HomeMy WebLinkAboutDept Report 07-18-01
Department Report - Board of Zoning Appeals
July 23,2001
Page 15 of 18
,
I. Old Business.
Ii. Moehl Residence (V-55-01)
Petitioner seeks a Developmental Standards Variance of Section 2.4: Lots in order to
build on a parcel with 23.89 feet of frontage on a public street. The site is located at 1866
Valley Drive. The site is zoned R-I/Residence.
Filed by Timothy F. Moehl.
In deciding whether or not the applicant has presented sufficient proof to permit the
granting of a variance of development standards, the Board shall determine in writing
that:
1. The approval will not be injurious to the public health, safety, morals and
general welfare of the community;
No evidence has been presented to suggest that the approval of this petition would be
injurious to the health, safety, morals and general welfare of 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; and
It is the Department's opinion that the use and value of the area adjacent to the property
will not be affected in a substantially adverse manner by the resident's accessing across a
23.89-foot-wide public street frontage.
3. The strict application of the terms of the Zoning Ordinance will result in
practical difficulties in use of the property.
The parcel in question appears to have been created before the Zoning and Subdivision
Control Ordinances for Carmel were adopted in 1959. Therefore, this property appears to
be a legal, pre-existing nonconformity. Practical difficulty arises from the strict
application of the requirement of adequate public street frontage, which has been
consistently applied by the City as fifty feet to parallel the requirement of the Subdivision
Control Ordinance for platted lots. Without this variance, the property becomes
ineligible for an Improvement Location Permit.
On July 2. 2001. the Department was copied on correspondence dated June 28.
2001. from Mr. Moehl to Mr. Taggart Birge of Bose McKinney & Evans regarding
coordination of landscape buffering efforts (see letter attached). The Department is
unaware of the status of this effort.
At the Public Hearing it was suggested that the prior owner of this property. Mr.
Greg Matters. had appeared before the Board to petition for the same Developmental
Standards Variance. A search of the Board's records did not reveal any petitions relating
to the subject property. nor did it reveal any petitions filed under the name "Matters." If
such a petition was filed. it was apparently never assigned a Docket Number. nor did it
appear on the Board's agenda for consideration.
Page 15
Department Report - Board of Zoning Appeals
July 23,2001
Page 16 of 18
The Department recommends favorable consideration of this petition. All
evidence available to the Department suggests that the property is a legal. ore-existing
nonconformity. and that. therefore. hardship does exist on the parcel.
Page 16