Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutDept Report 03-24-25 7 of 8 CARMEL BOARD OF ZONING APPEALS HEARING OFFICER DEPARTMENT REPORT MONDAY, MARCH 24, 2025 (V) Drucker Pool Setbacks Variance. The applicant seeks the following variance approval for a swimming pool and patio: 5. Docket No. PZ-2025-00023 V Silvara PUD Section 5.2 & UDO Section 5.02(C)(7) 5. Minimum Side and Rear Yard Setbacks: A swimming pool, or its deck or equipment shall be setback a minimum of the greater of the following: 10-ft from the side lot line; 5-ft requested, and be 3-ft from any easement; (a 20-ft Trail Easement plus a 20-ft regulated Drain Easement in the backyard exists); 43-ft rear setback required; 40-ft requested. (0-ft off rear easement). The 0.43-acre site is located at 1225 Skytag Drive (Jackson’s Grant on Williams Creek Subdivision, Lot 99). It is zoned Silvara PUD/Planned Unit Development Ordinance Z-652-20. Filed by Rob Sherrard of Sherrard Pools & Custom Concrete, on behalf of Rob & Shantell Drucker, owners. General Info: • The Petitioner seeks approval to add a new swimming pool, spa, and decking to the rear yard. • Building Permit B-2025-00014 was applied for. • Variance is requested for setbacks. • The site is in Jackson’s Grant on Williams Creek subdivision; HOA (Homeowner’s Association) approval has been granted. • The proposed pool/decking will not encroach into any drainage or utility easements. • Surrounding this site are single family residential dwellings and Clay Center Elementary School. • Please see the Petitioner’s info packet for more details on the variance request. Variance Requested: Setbacks - • The PUD and the UDO state the following for minimum side and rear setbacks: A swimming pool, or its deck or equipment shall be setback a minimum of the greater of the following: 10-ft from the side lot line; 5- ft requested, and be 3-ft from any easement; (a 20-ft Trail Easement plus a 20-ft Regulated Drain Easement exist in the back yard); 43-ft rear setback required; 40-ft requested. (0-ft off rear easement). • The pool/decking will not encroach into any easements; they will just be built right up to the drainage easement. The actual drainpipe will not be impacted. • The asphalt path that runs east-west across the rear of the property will not be impacted. • South of the site, past the easements, exists an elementary school property. Remaining Review Comments: • All Planning/Zoning comments have been addressed. Final Comments: • The Planning Dept. supports the variance request. The backyard is encumbered with easements, and the Petitioner proposes a site plan that is acceptable to various city and county agencies. • The Hamilton County Surveyor’s Office (HCSO) requested that the existing boulders be removed from the drainage easement area, and the Petitioner will comply. • The Carmel Engineering Dept. reported that it looks like the improvements are outside of the easements. The BPW Consent to Encroach will not be needed, and the Right of Way permit is proceeding. • The Petitioner will remove the existing boulders from the easement area and relocate them elsewhere. Findings of Fact: • Please refer to the Petitioner’s Findings of Facts included in their BZA Info Packet. Recommendation: • The Dept. of Community Services (DOCS) recommends positive consideration of the variance request, also with the adoption of the Findings of Facts submitted by the Petitioner.