HomeMy WebLinkAboutDept Report
CARMEL BOARD OF ZONING APPEALS
HEARING OFFICER: DEP AATMENT REPORT
I
April 25, 20Q5
General Info:
The, petitioner would like
to construct a pool house
in the rear yard. As
proposed the pool house
will encroach 10- ft into a
30-ft rear drainage and
utility easement that runs
, along the rear property
line.
Analysis:
The Hamilton County
Surveyor's Office has
approved the
encroachment, so 'long as
no other utility with rights
, to the easem.ent has
concerns with the encroachment. A golf ,course.is adjace~t to the rear property line. The structure will
still be set back 20- ft from the property line, even though it will encroach into the easement.
Id. W-indemere, See 5, lot 92: Altavilla Poolhouse
Petitioner seeks the following development standards variance approval:
Dock~t NQ. 05030014 V Chapter 25.01.0 1.B.3 .B..i.b accessory building setback
The site is located at 1041-7 Windemere Blvd, arid the site is zoned S-I/Residence.
Filed by Brian Robinson of Stoeppelwerth & Associates.
~
z
o
m
~
m
::u
m
OJ
r
<
Findings of Fact: poolhouse setback
1.) The approval of this variance will not be injurious to the public health, safety, morals,
and general welfare of the community because: the petitioner's poolhouse will still be set
"back 20-ft'feet from the property line, which meets the S-I/Resdien~e zone rear yard setback.
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 petitioner's poolhouse will still be set back 20-ft feet from the property line, which meets
the S-l/Resdience zone rear yard setback.
3.) The strict appJication of the terms of the Zoning Ordinance to the property will result in
practical difficulties in the use of the prppertybecause:
The petitioner will have to place his poolhouseonthe southeast part of the lot, where he will
not be able to achieve a look that complements the house's terraced airway and courtyard; a
transitional space will not be achieved.
Recommendation:
The Department recommends positive consideration of Docket No. 05030014 v.