Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutDept Report 03-25-13 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 an 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 1133 N Gray Road. It is zoned S-1/Residence District. Filed by Joe Getchell, owner. �� 4-' . I ,t I .. Y .4 . - - General Info: • ` � ; �£ , 1` ° . ; ,. ,,,-°` The Petitioner requests Use Variance. tt f e,,t . � ti . �, .,�d . ., ` „. o A i� 4 approval to build an Accessory a�a 2 r t ° 7 z i 3 1 3� , 371 I '' " » ' 0' A" t - Dwelling above a detached garage on a Viii. �€ � r � � t t g g g � � �� ,��r single family lot. To the north is a (AI. pa,t , t t yn .�S t, 4 ,A c ��3y����$�� 1, ,�,y.- , � 0°' 1 , :,,,-47/,---,r-:4 � � f single family lot,east is a utility n _ -.7''fi , substation, south is a residential ips- ,4 �_ ,° ' s, u ! ,.)� " -N ' '' ._ l Y ;' n# c subdivision, and west is farm land. The petitioner also requests a variance• ,�,r ,'<<�� �° .r' "� '' , . 1 ;j to •increase the height for the accessory " "`„, ap 1 ,,- 4' l�: , structure from 18 feet to about 21 feet. �x , ; ; .. ' € 1 ."� ,, Please see the petitioner's „� i r` 4 w,� sir x 4 ., . �"t , :;,...;40,4,,,v4 - , tom' information packet for more details. i �^ !� 1'r . l 'Li ' a t , { Y� b s d = i s '` .•F<r i A1'. ,---.4. � ,, '+ � �. 'v.? m,A.:6„ rtwµ�-.f?„,,,; tt to �,a F,v�,& - ,, s A'','"V-c"r$ r' f� p�ytt;} yj l� � 6 i� �4;��,� 'OP_ ,� �.'�` �� Z :• Analy ,, ��� _ x ,M . : �•,ti Use Variance: The petitioner would 14 A, , 5 f, ,w '., C q ` 'r ,;,"M r - 0 ` ' like to have living space separate from . 4 ' 1 1, 1 „ . t '` , �ir � �' { r r their main dwelling for their parents. �° ° ' , ` i` `" -: ' ” i. n - "1` i The Zoning Ordinance only permits i �� _ _. ' '� _z. �" w_R a''r�I,r �: one dwelling unit per lot in an S-1 t E. . :1.. 7, ° :. ., "�b/ zone. This Use Variance would permit permanent living space above a detached garage as an Accessory Dwelling. An Accessory Dwelling is defined in 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 on 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 in 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 3 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. 4