Metropolitan Board of Zoning Appeals, Division 3 Hearing - January 21, 2020
STREAMING COPY IN PREPARATION — RECORDING AVAILABLE FROM THE ORIGINAL SOURCE
Metropolitan Board of Zoning Appeals, Division 3 Hearing - January 21, 2020
The Metropolitan Board of Zoning Appeals, Division 3, held a public hearing on January 21, 2020, at 6:15 PM. Vice Chairperson Marisol Govai presided with members Anatoly Boshenko, Matthew Draving, and Janice Schoolson Dunlap present. The board heard requests for continuances, expedited docket transfers, and six variance/special exception petitions. All votes were unanimous, with four members voting.
Continuances and Procedural Motions
- 2019 UV 3010 (2630 South Arlington Avenue): Petitioner Justin King requested a continuance to February 18, 2020, without additional notice, as the petition was recommended for denial and the petitioner was revising the site plan. Staff had no objection. Approved unanimously.
- 2019 SE 3002 (11149 Stony Brook Drive): Petitioner Joe Calderon requested moving the case to the expedited docket. Staff agreed. Approved unanimously.
- 2019 UV 3017 (1018 Calvary Street): Petitioner Marcus Crouch requested expedited handling, but the Foundation Neighborhood Association had filed a letter requesting a continuance. The board voted to continue to February 18, 2020, without notice. Approved unanimously.
- 2019 DV 3004 (8602-9010 Southeastern Avenue): Attorney David Rutherford requested a continuance to February 18, 2020, without notice, citing technical issues with staff. Staff had no objection. Approved unanimously.
- 2019 UV 3016 (1024 Calvary Street): Staff reported an automatic continuance filed by a remonstrator to February 18, 2020, with additional notice. The board acknowledged the continuance.
Discussion Items
2019 DV 3042 – 5360 East 75th Street
- Request: Variance to allow a single-family dwelling with an 80-foot front setback (required: greater of 40 feet or average of 140 feet).
- Position: Petitioner Sam Mulligan (Northridge Construction) agreed with the staff report. Staff had no additional comments.
- Outcome: Approved unanimously (4-0).
2019 DV 3043 – 1238 Tecumseh Street
- Request: Variance to construct a single-family dwelling with a 10-foot front setback, 8 feet between dwellings, 3-foot south side setback, and a detached garage with reduced setbacks, including within the clear side triangle.
- Position: Petitioner Marcus Crouch stated staff recommended approval. The Windsor Park Neighborhood Association submitted a letter with commitments, but the petitioner disagreed with some requests, particularly the 40% open space minimum. Staff recommended disregarding the 40% open space condition as it was not part of the original petition. The petitioner preferred proceeding as originally proposed.
- Outcome: Approved unanimously (4-0).
2019 DV 3045 – 621 North Hamilton Avenue
- Request: Variance to construct a two-story single-family dwelling with a 2-foot south side yard and a detached garage with 57% open space (required: 3-foot side yard and 60% open space).
- Position: Petitioner James Long stated the variance was needed to avoid demolishing an existing foundation. He agreed with the staff report. Staff had no additional comments.
- Outcome: Approved unanimously (4-0).
2019 UV 3015 – 7969 Caswell Street
- Request: Variance to construct a new dwelling unit with an attached garage on a lot with 16 feet of frontage (required 125 feet).
- Position: Staff had no additional comments. No remonstrators appeared.
- Outcome: Approved unanimously (4-0).
2019 SE 3002 – 11149 Stony Brook Drive (Expedited)
- Request: Special exception for a wireless communications facility with a 120-foot monopole tower and 10-foot antenna on school district property.
- Position: Petitioner Joe Calderon (Vertical Bridge Development) stated the site is well-screened near I-70, and the Warren Township Development Association unanimously approved it. Staff recommended approval with one commitment, which the petitioner accepted.
- Outcome: Approved unanimously (4-0).
2019 DV 3041 – 1136 and 1138 East 19th Street
- Request: Variance to construct a two-family dwelling with 8-foot front and rear setbacks (required: 18-foot front setback or lot average, 15-foot rear setback).
- Position: Petitioner Danielle Smith (King Park Development Corporation) argued the practical difficulty was not self-imposed but due to the unique lot configuration and the need to provide affordable housing with attached garages. She stated that any design would require a variance. Staff recommended denial, stating the design could be revised to meet D8 district standards (e.g., by using two single-family attached units) and that the lot width (54 feet) was adequate. The petitioner countered that the existing neighborhood context features reduced setbacks and that redesign would compromise affordability.
- Outcome: Approved unanimously (4-0).
Key Outcomes
- All six variance/special exception petitions were approved with unanimous votes (4-0).
- Four continuances were granted to the February 18, 2020, hearing date, with or without notice as specified.
- One case (2019 SE 3002) was moved to the expedited docket and heard immediately.
- The board noted that with only four members present, a tied vote would result in an automatic continuance.
Meeting Transcript
Call to order. This is a public hearing of the Metropolitan Board of Zoning Appeals, Division 3. I am Marisol Govai, Vice Chairperson of Division 3. The other board members present are to my left, Anatoly, Tony Boshenko, and to my right, Matthew Draving and Janice Schoolson Dunlap. Legal Counsel for the Board today is Chris Steinmetz. Staff members present today from the Division of Planning are Heather Staffen, Senior Specialist and Secretary to the Board. Larry Calloway, Principal Planner 2. Robert Ulan Hake, Senior Planner, Marlene Irajeta, Senior Planner, and Alison Richardson, the senior planner. Matt Pleasant is the current planning administrator. The board has copies of the zoning ordinances 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 and 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 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 of 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 be then allowed 15 five minutes for the 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 the notice sign 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 this 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 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 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 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. Is there anyone in the audience who has any questions about our procedures? And be advised that we only have four members of the board present today. If there is a tied vote, the matter will be automatically continued to the next month. So if that affects your decision, and if you would like the benefit of a full board for your case, you may um submit a request for continuance at this time. If not, we'll consider special requests and continuances at this time. And please state your name and address when you approach the thing. Good afternoon, Justin King and addresses 618 East Market Street, Indianapolis, Indiana 46202. Here before you today, uh regarding the second petition under your continued petitions portion of the docket, case number 2019 UV 3010, address being 2630 South Arlington Avenue. In its present form, this petition is being recommended for denial by the planning staff. And so we are altering our site plan and plan of operations and hope to have that to them sometime this week in order for them to review the latest changes. And so therefore we're asking for a continuance without additional notice to your February 18th docket. And with that, I'll be happy to answer any questions you may have. Seeing none we go to comments from staff.
openpublica.com