Carmel zoning board denies short-term rental for historic Mattesville house next to elementary school

The Carmel Board of Zoning Appeals voted Jan. 29 to deny a petition to allow short-term residential rentals at a historic home on 100 16th Street, citing concerns about its proximity to an elementary school, tight private access and questions over mailed notice information.

Petitioner Lee Tesdell, who spoke for the property owners with Melissa Davidson, said the house — the historic 'Mattesville' built in 1868 — is their permanent residence and that short-term rentals would be occasional, mostly in winter. "We would like to, do short term rental on our home just basically in the winter," Tesdell said, and added that their son lives on-site in an independent garage apartment and that they have exterior cameras to address security concerns.

Several neighbors testified in opposition. "That lane is very narrow…emergency vehicles can't get past there," said resident Mel, who asked that rentals be limited to adults and flagged the private lane's shared maintenance responsibilities. Rob Vitilens told the board the parcel ID on the mailed notice appears to reference a different property: "the parcel ID that's on the letter is incorrect," he said, asking the city to correct the record. Trevor Adams, who lives behind the property, said the home sits adjacent to a school bus stop and playground and added, "Our main concern is the safety of the children," noting his daughter waits at the stop each morning.

Angie from planning staff summarized the review and recommended consideration of the request. Staff noted the site lies where 100 16th Street meets Haverstick Road amid single-family homes, a church and an elementary school; planning reported no code-enforcement incidents or police-reported incidents in the past year and advised that, if approved, a short-term rental authorization would be valid for one year and subject to renewal. "Planning staff does recommend consideration of the request, as well as the adoption of the findings of fact," Angie said.

Board members questioned whether the petition met the ordinance's strict standard for initial applications. One member described consulting the Unified Development Ordinance and told colleagues that only two zoning districts allow transient lodging near schools, saying that factored into a reluctance to approve the first application. The chair also noted online reviews showed stays at the property outside the city's 'freebie' holiday dates and said operating outside those dates was a concern.

After further discussion about buffers, exterior lighting and the presence of an on-site manager, a member moved to approve the petition and another seconded. The board ultimately voted and the chair announced the petition "is not approved." The chair then asked the legal department to draft findings of fact reflecting the decision.

The denial means the applicants would need to reapply and address the board's concerns if they wish to seek approval in the future; under the city's rules an approval, if granted, would be valid for one year before renewal is required.