ILNews

Adams: Is Indy Rezone long overdue or cutting edge?

March 26, 2014
Back to TopCommentsE-mailPrintBookmark and Share
Indiana Lawyer Focus

By David A. Adams

Unless you are a land use lawyer, you may not know that there are some very interesting things happening with Indianapolis’ city zoning ordinance and associated development regulations. For those of you who dabble in the real estate practice, you may be aware that among real estate practitioners, you often come across other attorneys and real estate professionals whose practice is nearly dedicated to “land use” or the zoning practice. Others (like me) deal more on the transactional side of real estate and are more than happy to get my partner down the hall to assist in getting a project through the zoning process. With that background in mind, I recently had the privilege of hearing from some of those individuals at the “Indy Rezone” project who are primarily spearheading the city of Indianapolis’ effort to transform and update the city’s zoning ordinance and development regulations.

adams-david.jpg Adams
The problem

According to the Indy Rezone website (www.indyrezone.org), due to the city’s expansive boundaries and diversity of uses within those boundaries, the city’s zoning ordinance is long overdue for an update:

“Today, the City’s jurisdiction encompasses over 400 square miles comprised of a myriad of development patterns ranging from agriculture, recently developed residential subdivisions, commercial areas that are decidedly suburban in character, and the original commercial nodes the heart of the City created during the streetcar era. This diverse array of communities was, and still is, regulated by a one-size-fits-all set of zoning and building ordinances and regulations. The City’s current practice of administering and enforcing a single use pattern of development is auto-centric. As a result, the City is hindered in its ability to create livable, sustainable places of lasting value.”

Indianapolis has changed drastically over the years, but its zoning ordinance and development standards have not been able to keep up.

Categories of permissible uses

Indy Rezone is introducing a new set of permitted-use tables, which will present a broader categorization of uses and will allow the city to better respond to new types of businesses and industries. The city is also including a new category of uses known as the “V” category, in an effort to help the city address its issues with long-term vacancies. For example, after a certain number of years of being vacant, a new set of permissible uses would open up for that property. Now the devil is in the details, correct? In other words, what does it mean to be “vacant?” Is that classification not available to me if my building is only occupied for a short period of time within that period? The new ordinance will also purportedly include new mixed-use categories, which may allow for different types of uses within the same zoning district.

Transit emphasis corridors

Portions of the new zoning ordinance allow for the accommodation of rail or additional bus lines and mass transit; this has been an ongoing issue that the city has struggled with for some time. The new zoning ordinance seeks flexibility to allow necessary changes that come with updates to the mass-transit movement. For example, new mixed-use zoning districts may be located at future transit stations, whether for light rail or bus service. These mixed-use districts might even restrict the amount of parking to further encourage transit-oriented development.

The green factor

The popularity of “green” or sustainable development is not a new concept and, though focus on those efforts have waned a bit over the years, it still remains a guiding principal in many developments. I also understand that one of the components of the new zoning ordinance will be to, in a sense, reward project owners for the use of “green” or sustainable practices in their developments by allowing for “double-dipping” of credits for landscaping and storm-water development standards.

Seeking consistency

Some of the more general, albeit necessary, revisions to the ordinance include the consolidation of definitions so that there is consistency throughout the ordinance (for example, those related to parking spaces, including how parking ratios are to be measured).

Conclusion

From the experienced land use practitioner’s perspective, these changes may seem long overdue. In fact, other cities across Indiana have already addressed some of these issues in their zoning ordinances. In that sense, Indianapolis may be playing catch up. That said, I think we can all appreciate the effort that has gone into this project and the time and commitment of people and resources to roll it out and educate the public about its goals and intended effects.

Indy Rezone is by no means finished with its project, but is in the process of completing the draft of the new ordinance that will be ready for “prime time” (public comment, including feedback from bar association and practicing attorneys in this area) in the near future. This will be followed by an educational period, which will give experienced land use professionals and novices alike an opportunity to further appreciate and refine these efforts. More information about this project can be found at www.indyrezone.org.

__________

David A. Adams is a partner in the economic development practice group of the Indianapolis office of Bingham Greenebaum Doll LLP. His practice focuses largely on commercial real estate development, finance, investment, acquisitions, sales and leasing. He also represents both lenders and borrowers in different types of secured financing transactions. The opinions expressed are those of the author.

ADVERTISEMENT

Post a comment to this story

COMMENTS POLICY
We reserve the right to remove any post that we feel is obscene, profane, vulgar, racist, sexually explicit, abusive, or hateful.
 
You are legally responsible for what you post and your anonymity is not guaranteed.
 
Posts that insult, defame, threaten, harass or abuse other readers or people mentioned in Indiana Lawyer editorial content are also subject to removal. Please respect the privacy of individuals and refrain from posting personal information.
 
No solicitations, spamming or advertisements are allowed. Readers may post links to other informational websites that are relevant to the topic at hand, but please do not link to objectionable material.
 
We may remove messages that are unrelated to the topic, encourage illegal activity, use all capital letters or are unreadable.
 

Messages that are flagged by readers as objectionable will be reviewed and may or may not be removed. Please do not flag a post simply because you disagree with it.

Sponsored by
ADVERTISEMENT
Subscribe to Indiana Lawyer
  1. "So we broke with England for the right to "off" our preborn progeny at will, and allow the processing plant doing the dirty deeds (dirt cheap) to profit on the marketing of those "products of conception." I was completely maleducated on our nation's founding, it would seem. (But I know the ACLU is hard at work to remedy that, too.)" Well, you know, we're just following in the footsteps of our founders who raped women, raped slaves, raped children, maimed immigrants, sold children, stole property, broke promises, broke apart families, killed natives... You know, good God fearing down home Christian folk! :/

  2. Who gives a rats behind about all the fluffy ranking nonsense. What students having to pay off debt need to know is that all schools aren't created equal and students from many schools don't have a snowball's chance of getting a decent paying job straight out of law school. Their lowly ranked lawschool won't tell them that though. When schools start honestly (accurately) reporting *those numbers, things will get interesting real quick, and the looks on student's faces will be priceless!

  3. Whilst it may be true that Judges and Justices enjoy such freedom of time and effort, it certainly does not hold true for the average working person. To say that one must 1) take a day or a half day off work every 3 months, 2) gather a list of information including recent photographs, and 3) set up a time that is convenient for the local sheriff or other such office to complete the registry is more than a bit near-sighted. This may be procedural, and hence, in the near-sighted minds of the court, not 'punishment,' but it is in fact 'punishment.' The local sheriffs probably feel a little punished too by the overwork. Registries serve to punish the offender whilst simultaneously providing the public at large with a false sense of security. The false sense of security is dangerous to the public who may not exercise due diligence by thinking there are no offenders in their locale. In fact, the registry only informs them of those who have been convicted.

  4. Unfortunately, the court doesn't understand the difference between ebidta and adjusted ebidta as they clearly got the ruling wrong based on their misunderstanding

  5. A common refrain in the comments on this website comes from people who cannot locate attorneys willing put justice over retainers. At the same time the judiciary threatens to make pro bono work mandatory, seemingly noting the same concern. But what happens to attorneys who have the chumptzah to threatened the legal status quo in Indiana? Ask Gary Welch, ask Paul Ogden, ask me. Speak truth to power, suffer horrendously accordingly. No wonder Hoosier attorneys who want to keep in good graces merely chase the dollars ... the powers that be have no concerns as to those who are ever for sale to the highest bidder ... for those even willing to compromise for $$$ never allow either justice or constitutionality to cause them to stand up to injustice or unconstitutionality. And the bad apples in the Hoosier barrel, like this one, just keep rotting.

ADVERTISEMENT