Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Get email alerts on the Sidewalk‑variance topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
Board approves variance to delay multiuse path on Headley Road; petitioner must record zoning commitment
Summary
The Bloomington Board of Zoning Appeals approved a request to defer construction of a 12-foot multiuse path along a new single-family lot on North Headley Road, finding that topography, adjacent ownership by Indiana University and lack of connecting sidewalks justify a variance; a zoning commitment must be recorded within 60 days.
The City of Bloomington Board of Zoning Appeals on Sept. 18 approved a requested determined sidewalk variance for a new single‑family parcel at 2403 North Headley Road, allowing the property owner not to construct a 12‑foot multiuse path now and instead delay that work until a coordinated future project.
City staff said the 0.79‑acre parcel on the northeast side of Bloomington would have required a 12‑foot multiuse path under the original site plan. Staff told the board that no multiuse path exists along Headley Road and that construction now would produce an isolated segment that would not connect to pedestrian facilities on adjacent properties. Staff cited steep topography, tall canopy trees on the required alignment and the fact that Indiana University controls adjacent parcels as reasons to coordinate a full corridor improvement later.
The department recommended adoption of findings concluding the variance would not be injurious to public health or welfare, would not substantially harm adjacent property values, and that practical difficulties unique to the parcel (topography, tree canopy, adjacent IU ownership) support relief. The department conditioned approval on a zoning commitment for the sidewalk variance being recorded within 60 days.
Ethan Michaelson, who said he lives next door at 2415 North Headley Road and who represented the petitioner, told the board that Headley Road and surrounding streets currently have no pedestrian facilities for at least a quarter‑mile and that a short, isolated 60‑foot path segment would be an “eyesore,” could require removal of two large white pines and would likely be rebuilt if a later corridor project locates the path differently. Michaelson said he and several neighbors objected to a stand‑alone short path for reasons of neighborhood character and tree preservation.
Board member Burrell moved to adopt the department's findings and approve the case; roll call votes were recorded as yes from Burrell, Sinead and Ballard and the motion carried. The approval is subject to the staff condition that the zoning commitment for the determined sidewalk variance be recorded within 60 days or the petitioner must return to the board.
The board heard no public comment on the petition. No cost estimate for future corridor construction or a timeline for a city‑led multiuse path along Headley Road was provided at the hearing.
The board then proceeded to the next agenda item.
