BZA continues requested Anson Hotel height variance after neighbor objections; hearing set for May 4

The Whitestown Board of Zoning Appeals voted March 5 to continue consideration of a variance that would raise the allowable building height for a proposed five‑story hotel in the Anson Business District from 50 to 62 feet. The continuance is scheduled for the BZA’s May meeting (May 4) to allow the petitioner to meet with adjacent homeowners and the HOA.

Why it matters: Allowing the hotel height would create a taller building immediately adjacent to townhomes; neighbors said the extra height could increase views into private homes, add light and noise, and affect property values. Board members raised questions about whether the petitioner created the claimed practical hardship and whether a lower compromise would address resident concerns.

Staff described the request (BZA26‑005‑DSV) as a development standards variance to allow a top‑of‑parapet height of 62 feet on a 2.24‑acre site at 6494 Mills Drive and noted comparable approvals elsewhere (TownePlace Suites at 60 feet). Colin Nikoski of Kimberly Horn presented the site plan and elevations, given a top of roof around 53.5 feet and a parapet rising to 62 feet; he said the fifth level mainly screens mechanicals but that the design supports full‑service amenities on the ground floor. Staff included comparative height data in the packet and recommended approval.

Neighbors directly adjacent to the site spoke in opposition. Evan Rosati, owner of 6383 Central Boulevard, said the hotel’s orientation would place front‑facing rooms overlooking his townhome and that the added height would harm privacy, light access and property value. "My son is 8 months old and this is his bedroom," Rosati urged, asking the board to consider residential impacts. Paige Smith, an HOA board member and homeowner, raised concerns about increased noise, light intrusion and the rationale for needing 62 feet rather than conforming at 50.

Petitioners’ representatives said the fifth story is largely to accommodate first‑floor amenities (a restaurant and bar) and that room counts would not increase; they offered to meet with homeowners on screening and to comply with Whitestown’s photometric standards to limit light spill. Chad Mays (Kimberly Horn Associates) said the parapet is intended to screen rooftop mechanicals and that most of the building’s mass is lower than the parapet.

Board members wrestled with the 'practical difficulty' criterion—several said the owner’s site choices create the hardship—while others noted that the PUD allows taller nonresidential buildings in nearby districts and that the site could accommodate taller commercial building types. Some members proposed compromise heights (52–55 feet) or mitigation commitments. Given the public objections and the petitioner's request to meet neighbors, the board voted to continue the item to the May meeting.

What’s next: The petitioner will meet with neighbors and the HOA; the variance (BZA26‑005‑DSV) will be re‑considered at the scheduled May meeting with any negotiated mitigation or revised plans submitted to staff in advance.