The URL can be used to link to this page

Home My WebLink AboutFindings of Fact Sheets_Signed FINDINGS OF FACT FORM FOR PRIMARY PLAT CONSIDERATION Carmel Plan Commission Carmel, Indiana DOCKET NO. : 5 6 — 9 1 Pp NAME OF SUBDIVISION: A v z a rz G 1 e ri PETITIONER: Avzarn G1.erz Associates Based upon all the evidence presented by the petitioner and upon the rep- resentations and certifications of the staff of the Department of Com- munity Development, I determine that the plat complies with standards of the Carmel Clay Subdivision Control Ordinance. I hereby approve of the primary plat as submitted with the following specific conditions as agreed to by the petitioner. Condition 1. Condition 2. Condition 3. I hereby disapprove of the primary plat as submitted for the following reasons: 1. 2. 3. DATED THIS 1 7 DAY OF D e c em b e r 199$ BOARD MEMBER 111011 Rev. March 1989 FINDINGS OF FACT FORM FOR PRIMARY PLAT CONSIDERATION Carmel Plan Commission Carmel, Indiana DOCKET NO. : 5 6 — 9 1 PP NAME OF SUBDIVISION: A v i a ri G 1 e rl PETITIONER: Av=iari G1ert Associates Based upon all the evidence presented by the petitioner and upon the rep- resentations and certifications of the staff of the Department of Com- munity Development, I determine that the plat complies with standards of the Carmel Clay Subdivision Control Ordinance. I hereby approve of the primary plat as submitted with the following specific conditions as agreed to by the petitioner. Condition 1. Condition 2. Condition 3. I hereby disapprove of the primary plat as submitted for the following reasons: 1. 2. 3. DATED THIS 1 7 DAY OF D e c em b e r 199/ BOARD MEMBER 111011 Rev. March 1989 FINDINGS OF FACT FORM FOR PRIMARY PLAT CONSIDERATION Carmel Plan Commission Carmel, Indiana DOCKET NO. : 5 6 — 9 1 PP NAME OF SUBDIVISION: Avian G 1 eri PETITIONER: Avzarz Glen AssociatLes XBased upon all the evidence presented by the petitioner resentations and certifications of the staff of the Department oofn tComrep- munity Development, I determine that the plat complies with standards of the Carmel Clay Subdivision Control Ordinance. I hereby approve of the primary plat as submitted with the followin specific conditions as agreed to by the petitioner. g Condition 1. Condition 2. Condition 3. I hereby disapprove of the primary plat as submitted for the following reasons: 1. 2. 3. DATED THIS 1 7 DAY OF D e c e m b e r 1990 BOARD MEMBER //1011 Rev. March 1989 FINDINGS OF FACT FORM FOR PRIMARY PLAT CONSIDERATION Carmel Plan Commission Carmel, Indiana DOCKET NO. : 5 6 — 9 1 P P NAME OF SUBDIVISION: Avian G l e n PETITIONER: Avian Glen Associates Based upon all the evidence presented by the petitioner and upon the rep- resentations and certifications of the staff of the Department of Com- munity Development, I determine that the plat complies with standards of the Carmel Clay Subdivision Control Ordinance. I hereby approve of the primary plat as submitted with the following specific conditions as agreed to by the petitioner. Condition 1. Condition 2. Condition 3. I hereby disapprove of the primary plat as submitted for the following reasons: 1. 2. 3. DATED THIS 17 DAY OF D e c em b a r , 199$ BOARD ER /I1011 Rev. March 1989 FINDINGS OF FACT FORM FOR PRIMARY PLAT CONSIDERATION Carmel Plan Commission Carmel, Indiana DOCKET NO. : 5 6 — 9 1 PE" NAME OF SUBDIVISION: A v i a ri G 1 ri PETITIONER: Avian Glen Associates Based upon all the evidence presented by the petitioner and upon the rep- resentations and certifications of the staff of the Department of Com- munity Development, I determine that the plat complies with standards of the Carmel Clay Subdivision Control Ordinance. I hereby approve of the primary plat as submitted with the following specific conditions as agreed to by the petitioner. Condition 1. Condition 2. Condition 3. I hereby disapprove of the primary plat as submitted for the following reasons: 1. 2. 3. DATED THIS 1 7 DAY OF D e c em b e r 1994 Gam- , B A BER //1011 Rev. March 1989 FINDINGS OF FACT FORM FOR PRIMARY PLAT CONSIDERATION Carmel Plan Commission Carmel, Indiana DOCKET NO. : 5 6 — 9 1 PP NAME OF SUBDIVISION: Avian G l e PETIT NER: Av n G1eri A ccates Based upon all the evidence presented by the petitioner and upon the rep- resentations and certifications of the staff of the Department of Com- munity Development, I determine that the plat complies with standards of the Carmel Clay Subdivision Control Ordinance. I hereby approve of the primary plat as submitted with the following specific conditions as agreed to by the petitioner. Condition 1. Condition 2. Condition 3. I hereby disapprove of the primary plat as submitted for the following reasons: 1. 2. 3. DATED THIS 1 7 DAY OF 199$ cAC BOARD MEMBER 01011 Rev. March 1989 FINDINGS OF FACT FORM FOR PRIMARY PLAT CONSIDERATION Carmel Plan Commission Carmel, Indiana DOCKET NO. : 5 6 — 91 PP NAME OF SUBDIVISION: Avian G 1 en PETIT : Avian Glen Associates Based upon all the evidence presented by the petitioner and upon the rep- resentations and certifications of the staff of the Department of Com- munity Development, I determine that the plat complies with standards of the Carmel Clay Subdivision Control Ordinance. I hereby approve of the primary plat as submitted with the following specific conditions as agreed to by the petitioner. Condition 1. e eZ -. G .E, 3 . Condition 2. Condition 3. I hereby disapprove of the primary plat as submitted for the following reasons: 1. 2. 3. DATED THIS 1 7 DAY OF Io e c emb t 199$ v ARD B R #1011 Rev. March 1989 FINDINGS OF FACT FORM FOR PRIMARY PLAT CONSIDERATION Carmel Plan Commission Carmel, Indiana DOCKET NO. : 5 6 — 9 1 PP NAME OF SUBDIVISION: Av i s ri G 1 e ri PETITION : Avian Glen Associates Based upon all the evidence presented by the petitioner and upon the rep- resentations and certifications of the staff of the Department of Com- munity Development, I determine that the plat complies with standards of the Carmel Clay Subdivision Control Ordinance. I hereby approve of the primary plat as submitted with the following specific conditions as agreed to by the petitioner. Condition 1. Condition 2. Condition 3. I hereby disapprove of the primary plat as submitted for the following reasons: 1. 2. 3. DATED THIS 17 DAY OF D e c em b • 19 __.--- t 1,'.1 O1011 / B M BE Rev. March 1989 FINDINGS OF FACT FORM FOR PRIMARY PLAT CONSIDERATION Carmel Plan Commission Carmel, Indiana DOCKET NO. : 5 6 — 9 1 PI? NAME OF SUBDIVISION: Air G 1 E rz PETITIONER: Aviarn G1arz Associates 1 : Based upon all the evidence presented by the petitioner and upon the rep- resentations and certifications of the staff of the Department of Com- munity Development, I determine that the plat complies with standards of the Carmel Clay Subdivision Control Ordinance. I hereby approve of the primary plat as submitted with the following specific conditions as agreed to by the petitioner. Condition 1. Condition 2. Condition 3. I hereby disapprove of the primary plat as submitted for the following reasons: 1. 2. 3. DATED THIS 1 7 DAY OF D e c ern b e r 1994 BOARD MEMBER #1011 Rev. March 1989 FINDINGS OF FACT FORM FOR PRIMARY PLAT CONSIDERATION Carmel Plan Commission Carmel, Indiana DOCKET NO. : 5 6 — 9 1 PI? NAME OF SUBDIVISION: Avian G l en PETITIONER: Aviz-A n Glen Associates Based upon all the evidence presented by the petitioner rep- resentations and certifications of the staff of the oDepartment ooftCom- munity Development, I determine that the plat complies with standards of the Carmel Clay Subdivision Control Ordinance. I hereby approve of the primary plat as submitted with the following specific conditions as agreed to by the petitioner. Condition 1. Condition 2. Condition 3. I hereby disapprove of the primary plat as submitted for the following reasons: 1. 2. 3. DATED THIS 17 DAY OF 199$ CA-Zt_‘) BOARD MEMB I11011 Rev. March 1989 FINDINGS OF FACT FORM FOR PRIMARY PLAT CONSIDERATION Carmel Plan Commission Carmel, Indiana DOCKET NO. : 5 6 — 9 1 PI' NAME OF SUBDIVISION: A v i a ri G 1 e rz PETITIONER: Av-i_ari G1eri Associates V Based upon all the evidence presented by the petitioner and upon the rep- resentations and certifications of the staff of the Department of Com- munity Development, I determine that the plat complies with standards of the Carmel Clay Subdivision Control Ordinance. I hereby approve of the primary plat as submitted with the following specific conditions as agreed to by the petitioner. Condition 1. Condition 2. Condition 3. I hereby disapprove of the primary plat as submitted for the following reasons: 1. 2. 3. DATED THIS 1 7 DAY OF D e c em b e r , 1991 BOARD MEMBER #1011 Rev. March 1989 FINDINGS OF FACT FORM FOR PRIMARY PLAT CONSIDERATION Carmel Plan Commission Carmel, Indiana DOCKET NO. : 5 6 — 9 1 PP NAME OF SUBDIVISION: A v i a ri G 1 e ri PETITIONER: AViari Glen Associates Based upon all the evidence presented by the petitioner and upon the rep- resentations and certifications of the staff of the Department of Com- munity Development, I determine that the plat complies with standards of the Carmel Clay Subdivision Control Ordinance. I hereby approve of the primary plat as submitted with the following specific conditions as agreed to by the petitioner. Condition 1. Condition 2. Condition 3. I hereby disapprove of the primary plat as submitted for the following reasons: 1. 2. 3. DATED THIS 1 7 DAY OF D e c em b e r , 1991 BOARD MEMBER 111011 Rev. March 1989 FINDINGS OF FACT FORM FOR PRIMARY PLAT CONSIDERATION Carmel Plan Commission Carmel, Indiana DOCKET NO. : 5 6 — 9 1 PP NAME OF SUBDIVISION: ANT i a ri G 1 era PETITIONER: Avzarn G1eri Associates V/ Based upon all the evidence presented by the petitioner rep- resentations and certifications of the staff of the oDepartment oofn tCom- munity Development, I determine that the plat complies with standards of the Carmel Clay Subdivision Control Ordinance. I hereby approve of the primary plat as submitted with the following specific conditions as agreed to by the petitioner. Condition 1. Condition 2. Condition 3. I hereby disapprove of the primary plat as submitted for the following reasons: 1. 2. 3. DATED THIS 1 7 DAY OF D e c em b e r , 199, rr7/ BOARD MEMBER O1011 Rev. March 1989 FINDINGS OF FACT FORM FOR PRIMARY PLAT CONSIDERATION Carmel Plan Commission Carmel, Indiana DOCKET NO. : 5 6 — 9 1 PI? NAME OF SUBDIVISION: A r i a ri G 1 eri PETITIONER: A v i a ri Glen A s s o c i a t e s )K Based upon all the evidence presented by the petitioner and upon the re - resentations and certifications of the staff of the Department of Com- p munity Development, I determine that the plat complies with standards of the Carmel Clay Subdivision Control Ordinance. I hereby approve of the primary plat as submitted with the following specific conditions as agreed to by the petitioner. Condition 1. Condition 2. Condition 3. I hereby disapprove of the primary plat as submitted for the following reasons: 1. 2. 3. DATED THIS 1 7 DAY OF D e c e m b e r 199, 4 � - ',, OAR �� D MEMBER O1011 Rev. March 1989 CARMEL/CLAY PLAN COMMISSION Carmel, Indiana Docket No.: 5 6 - 9 1 P P Petitioner: Aviari G1en. Associates Section Variance: 6 . 5 - 3 Brief Description of Variance: P 1-o t t i rig a t d o u b l e f r o n t a g e l o t In deciding whether or not the applicant has presented sufficient proof to permit the granting of a variance, the Plan Commission should consider the following: — — The grant of a variance will not be injurious to public health, safety, morals and general welfare of the community. — — The use or value of area adjacent to the property included in the proposed plat will not be affected in a substantially adverse manner. — — The need for the variance arises from some condition peculiar to the property and such condition is not due to the general conditions of the neighborhood. — — The strict application of terms of the ordinance will constitute an unusual and unnecessary hardship if applied to the property for which the variance is sought. — — The grant of the variance does not interfere substantially with the Comprehensive Plan. Based on al l the evidence presented by the petitioner, I approve of the requested subdivision variance. I hereby disapprove the subdivision variance request for the following reasons: 1. 2. 3. Dated this 17 day of December 1990. 41 /i0---71---- . s IF ission Member #1066.ghs CARMEL/CLAY PLAN COMMISSION Carmel, Indiana Docket No.: 5 6 - 9 1 P P Petitioner: Avian Glen Associates Section Variance: 6 . 5 _ 3 Brief Description of Variance: P o t t i n g a t d o u b l e f r o n t a g e lot s In deciding whether or not the applicant has presented sufficient proof to permit the granting of a variance, the Plan Commission should consider the following: — — The grant of a variance will not be injurious to public health, safety, morals and general welfare of the community. — — The use or value of area adjacent to the property included in the proposed plat will not be affected in a substantially adverse manner. — — The need for the variance arises from some condition peculiar to the property and such condition is not due to the general conditions of the neighborhood. — — The strict application of terms of the ordinance will constitute an unusual and unnecessary hardship if applied to the property for which the variance is sought. — — The grant of the variance does not interfere substantially with the Comprehensive Plan. >_ Based on all the evidence presented by the petitioner, I approve of the requested subdivision variance. I hereby disapprove the subdivision variance request for the following reasons: 1. 2. 3. Dated this 1 7 day of December 1990. C missi n Member #1066.ghs CARMEL/CLAY PLAN COMMISSION Carmel, Indiana Docket No.: 5 6 — 9 1 P P Petitioner: Avian Glen Associates Section Variance: 6 . 5 - 3 Brief Description of Variance: P]-o t t i n g a t d o-Lib l e frontage l o t s In deciding whether or not the applicant has presented sufficient proof to permit the granting of a variance, the Plan Commission should consider the following: — — The grant of a variance will not be injurious to public health, safety, morals and general welfare of the community. — — The use or value of area adjacent to the property included in the proposed plat will not be affected in a substantially adverse manner. — — The need for the variance arises from some condition peculiar to the property and such condition is not due to the general conditions of the neighborhood. — — The strict application of terms of the ordinance will constitute an unusual and unnecessary hardship if applied to the property for which the variance is sought. — — The grant of the variance does not interfere substantially with the Comprehensive Plan. /'f\ Based on all the evidence presented bythepetitioner, I approve of the requested PP q subdivision variance. I hereby disapprove the subdivision variance request for the following reasons: 1. 2 3. Dated this 1 7 day of D e ern b e r 1990. Commission Member #1066.ghs CARMEL/CLAY PLAN COMMISSION Carmel, Indiana Docket No.: 5 6 - 9 1 P P Petitioner: Avian Glen Associates Section Variance: 6 _ 5 - 3 Brief Description of Variance: P 7_o t t i n g a t double frontage lot In deciding whether or not the applicant has presented sufficient proof to permit the granting of a variance, the Plan Commission should consider the following: — — The grant of a variance will not be injurious to public health, safety, morals and general welfare of the community. — — The use or value of area adjacent to the property included in the proposed plat will not be affected in a substantially adverse manner. — — The need for the variance arises from some condition peculiar to the property and such condition is not due to the general conditions of the neighborhood. — — The strict application of terms of the ordinance will constitute an unusual and unnecessary hardship if applied to the property for which the variance is sought. — — The grant of the variance does not interfere substantially with the Comprehensive Plan. Based on all the evidence presented by the petitioner, I approve of the requested subdivision variance. I hereby disapprove the subdivision variance request for the following reasons: 1. 2. 3. Dated this 1 7 day of D e r_em b e r 1991. ommission em er #1066.ghs CARMEL/CLAY PLAN COMMISSION Carmel, Indiana Docket No.: 5 6 - 91 P P Petitioner: Aviari G1eri Associates Section Variance: 6 . 5 . 3 Brief Description of Variance: P 1 o t t i ri g a t d o u b l e fro ri t a g e l o t In deciding whether or not the applicant has presented sufficient proof to permit the granting of a variance, the Plan Commission should consider the following: — — The grant of a variance will not be injurious to public health, safety, morals and general welfare of the community. — — The use or value of area adjacent to the property included in the proposed plat will not be affected in a substantially adverse manner. — — The need for the variance arises from some condition peculiar to the property and such condition is not due to the general conditions of the neighborhood. — — The strict application of terms of the ordinance will constitute an unusual and unnecessary hardship if applied to the property for which the variance is sought. — — The grant of the variance does not interfere substantially with the Comprehensive Plan. Based on all the evidence presented by the petitioner, I approve of the requested subdivision variance. I hereby disapprove the subdivision variance request for the following reasons: 1. 2. 3. Dated this 17 day of D e c,.em b e r 1990. Com 'ssion Member #1066.ghs CARMEL/CLAY PLAN COMMISSION Carmel, Indiana Docket No.: 5 6 - 9 1 P P Petitioner: Avian Glen Associates Section Variance: 6 _ 5 - 3 Brief Description of Variance: Plotting at doLib'le frontage lots In decidi g whether or not the applicant has presented sufficient proof to permit the granting of a varia e, the Plan Commission should consider the following: — — The grant of a variance will not be injurious to public health, safety, morals and general welfare of the community. — — The use or value of area adjacent to the property included in the proposed plat will not be affected in a substantially adverse manner. — — The need for the variance arises from some condition peculiar to the property and such condition is not due to the general conditions of the neighborhood. — — The strict application of terms of the ordinance will constitute an unusual and unnecessary hardship if applied to the property for which the variance is sought. — — The grant of the variance does not interfere substantially with the Comprehensive Plan. Based on all the evidence presented by the petitioner, I approve of the requested subdivision variance. I hereby disapprove the subdivision variance request for the following reasons: 1. 2. 3. Dated this 17 day of D e c-,..ember- 1990. 0 Jam ' Commission Member #1066.ghs CARMEL/CLAY PLAN COMMISSION Carmel, Indiana Docket No.: 5 6 - 9 1 P P Petitioner: Avian Glen Associates Section Variance: 6 _ 5 - 3 Brief Description of Variance: P 1-o t t 1 In g a t d o u b l e f r o n t a g e l o t s In deciding whether or not the applicant has presented sufficient proof to permit the granting of a variance, the Plan Commission should consider the following: — — The grant of a variance will not be injurious to public health, safety, morals and general welfare of the community. — — The use or value of area adjacent to the property included in the proposed plat will not be affected in a substantially adverse manner. — — The need for the variance arises from some condition peculiar to the property and such condition is not due to the general conditions of the neighborhood. — — The strict application of terms of the ordinance will constitute an unusual and unnecessary hardship if applied to the property for which the variance is sought. — — The grant of the variance does not interfere substantially with the Comprehensive Plan. yBased on all the evidence presented by the petitioner, I approve of the requested subdivision variance. I hereby disapprove the subdivision variance request for the following reasons: 1. 2. 3. Dated this 1 7 day of D e c-.em b e r 1990. ommi s on Member #1066.ghs CARMEL/CLAY PLAN COMMISSION Carmel, Indiana Docket No.: 5 6 - 9 1 P P Petitioner: Avian Glen Associates Section Variance: 6 _ 5 - 3 Brief Description of Variance: P 1-c t t i ri g a t d o u b l e frontage Lot In deciding whether or not the applicant has presented sufficient proof to permit the granting of a variance, the Plan Commission should consider the following: — — The grant of a variance will not be injurious to public health, safety, morals and general welfare of the community. — — The use or value of area adjacent to the property included in the proposed plat will not be affected in a substantially adverse manner. — — The need for the variance arises from some condition peculiar to the property and such condition is not due to the general conditions of the neighborhood. — — The strict application of terms of the ordinance will constitute an unusual and unnecessary hardship if applied to the property for which the variance is sought. — — The grant of the variance does not interfere substantially with the Comprehensive Plan. L Based on all the evidence presented by the petitioner, I approve of the requested subdivision variance. I hereby disapprove the subdivision variance request for the following reasons: 1. 2. 3. Dated this 1 7 day of D e c.e m b e r 1991. b 7(4 (._4 , Commission Member #1066.ghs CARMEL/CLAY PLAN COMMISSION Carmel, Indiana Docket No.: 5 6 - 9 1 P P Petitioner: Avian G1era Associates Section Variance: 6 _ 5 - 3 Brief Description of Variance: P l o t t i n g a t d o u b l e fro n t a g e l o t In deciding whether or not the applicant has presented sufficient proof to permit the granting of a variance, the Plan Commission should consider the following: — — The grant of a variance will not be injurious to public health, safety, morals and general welfare of the community. — — The use or value of area adjacent to the property included in the proposed plat will not be affected in a substantially adverse manner. — — The need for the variance arises from some condition peculiar to the property and such condition is not due to the general conditions of the neighborhood. — — The strict application of terms of the ordinance will constitute an unusual and unnecessary hardship if applied to the property for which the variance is sought. — — e grant of the variance does not interfere substantially with the Comprehensive Plan. Based on all the evidence presented by the petitioner, I approve of the requested subdivision variance. I hereby disapprove the subdivision variance request for the following reasons: 1. 2 3. Dated this 17 day of D e c_.em b e r 1999. / ommission Mem r #1066.ghs CARMEL/CLAY PLAN COMMISSION Carmel, Indiana Docket No.: 5 6 - 9 1 PP Petitioner: Avian Glen Associates Section Variance: 6 _ 5 - 3 Brief Description of Variance: P]_o t t i n g a t d o u b l e frontage lot In deciding whether or not the applicant has presented sufficient proof to permit the granting of a variance, the Plan Commission should consider the following: — — The grant of a variance will not be injurious to public health, safety, morals and general welfare of the community. — — The use or value of area adjacent to the property included in the proposed plat will not be affected in a substantially adverse manner. — — The need for the variance arises from some condition peculiar to the property and such condition is not due to the general conditions of the neighborhood. — — The strict application of terms of the ordinance will constitute an unusual and unnecessary hardship if applied to the property for which the variance is sought. — — The grant of the variance does not interfere substantially with the Comprehensive Plan. Based on all the evidence presented by the petitioner, I approve of the requested subdivision variance. I hereby disapprove the subdivision variance request for the following reasons: 1. 2 3. Dated this 17 day of December 199.. Fommissior Member #1066.ghs CARMEL/CLAY PLAN COMMISSION Carmel, Indiana Docket No.: 5 6 - 9 1 P P Petitioner: Avian G1eri Associates Section Variance: 6 - 5 - 3 Brief Description of Variance: P 1 o t t i ri g a t d o u b l e f z-o u t a g e l o t In deciding whether or not the applicant has presented sufficient proof to permit the granting of a variance, the Plan Commission should consider the following: — — The grant of a variance will not be injurious to public health, safety, morals and general welfare of the community. — — The use or value of area adjacent to the property included in the proposed plat will not be affected in a substantially adverse manner. — — The need for the variance arises from some condition peculiar to the property and such condition is not due to the general conditions of the neighborhood. — — The strict application of terms of the ordinance will constitute an unusual and unnecessary hardship if applied to the property for which the variance is sought. — — The grant of the variance does not interfere substantially with the Comprehensive Plan. lBased on all the evidence presented by the petitioner, I approve of the requested subdivision variance. I hereby disapprove the subdivision variance request for the following reasons: 1. 2 3. Dated this 17 day of D c-em b e r 1991. x etyCommission Member #1066.ghs CARMEL/CLAY PLAN COMMISSION Carmel, Indiana Docket No.: 5 6 - 9 1 P P Petitioner: Aviari Glen Associates Section Variance: 6 - 5 _ 3 Brief Description of Variance: P double froritage lots In deciding whether or not the applicant has presented sufficient proof to permit the granting of a variance, the Plan Commission should consider the following: — — The grant of a variance will not be injurious to public health, safety, morals and general welfare of the community. — — The use or value of area adjacent to the property included in the proposed plat will not be affected in a substantially adverse manner. — — The need for the variance arises from some condition peculiar to the property and such condition is not due to the general conditions of the neighborhood. — — The strict application of terms of the ordinance will constitute an unusual and unnecessary hardship if applied to the property for which the variance is sought. — — The grant of the variance does not interfere substantially with the Comprehensive Plan. Based on all the evidence presented by the petitioner, I approve of the requested subdivision variance. I hereby disapprove the subdivision variance request for the following reasons: 1. 2. 3. Dated this 17 day of December 1990. Commission Member #1066.ghs CARMEL/CLAY PLAN COMMISSION Carmel, Indiana Docket No.: 5 6 - 9 1 P P Petitioner: Avian Glen Associates Section Variance: 6 - 5 . 3 Brief Description of Variance: P l_o t t 111 g a t double f r o ri t a g e l o t s In deciding whether or not the applicant has presented sufficient proof to permit the granting of a variance, the Plan Commission should consider the following: — — The grant of a variance will not be injurious to public health, safety, morals and general welfare of the community. — — The use or value of area adjacent to the property included in the proposed plat will not be affected in a substantially adverse manner. — — The need for the variance arises from some condition peculiar to the property and such condition is not due to the general conditions of the neighborhood. — — The strict application of terms of the ordinance will constitute an unusual and unnecessary hardship if applied to the property for which the variance is sought. — — The grant of the variance does not interfere substantially with the Comprehensive Plan. v7 Based on all the evidence presented by the petitioner, I approve of the requested subdivision variance. I hereby disapprove the subdivision variance request for the following reasons: 1. 2. 3. Dated this 17 day of December , 1991. Commission Member #1066.ghs CARMEL/CLAY PLAN COMMISSION Carmel, Indiana Docket No.: 5 6 - 9 1 P P Petitioner: Avian Glen Associates Section Variance: 6 _ 5 _ 3 Brief Description of Variance: P 1ott irig at double f rontage lots In deciding whether or not the applicant has presented sufficient proof to permit the granting of a variance, the Plan Commission should consider the following: — — The grant of a variance will not be injurious to public health, safety, morals and general welfare of the community. — — The use or value of area adjacent to the property included in the proposed plat will not be affected in a substantially adverse manner. — — The need for the variance arises from some condition peculiar to the property and such condition is not due to the general conditions of the neighborhood. — — The strict application of terms of the ordinance will constitute an unusual and unnecessary hardship if applied to the property for which the variance is sought. reTh grant of the variance does not interfere substantially with the Comprehensive Plan. Based on all the evidence presented by the petitioner, I approve of the requested subdivision variance. I hereby disapprove the subdivision variance request for the following reasons: 1. 2. 3. Dated this 17 day of December •9 , /di Commis on Member #1066.ghs CARMEL/CLAY PLAN COMMISSION Carmel, Indiana Docket No.: 5 6 - 9 1 P P Petitioner: Avian Glen Associates Section Variance: 6 _ 5 _ 3 Brief Description of Variance: P 1_<3 t t i ri g a t double frontage lot s In deciding whether or not the applicant has presented sufficient proof to permit the granting of a variance, the Plan Commission should consider the following: — — The grant of a variance will not be injurious to public health, safety, morals and general welfare of the community. — — The use or value of area adjacent to the property included in the proposed plat will not be affected in a substantially adverse manner. — — The need for the variance arises from some condition peculiar to the property and such condition is not due to the general conditions of the neighborhood. — — The strict application of terms of the ordinance will constitute an unusual and unnecessary hardship if applied to the property for which the variance is sought. — — The grant of the variance does not interfere substantially with the Comprehensive Plan. Based on all the evidence presented by the petitioner, I approve of the requested subdivision variance. I hereby disapprove the subdivision variance request for the following reasons: 1. 2. 3. Dated this 17 day of December 1990. Commission Member #1066.ghs