Metropolitan Board of Zoning Appeals Division II Meeting - December 13, 2022
STREAMING COPY IN PREPARATION — RECORDING AVAILABLE FROM THE ORIGINAL SOURCE
Metropolitan Board of Zoning Appeals Division II Meeting - December 13, 2022
The Metropolitan Board of Zoning Appeals Division II met on December 13, 2022, to hear a variety of variance petitions. Key actions included the approval of a daycare facility conversion, approval of a third-story addition and a lot/addition in a suburban district, and denial of three digital billboard proposals. Several petitions were continued or withdrawn.
Consent Calendar
- 2022-DV2-044 (305 North Beville Avenue): Expedited petition for a variance to allow a 7-foot rear setback for a single-family dwelling. Approved unanimously by voice vote.
Public Comments & Testimony
- Valerie Johnson (parent/grandparent): Expressed strong support for the Fruit of the Holy Spirit Daycare (2022-UV3-025), citing its high-quality, affordable care and no traffic issues encountered personally. She urged approval.
- Gary Chalufo (Historic Urban Neighborhoods of Indianapolis): Opposed the digital billboard petitions (2022-UV2-009, 011, 012), arguing they circumvent the 2019 City-County Council sign ordinance ban on digital off-premise signs. He emphasized driver distraction, privacy, and precedent concerns.
- Pete Fisher (NORA North Side Community Council): Opposed all three billboard petitions, stating the NORA Council has long opposed billboards, especially digital ones, and that approval would open floodgates and undermine the public process that created the sign ordinance.
- J. Napoleon (Marion County Alliance of Neighborhood Associations): Strongly opposed the billboard requests, arguing the petitioners failed to meet the legal standard for variances and that digital billboards would harm neighborhood character and safety. He referenced the history of redlining and urged the board not to add insult to injury along interstate corridors.
- Edwin Locke (community representative): Opposed the Haver Way billboard (2022-UV2-012), noting broad community group opposition and citing the unanimous 2019 council vote against digital billboards.
Discussion Items
- 2022-UV3-025 (3335 North Sherman Drive) – Childcare Facility: Petitioner Shantae Flemons sought a variance of use to operate a daycare center (ministry) in a D-5 zone. She and her attorney argued the site is unique (circular driveway, large lot, mixed-use arterial corridor) and has operated four years without complaints. Staff recommended denial, citing the residential mid-block location, illegal operation, and lack of hardship. The petitioner committed to a maximum of 25 children. Board members questioned traffic, licensing, and capacity. After staff recommended a 16-child limit if approved, the board voted 4-0 to approve (with findings to be adopted later).
- 2022-DV2-042 (21 North Chester Avenue) – Third Story Addition: Petitioner requested a variance to allow a roof-line alteration resulting in a third story (2.5 stories permitted) and a reduced side setback. Staff recommended approval for the setback but denial for the third story, citing self-imposed hardship, neighborhood context, and infill guidelines. The petitioner argued the attic is only 5 feet tall and used for storage. After discussion about the definition of a “story” and permit violations, the board approved the variance 4-1 (Farmer dissenting), with findings to be adopted.
- 2022-DV2-043 (220 West 81st Street) – Lot and Addition Variances: Petitioners sought to legally establish a 0.8-acre lot (one acre required) and allow a building addition with reduced rear setbacks and open space. Staff recommended denial, stating practical difficulties were self-imposed and alternatives existed. The petitioner argued the lot’s D-S zoning was inappropriate and that D-1 standards would be more fitting; they submitted a letter of support from an adjacent neighbor. The board voted 4-1 to approve (Farmer dissenting), with findings to be adopted.
- 2022-UV2-009 (1251 West 96th Street) – Digital Billboard: Reagan Outdoor Advertising sought variances to convert an existing static billboard to a 40-foot-tall digital sign with reduced setbacks and separation from protected districts. Staff recommended denial, citing the 2019 council ban, self-created injury, safety concerns, and feasible alternatives (maintaining the existing static sign). The petitioner argued no evidence of safety risk and committed to a 10-second display duration. Remonstrators opposed. The board voted 0-3 to deny (Brown, Farmer, Von Dalen all “no”). Negatives findings to be adopted.
- 2022-UV2-011 (1355 West 96th Street) – Digital Billboard: Similar petition for a digital sign at a different location, also recommended for denial by staff. The petitioner made similar arguments; remonstrators repeated opposition. The board voted 0-3 to deny.
- 2022-UV2-012 (9333 Haver Way) – Digital Billboard: Third digital billboard petition, for a 60-foot-tall sign near an interstate entrance ramp. Staff recommended denial, citing height, separation, and safety. Petitioner conceded time, remonstrators opposed. Board voted 0-3 to deny.
Key Outcomes
- 2022-DV2-044 (Expedited): Approved (unanimous voice vote).
- 2022-UV3-025 (Childcare): Approved (4-0; Ducett Brown, Brown, Duncan, Von Dalen yes); continued for findings.
- 2022-DV2-042 (Third Story): Approved (4-1; Farmer no); continued for findings.
- 2022-DV2-043 (Lot & Addition): Approved (4-1; Farmer no); continued for findings.
- 2022-UV2-009, 011, 012 (Digital Billboards): All denied (0-3 each; Ducett Brown, Farmer, Von Dalen no); continued for negative findings.
- 2022-UV2-010 (2400 Roosevelt Avenue): Withdrawn by petitioner; board acknowledged.
- 2022-DV2-045 (1251 South Alabama Street): Continued and transferred to January 3, 2023, Division I.
- 2022-DV2-046 (14 East Caven Street): Automatically continued to January 10, 2023, Division II (due to neighborhood organization request).
- 2022-UV2-027 (3445 Washington Boulevard): Continued to February 14, 2023, with additional notice.
- Findings of Fact: The board adopted negative findings for three petitions denied at the November 15, 2022 hearing (2022-UV2-014, 015, 016).
Meeting Transcript
This is a 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 Division 2. The other board members present are to my right, Patrice Ducett Brown and David Duncan, an alternate. And to my left, Kirk Farmer, who will be here in a little bit, and Bart Brown, who's an alternate out of Division 3. Legal Counsel to the Board today is Chris Steinmetz. Staff members present today from the Division of Planning are Eddie O'Neill, Principal Planner 2, Robert Eulen Hake, Senior Planner, Marlena Earhatta, Senior Planner, Heather Stevens, Senior Specialist and Secretary of 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 by 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 names and address for the record before beginning to testify. Petitioners and persons appearing in support of the 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 in 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 of notice signed on the subject property at least through 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 right-of-ways 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 improvement location permit must be obtained prior to the establishment of the authorized improvements. Failure to comply with any conditions of the commitments or variances granted or 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 a petition for judicial review of a decision to 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 actually we have four members present today. And we will be losing uh one member at one point at uh after 245, and uh um hopefully Mr. Farmer will be here soon. But also make note that in an indecisive vote will be um votes your petition will automatically continue to the next hearing of the board. You will need at least three votes in favor of your variants to pass. We will um and if you would like an uh to get a continuance based upon us not having enough members, we'll take that into consideration when hearing special requests. If there's anyone in the audience who has any questions about our procedures, not before we hear special requests, I'll 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? Duncan so moved. Thank you. And a second.
openpublica.com