
- 2022-DV2-043 (81st Street – Automatic Continuance): Acknowledged continuance to December 13, 2022.
Meeting Transcript
Call to order. This is a public hearing of the Metropolitan Board of Zoning Appeals Division 2. I am Craig E. Von Dalen, Chairperson of the Division 2. The board members present are to my right James Duke and Patrice Ducett Brown and to my left, Kirk Farmer. Legal Counsel for the Board today is Chris Steinmetz. Staff members present today from the Division of Planning are Eddie Onea, Principal Planner 2. Jeffrey York, senior planner, Robert Ulenhake, Senior Planner, Marlene Arahata, Era Heta, Senior Planner. Alison Richardson, senior planner, Jennison Hill, Genesis Hill, Associate Planner. Heather Stevens, Senior Specialist and Secretary to the Board. Matt Pleasant is the current planning administrator. The board has copies of the zoning ordinance 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 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 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 the matters covered in the stat to this 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 a 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 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 a 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 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 granted 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 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. Please note that there are only three members, I'm sorry, there are four members present today. Your request will need a a uh three votes out of four to take off action on the requests. If an indecisive vote occurs or we have a two-two tie, your petition will be automatically continued to the next hearing of the board. We will take this into consideration when hearing special requests. Is there anyone in the audience who has any questions about our procedures? If not, before we hear special requests, I will ask for a waiver of our rules of procedure to allow the board to vote for all expedited petitions and adopt their findings of fact without any additional testimony from the individual petitioners. Do I hear a motion? Duke's a move. Motion by Member Duke. Do I hear a second? Farmer second.
openpublica.com