HomeMy WebLinkAboutPacket
v
CARMEUCLAY ADVISORY BOARD OF ZONING APPEALS
Docket No.: 04120009
Il~/.~..
'--.::..J. ~
".. )"9
~
~'1\
\---\ 'Si~
\ ~~.~ ,\ I~--
\. / ,', I'.,'
\;",/ /'\.. /1#<':<, '
FINDING OF FACT - DEtELOPMENT STANDARDS VARIANCE (Balldf-::'S:heen _ -,_--:--<;',/
'-...!, -.!.._~~ .L.. \_.:-.~-- ~,
Carmel, Indiana
Petitioner: David A. Scherb
1 .
2.
3.
DATED THIS Twentv-fourth DAY OF January. 2005
Board Member
Page 7 of 8 -z\shared\forms\BZA applications\Development.Standards Variance Application rev. 01/05/2004
CARMEL/CLA Y ADVISORY BOARP OF ZQNING APPEALS
CARMEL,INDIAfiA
Docket No.: 04120009V
Petitioner: David A.Scher~
FINDING OF FACT - DEVELOPMENT STA~DARDS VARIANCE
1. The approval of this variance will not be injurious to the public health, safety, morals and general
welfare of the comm~n~ty because: There are no known util~tif3s within the footprint. the storaae shed is
consistent in position with adiacent properties. it is located within a fence that has been undisturbed
since 1972. The shed is also moveable. in the event that utilities need access. It is a nice lookina
accessory buildina.
2. 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 shed is attr9ct~V~1 and well built. it's use will allow for lawn
maintenance eauipm~nt. patio furniture and children's tOYS to be stored in an acces~ible location which
will permit automobiles to be parked in the existina aaraae providina better curb appeal.
3. The strict application of the terms of the Zoning Ordinance to the property will result in practical
difficulties in the use of the property because: Movina the shed out nine feet from the property line
(du&e plus three feet) will Drevent child's play (larae space activities like volleyball. baseball. etc.) within
the safe confines of the fenced rear yard. Aesthetic value would decrease. dramatically.
DECISION
IT IS THEREFORE the decision of the Carmel/Clay Board of Zoning Appeals that Development Standards
Variance Docket No. 4120009V is granted, subject to any conditions stated. in the minutes of this Board, which
are inc'orporated herein by reference and made a part hereof.
. Adopted this Twentv-fourth day of January. 2005
CHAIRPERSON, Carmel/Clay Board of Zoning Appeals
SECRETARY, Carmel/Clay Board of Zoning Appeals
Conditions of the Board are listed on the back. (Petitioner or his representative tq~$ign).
~:-,
Page 8 of 8 -z\shared\forms\BZA applications\Development Standards Variance Application rev. 01/05/2004
<)
From: David Scherb
3919 Brian Place
Carmel, IN 46033
Date: January 14, 2005
To: Carmel/Clay Advisory Board
Zoning Appeals Members
Subject: Docket No. 04120009V
Re: Statement of Variance and Support
Board Members,
It has been brought to my attention that I have made a mistake. Late this past fall, I built a
storage shed in my back/side yard. I built it in a location that is not unnke most other storage
sheds around my neighborhood, about two feet off the pro.perty line. Even a non-permanent
structure, such as this must not only be outside of the six foot drainage and utility easement, it
must be three feet away from the easement (Carmel/Clay Zoning Ordinance 25.01.B.3.b.i).
Prior to receiving the Zoning Ordinance Violation Notice last November, I was unaware of this
fact. Because the shed was 75% complete at the time of the citationL Kevin Brennan, the Code
Enforcement Inspector, was kind enough to let me .complete the installation of the shingles and
siding. It is my desire to obtain a variance to leave the storage shed within the drainage and
utility easement, and finish the project early in the spring.
This storage_:shed is an attractive addition to our landscaping and the overall appearance of our
part of the neighborhood. It allows us to store miscellaneous children's toys and bicycles, along
with lawn and garden maintenance tools and equipment, plus seasonal patio furniture. With the
addition of the shed and it's storage capacity, we are able to actually store our vehicles in the
existing garage, further improving the curb appeal of our family home.
With the storage shed in the present location and the mature trees that are in our yard, the
children are able to continue to safely play baseball, football and other games in our back yard.
In addition, my daughter's volleyball team gets together for fun and practice. If it becomes
necessary to move the shed per the ordinance, some games and activities would be limited and
others, volleyball for instance, would be impossible with in the safe confines of our fenced rear
yard.
As stated above, the positioning of the storage shed is consistent with others in the vicinity. In
addition, there are no known common utilities buried under the footprint of the shed. I
purchased this home from the original owner, my father-in-law, who had the home built. The
existing fence h~s been in place since about 1972 and was installed on the property line. In the
last thirty plus years, it has been unnecessary to engage in utility work within the fenced area,
including the area under the storage shed. Nevertheless, this storage shed is built on skids and
'is movable, should the need ever arise.
It is my hope, because of the aforementioned facts and beliefs, the variance will be granted and
this storage shed will be able to remain intact in the present location.
David Scherb
.~
1Ifw.
~"~~'~'fr
IP"J ,~.~ ilLI1
i1'.'~~e", f.
<.,
'["0
,"~
a
b
~ 'l.f:J
~"~
a
-6!
N' ~
~ I't.~
",,;,J I ~
-,;"
i
N
.~
)~
~ I-I
;ftt ~a,
~t" d_i
g
1l'J1 it
~f.,I
m);~
~;Q
~_.~~.,
.........','L,,,,,...'.J
~rQ)
~
'f".:.'L!s.~. '.'
o
,liJ.
t=:i'O
',fir. I "",.11
<t!. . c~
I
e
~.
.yk.
;~il
".';!
~I'"i:.i 1M
~..;.@ .' ~~-~,~
~! 5i
.,.;.~
~ ~ r~
~.'"
~ I' 11 ,(II
C.REEr4 'S T
'~,Q
~,
I Q ;ql~ I 0 .;-r. 10 I ;; If
"'I-J ~:..n r. I\otJ UI
Li\ii ,~~n '....1 ~rr "S! fm ~ ~ig
Uf 1;;.1 , 'Q'I ir'~! ~'..'J ~
I~~'d;
.G
.~c
.i~. 12~;'..'.:
:~ ~
;,;?/,.I(-
(n. '.~~
..... 0
rJ > "0;-1
I"C'
:~
?hl' Cj.
Ld <
,;~ 0
'~1t.) SS
'.
~
~