Bridgeway Church denied parking variance
Board of Zoning Appeals cites lack of communication, illegal construction in voting down request
This article is brought to you by Bob Stephenson for City Council District 2. Bob says, “I would like to thank my good friend and long-time city councilman Bob Hayes for his endorsement! Bob spent years making Kokomo a great to live, work, and raise a family. With your help, I will continue that tradition on the Kokomo Common Council!”
Election Day is Tuesday, Nov. 7. Please consider voting for Bob Stephenson for Council District 2. Visit BobforCouncil.com for more information or to reach out to Bob.
Bridgeway Church has some big plans. They’re in the middle of building a new home along East Hoffer Street. But the project stumbled on Oct. 4 when the Kokomo Board of Zoning Appeals denied a request to increase parking above what the law allows.
The rare opposition stemmed from two major transgressions committed by the project manager, David Counsell of Land Stewards Design Group, and the contractor, Hearn Construction.
Mike Duncan, representative for Hearn Construction, made the appeal for the project, but he quickly ran into a buzzsaw in the form of Kokomo Plan Commission President Mike Besser.
Duncan sought approval for two variances to the church project. One request would allow additional parking in front of the building. The other would increase the maximum lot coverage for parking to accommodate the church’s projections for growth.
“From day one of opening, the church anticipates 350 total users at approximately three people per vehicle,” said Duncan. “So, 117 parking spaces are needed. The church anticipates that this number will double to 700 total members, visitors, and staff in the years to come, requiring as many spaces as possible.”
Without the variance to the parking in front of the building, the church would only have 85 percent of the needed parking for the current congregation. Without the lot coverage variance, the church will not be able to provide the 152 parking spaces needed for estimated future growth.
Besser was not impressed with the request, as it included information the plan commission typically receives well before a variance is requested.
“You continually say from day one you knew what the parking status was,” said Besser. “Why didn't we ever hear about this?”
Kokomo Plan Commission Director Greg Sheline attempted to shed light on the matter, despite the absence of Counsell, who had suffered a significant personal emergency and could not attend.
“We went through everything with Mr. Counsell when they presented the site plan,” said Sheline “One of our planners then told Mr. Counsell about these two potential variances. I think he went back to the church, and my understanding was they decided to basically redo the plan to take away the two variances because they didn't want to have to wait.”
Sheline said the revised plan was approved by the commission, but Counsell contacted Sheline a few days later, claiming that the church had reconsidered and wanted to pursue the parking variances.
Besser continued to press Duncan, asking why the no one representing the project attended its site plan hearing and why construction began on the project before permits were obtained.
“I go to get my car washed and drive by to see that the footer is completely done,” said Besser. “And it's not even supposed to be started until the meeting I'm going to has approved it.”
Duncan had no answer for the early construction or the lack of attendance at the site plan meeting.
“I wasn't part of that process at that point in time, so I can't answer that question for you,” said Duncan.
“In every instance, the petitioner did something incorrect,” said Besser. “I'm trying to find out who's driving the bus while we're playing catch up.”
Duncan admitted that Hearn Construction was in error by starting construction without approval but continued to attempt to obtain the requested parking variance.
“(The church) has a certain timeframe that they have to be out of their location,” said Duncan. “Time is not something that's on our side. (Hearn) is trying to assist them so they're not stuck in a situation next spring or summer where they don't have a building or a church to move into.”
It quickly became obvious that at least Besser was unwilling to grant the exception for increased parking. City attorney T.J. Rethlake offered that the petitioner could separate their two variance requests, allowing the board to consider the variance for increased parking in front of the structure separately from the more ambitious maximum parking lot coverage variance.
Duncan agreed to separate the two requests, and the board approved the frontage parking variance. When the vote came for the lot coverage variance, the project hit a unanimous wall of opposition.
Following the meeting, Duncan sought clarification about the board’s opposition to the variance.
“My question is, why did you allow us to come this far without trying to settle these types of differences?” asked Duncan.
“If someone had shown up at the first plat meeting, we would have,” said Besser. “A lot of things happen in that meeting. We ask about the project, and if you want to do something different, Mr. Sheline and his staff can look at it and let you know if there is a problem.
“We get some people coming here, and their preparation and comprehensive business plan from day one is unbelievable. They’ve dotted every ‘I.’ They've crossed every ‘T.’ They explain what they do and give you the history of, in this case, what the church was doing. They would tell us from day one how much the church has expanded to the present day.
“With this case, I have nothing to base my opinion on. You have showed me no evidence of how the church has grown. And if it is growing that fast. I think you just invested into a block that’s too small. But it's those types of questions that are normally asked and answered up front.”
Sheline added that he and his office had several conversations with the project manager, David Counsell, to no avail.
“I don't think we've ever done a project with Mr. Counsell before, and I don't think he totally understood our process,” said Sheline. “We did our best to talk him through like we do everybody.”
Duncan offered a final defense, admitting that Hearn knowingly ignored the legal process by starting construction without a permit, but hoping it wouldn’t be held against the church.
“We're not trying to do anything that we're not supposed to do,” said Duncan. “I know we did shoot the gun on that, and that's our fault. We were stuck in a bad spot. We did something we shouldn't have done. We won't do it again. We understand that, but we're trying to do the best for our customer.”
In other activity, the board approved a variance to allow additional parking in front of a planned Marathon gas station and convenience store at the intersection of Championship Drive and Markland Avenue (Ind. 22) on the city's far east side.
Under current comprehensive plan rules, no more than 25 percent of the total parking for a business may be located in front of the business.
The rule is among the most common reasons for a zoning appeal. Sheline admitted that the rule has become problematic, particularly when dealing with corner properties that have more than one street fronting it. Laying out a project's footprint becomes more of a challenge in these situations, and often the board of zoning appeals must make an exception to the rule so that the projects can meet other development standards in the city's comprehensive plan.
Sheline disclosed after the meeting that his office is currently reviewing the parking frontage rule for possible revisions.
It seems like this group is acting in bad "faith". In going ahead without proper approval. It seems more like go ahead and do it and ask for "forgiveness" later.