Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutPacket 04-22-13 April 11, 2013 PE°C -.`, Members of the Board; `1PR 12 2013 4 We were scheduled for March hearing, however, we decoded to e -: postpone until the April hearing. We are applying for another. ; ,,,,y variance due to some last minute information we received via email on March 25, 2013. We were asked for 65 '/2 foot right of way per the Thoroughfare Plan. You can imagine our surprise as we had already received affirmation on our proposal from the BZA and there had never been mention of this previously. We appreciate the beautiful city in which we live; we also appreciate the beautiful streets and the safety. We are approaching this with an attitude of compromise. 65 ft. of our front yard would leave us with only 3 feet of our,yard off our front porch. We feel that 65 ft. right of way would drastically lower our property value. A dated (1/21/2002) surveyor location report clearly shows an apparent right of way at 40 ft. We feel that this is more than fair. We are not disputing any improvements the city wishes to make, we are just unsure if the 65 ft. is indeed required or if this is what they are requesting. We would like to leave it as is. We would like to proceed with our project as proposed as we have the support of all of our neighbors and feel that it is best for all parties involved. This would improve the aesthetics from all angles of our property, specifically Gray Road. Thank you for your consideration, Joe and Amy Getchell • From: Joe Hubby getchelibrothers@yahoo.com Subject: Fw:Print for Docket#13010015UV Date: April 11,2013,9:11 PM To: Amy Getchell agetcheli@sbc louai.net Joe and Jon Getchell Getchell Brothers, Inc. "The only place success comes before work is in the dictionary." Vince Lombardi Forwarded Message From: "Foley,Amanda J"<afoley(acarmel.in.gov> To: 'Joe Getchell'<petchellbrothers(uvahoo.com> Cc: "Duncan, Gary R"<gduncan as carmei.in.gov>; "Thomas, John G"<jthomas(cr carmel.in.gov>; "Redden, Nick" <nreddenrcarmel.in.gov>; "Barnes, David R"<dbarnescarmel.in.gov>; "Conn, Angelina V"<Aconn carnlel.in.gov>; "Boone, Rachel M."<rboone(acarmei.in.gov> Sent: Monday, March 25, 2013 10:56 AM Subject: RE: Print for Docket# 13010015UV Joe, In addition to these comments, right-of-way dedication will be required per the Thoroughfare Plan. The Thoroughfare Plan indicates a 65-foot 1/2 right-of-way (130-foot full r/w) for this section of Gray Road. Please let me know if you have any questions. Sincerely, Amanda Foley Staff Engineer City of Carmel Department of Engineering 317-571-2309 (direct) afoley@carmel.in.gov From: Foley,Amanda J Sent: Friday,March 08, 2013 9:35 AM To: 'Joe Getchell' Cc:Duncan,Gary R;Thomas,John G;Redden,Nick;Barnes,David R;Conn,Angelina V;Boone,Rachel M. Subject:RE: Print for Docket# 13.010015UV Joe, Please submit a grading plan for this project to the Engineering Department, specifically for the north property line. It may be necessary to construct a swale along this property line to convey existing storm water runoff(from the west and north) to the east and then south. A Right-of-Way permit is required as well. Please contact Fred Glaser, 571-2677, regarding this permit. Let me know if you have any questions. Thank you, Amanda Foley Staff Engineer City of Carmel Department of Engineering 317-571-2309 (direct) afoley cartneLin.gov From: Joe Getchell [mailto:getchelbrothers iyahoo.com] Sent: Thursday,March 07, 2013 12:18 AM To: Conn,Angelina V;Donahue-Wold,Alexia K;Mindham,Daren;Littlejohn,David W;Lux,Pamela K;Huffman, David; nrec.hoyesicuhamiltoncountv,in.gov; gilko(ebcrossroademzineers.com;Thomas, John G; Duncan,Gary R;Foley, Amanda J;Redden,Nick; Barnes,David R; david,Lucas(alhamiltoncounty.in.gov;whohlt2(a�carmel,in,gov;Blanchard, Jim E;Duffy,John M;Green,Timothy J; Strong,David C Subject: Print for Docket# 13010015UV Please see the attached Print with reference to Docket # 13010015UV set for the March 25th hearing. This garage print is able to be scaled when printed to the original 11x17 size. I had the architect do a full set and can get you a paper copy at your request. Please call me with any questions or feel free to respond to this email with questions or if you want a paper copy of print. Also please let me know if there is any further information needed. Thank you for your time, Joe Getchell :' , CARMEL BOARD OF ZONING APPEALS DEPARTMENT REPORT MARCH 25, 2013 3-4. (UV,DSV) Getchell Accessory Dwelling, 11333 N Gray Rd The applicant seeks the following use variance approval for ani accessory dwelling in an S-1 Residence District: Docket No. 13010015 UV ZO Ch. 5.01.01 Permitted Uses Docket No. 13030002 V ZO Ch 25.01.01.B.1: Max.Height 18 feet for Accessory Structure The site is located at 1 133 N Gray Road. It is zoned S-1/Residence District. Filed by Joe Getchell, owner. r �> ;.. 3 =1� 1 . �. e` General Info: i�` . , � ° ° The Petitioner requests Use Variance iiiisliii ,; i - _ ��7 ; ,1,,‘\ approval to build an Accessory *:4-7-':::41:41":0,ti* I ri!::, ! V$ 9 Dwellin above a detached ara e on a ,, ; single family lot. To the north is a d � r :. vf. t� r.; single family lot, east is a utility a ' ` 't._ c,. .r!. substation, south is a residential 1: ' 7:.; ' Tt;, - subdivision, and west is farm land. =r' :''%�4 �" .= a The etitioner also re nests a variance m f : t 4 P q Air o' "'.0 �'h . ,' � to increase the height for the accessory S,, r:"":„.;10: '`r3 � structure from 1 8 feet to about 21 feet.il, r `® * � i , ,j' ,t . Please see the petitioner s <� `� ' r ` l' �t %� information packet for more details. c: s 1 : ' ,® �. �aid> sa J+� � �� rf m, " � e . '� .-.,. `:1 , r ,. '..L.1 Analysis: ," ,�.;. .ti� '° " �r � w ��� Use Variance: The petitioner would � `1 4,,6;.:)-j 8. ° .;• " ,I ., '�.' '' like to have living space separate from t + of " 1 ' E` , their main dwelling for their parents. q a � �. ��. The Zoning Ordinance only permits & � �,� .. gas .., a„o=a.00d tz f �, � Rc P'°' one dwelling unit per lot in an S-I 1 �r - ,rrrr.�e 'rte �R zone. This Use Variance would permit permanent living space above a detached garage as an Accessory Dwelling. An Accessory Dwelling is defined i the Zoning Ordinance as "A Dwelling that is attached to or located on the same Lot as a detached or attached Single-family Dwelling, has an independent means of access and is owned by the owner of the Principal Building but occupied by another. Accessory Dwellings include Apartments integrated within or attached to a Single-family Dwelling, or located in detached Accessory Buildings located on the same Lot as the Single-family Dwelling." An accessory dwelling could be a compatible use at this location when considering its size and location onf the site. It is setback from the street over 100 feet and is behind the rear building line of the main dwelling. The size of the accessory dwelling will be modest at only about 988 square feet, not including the garage.The architecture of the building will be complimentary to the existing home by matching the architectural style as well as the materials and colors. When considering these factors, an accessory dwelling use should have a minimal impact on adjacent properties and the community. One concern might be that this accessory dwelling could be rented out ine the future. This could be possible, however it should not be a concern. The limited size of the dwelling and location lend themselves to this structure existing without being noticed or having a negative effect on the surrounding area. The main home will remain the principal use of this property and proposed structure will only be an accessory use. The Carmel Clay Comprehensive Plan (C3 Plan)designates this area as Suburban Residential on the Land Use Plan. The use will remain residential, it will just allow for extra living space for the owners' parents. The Department has seen an increase in interest for similar"in.-laws quarters,"and this demand will probably only increase as the baby boomer generation continues to age and desire a place to live that is closer to family. There is an existing substation to the rear of the property which provides a barrier for neighbors behind this property. To date, no negative feedback has been received 1 from adjacent property owners. Based on the proposed use, architectural design, proposed location, and the existing surrounding uses and conditions, DOCS is supportive of this Use Variance. Height Variance: The height variance would allow the structure to be about 21 feet high to the midpoint between the eaves and peak, 30 feet to the peak. The ordinance permits a height of 18 feet at that midpoint for an accessory structure. Due to the unique use of this structure, a taller height is desired to allow for a better design for the accessory dwelling. The increase in height will also allow the accessory structure to better match the architectural design of the main dwelling. The accessory structure will be setback 9 feet from the side(north) property line, which abuts a property that also has a large accessory structure and so it should not have a detrimental effect. DOCS is supportive of the Height Variance. Petitioner's Findings of Fact, 13010015 Use Variance: 1. The granting of this variance will not be contrary to the public interest, due to the existence of special condition(s) such that enforcement of the zoning ordinance will result in unnecessary hardship because: we are improving property that sits on Gray Road. 2. The granting of this variance will not be injurious to the public health, safety, morals and general welfare of the community because: it will have a positive effect on community by increasing value of a home. 3. The use or value of the area adjacent to the subject property will not be substantially affected in any adverse manner because: we are helping to mask the substation directly to the east of us and will be more appealing. 4. The need for the variance arises from a natural condition peculiar to the subject property because: we need more parking. Garage space will get cars out of the drive. 5. The granting of this variance does not substantially interfere with the Carmel/Clay Comprehensive Plan because: we aren't located directly in a neighborhood. We will improve property appeal. Petitioner's Findings of Fact: 13030002 V: Height. 1. The approval of this variance will not be injurious to the public health,safety, morals,and general welfare of the community because: it will not be injurious to public health, etc. Project will make property more appealing from Gray Road by masking substation. 2. The use and value of the area adjacent to the property included in the variances will not be affected in a substantially adverse manner because: Our project will increase the value of our home and likewise for those around us. Neighbors to the south will have more appealing backyard. 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: in keeping with aesthetics of our existing home we need to maintain the steeper pitch of the roofline. We can do this by exceeding by only 2 feet 6 inches. Recommendation: After all comments and concerns have been addressed,the Dept. of Community Services recommends positive consideration of Docket Nos. 13010015 UV and 13030002 V. 2 From: Joe Hubby <etcheilbrotne;sL yahL Subject: Fw:Neighbor Date: April 11,2013,9:09 PM To: Amy Getchell agetchedi@sbrcgiobai.net Joe and Jon Getchell Getchell Brothers, Inc. "The only place success comes before work is in the dictionary." Vince Lombardi Forwarded Message From: John Scott<JScott( lestersalesco.com> To:Joe Get hell<aetchellbrothersCa.yahoo.corn> Sent: Monday, March 25, 2013 8:12 AM Subject: Re: Neighbor Joe Per our discussion. Good luck with your project. I have no objection whatsoever. In fact, i think it will improve the view from my back patio! Regards, John Scott 4928 Regency Place Cannel Sent from my iPhone On Mar 25, 2013, at 9:06 AM, "Joe Get hell" <getchellbrothersayahoo.com> wrote: > Thank you for taking the time to send an email I really appreciate it. Joe > Sent from my iPhone crG 0. .—■ M O 4 ;-. U O N ,0 0 O cn II — b c-• a.) au Vl op 0 o (1) O >,'CS cd O x o O Q .5 U ' U ct 42 "CS I >, �J co CC bp I cu con-I T,, o j ct ■ 3 ' CD a go , a., cr.) 0 a) 1 .• U iR � � 1 o � >, o \� � � ao U � � 3 0 .-� cd cd o °1 bA. 0 0 C \�• \\._.\ O y� E N b11 I -__________ A.., U— � • 6 0 H . 0 -01 0 -. p >' s_. U co ezt CD Q W O R @) G • Q. CO bp • c (cc oN p. '�t o o ++ 0 •V - 0 ' . .. .- Com c2 o o Ln O 0 0 ° 7 T ,� cn O O O o >, C O O A N CD O � ao O i v § _c CO g •¢ N _ C [r N • cn cd _ co v 0 O O N 0 N U .. ■ m ,- o sn Pa d -, O 0 4. p a) F- 2 0 Li E !— Ct O O, -� p N O -V Q N �- cn L.L. H CO f� A H v) ti >, .- Q, ,-. >, , PC a 4- 0 a. �111` From: Deb Klein youccgoifgin@aoi.com Subject: Variance Letters Date: March 25,2013, 9:49 AM To: Amy Getchell agetche!!@shcglobaLnet • April 25, 2013 Debbie Klein 4912 Regency Place Carmel, IN 46033 Dear Joe and Amy Getchell, Don and I have recently received a couple of letters from the city concerning variances for your property. We wanted you to know that we have absolutely no objections to the requests and changes you hope to make to your property. As our property is next to yours,we have been able to watch all the wonderful improvements to your property. We are confident, that the addition of an accessory dwelling or additional three feet higher pitch to your roof,will be done with style and will be appealing. Good luck with your project!! Sincerely, Don and Debbie Klein / • • ~ 70 l//V From Joe Hubby 8ek*s|u^:;41`em,:if yahoc rn--� Svu!ect: Fw:Garage Date: April n.eo13,o:1oMw To: Amy Getche n4ex�*o��u��bdw Joe and Jon Getchell Getchell Brothers, Inc. The only place success comes before work is in the dictionary." Vince Lombardi Forwarded Message From:'',:,,,mbricbiecuntgIma,ad.co0�'^oambridoecus\on-U-Danirorn^ To: qetohe/|brn|her.q:7Va!`oo.com Sent: Monday, March 25, 2013 3:15 PM Subject: Garage Dear Joe, after looking at your plans for a garage on your property I have no problem with it. Douglas Cotton 11343 N Gray Rd. Carmel |nd.4UO33