HomeMy WebLinkAboutFindings of Fact FINDINGS OF FACT
Carmel Board of Zoning Appeals,Carmel,Indiana
Docket No.: PZ-2023-00211 V
Petitioners: Jared&Kyra Meyer
This matter came for a public hearing before the Cannel Board of Zoning Appeals(the"Board")on October
23,2023,on the petition filed by Jared&Kyra Meyer(collectively"Petitioner")to request a Development
Standards Variance from Cannel's Unified Development Ordinance ("UDO") Section 5.02 Residential
Accessory Building and Use Standards—Minimum 5-ft rear yard setback for accessory structures required.
The property is located at 11179 Westminster Way in the Kingswood subdivision and is zoned S-
2/Residential. Three remonstrators appeared at the hearing to oppose the Variance and several letters in
opposition of granting the Variance were received.
The Board now finds and concludes as follows:
1. Petitioner requested a developmental standards variance from UDO Section 5.02.This section
requires, in part,that the minimum side yard setback be a minimum of Five(5)feet or greater.
Petitioner requests a variance to allow an outdoor fireplace to be four feet from the side property
line.
2. The subject Property is located at 11179 Westminster Way, Carmel, Indiana(the "Property")
and is zoned S2/Residential. The Property is part of the Kingswood subdivision and is not
located in any Overlay.
3. The surrounding properties include single-family homes that are also zoned S-2/Residential.
To the far East of the Property are single-family homes that are zoned R1. To the far West of
the Property are single-family homes that are zoned R-2 and S-1.
4. The subject accessory structure is a 11-feet tall outdoor fireplace and is located approximately
14 feet from the neighboring house located at 11189 Westminster Way.The previous owner of
the Petitioner's property constructed the structure without first obtaining a permit or a required
setback variance.
5. In making its determination,the Board considered the following evidence:
a. Petitioner's application and supporting documents, including notices, receipts,
attachments, statement of reasons, exhibits, site plans and diagrams;
b. DOCS Department Report;
c. Relevant portions of the City of Carmel Unified Development Ordinance;
d. Testimony and exhibits of Petitioner;
e. Packet,testimonies,exhibits,and letters of remonstrators.
6. Petitioner has paid the required fee, filed all necessary documents, and demonstrated
compliance with all public notice requirements in this matter for consideration by the Board.
7. UDO Section 9.15(C) states that developmental standards variances from the terms of the
UDO, and in accordance with Ind. Code § 36-7-4-918.5, may be approved only upon a
determination in writing that:
1
a. The approval will not be injurious to the public health, safety, morals, and general
welfare of the community;
b. The use and value of the area adjacent to the property included in the variance will not
be affected in a substantially adverse manner;
c. The strict application of the terms of the zoning ordinance will result in practical
difficulties in the use of the property.
8. There was evidence presented that granting of the variance would be injurious to the public
health, safety, morals, and general welfare of the community. Testimony was given by the
neighbor who lives at 11189 Westminster Way that the fireplace is a fire and health hazard due
to its proximity to the residence. Because the fireplace is so close to the neighbor's house,
embers and ash have landed on his roof and the sides of the house.Additionally,the neighbor
cannot open the windows of his house when the fireplace has a fire in it because smoke flows
directly into his house.Additional testimony was given by an HOA president that the fireplace
violated multiple covenants, and that the homeowner was aware of this from personal
conversations, letters, and a disclosure at the time of the sale of the home. The homeowner
testified that he had received the covenants when he bought the house in July of 2022 but did
not read them.The violation of these covenants is injurious to the welfare of the community as
the covenants are put into place to protect the enjoyment of the property and the general welfare
of the community.
9. There was evidence presented that granting of this variance would affect the use of the area
adjacent to the Property in a substantially adverse manner. Testimony was given that the
fireplace is a hazard to the health and safety of the next-door neighbor and is generally a direct
detriment to the property and its use.The fireplace is close enough to the neighbor's house that
embers and ash have landed on his roof and sides and smoke has gotten into the neighbor's
house. The Petitioner did not present any evidence that the fireplace would not affect the
adjacent properties in a substantially adverse manner.
10. Petitioner did not present sufficient evidence that the strict application of the terms of the UDO
will result in practical difficulties in the use of the Property. The fireplace is an amenity that is
not required for a residential use of the Property. The location of the fireplace was a design
choice, which does not constitute a practical difficulty in the use of the Property. Without the
fireplace, the Property is still well suited for its current residential use.
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
Based on the facts stated above, application for developmental standards variance PZ-2023-00211 V is
hereby DENIED.
Adopted t i 2 h ay of November,2023.
74TTIRPERSOarmel Board of Zoning Appeals
54445\
SE TARY,Carmel Board of Zoning Appeals
2