HomeMy WebLinkAboutMinutes HO 06-26-23 Board Comments:Jim Hawkins
• Make sure to apply for your fence permit. Cindy Black: We will.
Approved 1-0.
(V)Fagan Residence,Lot Cover Variance.
The applicant seeks the following development standards variance approval for a pool and patio:
6. Docket No. PZ-2023-00121 V UDO Section 2.08 Maximum 35% lot cover allowed,42% requested.
The site is located at 14397 Jeremy Drive(Foster Estates Subdivision,Lot 235).It is zoned RI/Residence. Filed by
Matthew Harms of Modish Pools,LLC on behalf of Thomas Fagan Jr.and Jacquelyn Fagan,owners.
Petitioner: Matt Harms,Modish Pools
• Seeking a 7%increase in the allowable lot coverage to allow the homeowner to complete the hardscape area
next to the existing pool
Public Comments:
Steve Priddy,Jeremy Court: Adjacent neighbor. I object to this.The justification of this variance states this request
will not significantly impact the direct neighbors and cause the gulley to overflow.There's a gulley that empties into
Cool Creek.We have had multiple floods here. It took 15 years to restrict the amount of lot coverage allowed in our
neighborhood.When Cool Creek floods,it backs up into the detention areas. I believe this will create more flooding.
Debbie Priddy,Jeremy Court: I object.The HOA board did not seek any approval. There's no approval from the
City Engineers that redesigned this flood area three times.Their property backs up to the flood retention area. Their
pool,concrete patio,and decking will create significant water runoff.It will negatively affect our property.Even
with the redesigned flood area,we still get standing water in our backyard.
Mary DeGrella,Jeremy Drive: I live across the street.I object. We donated a large part of our backyard to help to
install a drainage pipe to reduce the amount of flooding.We still have standing water when it rains.Did the
Engineering Dept.approve this?Where will the drainage from this property go?To Cool Creek?
Raymond DeGrella,Jeremy Drive: I object. We have green spaces that surround our houses.My concern is that we
will be setting a precedent to allow for more hardscape areas. One of our neighbors wanted a pool and needed a
variance, so they ended up selling their home. I don't understand how they built their patio space before the permit.
Debbie Klineman, Hazel Foster Drive: I object. I live directly behind this property. We worked with the City to
work on our ongoing drainage problem. My backyard floods when it rains. Where is all the runoff going with this
increase of hardscape?The City Engineer told us hardscape areas do not help with the drainage.
Rebuttal to Public Comments: Matt Harms
• We did not build anything without obtaining a permit
• We went through the normal permitting process through the City of Carmel Building Dept.
• We understood we needed a variance and applied for a variance
• The homeowner wanted to pursue with the patio area after the pool was installed
• We didn't think the pool would count against our overall lot coverage,but it does per the UDO
• We are sensitive to all the drainage concerns. We are not encroaching on any of the drainage easements.
• We have the ability to direct any runoff and the Engineer Dept. is satisfactory with this request
• We will continue to work with the Engineering Dept.on any drainage issues
Department Report: Angie Conn:
• The Petitioner is requesting a 7%increase of lot coverage
• The pool and patio area will not be encroaching into any easement areas
• We do have an approval email from the architectural review committee
• Cannel Engineering Department is currently reviewing this project
• BZA is not a precedent setting body. Each petition is reviewed on its own merit.
3
BZA Hearing Officer Minutes 6-26-23
• Staff recommends positive consideration with the condition of final Cannel Engineering Dept. approval,and
with the adoption of the findings of fact submitted by the Petitioner.
Board Comments:Jim Hawkins
• Is the architectural review committee approval from the HOA?Angie Conn: It's an email that says
architectural review committee. Matt Harms: I received that email from the homeowner.
• We are not precedent setting. We can't control someone's greenspace.I can make sure the drainage will be
sufficient.
• I will approve this subject to approvals from the HOA, Engineering Dept. and Urban Forester
Approved 1-0 with the conditions: the Petitioner receives final approvals from the Carmel Engineering and
Urban Forestry Departments and submits Foster Estates HOA approval letter.
(V)Thrift Residence,Fence Height Variance.
The applicant seeks the following development standards variance approval:
7. Docket No. PZ-2023-00122 V UDO Section 5.09 Maximum 72"(6')side/rear fence height
allowed,90"(7.5')height requested. The site is located at 141 1st Ave NW(Henry Roberts Addition Lot 3).It is
zoned R4/Residence and Old Town Overlay Character Subarea. Filed by Matt Huffman of Old Town Design Group,
on behalf of Paul M Thrift Trustee Angie H Thrift Rev Trust.
Petitioner: Tim Tompkins,Old Town Design Group:
• They want to match and continue the exact fence height of the adjacent neighbor's yard
• We received a letter of support from the adjacent neighbor to the south
• We will match the look and materials of the existing fence of the neighbor
• This is a corner lot, so we have two front yards per the Cannel UDO
Public Comments: None
Department Report: Angie Conn:
• This request is for 1.5 ft for the fence height in the sideyard
• We received a support letter from the immediate neighbor
• The design, look,and height will be the same of the neighbor's existing fence
• Staff is supportive of this request with the adoption of the findings of fact
Board Comments:Jim Hawkins
• What will the fence height be at the elevation change?Tim Tompkins: The front yard fence will be 4-ft,this
will help screen the A/C unit.Our 1.5 ft increase variance request is where we will tie our fence into the
neighbor's fence,and that 90"fence will run along that side of the yard.
Approved 1-0,subject that the fence is no higher than the existing fence or 90".
(V)Fennerty Residence,Side Setback Variance.
The applicant seeks the following development standards variance approval:
8. Docket No. PZ-2023-00124 V UDO Section 2.04 Minimum 30' aggregate of side yards required; 27'
requested. The site is located at 1344 N. Claridge Way(Claridge Farm Subdivision,Lot 58).The site is zoned
S1/Residence. Filed by Michael and Megan Fennerty,owners.
Petitioner: Michael& Megan Fennerty:
• We are asking for the aggregate side yard to be 27' and not 30'
• We did receive approval from the City of Cannel,but they overlooked the aggregate total
• We received letters of support from our neighbors
• We are matching the design,brick,and colors of our existing home
• We were 75%done with the project before the City's Building Dept. notified us
4
BZA Hearing Officer Minutes 6-26-23