HomeMy WebLinkAboutPacket for HO 06-24-24Patrick M. Rooney
Attorney at Law
REAL ESTATE • BUSEWM • ESTATE PLANNING
Carmel Board of Zoning Appeals
Carmel City Hall,
2°d Floor Council Chambers Room
1 Civic Sq.,
Carmel, IN 46032
1638 Shelby Street
Suite 101
Indianapolis, Indiana 46203
Direct (317) 445-9956
pmrooney1@gmail.com
June 12, 2024
RE: Singh Subdivision — Docket No.: PZ-2024-00087 — Introduction Letter
To Whom It May Concern:
My clients, Gurpreet Singh, Lakhwant Singh, Rupinder Multani, and Kamaljit Kaur (collectively,
the "Petitioners"), are petitioning you for a Variance of Development Standards so that they may avoid
a financial hardship as they embark on their next home -owning journey. The Petitioners are requesting
said variance because the required right-of-way under the UDO would be impractical due to the existing
utility easements on the property. Strictly adhering to the UDO requirements would require the
Petitioners to spend over $400,000 to reinforce pipe which is and shall remain in the ground with dirt
and grass above it just as it is now and will remain for the foreseeable future since 106t" Street was
redesigned recently enough that it may never be widened onto the Petitioner's property.
Very truly yours,
/s/ Patrick M. Rooney
Patrick M. Rooney, Attorney
Patrick M. Rooney
Attorney at Law
REAL ESTATE • BUSINESS •ESTATE PLANNING
Carmel Board of Zoning Appeals
Carmel City Hall,
2"d Floor Council Chambers Room
1 Civic Sq.,
Carmel, IN 46032
1638 Shelby Street
Suite 101
Indianapolis, Indiana 46203
Direct (317) 445-9956
pmrooneyI @gmail.com
June 12, 2024
RE: Singh Subdivision — Docket No.: PZ-2024-00087 — Statement of Request
To Whom It May Concern:
Petitioners' Variance of Development Standards is with respect to UDO Section 1.07(e) and (f)
— Dedication of Public Rights -of -Way. As part of a simple subdivision, Owners are dedicating a portion
of the ROW pursuant to UDO Section 6.03, but are not dedicating all of the ROW due to utility
easements. As further described in the rest of the Petition, the requested variance will not detrimentally
impact the subject property, adjacent properties, the City of Carmel, or any other third parties
whatsoever, and will merely result in Petitioners not incurring an undue hardship.
Very truly yours,
ls/ Patrick M. Rooney
Patrick M. Rooney, Attorney
Patrick M. Rooney
Attorney at Law
REAL ESTATE • BUSINESS • ESTATE PLANNING
Carmel Board of Zoning Appeals
Carmel City Hall,
2°d Floor Council Chambers Room
1 Civic Sq.,
Carmel, IN 46032
1638 Shelby Street
Suite 101
Indianapolis, Indiana 46203
Direct (317) 445-9956
pmrooneyl @gmail.com
June 12, 2024
RE: Singh Subdivision — Docket No.: PZ-2024-00087 — Statement of Support
To Whom It May Concern:
This Variance will allow Petitioners to redevelop this property from one old, dilapidated house
into two modern custom homes which will significantly increase the value of the subject property as
well as the surrounding properties. Given the recent reworking of 106th Street, it is unlikely that 1061h
Street will ever need to be widened into the Petitioners' property, and certainly not in the near future.
Thus, requiring the Petitioners to spend over $400,000 reinforcing pipes which are not going to be
impacted by the replat and which there are no plans to build houses nor streets over would be an
unconscionable hardship.
Very truly yours,
/s/ Patrick M. Rooney
Patrick M. Rooney, Attorney
ith St W 106th St 106th St
W 106th St
Google
Imaoery C2024 Airbus, Maxar Technologies, Map data 02024 Goo le
P
u
y
4t
fi 4Y�
9
Google
G, Loom to
i Address No
Address No Suffix
Address Prefix Qir
Address Subtype
t
Address Type
Business mate
Business Name
City
Formatted Parcel No
Full Address
x
State
[ Street Name
Street Suffix
Street Suffix Qir
Zip
_ �_ ._ . .. �.. .. MF r �.:ar•1%, /N ek. R ....•
ge � ��.... � o xme�ar 'Ara eras r �n, �.� I"•i
V � Q
�.
y j i C7 1
t
` i � 1 ' 4- f Y� i.� { ,` F P ;�'�! is pp� �p • [
UJ
t
i
it r
w r
v ifli � %. �'• •. `� a k'�.G�.::, � � � '� � �' f s � � � �^"
� � • • � � i -"0 ¢: •k��� }", a t X= .;'fit � e...•K � �"�ry�.
_
1
f...... a :7R
r
Un
io
• „n
I �
f !
{• i
t }J
4.
0
1
14
. ...... . . ... .......
. . .... . .... ------
e3
worm
1,92.5' N 00*2246 E - 68.9.62'
4� "I
!!L — --L , — I 1� —,
A4
+o --- - -------
%
Zw N
\i W
j
---- ------ - r
II
— ----------
------ . . . . . .
v,
n
----------
ml
4
----------- ........ . .. . ........ .
csn
m
99 RA
< I
i ...... . .....
T
11-001fiv, 11 v i g ap 4411 pp HNA o' h i 1 1% Im.
�g �RIQ 2F JIM ..R
up, lit TY, j,11H9 4��N'
i6d, ;jj� p!'J'J"I'l
G
3 AAJ A Q04 I HIT, H �,M:i
Y 2
P !Nig q 'E -2 'm'j �ixE�v 1;
g,6 P�l M. I'l
w!"J V g Vfift
ONXfm� HIP 211 hl 1. V34
A q Ug j�
pp 1,8
2!q
i J JpRopos
Ropos D SINGH SUBDIVISION
KEELER-WEBB ASSOCIATES
Lakawant Singh & Mike Singh
Singh bdivisio
S
I I A
10—
Place
6535 Cressendo Pk
IndinapoNs, IN 46259
-
_
alai writ io&t 51—t
C— W 1.32
317-985-8513 emad
FINDINGS OF FACT SHEET - DEVELOPMENT STANDARDS VARIANCE
CARMEL ADVISORY BOARD OF ZONING APPEALS
(Petitioner to fill out 1-3 + first two blanks)
Docket No.: PZ-2024-00087
Petitioner: Pat Rooney Attorney at Law
The approval of this variance will not be injurious to the public health, safety, morals and general welfare of the
community because:
The variance will only serve to save the Petitioners an undue financial hardship The required Right -of -Way under
the UDO is not practical due to the existing utility easements on the subject property. To comply with the Right -of -
Way requirements Petitioners would have to spend over $400 000 to reinforce the ground on which the utility
easement runs despite the fact that 106th Street may never actually be expanded and there are currently no plans
to expand 106th Street.
The use and value of the area adjacent to the property included in the variance will not be affected in a substantially
adverse manner because:
The variance will allow the Petitioners to demolish the old vacant dilapidated home and construct two (2) new
custom homes which shall substantially increase the assessed value of the subject property and thereby
significantly increasing the value of all nearby properties.
3. The strict application of the terms of the Unified Development to the property will result in practical difficulties in the
use of the property because:
The strict application of the terms of the LIDO would force the Petitioners to spend over $400 000 to reinforce the
ground on which the utility easement runs Granting this variance would allow the Petitioners to bypass this hardship
and will not detrimentally impact the property. Unless and until 106th Street is actually expanded, reinforcing pipe
which is and will remain in the Petitioner's front yard with grass above it is an undue hardship and a practical
difficulty which this Variance solves without negatively impacting the Petitioner nor any third parties.
DECISION
IT IS THEREFORE the decision of the Carmel Board of Zoning Appeals that Development Standards Variance Docket No.
is granted, subject to any conditions stated in the minutes of this Board, which are
incorporated herein by reference and made a part hereof.
Adopted this
day of
HEARING OFFICER, Carmel Board of Zoning Appeals
SECRETARY, Carmel Board of Zoning Appeals
20
Conditions of approval of the Board, if any, are listed on the Letter of Grant.
Page 9 of 12