Carmel hearing officer approves small lot‑coverage variance for Cool Creek North addition

5882612 · September 30, 2025

Get AI-powered insights, summaries, and transcripts

Subscribe
AI-Generated Content: All content on this page was generated by AI to highlight key points from the meeting. For complete details and context, we recommend watching the full video. so we can fix them.

Summary

The Board of Zoning Appeals hearing officer approved a variance allowing a modest lot‑coverage increase for a two‑room addition in Cool Creek North after Carmel planning and engineering staff said stormwater systems could handle the change.

The Board of Zoning Appeals hearing officer on Sept. 29 approved a variance allowing a planned two‑room addition that slightly exceeds the Unified Development Ordinance lot‑coverage limit for a home in the Cool Creek North neighborhood.

The petitioner, represented by Andy Word, land‑use professional with Church, Churchill & Antrim, said one of the new rooms will be an enclosed family room and the other an outdoor living space “partially enclosed by walls.” Word told the board the project matches existing brick and that “the storm system in Cool Creek North will have no problem handling this marginal increase.”

Carmel planning staff told the hearing the addition is about an 891‑square‑foot building addition, will match the house materials, meets building setbacks and has addressed planning review comments. Staff said Carmel Engineering raised no concerns about stormwater capacity and recommended approval.

The hearing officer approved the variance and adoption of the petitioner’s findings of fact. No members of the public spoke for or against the petition during the hearing.

Project files show the addition will be at least 10 feet from the side and about 22 feet from the rear property lines and that half of the addition is not under roof, which staff said mitigates massing concerns.

The approval is conditioned on the record of planning and zoning review comments having been addressed as noted by staff; no separate council or board vote was recorded in the public meeting minutes shown.