Metropolitan Board of Zoning Appeals Division 3 Public Hearing - October 15, 2024
STREAMING COPY IN PREPARATION — RECORDING AVAILABLE FROM THE ORIGINAL SOURCE
Metropolitan Board of Zoning Appeals Division 3 Public Hearing - October 15, 2024
This public hearing of the Metropolitan Board of Zoning Appeals (Division 3) was held on October 15, 2024, at 6:00 PM, chaired by Acting Chairperson Percy Blaine Jr. with board members Rihanna Binder, Tom Barnes, and Craig Von Dalen present. The board considered multiple requests for continuances, withdrawals, expedited petitions, and variances. Key topics included a garage frontage variance for a subdivision, a pole barn variance on agricultural-zoned land, and a digital sign variance for a school.
Consent Calendar
- Expedited Petition 2024-UV3-008 (Amended): Variance of development standards for an accessory structure at 2649 Fisher Road. The petitioner withdrew the variance of use for an event center, and the board unanimously granted the remaining variance for the accessory structure location and setback, with a commitment that the structure shall not be used as an event center or for commercial purposes.
Public Comments & Testimony
- Brooke Thomas (Chief Development Officer, Indigo, 1501 West Washington Street) appeared in remonstrance to cases 2024-DV3-024 and 2024-DV3-026 but expressed support for the requested continuances.
- Kevin Buckheit (Planner, Craig DeVault, representing University of Indianapolis) indicated interest in case 2024-UV-3015 and requested that if the petition were amended, additional public notice should be provided.
Discussion Items
-
Case 2024-DV3-023 (Lawrence Township, 138-lot subdivision): Petitioner Mark Crouch requested a variance to allow front-loaded garages comprising up to 60% of the front facade (amended from 65%), exceeding the 45% maximum in D5 zoning. The petitioner argued that the two-car garage is essential for marketability, that the timing of the project prevented compliance with newer walkable neighborhood rules, and that the hardship was not self-imposed. Staff recommended denial, stating that the difficulty was self-created, that the zoning district was chosen by the applicant, and that compliant designs (e.g., side-loaded garages, smaller garages, or rezoning) were possible. After a 4-0 vote (with Craig Von Dalen voting yes, others no), the variance was denied.
-
Case 2024-DV3-027 (Lawrence Township, 9621 East 96th Street): Petitioner Chris Shaptar sought a variance to construct a 40x80 foot pole barn (20 ft eave height, ~30 ft peak) that would be larger and taller than the primary dwelling. The property is 2.76 acres zoned DA (dwelling agricultural). The petitioner argued the barn would store race cars and trailers, mirroring a neighbor's structure, and that all neighbors supported it. Staff opposed, noting that the DA zone allows larger accessory structures only for agricultural operations, and that the property does not meet the 3-acre minimum for such use. The vote was 2-2 (Rihanna Binder no, Craig Von Dalen yes, Percy Bland yes, Tom Barnes no), resulting in an indecisive vote, and the petition was continued to November 19, 2024.
-
Case 2024-UV3-014 (Perry Township, Douglas MacArthur Elementary School): Petitioner Thomas Hopkins (Sign Solutions) requested a variance for a monument sign with a digital display (63% of sign face) located within the right-of-way and within 600 feet of protected districts. The school seeks to replace an existing changeable-copy sign with a digital version for easier updates and multilingual messaging. Staff recommended denial, citing that digital signs are prohibited in SU2 zones, the sign would be too close to homes, and the location within the right-of-way creates safety hazards. The vote was 2-2 (Craig Von Dalen yes, Rihanna Binder no, Tom Barnes no, Percy Bland yes), resulting in an indecisive vote, and the petition was continued to November 19, 2024.
Key Outcomes
- Denied: Case 2024-DV3-023 (garage frontage variance) – motion failed 1-3.
- Continued (indecisive vote): Cases 2024-DV3-027 and 2024-UV3-014 – both continued to the November 19, 2024 hearing.
- Granted: Expedited petition 2024-UV3-008 (amended) – unanimously approved.
- Withdrawn/Acknowledged: Case 2024-UV-1009 withdrawn; part of 2024-UV3-008 (variance of use) withdrawn.
- Continued (no objection): Cases 2024-DV3-028, 2024-DV3-024, 2024-DV3-026, and 2024-UV-3015 were continued to November 19, 2024, with or without additional notice as noted.
- Five-day waivers granted: Cases 2024-UV-3014 and 2024-DV3-027 (for notice timeliness) – both approved unanimously.
All decisions are subject to compliance with conditions imposed by the board and the requirements of the zoning ordinance.
Meeting Transcript
I'll go ahead and call the meeting to order. This is a public hearing of the Metropolitan Board of Zoning Appeals Division 3. I am Percy Blaine Jr., acting chairperson of Division 3. Other board members present here today are to my right are Miss Ryanna Binder, Tom Barnes, and Craig Von Dalen. Hope I said that right, sir. Legal counsel for the board today is Chris Steinmetz. Staff members present today from the Division of Planning are Eddie Hunea, Principal Planner 2, and Interim Current Planning Administrator, Robert Ulenhaik, Senior Planner, Michael Weigel, Senior Planner, Noah Stern, Senior Planner, Kaya Mullins, Associate Planner, and Marty Weiste, Specialist and Secretary to the Board. The board has copy 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. 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 that 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 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 then be allowed five minutes for rebuttal of the petitioner's rebuttal evidence before the 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 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 Bull's rules of procedures, including posting of the notice signed on the subject property at least 20 to three days before the hearing, the board may continue the petition. Anyone at this hearing who thinks uh complete and proper notice has not been given and would like the petition to be 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, paving of the marking area, and dedication of the rights of way are examples. These conditions and commitments are an integral part of the board's decision and must be met for granted uh variants to be valid. Compliance with conditions imposed by the board must be proved by an affidavit of compliance submitted to the petitioner or by the petitioner, excuse me, 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 at the decision 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 reference to the board 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 is prohibited. Please be courteous and orderly at all times, and please be sure your cell phone ringers are turned off. So because we have uh four board members present today. If your petition receives an indecisive vote, your petition will be automatically continued to the November 19th, 2024 hearing. All right. Is there anyone in the audience who has any question about the procedures that I just outlined? Okay. Before we hear special requests, I will ask for a waiver of our rules to procedure and allow the board to vote for all expedited petitions and adopt their findings of fact without any testimony from the individual petitioners. And I need a motion. So moved. Second. Thank you. I will now ask for a vote. Sorry. Bender. So moved.
openpublica.com