HomeMy WebLinkAboutLetter #01 Debbie Klineman6/26/2023 Board of Zoning Appeals Re: Fagen Residence Lot Cover Variance
We are not in favor of the lot cover variance request applied for by the homeowner at 14397 Jeremy
Drive.
There is a history with the drainage retention area which directly abuts the property that the Board of
Zoning Appeals should be aware of before rendering a decision. Homeowners who flooded repeatedly
or were under the threat of flooding with any heavy rain worked with the city over the course of 15
years to have their flooding concerns alleviated. The City of Carmel spent upwards of $1M on the fix
with a larger pipe and additional grading to the drainage basin and swale between our property and the
petitioner. The HOA also contributed approximately $40K. The work was completed in, I believe, 2018
and the remedy has given all properties who are adjacent a huge sense of relief whenever there is heavy
rainfall or multiple days of rain and Cool Creek is elevated.
With all the above facts, those same adjacent homeowners were quite surprised that a very large 8’
deep diving pool was approved for this lot requesting the variance. Technically the property is just
outside of the flood plain but the pool is very close to the drainage retention area to the east and the
drainage swale directly to its south. The amount of ground surface and subsurface area for just the pool
and the allowed hardscapes is very concerning as it greatly reduces water capacity absorption for the lot.
To allow hardscapes which put them well above the 35% lot coverage ordinance just seems excessive
and possibly detrimental for such a superfluous reason. It would seem a proportionately sized project
could be designed leaving the property under the 35% maximum allowed under the ordinance.
Additionally, the petitioner was made aware of all concerns prior to the onset of the project and appears
to have made no effort to try and comply with existing lot coverage guidelines; consequently is there
truly a valid reason to grant the exception?
One might reasonably question why Carmel has the 35% lot coverage ordinance if we simply allow
homeowners to run roughshod over it and hardscape much of their front and backyards when
compliance is easily achievable in the first place.
Thank you for your consideration.
Steve & Debbie Klineman
2842 Hazel Foster Drive