Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutFindings of Fact Sheet/Ballot Sheets CARMEL ADVISORY BOARD OF ZONING APPEALS FINDINGS OF FACT SHEET - DEVELOPMENT STANDARDS VARIANCE Docket No.: 18120006-8V Petitioner: Karl & Barbara Meyer 1. The approval of this variance will not be injurious to the public health, safety, morals and general welfare of the community because: The approvals will permit the reuse and modernization of an existing structure on the property as an"in-law quarters". Once the new home is built on the property the existing,renovated structure will become the accessory structure. No changes in the height of the existing structure are contemplated,but as constructed it exceeds the permitted height once it becomes an accessory structure. The footprint of the existing structure will be reduced, but will still exceed the permitted height once it becomes an accessory structure. Additionally,the structures location will not change,but once it is the accessory structure it will be in the front yard of 1st Street SW. The location,size or massing of the existing structure will not be increased by the approval of the variance and the approval of the variance will allow for the reuse of this property to the benefit of the public health,safety,welfare and morals of surrounding property owners and the community. 2. The use and value of the area adjacent to the property included in the variance will not be affected in a substantially adverse manner because: The existing residential structure on site is approximately 100 years old,but by itself does not fit into the character of the redevelopment which has occurred to the east,north and south of the site. Without the granting of a variance,rehabbing the existing structure alone would not be as advantageous to the use,value and enjoyment of surrounding property owners. The proposed redevelopment,utilizing the existing structure as"in-law quarters" and replacing the existing garage,while adding a new primary residential structure will lead to a residential use which is similar in scale and size to other nearby redeveloped properties. The renovated existing structure,though characterized by the ordinance as an accessory building,will still be utilized residentially and massed in a way consistent with surrounding uses. The replacement garage will be located between the new proposed residential structure and the existing structure,which is also in the front yard for the new home,but will utilize the existing drive on the property and be appropriate in design and scale,and until the new residential structure is completed would be permitted by right under the ordinance. 3. The strict application of the terms of the Unified Development Ordinance to the property will result in practical difficulties in the use of the property because: The property has two street frontages,which creates two front yards. As such,even though the location of the renovated building will not change,the change in use and addition of the new residential structure changes the classification of the location by the ordinance. The building height is not changing,but its use will change. The strict application of the ordinance would require a structure,which has been in its location and approximately size and height for approximately 100 years,to move and/or be drastically altered to comply with the ordinance. The requests here seek to allow for the infusion of improvements and renovations into the property which would not be available under a strict application of the ordinance. A strict application of the ordinance treats all accessory structures the same,whether they are new structures or repurposed structures and without regard for their proposed or actual use. DECISION It is therefore the decision of the Carmel Board of Zoning Appeals that Development Standards Variance Docket No. 18120006-8V is granted, subject to any conditions stated in the minutes of this Board, which are incorporated herein by referenc nd made a part hereof. Adopted this 7-11r* day of .4 / , 20 ` . Al 'E%'•+N, el Board o oning Appeals , 3t4jt SECR R Carmel Board f Z ni g Appeals Conditions of the Board are listed on back; r —~ Petitioner or representative to sign. Page 11 of 1 Filename:development standards variance application&instructions 2018 Revised 01/02/2018 CARMEL ADVISORY BOARD OF ZONING APPEALS FINDINGS OF FACT SHEET -DEVELOPMENT STANDARDS VARIANCE Docket No.: 18120006-8V Petitioner: Karl & Barbara Meyer 1. The approval of this variance will not be injurious to the public health, safety, morals and general welfare of the community because: The approvals will permit the reuse and modernization of an existing structure on the property as an "in-law quarters". Once the new home is built on the property the existing,renovated structure will become the accessory structure. No changes in the height of the existing structure are contemplated,but as constructed it exceeds the permitted height once it becomes an accessory structure. The footprint of the existing structure will be reduced, but will still exceed the permitted height once it becomes an accessory structure. Additionally,the structures location will not change,but once it is the accessory structure it will be in the front yard of 1st Street SW. The location,size or massing of the existing structure will not be increased by the approval of the variance and the approval of the variance will allow for the reuse of this property to the benefit of the public health,safety,welfare and morals of surrounding property owners and the community. 2. The use and value of the area adjacent to the property included in the variance will not be affected in a substantially adverse manner because: The existing residential structure on site is approximately 100 years old,but by itself does not fit into the character of the redevelopment which has occurred to the east,north and south of the site. Without the granting of a variance,rehabbing the existing structure alone would not be as advantageous to the use,value and enjoyment of surrounding property owners. The proposed redevelopment,utilizing the existing structure as"in-law quarters" and replacing the existing garage,while adding a new primary residential structure will lead to a residential use which is similar in scale and size to other nearby redeveloped properties. The renovated existing structure,though characterized by the ordinance as an accessory building,will still be utilized residentially and massed in a way consistent with surrounding uses. The replacement garage will be located between the new proposed residential structure and the existing structure,which is also in the front yard for the new home,but will utilize the existing drive on the property and be appropriate in design and scale,and until the new residential structure is completed would be permitted by right under the ordinance. 3. The strict application of the terms of the Unified Development Ordinance to the property will result in practical difficulties in the use of the property because: The property has two street frontages,which creates two front yards. As such,even though the location of the renovated building will not change,the change in use and addition of the new residential structure changes the classification of the location by the ordinance. The building height is not changing,but its use will change. The strict application of the ordinance would require a structure,which has been in its location and approximately size and height for approximately 100 years,to move and/or be drastically altered to comply with the ordinance. The requests here seek to allow for the infusion of improvements and renovations into the property which would not be available under a strict application of the ordinance. A strict application of the ordinance treats all accessory structures the same,whether they are new structures or repurposed structures and without regard for their proposed or actual use. DECISION It is therefore the decision of the Carmel Board of Zoning Appeals that Development Standards Variance Docket No. 18120006-8v is granted, subject to any conditions stated in the minutes of this Board, which are incorporated herein by reference and made a part hereof. Adopted this 'a et day of ''G 41 , 20 6 p CHAIR ill-SON, r el d of Zoning Appeals SEC-'ARY, Carmel Board of Zoning Appeals Conditions of the Board are listed on back; Petitioner or representative to sign. Page 11 of 12 Filename:development standards variance application&instructions 2018 Revised 01/02/2018 CARMEL ADVISORY BOARD OF ZONING APPEALS FINDINGS OF FACT SHEET -DEVELOPMENT STANDARDS VARIANCE Docket No.: 18120006-8V Petitioner: Karl & Barbara Meyer 1. The approval of this variance will not be injurious to the public health, safety, morals and general welfare of the community because: The approvals will permit the reuse and modernization of an existing structure on the property as an "in-law quarters". Once the new home is built on the property the existing,renovated structure will become the accessory structure. No changes in the height of the existing structure are contemplated,but as constructed it exceeds the permitted height once it becomes an accessory structure. The footprint of the existing structure will be reduced, but will still exceed the permitted height once it becomes an accessory structure. Additionally,the structures location will not change,but once it is the accessory structure it will be in the front yard of 1st Street SW. The location,size or massing of the existing structure will not be increased by the approval of the variance and the approval of the variance will allow for the reuse of this property to the benefit of the public health,safety,welfare and morals of surrounding property owners and the community. 2. The use and value of the area adjacent to the property included in the variance will not be affected in a substantially adverse manner because: The existing residential structure on site is approximately 100 years old,but by itself does not fit into the character of the redevelopment which has occurred to the east,north and south of the site. Without the granting of a variance,rehabbing the existing structure alone would not be as advantageous to the use,value and enjoyment of surrounding property owners. The proposed redevelopment,utilizing the existing structure as"in-law quarters" and replacing the existing garage,while adding a new primary residential structure will lead to a residential use which is similar in scale and size to other nearby redeveloped properties. The renovated existing structure,though characterized by the ordinance as an accessory building,will still be utilized residentially and massed in a way consistent with surrounding uses. The replacement garage will be located between the new proposed residential structure and the existing structure,which is also in the front yard for the new home,but will utilize the existing drive on the property and be appropriate in design and scale,and until the new residential structure is completed would be permitted by right under the ordinance. 3. The strict application of the terms of the Unified Development Ordinance to the property will result in practical difficulties in the use of the property because: The property has two street frontages,which creates two front yards. As such,even though the location of the renovated building will not change,the change in use and addition of the new residential structure changes the classification of the location by the ordinance. The building height is not changing,but its use will change. The strict application of the ordinance would require a structure,which has been in its location and approximately size and height for approximately 100 years,to move and/or be drastically altered to comply with the ordinance. The requests here seek to allow for the infusion of improvements and renovations into the property which would not be available under a strict application of the ordinance. A strict application of the ordinance treats all accessory structures the same,whether they are new structures or repurposed structures and without regard for their proposed or actual use. DECISION It is therefore the decision of the Carmel Board of Zoning Appeals that Development Standards Variance Docket No. 18120006-8V is granted, subject to any conditions stated in the minutes of this Board, which are incorporated herein by reference and made a part hereof. Tali , Adopted this 2 day ofAde , 20 11 1 1 � 1 CHAIRPERSO , Carr l)Board of Zoning Appeals ( SECRETA Carmen oard of Zoning Appeals Conditions of the Board are listed on back; Petitioner or representative to sign. Page 11 of 12 Filename:development standards variance application&instructions 2018 Revised 01/02/2018 CARMEL ADVISORY BOARD OF ZONING APPEALS BALLOT SHEET: FINDINGS OF FACT, DEVELOPMENT STANDARDS VARIANCE Carmel, Indiana Docket No.: 18120006-8V ( 3\ \ s'- Sj- Sk.,)> Petitioner: Karl & Barbara Meyer 1. 6111?(- 2. 3. DATED THIS :.)) :) DAY OF , 20 1 Board ember Page 10 of 12 Filename:development standards variance application&instructions 2018 Revised 01/02/2018 CARMEL ADVISORY BOARD OF ZONING APPEALS BALLOT SHEET: FINDINGS OF FACT, DEVELOPMENT STANDARDS VARIANCE Carmel, Indiana Docket No.: 18120006-8V Petitioner: Karl & Barbara Meyer 1. 414, 6.rtki4v- 41 1,44 2. 3. 7,77.DATED THIS v ' DAY OF , 20 /7 Board Membe Page 10 of 12 Filename:development standards variance application&instructions 2018 Revised 01/02/2018 • K !. ,1 CARMEL ADVISORY BOARD OF ZONING APPEALS BALLOT SHEET: FINDINGS OF FACT, DEVELOPMENT STANDARDS VARIANCE Carmel, Indiana Docket No.: 18120006-8V Petitioner: Karl & Barbara Meyer 1. 2. 3. DATED THIS Z V DAY OF - 01✓ALA V , 20 I 9 . Boar ember Page 10 of 12 Filename:development standards variance application&instructions 2018 Revised 01/02/2018 CARMEL ADVISORY BOARD OF ZONING APPEALS BALLOT SHEET: FINDINGS OF FACT, DEVELOPMENT STANDARDS VARIANCE Carmel, Indiana Docket No.: 18120006-8V Petitioner: Karl & Barbara Meyer 1. A Frirci 2. 3. DATED THIS 2� DAY OF41? / , 20 (C Board Member Page 10 of 12 Filename:development standards variance application&instructions 2018 Revised 01/02/2018 CARMEL ADVISORY BOARD OF ZONING APPEALS BALLOT SHEET: FINDINGS OF FACT, DEVELOPMENT STANDARDS VARIANCE Carmel, Indiana Docket No.: 18120006-8V Petitioner Karl & Barbara Meyer 1. ,,,e7iptierve,49/ 2. 3. DATED THIS DAY OF `' �� , 20 /71 Board MeneT Page 10 of 12 Filename:development standards variance application&instructions 2018 Revised 01/02/2018 � ♦a ♦ay f ♦�N