UPDATE: The hearing before the Metropolitan Development Commission on the variance request at the Community Justice Campus did not take place on Jan. 2. It has been postponed to Jan. 15 because a quorum from the Commission was not present at the meeting.

One obstacle stands between the city and its goal of completing its $620 million justice center project: the city itself.

Indianapolis officials have sought a variance toa 2015 stream water protection ordinance so they can place a parking lot and access road within 60 feet of Pleasant Run. The city's own hearing examiner has recommended denial.

Now, the city is appealing, in effect, to itself.

In a merry-go-round of checks and balances, yet another city board — the Metropolitan Development Commission — will take up the city's appeal on Jan. 2 at 1 p.m. And residents in surrounding neighborhoods are watching closely.

Some say the variance request represents a failure of city officials to play by the rules they set for others. They raise concerns about negative impacts to Pleasant Run, an urban stream with a history of industrial and sewage pollution. They question the city's commitment to protecting the environment.

But city officials say the variance is the only way to achieve Mayor Joe Hogsett's dream of criminal justice reform, and they argue that the project will enhance the site. Besides, they say, flexibility was built into the ordinance to allow for such variances.

One way or another, the city's fate appears to be in the city's hands. For now.

An unusual civics lesson

This unusual lesson in civics began in August, when the city first filed its variance request, which included proposals to change building heights and to divide the land into different plats. Residents in the surrounding areas – including Fountain Square, Christian Park and Twin Aire – have no problem with those requests.

In fact, residents largely support the Community Justice Campus and believe it will help build up the area, according to Susan Gaw and Juliet Port, who together, with leaders from several other neighborhood organizations, helped found People for Pleasant Run.

Their sticking point is the request for an exception to the Stream Protection Corridor.

The city created the Stream Protection Corridor in 2015 as part of its Indy Rezone campaign. It is meant to preserve green space within 60 feet of the top of the bank on each side of city waterways to "protect a stream system," according to the ordinance.

"All we really want the city to do is adhere to its ordinance from 2015, which they touted as one of their great accomplishments," said Gaw, a longtime resident of the area and president of the Fountain Square Alliance. "We've been trying to accomplish projects to get the community to connect with the creek, and the city wants to go in and pave next to it."

A great deal of science and input from many stakeholders was used to arrive at the 60-foot number, according to Julie Rhodes, director of collective impact group Reconnecting to Our Waterways. That setback is important to maintain healthy stream banks for erosion, water quality, wildlife habitat and to reduce flooding impacts, she said.

The city’s initial variance request encroached into the green space of the corridor, however, and would have left only 20 feet untouched. The plans would have paved it over for a parking lot and access road.

"It maybe was not quite as thoughtful as it should have been,” Rhodes said of the proposal.

City officials said that they considered all alternatives to avoid encroaching into the stream protection corridor. But with all that they need to fit on the space – including the jail, courthouse and parking – “we need to use every piece of land that we can,” said Scarlett Martin, the administrator of community and economic development.

To offset the impacts of encroaching on the stream, the city plans to plant additional trees as required by the ordinance, Martin said. And developers are planning to build retention structures under the parking lots to help store stormwater onsite, said Paul Babcock, director of the office of public health and safety.

City officials argue the site will be a marked improvement to what's there. Babcock said the city is working to clean up contamination from the former Citizens coke plant and thus reinvesting in the communities and environment.

Port, a community resident, said that investment makes it all the more important that all aspects of the environment are taken into account – including the waterway, not just the cleanup. As a private environmental planner herself who used to work for the state, Port has been helping the surrounding neighborhoods understand the proposals and technical documents.

She also has done some testing of her own. Port took the temperature of water in Pleasant Run upstream from the site and downstream of areas where trees have been removed. She found that the temperature was a few degrees warmer, which she said can harm aquatic life.

“You can get bogged down in technical details,” Port said. “But at the end of the day, it’s pretty simple: People value green space and the corridor that Pleasant Run and nature provides.”

City-County Council Vice President Zach Adamson worries about the precedent that approving the variance request would set. This isn’t the first time an exception to the stream protection corridor has been granted: There have been seven since the ordinance was adopted four years ago. Still, Adamson said those weren’t on the city’s own property under its control.

“I think the city ought to strive to set the example of respecting the standards we just implemented intending to protect our streams and waterways,” he said. “If the city can’t follow the standard, and the whole point of the Indy Rezone was to set the standard to both best practice and prevent the relentless variance requests, what was the point?”

Adamson said he thinks the part of the variance request related to the stream protection corridor should not be approved.

There has been some back-and-forth with city officials and community residents in efforts to reach an agreement. The residents, however, said they have not been satisfied with the changes made thus far, and want more done to maintain as much of the 60-foot corridor and trees along the stream bank as possible.

The hearing examiner – a contract employee delegated by the Metropolitan Development Commission to hear cases on its behalf – reviewed the variance request at a meeting on Dec. 12. Roughly a dozen residents attended and a handful spoke, including Gaw.

The examiner, Judy Weerts-Hall, recommended approving the proposals related to building height and division of plats. But “denial of the Stream Protection Corridor was recommended,” according to the memorandum of the examiner’s decision.

The letter cited residents' concerns with erosion control, tree preservation, flooding and aesthetics of waterways. The examiner also referenced having insufficient time to review revised cross sections that were submitted on the day of the meeting.

Gaw admits she was a little surprised at that decision, stopping herself short from jumping up and cheering. The city, however, is appealing Weerts-Hall's recommendation, meaning it will now go before the full Commission. The body – which functions as a board for the Department of Metropolitan Development – is nine members; the mayor appoints five and the City-County Council appoints four, all drawing from the general population.

The Development Commission will make the final decision, unless an appeal is filed with the courts through the judicial review process. The variance request will not go before the full City-County Council, but council members can speak at Thursday’s hearing.

Adamson said he is happy to see the community fighting to protect its waterway.

Rhodes, who leads ROW, said she thinks the city underestimated that people would care about this. But it was a lesson learned for everyone: There are a lot of competing priorities within a city, she said, but the public also made clear that natural resources are a priority for them.

“The Mayor is touting an innovative criminal justice complex and we know that’s a major goal, but then what does that mean for these other goals in our city?” Rhodes asked. “It’s a $600M development, and we should be able to do right by the waterway.”

Call IndyStar reporter Sarah Bowman at 317-444-6129 or email at sarah.bowman@indystar.com. Follow her on Twitter and Facebook: @IndyStarSarah. Connect with IndyStar’s environmental reporters: Join The Scrub on Facebook.

IndyStar's environmental reporting project is made possible through the generous support of the nonprofit Nina Mason Pulliam Charitable Trust.