Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutCorrespondence Conn, Angelina V From: Tamara Mattingly [tlmattingly2 ©yahoo.com] Sent: Friday, October 07, 2011 11:02 AM To: Conn, Angelina V Subject: RE: Docket No. Assignment: (Variances, Docket #s 11090012 -14V) 141 3rd St NW Excellent, Angie, thanks! I'm out of town today and probably won't get everything out in time today. Can I still make the mtg on the 24th? Justin mentioned he thought the notice for the special mtg was only 10 days. If that might possibly be correct, if I have everything done by Monday, would that work? Tami On Fri Oct 7th, 2011 10:21 AM EDT Conn, Angelina V wrote: >F.YI 2 of these variances are no longer needed. The total filing fee >is now $89.90. -Angie Conn, Planning Administrator >From: Conn, Angelina V >Sent: Tuesday, October 04, 2011 10:24 AM >To: Boone, Rachel M.; Blanchard, Jim E; Donahue -Wold, Alexia K; >Hancock, Ramona B; Hollibaugh, Mike P; Keeling, Adrienne M; Littlejohn, >David W; Mindham, Daren; Stewart, Lisa M; Tingley, Connie S; Duncan, >Gary R; Thomas, John G >Cc: 'Tamara Mattingly' >Subject: Docket No. Assignment: (Variances, Docket #s 11090012 -14V) 141 >3rd St NW >I have updated the file. I have contacted the petitioner and issued the >necessary Docket Number for (V) 141 3rd St NW. It will be the >following: >(V) 141 Third St NW New House. >The applicant seeks the following development standards variance >approvals: >Docket No. 11090012 V Ch. 23D.03.C.3.d.i.b garage setback. >Docket No. 11090013 V Ch. 23D.03.C.3.k.iii building height. >Docket No. 11090014 V Ch. 23D.03.C.3.g.v chimney material. >The site is located at 141 3rd Street NW and is zoned R -4 /Residence, 1 Conn, Angelina V From: Hollibaugh, Mike P Sent: Friday, October 07, 2011 10:14 AM To: 'justinmoffett@aol.com'; Conn, Angelina V Subject: RE: Mattingly Home and your latest SDRs Thanks Justin, for the follow -up and for meeting with Tammy and Steve. They were back at City Hall later that afternoon, shortly after your meeting, to share the ideas you discussed with them. I think we're ok with everything but garage at this point, and while I appreciate what you are saying about that she has a very good case for the variance of that provision, and staff will be able to support it. Angie and I will finalize comments on the three SDRs from 10/4 early next week. Have a nice weekend, Mike H. From: iustinmoffett(aaol.com jmailto:iustinmoffett(aaol.coml Sent: Wednesday, October 05, 2011 4:59 PM To: Hollibaugh, Mike P; Conn, Angelina V Subject: Mattingly Home Mike, I had a chance to meet with the neighbor to the north of my Applegate property, Tammy Mattingly, who has plans to build at the corner of 2nd Ave NW and 3rd Street NW. She showed me her home plans and the proposed docket numbers for the variances the planning staff says she would need. Just thought I'd let you know my opinions as a concerned property owner. 1) I think the cantilevered fireplace area looks out of place and I discussed a few options on how they could improve the design that should look much more attractive. 2) The height of the home is within 7' of the nearest 2 contributing structures. I don't understand why they would need a variance on this issue. 3) The garage doors facing the side street (3rd Street NW) meets the ordinance requirements per my understanding of the ordinance and is much more appealing than having the doors face 2nd Ave NW, which could be done in a less appealing design without the need for a variance. However, if your interpretation of the ordinance is different I think this is an easily supported variance request that I would personally support over the other likely configurations. Ultimately, I think that Ms. Mattingly should be able to move forward without the need for any variances if she were to bring her shed /cantilevered chimney design into compliance with the ordinance. Thanks, Justin Justin Moffett The Old Town Design Group 317.966.2023 phone justinmoffett@aol.com 1 Conn, Angelina V From: justinmoffett @aol.com Sent: Wednesday, October 05, 2011 4:59 PM To: Hollibaugh, Mike P; Conn, Angelina V Subject: Mattingly Home Mike, I had a chance to meet with the neighbor to the north of my Applegate property, Tammy Mattingly, who has plans to build at the corner of 2nd Ave NW and 3rd Street NW. She showed me her home plans and the proposed docket numbers for the variances the planning staff says she would need. Just thought I'd let you know my opinions as a concerned property owner. 1) I think the cantilevered fireplace area looks out of place and I discussed a few options on how they could improve the design that should look much more attractive. 2) The height of the home is within 7' of the nearest 2 contributing structures. I don't understand why they would need a variance on this issue. 3) The garage doors facing the side street (3rd Street NW) meets the ordinance requirements per my understanding of the ordinance and is much more appealing than having the doors face 2nd Ave NW, which could be done in a less appealing design without the need for a variance. However, if your interpretation of the ordinance is different I think this is an easily supported variance request that I would personally support over the other likely configurations. Ultimately, I think that Ms. Mattingly should be able to move forward without the need for any variances if she were to bring her shed /cantilevered chimney design into compliance with the ordinance. Thanks, Justin Justin Moffett The Old Town Design Group 317.966.2023 phone justinmoffett@aol.com 1 Conn, Angelina V From: Conn, Angelina V Sent: Friday, September 30, 2011 4:54 PM To: 'tImattingly2 yahoo.com' Cc: Hollibaugh, Mike P;'ser19637 @aol.com'; Donahue -Wold, Alexia K Subject: RE: variances for proposed house at 141 3rd St NW Good evening, Tami 'I went ahead and assigned the docket numbers, so you can make some headway on filling out your variance application. They are: 1. Docket No. 11090012 V: Garage Setback: chapter 23D.03.C.3.d.i.b•(Garages: All new garages must be either: (a) Detached buildings that are sited at least five (5) feet behind the Principal Building, or (b) Attached to the Principal Building so that the front face of the garage is at least fifteen (15) feet further from the Front Lot Line than the primary front line of the Principal Building. New attached garages on Corner Lots should be oriented to the side street, rather than to Range Line Road.) 2. Docket No. 11090013 V: Building Height: chapter 23D.03.C.3.k.iii (Building Height: i. Minimum: Thirteen (13) feet to the midpoint of the cornice and the ridgeline. ii. Maximum: Thirty (30) feet to the midpoint of the cornice and the ridgeline, except as provided in 7(c). iii. Buildings may not exceed the height of the tallest dimension of the nearest two Contributing Buildings by more than seven (7) feet.) 3. Docket No. 11090014 V: Exterior chimney material: chapter 23D.03.C.3.g.v (Chimneys are to be brick /masonry.) I will send out the official Docket no. assignment email with the filing dates and deadlines after you officially submit the application to us next week. Have a nice weekend, Angie Conn, Planning Administrator City of Carmel Planning Zoning Division Dept. of Community Services 1 Civic Square, 3rd Flr. Carmel, IN 46032 0: 317 -571 -2417 I F: 317 571 -2426 1 E: aconnacarmel.in.gov W: www.carmeldocs.com Please consider the environment before printing this e-mail From: Conn, Angelina V Sent: Wednesday, September 28, 2011 9:39 AM To: 'tImattingly2 @yahoo.com' Cc: Hollibaugh, Mike P; 'ser19637 @aol.com'; Donahue -Wold, Alexia K Subject: variances for proposed house at 141 3rd St NW Good morning, Tamara Based off of Mike Hollibaugh's determination letter, you will need BZA (Board of Zoning Appeals) variance approvals from the following sections of the Carmel zoning ordinance (if you decide not to modify the proposed house design to meet the ordinance requirements): 4. Garage Setback: chapter 23D.03.C.3.d.i.b (Garages: All new garages must be either: (a) Detached buildings that are sited at least five (5) feet behind the Principal Building, or (b) Attached to the Principal Building so that the front face of the garage is at least fifteen (15) feet further from the Front Lot Line than the primary front line of the Principal Building. New attached garages on Corner Lots should be oriented to the side street, rather than to Range Line Road.) 5. Building Height: chapter 23D.03.C.3.k.iii (Building Height: i. Minimum: Thirteen (13) feet to the midpoint of the cornice and the ridgeline. ii. Maximum: Thirty (30) feet to the midpoint of the cornice and the ridgeline, except 1 Conn, Angelina V From: Conn, Angelina V Sent: Wednesday, September 28, 2011 9:39 AM To: 'tlm attingly2 yahoo.com' Cc: Hollibaugh, Mike P;'ser19637 @aol.com'; Donahue -Wold, Alexia K Subject: variances for proposed house at 141 3rd St NW Good morning, Tamara Based off of Mike Hollibaugh's determination letter, you will need BZA (Board of Zoning Appeals) variance approvals from the following sections of the Carmel zoning ordinance (if you decide not to modify the proposed house design to meet the ordinance requirements): 1. Garage Setback: chapter 23D.03.C.3.d.i.b (Garages: All new garages must be either: (a) Detached buildings that are sited at least five (5) feet behind the Principal Building, or (b) Attached to the Principal Building so that the rr 1109 L Z front face of the garage is at least fifteen (15) feet further from the Front Lot Line than the primary front line of the Principal Building. New attached garages on Corner Lots should be oriented to the side street, rather than to Range Line Road.) 2. Building Height: chapter 23D.03.C.3.k.iii (Building Height: i. Minimum: Thirteen (13) feet to the midpoint of the cornice and the ridgeline. ii. Maximum: Thirty (30) feet to the midpoint of the cornice and the ridgeline, except ,�u900 as provided in 7(c). iii. Buildings may not exceed the height of the tallest dimension of the nearest two Contributing Buildings by more than seven (7) feet.) 1 lC9()61� 3. Exterior chimney material: chapter 23D.03.C.3.g.v (Chimneys are to be brick /masonry.) The BZA public hearing process takes about 45 days total Below are website links to pertinent documents: BZA calendar with filing dates deadlines: http: /www.carmel.in.gov/ modules /showdocument.aspx ?documentid =641 BZA process flowchart: http: /www.carmel.in.gov/ modules /showdocument.aspx ?documentid =627 Variance application instructions: http: /www.carmel.in.gov/ modules /showdocument.aspx ?documentid =397 *A shorter cheaper option is to ask to be heard at the BZA Hearing Officer. For that, the public notice is 12 days prior, rather than 25 days prior to the meeting date, and the filing fee is $151.50 for the first variance request, and $89.90 for each additional. The hearing officer meeting usually occurs about half an hour before the regular BZA meeting, and would begin around 5:30pm. The next hearing officer meeting is Oct. 24, but it is possible for us to set up a time /date earlier in the month; it is just a matter of you being able to do the public notice in time. We can discuss this further. Sincerely, Angie Conn, Planning Administrator City of Carmel Planning Zoning Division Dept. of Community Services 1 Civic Square, 3rd Flr. Carmel, IN 46032 0: 317 571 -2417 I F: 317- 571 -2426 I E: aconn@carmel.in.gov W: www.carmeldocs.com Please consider the environment before printing this e -mail 1 3y R.ys�Syy� 5gy�, `y�? Y Y' 11 1 F"'i d s L JAMES BRAINARD, MAYOR September 23, 2011 Mr. Stephen Reeve 5659 E Co. Road 3503 Frankfort, IN 46041 Re: Proposed demolition 141 Third Street NW, Carmel, IN Dear Mr. Reeve: This letter is written in response to your request for demolition dated September 9, 2011, to remove a Contributing Building as defined and identified in the Old Town Overlay Zone Ordinance, adopted by the Carmel City Council in 2001. The Director of the Department of Community Services takes seriously every request to remove a Contributing Building in Old Town. As such, your request and key points of explanation to support the demolition have been thoroughly considered, per the following findings and explanation. There are four main areas of criteria which the Zoning Ordinance has established when considering the removal of a Contributing Building in Old Town: i. Structural conditions of the building that pose an imminent safety hazard. ii. An advanced state of dilapidation or fire damage would make it unfeasible to repair the building for any reasonable economic use. iii. The architectural and historical significance of the structure individually, in relation to the street, and as a part of the district as a whole. iv. Replacement value, if it can be determined that the proposed new development with which it will be replaced is of greater significance to the enhancement of the overlay district than retention of the existing structure. When reviewing the material provided to support the demolition, supplemented by the site visit with you on 9/7/11, it is clear that the existing building does not fit the first two criteria, as it is neither an imminent safety hazard, nor is its condition so poor that it is beyond reasonable repair. The criteria iii, architectural significance, does require some explanation. The building, constructed in 1950, is not recognized in the Hamilton County Interim Report by the Historic Landmarks Foundation of Indiana. It is, however, recognized by a recent Ball State historic preservation survey of Old Town as a contributing structure to a (potential) National Register Historic District. DEPARTMENT OF COMMUNITY SERVICES ONE CIVIC SQUARE, CARMEL, IN 46032 PIIII0NE 317.571.2417, FAX 317.571.2426 MICHAEL P. HOLLIBAUGH, DIRECTOR Mr. Stephen Reeve Re: Proposed demolition 141 Third Street NW, Carmel. IN page 2 The home is small, approximately 625 square feet, plus an approximate 310 square feet of one -car garage. The lot is small, limiting the ability to add onto the home in order to allow enough living space to function in today's real estate market. Further, the building's historic context has been altered somewhat with the odd garage addition, and there exists a new home adjacent to the east, as well as a recent redevelopment approved for the Applegate real estate located south of this building. Our review finds criteria iii to be inconclusive, as the related facts neither solely support demolition nor support preservation of this building. In reviewing criteria number iv, Replacement, consideration of the location and visibility of this lot are of significant value to the area, i.e., a corner parcel with adjacency to the Monon Trail, in the SW quadrant of Old Town. Any replacement structure must, without question, be built consistent with the design requirements for new construction found in the overlay zone. Further, its exposure on two sides to public right -of -way, plus the Monon exposure, would indicate that a high level of attention to detailing of the north and west facades is important, especially when weighing a demolition which relies upon Replacement as the prime consideration. The house design submitted with this demolition request, would represent a substantial investment which, when completed, will be of greater significance than the existing structure. It appears from our review, however, that the house design as proposed would not fully meet the ordinance requirements for building height in the Character sub -area, Section C.3.k.iii; for garage setback found in C.3.d.i (b), and chimney brick exterior, Section C.3.g.v. In conclusion, the City does hereby find that the demolition of this Contributing Building shall be allowed based upon criteria number iv., Replacement, except that the demolition may only occur pursuant to the below conditions: 1. An amended site plan and house design plans shall be submitted and approved prior to demolition. Such plans shall properly address the provisions for garage setback, building height, and brick chimney, and otherwise shall comply with Z- 374 -02, as amended. 2. Any front porch will be a minimum depth of 6 -0 feet, an accepted minimum dimension for a functional porch. 3. Any fireplace venting, if visible from the public right -of -way, will consist of a masonry chimney rather than a shed chimney. 4. Additional windows will be provided where feasible in the southern facing facade, in order to allow for more natural light in the house, and to provide architectural relief from the unbroken expanse of siding. 5. This determination shall take effect at 12 :00 PM on Monday, September 27, 2011. This Director's determination may be appealed to the Carmel Board of Zoning Appeals by you or any other interested party pursuant to Chapter 30.0 of the Carmel Zoning Ordinance. Mr. Stephen Reeve Re: Proposed demolition 141 Third Street NW, Carmel. IN page 3 An appeal must occur within thirty (30) days of issuance of this letter, or the determination is final. If you wish to discuss any of the above, please contact me at 317 571 2422, or via email at mhollibaugh@cannel .in.gov. Yours truly, r Michael Holliba Copy: adjoining property owners Carmel Historical Society