Metropolitan Board of Zoning Appeals Division III Hearing - July 19, 2022
STREAMING COPY IN PREPARATION — RECORDING AVAILABLE FROM THE ORIGINAL SOURCE
Metropolitan Board of Zoning Appeals Division III Hearing - July 19, 2022
This was a public hearing of the Metropolitan Board of Zoning Appeals, Division III, held on July 19, 2022, chaired by Joanna Taft, with members Bart Brown, Cameron Radford, and Roderick Bohannan. The board processed multiple continuances, two expedited petitions, and two non-expedited variance petitions.
Continuances and Special Requests
- The board approved numerous continuances to the August 16, 2022 hearing, including for cases 2022-DV3-022 (convenience centers), 2022-DV3-018 (24 East Street), 2022-UV3-010, 2022-UV3-014, 2022-UV3-018, 2022-UV3-009, 2022-UV3-011, 2022-UV3-015, 2022-DV3-026, and others. Some continuances were without additional notice, others with.
- A request for continuance for 2022-DV3-028 (fence variance) was denied; the case proceeded.
- Withdrawals were acknowledged for 2022-UV3-005, 2022-UV3-017, and 2022-DV3-009B.
- Timely automatic continuances were acknowledged for 2022-UV3-019 and 2022-DV3-025.
Expedited Cases
- Two petitions were moved to expedited and approved by unanimous vote (4-0):
- 2022-DV3-024: 6832 East 82nd Street – variance for a 25-foot pylon sign (staff recommended approval).
- 2022-DV3-027: 1609 Oliver Avenue – variance for a building addition with reduced front setback (staff recommended approval).
Public Comments & Testimony (Non-Expedited Case: 2022-DV3-014 – 337 Parkway Avenue)
- Petitioner Paul Carroll (representing the developer) requested variances to construct a duplex on a substandard lot. He argued the lot historically had two houses, and the duplex is the highest and best use, consistent with new D5 zoning and TOD overlay. He noted cooperation with the Bates Hendricks Neighborhood Association and staff, reducing the open space variance from 47% to 55% (required 60%).
- Remonstrator Jean Salzman (homeowner at 330 Parkway for 24 years) opposed, stating a previous variance for two houses was denied in 2019. She argued the lot can only support one dwelling, and the duplex would overcrowd, detract from property values, and be inconsistent with the streetscape. She presented seven letters of opposition.
- Staff recommended approval, noting the lot is substandard regardless of use, the front setback is consistent with neighbors, and the duplex fits the D5 district character.
Public Comments & Testimony (Non-Expedited Case: 2022-DV3-028 – 4017 South State Avenue)
- Petitioner Uche Anagu (property owner) requested a variance to add a 4-foot privacy screen atop a 6-foot fence, creating a 10-foot fence. He testified that the neighbor, Wanda Ladd, has engaged in ongoing harassment, including peering over the fence, using a ladder to watch, installing cameras, and making animal sounds at his children. He presented photos, videos, and police reports, and letters of support from neighbors and the University of Indianapolis president.
- Remonstrator Wanda Ladd (neighbor) denied the allegations, accusing Anagu of lying and exaggerating. She claimed Anagu’s fence is ugly, that he has multiple Airbnb units, and that he is trying to block city inspectors from viewing his property. She stated Anagu’s second story sees into their yard, and they have no privacy. She also claimed Anagu did not provide proper notice to neighbors.
- Staff recommended denial, citing the zoning ordinance that fences shall not exceed six feet to maintain residential character.
Key Outcomes
- 2022-DV3-014 (337 Parkway Avenue): Approved by a vote of 3-1 (Bohannan opposed). The variance allows construction of a duplex with an 8-foot front setback and 55% open space (reduced from 60%).
- 2022-DV3-028 (4017 South State Avenue): Approved by a vote of 3-1 (Brown opposed). The variance allows a 10-foot fence (6-foot fence plus 4-foot screen) along the north property line.
- The board also adopted revised findings of fact for previously continued cases (2022-DV3-098, 2022-DV3-017, 2022-DV3-019).
- Meeting adjourned.
Meeting Transcript
I'm going to call this meeting to order. This is a public hearing of the Metropolitan Board of Zoning Appeals, Division III. I'm Joanna Taft, Chairperson of Division III. Other board members present today are to my right, Bart Brown, who are welcoming for his first meeting on the board, and then Cameron Radford, and then to my left, Roderick Bohannan. Legal counsel for the board today is Chris Steinmetz. Staff members present today from the Division of Planning are Eddie Honeya, Principal Planner 2, Jeffrey York, Senior Planner, Robert Ulenhaik, Senior Planner, Marlene Irihetta, Senior Planner, Genesis Hill, Associate Planner, Heather Steffen, Senior Specialist and Secretary to the Board. 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 or withdrawals. As each non-expedited case is called, petitioners 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 the 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 a 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's 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 signed on the subject 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 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 the 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 a 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 four board members present today. If at indecisive vote occurs, your petition will be automatically continued to the next hearing of the board. We will take this into consideration when hearing special requests. So what that means is if you don't, if you would like to ask for continuance to be heard next month as said of this month, because we only have four board members, we will generally be favorable to that type of request in this situation. If there's anyone in the audience who has questions about our procedures, um if not, we will 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 positions and adopt their findings of fact without any additional testimony from the individual petitioners. So I need a motion from the board. Bohan is so moved. I need a second. Second. I'll now ask for vote. I'm gonna poll the board. Bohannon. Bohanna, yes. Radford.
openpublica.com