Letter: In response to the city’s Airbnb letter

You may also like...

  • RKW50

    Allison, you are SO correct in your statements. Specifically this one

    “It is more than odd that the city of Carmel is so eager to interrupt people’s lives for renting out a room for a few weekends on the basis of zoning, but when developers come to the city with a PUD designed for the purpose of subverting existing zoning ordinances, they are welcomed with open arms. No arguments about traffic or property values are strong enough to turn back the massive permanent over-development of a Residential Single Family area. But when a Carmel citizen wishes to have an empty room in her house used in a reasonable fashion, then the city becomes extremely active. I demand that developers be held to the same zoning standards as Carmel wishes to use on individual citizens.”

    Carmel has been changing, or gifting zoning changes for YEARS. Especially west of Meridian, since 1985. These same comments are brought up each time by concerned citizens, yet the city council, and the developers’ attorneys keep using the old “best use” argument. Best use for who? For the developer and the mayor, or for the folks that made what may be their largest investment in their home? I have 3 empty bedrooms in my home, and am one heck of a cook, so when I retire, I may just test this. After all, if Carmel classifies it as a business, attorney fees would just be a deduction 🙂 How can they deny me? They decided to build commercial, and retail across the street from my house, And soon a bunch of apartments, in what used to be S1 zoning!

  • Eric Morris

    It was “ironic and disappointing” (to quote the City’s lawyers in their legal brief regarding Home Place annexation) to hear the Mayor (rightfully) give lip service to private property rights. It just so happened to be in a discussion regarding a new PUD, plus his comments on the Monon Trail trees a few weeks ago. Zoning is an attack on private property; playing into the perception of playing favorites is also toxic. But I guess as long as the debt never turns toxic on the bond holders it won’t matter much.