HomeMy WebLinkAboutFindings of Fact FINDINGS OF FACT
Carmel Board of Zoning Appeals,Carmel, Indiana
Docket No.: PZ-2023-00128 SE
Petitioner: Aaron Kusel
BACKGROUND
This matter came for hearing before the Cannel Board of Zoning Appeals (the "Board") on October 23,
2023,on the petition of Aaron Kusel(the"Petitioner")to approve a Special Exception for a proposed short
term residential rental located at 11869 Gray Road, Cannel, Indiana, 46033. The Property is zoned
S 1/Residential and is not located in any subdivision.At the hearing,the Petitioner represented himself.The
Petitioner represented that he did not reside at the Property.Multiple neighbors appeared and spoke against
the Petition.
The Board now finds and concludes as follows:
1. Cannel Unified Development Ordinance("UDO")Sections 5.73 and 9.08 address regulations
relating to special exceptions for short-term rentals in the City and list specific criteria for
Board's consideration for approval/denial.
2. UDO defines Short Term Residential Rental Unit as a dwelling,or portion thereof,that is rented
or leased to transient guests by a permanent resident of the dwelling for a period of less than
thirty consecutive calendar days. In turn, a permanent resident is a person who occupies a
dwelling for at least 60 consecutive days with intent to establish the dwelling as his/her primary
residence. The original application for a short-term rental permit shall not generally be entitled
to favorable consideration.
3. UDO Section 5.73(A) states that the purpose of the ordinance is to benefit the general public
by minimizing adverse impacts on established residential neighborhoods and the owners and
residents of properties in these neighborhoods resulting from the conversion of residential
properties to tourist and transient use.
4. UDO Section 5.73(C)states that permanent residency must be shown by presenting two of the
following: motor vehicle registration; driver's license; voter registration; tax documents
showing the unit as the applicant's primary residence for a standard homestead credit;or utility
bill.
5. In reviewing a Special Exception application, the Board shall give consideration to the
particular needs and circumstances of each application and shall examine the following items
as they relate to the proposed Special Exception: surrounding zoning and land uses, access to
public streets, driveway and curb cut location in relation to other sites, parking location and
arrangement,trash and material storage,necessary exterior lighting,and protective restrictions
and/or covenants.
6. The Board, in approving or rejecting a Special Exception, shall base his/her decision upon the
following factors as they relate to the above listed items: 1)The economic factors related to the
proposed Special Exception, such as cost/benefit to the community and its anticipated effect
on surrounding property values; 2) The social/neighborhood factors related to the proposed
Special Exception,such as compatibility with existing uses in the vicinity of the premises under
1
consideration and how the proposed Special Exception will affect neighborhood integrity;and
3)The effects of proposed Special Exception on vehicular and pedestrian traffic in and around
the premises upon which the Special Exception is proposed. UDO Sections 5.73 and 9.08.
7. In making its determination,the Board considered the following evidence:
a. Petitioner's application and supporting documents, including notices, receipts, and
attachments.
b. Packet and Department of Community Services Report;
c. Relevant portions of the City of Carmel Unified Development Ordinance;
d. Answers of Petitioners;
e. Testimony of remonstrators.
8. At the hearing, the Petitioner testified that the subject Property is next door to where he lives
and planned to turn it into a short-term rental. He does not currently live at the Property.
Additionally,the Petitioner testified that the home was already listed on a rental website.
9. Remonstrators stated that they were concerned about the impact on the property values as well
as the safety of themselves and their children.Remonstrators also stated that all other homes in
the vicinity are owner occupied, and a short-term rental is not compatible with this. The
Remonstrators expressed concerns about the additional traffic that the short-term rental creates.
10. In the Department of Community Services Report, staff stated that the only documents
provided to prove permanent residency were a deed and a utility bill.
11. Any Findings of Fact that can be considered Conclusions of Law are deemed Conclusions of
Law,and any Conclusions of Law that can be considered Findings of Fact are deemed Findings
of Fact.
DECISION
Petitioner, not being a permanent resident of the Property, is not eligible for the short-term rental permit.
Additionally, Petitioner did not provide the appropriate documentation to show that he was a permanent
resident. Finally, Evidence presented at the hearing demonstrated that the Property's use as a short-term
rental will negatively affect surrounding properties and neighborhood integrity.
Based on the facts stated above, application for developmental standards variance PZ-2023-00218 SE is
hereby DENIED.
Adopted this 27th day of November 2023.
HE G O ICER, a Board o Zoning Appeals
SE ETA ,Carmel Board of Zoning Appeals
2