OPENPUBLICA · PUBLIC MEETING RECORD
Record of Proceedings

Metropolitan Board of Zoning Appeals Division II Meeting - February 14, 2023

Board of Zoning Appeals IITuesday, February 14, 2023
BodyIndianapolis, Indiana
SessionBoard of Zoning Appeals II
DateTuesday, February 14, 2023
StatusFILED
Video Record

STREAMING COPY IN PREPARATION — RECORDING AVAILABLE FROM THE ORIGINAL SOURCE

Transcript — Verbatim
0:00

Okay.

0:01

Call to order.

0:02

This is a public hearing of the Metropolitan Board of Zoning Appeals, Division 2.

0:05

I am Craig E.

0:06

Von Dalen, Chairperson of Division 2.

0:09

The other board members present are James Duke, Patrice Ducett Brown, Beth Brandon, and Tom Barnes.

0:14

Legal Counsel for the Board today is Chris Steinmetz.

0:17

Staff members present today from the Division of Planning are Eddie O'Neill, Principal Planner 2.

0:22

Robert Eulin Hay, Senior Planner, Marlene Urajeda, Senior Planner.

0:26

Heather Stevens, Senior Specialist and Secretary of the Board, and Tamara Wisdom, Hearing Specialist.

0:31

Matt Pleasant is the current planning administrator.

0:34

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

0:39

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

0:42

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

0:47

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

0:53

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

0:57

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

1:01

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

1:05

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.

1:15

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.

1:24

Staff will then present the administrator's comments regarding the petition.

1:28

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

1:32

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

1:36

Remonstrators will then be allowed five minutes for rebuttal of the petitioner's rebuttal evidence and a brief closing statement.

1:41

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

1:46

Please limit your testimony to the and evidence to the matters covered in the statutory requirements, which must be met in order for the board to grant a variance.

1:54

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.

2:06

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.

2:16

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

2:22

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

2:30

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

2:35

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

2:42

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

2:49

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

2:57

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.

3:03

The 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.

3:12

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

3:16

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

3:23

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

3:28

Is there anyone in the audience who has any questions about our procedure?

3:34

If not, before we hear specialist 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.

3:46

Do I hear a motion?

3:47

Duke.

3:48

So move.

3:49

Do I hear a second?

3:50

Brandon, second.

3:51

Thank you.

3:52

I'll now ask for a vote.

3:53

Duke.

3:54

Duke, yes.

3:54

Ducett Brown.

3:56

Ducett Brown, yes.

3:57

Brandon.

3:58

Brandon, yes.

3:59

Barnes.

3:59

Yes.

4:00

And I am also a yes.

4:01

We'll consider special requests and continuances at this time.

4:08

Please come forward, state your name and address for the record.

4:13

Good afternoon.

Discussion Breakdown — Share of Meeting
Sign Regulation█████████████████████████████29%
Procedural████████████████████20%
Zoning and Land Use████████████████████20%
Zoning And Land Use██████████10%
Economic Development████████8%
Land Use Regulation███████7%
Real Estate███3%
Community Engagement███3%
Summary of Proceedings

Metropolitan Board of Zoning Appeals Division II Meeting - February 14, 2023

The Metropolitan Board of Zoning Appeals Division II convened on Tuesday, February 14, 2023, at 1:00 PM local time (18:15 UTC) in the Public Assembly Room of the City-County Building. Chairperson Craig E. Von Dalen presided over the meeting with members James Duke, Patrice Ducett Brown, Beth Brandon, and Tom Barnes. Legal counsel was Chris Steinmetz, and staff from the Division of Planning supported the proceedings. The board addressed continuances, expedited petitions, and two public hearings, culminating in approvals for both contested variances.

Continuances and Procedural Matters

  • Case 2022-DV2-047 (2304 and 2302 West 60th Street): An automatic continuance requested by a registered neighborhood organization was acknowledged, moving the hearing to March 14, 2023.
  • Case 2023-DV2-001 (801 Shelby Street): An automatic continuance was acknowledged, also continuing the matter to March 14, 2023.
  • Case 2022-UV2-030 (2307 Dr. Martin Luther King Jr. Street): The board granted a one-day waiver of the public notice requirement (5-0 vote), allowing the petition to be heard that day.
  • Case 2022-UV2-029 (1645 East Minnesota Street): The board granted a one-day waiver of the public notice requirement (5-0 vote) to hear the petition.

Expedited Petitions

Two petitions were considered under the expedited docket after a waiver of standard procedures (unanimously approved):

  • 2022-UV2-027 (Amended) (3445 Washington Boulevard): Requested a variance of use and development standards for a mixed-use development—a 3,580-square-foot dwelling unit, 6,410 square feet of office, and a 1,810-square-foot basement dwelling unit with 13 parking spaces (23 required).
  • 2022-UV2-029 (1645 East Minnesota Street): Requested a variance of use to legally establish an existing single-family dwelling and accessory structure with a seven-foot rear setback (eight feet required).
  • Both petitions were approved unanimously (5 yes votes each). The second petition was continued for submission of revised findings of fact.

Public Hearings

Case 2022-DV2-048 – 3815 River Crossing Parkway (Skyline Sign Variance)

  • Petitioner: ASAP Permits (Brent Bennett) on behalf of Sanctuary Wealth, a wealth management firm relocating from Hamilton County to Marion County. They sought a second skyline sign on the northern elevation (one permitted per elevation). The sign would replace a previous tenant’s sign on the same facade, facing I-465 (over 200,000 vehicles per day).
  • Arguments: Sanctuary Wealth plans a $1.7 million investment in the space; the building owner (Felton Properties) purchased the property for $35 million and will invest an additional $3 million in upgrades. The northern elevation provides critical visibility, and signs at lower elevations would be obscured by a tree line. Denial would harm a growing local business and reduce property values.
  • Staff Recommendation: Denial. Staff noted that the 2019 ordinance limits skyline signs to one per facade to prevent visual clutter. The tenant could install a sign below 26 feet without a variance, and the building already has a freestanding sign with tenant identification. Other tenants operate without skyline signage.
  • Board Deliberation: Members questioned the removal of the previous sign and whether that forfeited grandfathered status. Board member Barnes expressed concern that the city’s position seemed punitive.
  • Rebuttal: Petitioners emphasized that visibility at 26 feet is obstructed by highway landscaping and a parking garage, making the high elevation essential.
  • Vote: 4 yes (Duke, Brandon, Ducett Brown, Von Dalen), 1 no (Barnes). Approved, continued for adoption of findings of fact.

Case 2022-UV2-030 – 2307 Dr. Martin Luther King Jr. Street (Single-Family Dwelling on C1 Lot)

  • Petitioner: Flanner House Inc. (Brent Lyle) requested a variance of use to construct a single-family dwelling on a C1 (commercial) lot, with a 1.5-foot front setback (10 feet required). The home was already manufactured and awaiting placement.
  • Arguments: The site and surrounding area are historically residential. Flanner House has secured nearly $1 million in federal grants (including crime prevention funds) tied to this development. Delays hinder neighborhood revitalization efforts. A letter from City-County Council President Vop Osili supported the variance.
  • Staff Recommendation: Denial of the use variance; staff advised the petitioner to file a rezoning to D-8 (residential) instead. Staff acknowledged the setback variance was acceptable but argued the use change should follow the rezoning process, similar to a nearby parcel rezoned in 2019.
  • Board Deliberation: Members discussed the legacy C1 zoning, the “sawtooth” effect of piecemeal rezoning, and the comprehensive plan’s support for residential use on the corridor. Board member Duke recused himself, leaving four voting members.
  • Rebuttal: Petitioner emphasized the building is already paid for and federal funds are at risk, urging approval to avoid bureaucratic delays.
  • Vote: 3 yes (Brandon, Ducett Brown, Von Dalen), 1 no (Barnes). Approved, continued for adoption of findings of fact.

Key Outcomes

  • Continuances: Two cases continued to March 14, 2023.
  • Waivers Granted: Two one-day waivers for public notice (unanimous).
  • Expedited Petitions: Both approved (5-0); one continued for findings of fact.
  • Skyline Sign Variance (2022-DV2-048): Approved 4-1; continued for findings of fact.
  • Single-Family Dwelling Variance (2022-UV2-030): Approved 3-1; continued for findings of fact.
  • Officer Elections: The board unanimously re-elected Craig E. Von Dalen as Chairperson, James Duke as Vice Chairperson, and Patrice Ducett Brown as Secretary.

Meeting Transcript

Okay. 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 James Duke, Patrice Ducett Brown, Beth Brandon, and Tom Barnes. Legal Counsel for the Board today is Chris Steinmetz. Staff members present today from the Division of Planning are Eddie O'Neill, Principal Planner 2. Robert Eulin Hay, Senior Planner, Marlene Urajeda, Senior Planner. Heather Stevens, Senior Specialist and Secretary of the Board, and Tamara Wisdom, Hearing Specialist. 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, 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 to the 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 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 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 a petition for judicial review of a decision of the board. The 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. Is there anyone in the audience who has any questions about our procedure? If not, before we hear specialist 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. So move. Do I hear a second? Brandon, second. Thank you. I'll now ask for a vote. Duke. Duke, yes.

SUMMARIZED BY OPENPUBLICA AI
TRANSCRIPT VIA PUBLIC VIDEO
openpublica.com