HomeMy WebLinkAboutCorrespondence City of Carmel
Department of Community Services
One Civic Square
Carmel, IN 46032
317-571-2417
Fax: 317-571-2426
DATE:
FACSIMILE TELECOPY COVER LETTER
January 19, 2005
TO: Mr. Scherb
FAX: 844-2542
FROM: Connie
Attached hereto are 3 pages, including this cover letter, for facsimile transmission.
Should you experience any problem in the receipt of these pages, please call 317/571/2419
and ask for Connie.
NOTES:
Attached are the Agenda and Department Report for the January 24, 2005 BZA Hearing
Officer meeting.
Please remember to bring three (3) additional fully filled-out Findings-of-Fact sheets and
ballot sheets for each petition the night of the meeting for the Hearing Officer's use.
Please call if you have any questions.
CONFIDENTIALITY NOTICE: The materials enclosed with this facsimile transmission are private and confidential
and are the property of the sender. The information contained in the material is privileged and is intended only for
the use of the individual(s) or entity(/es) named above. If you are not the intended recipient, be advised that any
unauthorized disclosure, copying, distribution or the taking of any action in reliance on the contents of this telecopied
information is strictly prohibited, If you have received this facsimile transmission in error, please immediately notify
us by telephone to arrange for return of the forwarded documents to us,
Dear Carmel/Clay Board of Zoning Appeals,
January 17, 2005
DODS
This letter is in regard to the January 24, 2005 meeting in which there will
public hearing regarding David Scherb's variance application to violate
Carmel/Clay Zoning Qrdinance 25.01 B3b involving a recently constructed
storage building situated partially within the drainage and utility easement on the
property know as 39'~9 Brian Place, Carmel Indiana 46033, Docket No.
04120009V. The real estate affected by said applications is Woodland Green,
Section 1, ]ct 77, Scherb Residence.
My husband, Bill and I live at 4109 Brian place, next to the Scherb residence
to the West. We very much wanted to attend the January 24, 2005 meeting in
person, however, we will both be in Florida visiting relatives from January 19th to
the 25m and will be unable to attend since plans for this trip were made well in
advance of our knowing about the meeting date. It is our hope that this letter will
suffice in explaining our position regarding the placement of David Scherb's shed
in question.
We fee] quite strongly that David Scherb should be required to obey the
zoning laws that the city of Carmel has set in p~ace. We feel that the shed should
be moved away from the property line according to the standards set by the city.
The shed, in its current location is causing problems for us both from an
aesthetics standpoint and from a drainage standpoint.
Mr. Scherb's shed is a large structure, 12' x 16' with a front porch, large
enough to have furniture on it. If Mr. Scherb had gotten a builders permit, as
required for a structure of that size, he would have known that the city does not
allow structures to be built on the property line. It is surprising to us that since
Mr. Scherb's business is that of "general contractor" that he would be unaware of
city bui]ding laws. Regardless, whether he was unaware of the zoning laws set
in place for the city of Carmel or not, he has caused himself a problem and
affected our family as well.
The shed in question is built as close to our house as it possibly could be. It
is situated exactly one foot eight inches from the side fence on the property line
next to our fami]y room. (See enclosed photos taken from our family room), in
fact, this shed is deady closer to our home than it is to Mr. Scherb's. Not only
that, but the closest part of his home to the shed is his garage, and his living area
is on the other side of the yard from this shed. He looks out on the front of the
shed from a distance, whereas we see the backside, up dose. Our family room
has 17 floor to ceiling windows, 8 of which look out on the back of Mr. Scherb's
shed. It's an unattractive view and the shed's placement is both inconsiderate
and a clear violation of Carmel/Clay building standards. What's more, Mr.
Scherb's decision to construct the shed in its existing location was based entirely
on his own convenience. There are other locations within his property where the
shed could have been constructed without violating the permitting requirements
or negatively impacting neighbors.
If the city requires Mr. Scherb to move the shed away from the property line,
which we sincerely hope is the case, at least the shed will be further away from
our living area. One Sunday in December when we were gathered in our family
room we could hear one of Mr. Scherb's children making a lot of noise in the
shed. It sounded like he was bouncing a ball for about 20 minutes. If it were
further away from the property line as required, we would be much less likely to
be bothered by noise inside the shed, as well.
Prior to the construction of the shed, we never experienced any kind of
drainage problems in our yard including the utility easement area. However,
since construction of the shed, we have had flooding on our side of the property
line. Rain coming offthe roof of the shed forms troughs of water that drain
toward our property and pool there. (See enclosed photos of flooded areas in
easement and yard). Occasionally, the city and utility companies have to bring
large equipment through the easement to work on the utility box. I suspect that
standing water will make access more difficult and could create a safety hazard
to workers.
In a letter to us, Mr. Scherb stated that he put his shed on the property line so
that his kids would have a lot of room for volleyball and other games. This
seems to us an inadequate justification for a variance. Within a few years when
the Scherb children are older and ~ess interested in backyard games, we will still
be looking at the back of their shed. The Scherb children will not be deprived of
these activities as they already regulady play in their front yard and their side
yard, which are both treeless. Furthermore, Mr. Scherb refers to his building as
"temporary". We know of no deadline for removing it, and based on its
construction and appearance it looks to all the world as a permanent structure.
On the other hand, the negative effects of this building on our property, if it isn't
moved, will be permanent.
We are formally requesting that the zoning board deny Mr. Scherb's variance
request and require him to comply with same rules that the rest of us live by. We
request that the shed be moved the required distance from the property line, and
that any other building and zoning codes be enforced for a structure of the size
and type constructed by Mr. Scherb. Mr. Scherb is solely responsible for his
building permit and zoning code violations. He has no valid justification for a
variance and has ample space to comply with all applicable requirements. In
addition, as a general contractor, Mr. Schreb has the means to correct his
violations at lower cost than would most people in a similar situation.
In closing, we feel that Mr. Scherb has created this hardship for himself by not
getting a builders permit or complying with the zoning laws before initiating
construction. If Mr Scherb is allowed to keep this large structure in it's current
location, it will continue to negatively impact our family, our property and our
property value. It is our sincere hope that the board will take these factors into
serious consideration in rendering its decision on this matter. Thank you very
much.
Sincerely,
Kellee and Bill Heisel
Cc. Kevin Brennan
Zoning Department
Tlngley, Connie S
From: Corm, Angelina V
Sent: Thursday, December 09, 2004 3:10 PM
To: Tingley, Connie S
Cc: Morrissey, Phyllis G; Pattyn, Dawn E; Babbitt, Pamela A; Hollibaugh, Mike P;
Keeling, Adrienne M; Kendall, Jeff A; Brewer, Scott I; Hancock, Ramona B;
Dobosiewicz, Jon C; Brennan, Kevin S; Griffin, Matt L; Mindham, Daren
Subject: Docket No. Assignment: (V) Woodland Green, Sec 1, lot 77: Scherb Residence
(#04120009 V)
Connie,
Please print and fax this c-mail to the petitioner identified below and update the file. I have
issued the necessary Docket Number for (V) Woodland Green, Sec 1, lot 77: Scherb
Residence. It will be the following:
Docket No. 04120009 V $125
Total Fee: $125.00
Woodland Green, Sec 1, lot 77: Scherb Residence
Petitioner seeks the following development standards variance approval:
Docket No. 04120009 V Chapter 25.01.01 .B.3.b.i.(b) accessory building rear/side
yard setback
The site is located at 3919 Brian Place and is zoned R-2/Residence.
Filed by David and Diana Scherb.
Petitioner, please note the following:
1. This Item will not be on an agenda of the Technical Advisory Committee.
2. Mailed and Published Public Notice needs to occur no later than Thursday, January 14,
2004. Published notice is required within the Indianapolis Star. Note: the BZA Hearing
Officer meeting will begin at 6:30, not 7 pm.
3. The Proof of Notice will need to be received by this Department no later than noon,
Friday, January 21, 2005. Failure to submit Proof of Notice by this time will result in the
tabling of the petition.
4. The Filing Fee and Nine (9) Informational Packets must be delivered to BZA Secretary
Connie Tingley no later than Noon, Friday, January 14, 2005. Failure to submit Informational
Packets by this time will result in the automatic tabling of the petition to the Monday, February
28, 2005 agenda of the BZA.
5. This Item will appear on the January 24, 2005 agenda of the Board of Zoning Appeals
HEARING OFFICER under Public Hearings.
6. The petitioner will need to provide a fully filled-out Findings-of-Fact sheets for each
petition the night of the meeting for the Board's use (Sheet 8). On Ballot sheets, only fill out
docket number, petitioner, and date (Sheet 7). Ballot sheets must be collated.
7.) PETITIONER: refer to your instruction sheet for more details.
Petitioner: please complete the following items:
1 .) Please come into our office to have the Affidavit notarized. Also, please submit the Affidavit
of Notice of Public Hearing, once letters are mailed/delivered.
2.) An Improvement Location Permit from the Building & Code Enforcement Department will be
needed, since the shed is greater than 120 sq. ft.
3.) If the variance is granted, you will be required to enter into a Consent to Encroach Agreement.
Contact Libby Pickett in the Engineering Department regarding this agreement at 571-2441.
4.) Make sure the public notice meeting time to the newspaper and neighbors reads 6:30, not 7
pm.
5.) Please provide an area location map.
6.) Show/label the rear setback line for the shed, as required by the ordinance (9-ft Ii'om property
line).
Please contact Mr. Scherb at 844-1542 (Fax: 844-2542) with this information. Once the file is
updated please return it to my office, ~ .....
Angie
City of Carmel
Department of Community Services
One Civic Square
Carmel, IN 46032
317-571-2417
Fax: 317-571-2426
FACSIMILE TELECOPY COVER LETTER
DATE: December 9, 2004
TO: Mr. Scherb
FAX: 844-2542
FROM: Connie
Attached hereto are ~ pages, including this cover letter, for facsimile transmission.
Should you experience any problem in the receipt of these pages, please call 317/571/2419
and ask for Connie.
NOTES:
Attached is the filing information for:
Woodland Green, Sec 1, lot 77: Scherb Residence
Please call if you have any questions.
CONFIDENTIALITY NOTICE: The materials enclosed with this facsimile transmission are private and confidential
and are the property of the sender. The information contained in the material is privileged and is intended only for
the use of the individual(s) or entity(ies) named above. If you are not the intended recipient, be advised that any
unauthorized disclosure, copying, distribution or the taking of any action in reliance on the contents of this telecopied
inforrnation is stficfiy prehibited, If you have received thia facsimile transmission in error, please immediately notify
us by telephone to arrange for return of the forwarded documents to us.