on Jul 15th, 2019

Last year, I wrote an article about the Indianapolis Department of Metropolitan Development’s seeming devotion to neighborhood land use plans. This is still an ongoing issue, as mid-block duplex proposals keep getting denied by the Metropolitan Development Commission. This is a sure-fire way to raise housing costs, and stifle the growth of our burgeoning transit system.

And now, they are not even listening to their own advice regarding land use plans. Witness a few bullet points, starting on the 15th page of the latest MDC Staff Report:

This request would rezone the site from the D-5 District to the D-P classification to provide for

six, single-family dwellings for a density of 27 units per acre. The D-P District is a planned-unit

development that encourages development plans that incorporate and promote environmental

and aesthetic considerations, working within the constraints and advantages presented by

existing site conditions.

◊ The Comprehensive Plan recommends traditional neighborhood with a transit oriented

development overlay. “The Traditional Neighborhood typology includes a full spectrum of

housing types, ranging from single family homes to large-scale multifamily housing. The

development pattern of this typology should be compact and well-connected, with access to

individual parcels by an alley when practical. Building form should promote the social

connectivity of the neighborhood, with clearly defined public, semi-public, and private spaces.

Infill development should continue the existing visual pattern, rhythm, or orientation of

surrounding buildings when possible. A wide range of neighborhood-serving businesses,

institutions, and amenities should be present. Ideally, most daily needs are within walking

distance. This typology usually has a residential density of 5 to 15 dwelling units per acre.”

◊ The Transit-Oriented Development (TOD) overlay is intended for areas within walking distance

of a transit station. The purpose of this overlay is to promote pedestrian connectivity and a

higher density than the surrounding area (15+ dwelling units for this site). This site lies within

a ¼ mile of the proposed Blue Rapid Transit Line that would run along Washington Street

between Cumberland and Plainfield.

◊ Staff recognizes that density is needed to support transit-oriented development, but

redevelopment should be harmonious with and not detrimental to the neighborhood and

surrounding land uses.

So, basically, this is exactly what we asked for, but because it doesn’t match the existing infrastructure, we are going to deny it. What is this controversial proposal about, after all? This:

It’s 6 individual houses placed upon two lots, with a walking path placed in the middle. This is a unique new proposal, but such places do exist within the city. Witness Washington Court, or College Avenue’s Cottage Houses, or 1725 Cottage Avenue. Today’s DMD would likely deny all of them.

City streets should be more than owner-occupied single family homes. Even my own block in Meridian-Kessler has duplexes and rental houses. Just one block away from my house is a small mid-block apartment complex, which likely would not exist if an identical copy were proposed today. This all begs the question: How well does DMD know its own city?