I have attended most of the Broad Ripple Village Association (BRVA) Land Use Committee meetings. I also watch most of the City of Indianapolis' Department of Metropolitan Development (DMD) Zoning Variance hearings on Channel 16. When neighbors complained at a recent meeting that they were not notified of the public BRVA committee meeting where a petition that affects their area was passed by the committee, as a disinterested third party, I started to think about the role of the BRVA in zoning matters.

The governing body in zoning cases is the Department of Metropolitan Development. The DMD holds hearings on the first three Tuesdays of each month at the City-County Building. Petitioners (residents that wish to build a structure that will violate a city code, for example) get their cases on the docket for a hearing. The petitioner sends out the required legal notice of the hearing date to adjoining property owners and neighborhood associations about a month before the hearing and places a sign with the petition number and hearing date on the property. All of this is intended to give interested parties sufficient warning if they wish to testify either for or against a petition that would affect them.

The BRVA also requests that petitioners come before the BRVA Land Use committee to present their case. The committee meets on the fourth Tuesday of each month at Broad Ripple United Methodist Church. The committee hears the case and then decides to support, oppose, or take no position on the petition when it comes before the DMD Zoning Board at the City-County Building hearing.

Currently, the BRVA makes quite an effort to distribute fliers to nearby residents of a petitioner that is scheduled to come before the committee. Sometimes a petitioner asks to be added to the BRVA's committee agenda after it is too late to notify the neighbors. What to do? Require that the petitioner wait until the following committee meeting so neighbors can be notified, probably resulting an a one month slip in the DMD meeting appearance, further delaying the proposed project, or hear the case with little or no input from the neighbors?

My suggestion is that the BRVA should present a recommendation of approval or denial of a petition to the DMD based on the experience and expertise of the BRVA Land Use committee, with input from BRVA members as time allows. BRVA members could receive the meeting agenda via email, although there would be special instances when last minute requests could change that agenda. Non-BRVA member residents could perhaps be included in the discussion, but just as non-members are not allowed to vote in BRVA board elections, they would also not be able to "vote" for or against a petition.

Therefore, I believe that it is unreasonable to expect the BRVA to guarantee a forum between a petitioner and all interested parties. The forum should be between the petitioner and the BRVA. The BRVA would then present its position on a petition at the DMD hearing. Any residents of Indianapolis are also encouraged to voice their position on a petition at that DMD hearing. This is the proper arena, as the city has in place a timely notification system and an open forum for all.

Next issue: Part two of the editorial.