The URL can be used to link to this page

Home My WebLink AboutFindings of Fact , ~[NGS OF F.~\CT1:?:1~FO.R ,PRIlVIARY'PLAT CONSIDERATION ", . ,', Carmel Plan Commission Carmel, Indiana DOCKET NO.' 32-01 pp NAME OF SUBDMSION: Woods at Williams Creek PETITIONER:" Williams Creek Woods LLC , i, i: ...!i. , . . ~. . ,. , BlUcd upon all the evidence presented by the pctUloncr and upoa Ihe represeatadons md " certiOcation. ollho staal of Ihe Department or Commuaity pevelopmeat, 1 determine Ihat Iho plat compUe. wflh scaadards or Iho Carmel Clay Subdivt.doa Coatrol OrdlaanCe.' ' I hereby approve of tho primlU')' plat as submitted "Uh the foUowing specUlc condJllolU at agreed 10 by Ibe petitioner. ' Condition 1. Condition 2. Condition 3. I hereby dlsaporove or the priDuu'y plu as submitted for tbo foUowing I'CIUOD': t. 2. ", J. DATED TIllS \~ c-\ . DAYOF ..~~/ . 2001. ~~ ~~.,..: --- . ~Ion ,Member . Rev. March 1995.ghs " s:\plancomm\applicm.pc\primplauplC \ ~ '] I FI1'QINGS OF F.~\CT l~OlU\'WF~R 'PRIN[ARY~PLAT CONSIDERATION Carmel Plan Coninlission Carmel, Indiana ,~ ,'. -r, . ~ DOCKET NO.' 32-01 pp NAME OF SUBDMSION: Woods at Williams Creek PETnnO~' Williams Creek Woods LLC ~d .P~. aU tho ..1oI.....p......... by tho pollll...r ~d .p.. 'bo ~:L"d." oad · certifications or Ibe .rair of Ibe Department of Community Development, 1 determine Ibat Ihe plat compUel wUb .taadards of Ibe Carmel Clay Subdivision' Conh'Ol Ordlaaaee. . ' . , ' ' I hereby approve of tbe primary plat as submitted witb the foUowing specific coadJtloDJ u agreed 10 bylbe petitioner. Condition 1. Condition 2. Condition 3. I bereby dlsaporove of tbe prfDuuT plat .. submitted for Ibe foUowing reasons: t. 2. ". 3. DATED TInS tq DA Y OF . 01) r-Jc: 2001 . Yf/~"1i!~:;;; Rev. March 1995.gh.s s:\plaacomm\4pplictn.pc\primplaLaplC FI1'QlNGS OF FACT l~Oltt)FOR PRIl\tIARY'PLAT CONSIDERATION :-, . Carmel Plan Commission Carmel, Indiana DOCKET NO. 32-01 pp NAME OF SUBDMSION: Woods at Williams Creek PETITIONER.: Williams Creek Woods LLC i, .& Ba.sed upon all the evldenco presented by tho pedtloner and upon Iho rep.:cscntadonJ md certification. oC Iho scaff oC tho Department oC Community Development, 1 determine Ibat Iho plat compUe. witb sbUldards oC the Cannel Clay Subdivision Conttol Ordinance. ~."b1 ........ .r lb. prim..., pia. u ..b..i".d ,,11h Ih. r.u."mg .pedllc ...dltI... .. .grocd 10 by tbe petitioner. COoditiOD 1. Condition 2. CooditiOD J. : ! J _ : . I hereby disapprove 01' tbe primary plat .. submitted for tbe foUowtng reasons: 1. 2. 3. DATED TInS \ ~ DA Y OF :Su '~..._, ~~~ Commission Member . Rev. Much 1995.ghs s:\pllU1comm\applicm.pc\primplllupx ~ DOCKET NO.. PE1Tl10~ / FINCJNGS Of F.~\CT FOltlVJ"FOR ... .." V . . . PRIl\tIARY:PLAT CONSIDERATION " ' , Carmel Plan Commission Carmel, Indiana 32-01 PP NAME OF SUBDMSION: Woods at Williams Creek Williams Creek Woods LLC i : .. Bated upon aU tbe evidence presented by tbe- pe.Uloaer~d upon rbe representations and " certification. ot rbe staff 0( tbe Depal11Dent of CommunitY Development, 1 determine tbltt rho plat compUe. wltb standard. of tbe Carmel Clay Subdivision Concrol Ordinance. ; ( I hereby approve of tbe primlU')' plat u submitted with tbe foUowiag specific cODdUloDl lU agreed to by tbe petitioner. Condition I. Condition 2. I : ! : ! , I Condition J. ; 1 I hereby disapprove or tbe primary plat.. submitted lor tbe loUong reasons: I. 2. 3. l~ J u,Jf 2001 . DATED THIS DA Y OF Rev. March I 99S.ghs s:\plancomm\applicm.pc\primplllLllPlC ~/ 'i , , EltlINGS OF F.k\CT~:~,l~FO.R PRIlVlARY 'PLAT CONSIDERATION >,' . Carmel Plan Commission Carmel, Indiana DOCKET NO. 32-01 pp NAME OF SUBDMSION: Woods at Williams Creek PETnJO~ Williams Creek Woods LLC ~ BlUed upon all the evidence presented by tho petUloner and upon tbe representadons :and certification. oC tbo .eatT oC tbe Department oC Community Development, 1 detennine tbld the plaa compUes wUb .landards oC tbe Cannel Clay SubdlYtslon Control OnUnance. I bereby appro"e oC tb. primary plat as submitted with lh. roUowing specUlc condUlolU :u agreed to by tbe petitioner. Condition 1. Condition 2. Condition 3. I hereby dl,.poro". oC the primary pJaa .. submitted Cor tbe CoUowing reasons: 1. 2. 3. DATED TInS L l\ DA Y OF " 2001 s:\plancomm\applictD.pc\primplllupx: Rev. March 1995.ghs ~ FINQINGS OF F.~\CT,;~~?,1t(\16FOR PRIlVfARY ipLA T' CONSIDERATION . ' . ~ . ,: t ::' , Carmel Plan Conirriission Carmel, Indiana DOCKET NO.' 32-01 pp NAME OF SUBDMSION: Woods at Williams Creek PETITIONER: Williams Creek Woods LLC ! : I- , " ,I " Bued upon aU ,he evidence pmen,ed by the pe'Ulone~ and upon tbe representations :and " certiOcatlon. o( 'he scatT of 'he Department or Commwdty Development, I de,ermm. 'hat 'he plat compUe. witb standard. oC 'he Carmel Clay Subdivision' CO~h'Ol Ordlaaaee. I bereby approYe DC the primary plat as submitted with the foUowing specific coadU'olU as agreed to by the petitioner. Condition I. Condition 2. I , ! Condition J. I hereby disapprove DC the primal'y plat as submitted for the foUowing reuons: 1. 2. J. DATED TInS t' ~ DA Y OF \lu.JE . ~ 2001, /)AdLIJ ~ Co.......'o. M.mbC S:\plllDcomm\applictD.pc\primplaLllplC Rev. Much 1995.gh.s - "--- --.J FII\QINGS OF F.-\CT, ~:,?ltl\'6FOR PRl1\tIARy.',PLAT CONSIDERATION " t:'" ;~ Carmel Plan Comniission Carmel, Indiana DOCKET NO.' 32-01 pp NAME OF SUBDMSION: Woods at Williams Creek PETmONER: Williams Creek Woods LLC ~ -:t ". : ,; ; , I hereb)' approve o( the primlU')' plAt u submitted with the foUowing specific coac1UfoD.l lU agreed to by tbe petitioner. Condition 1. Condition 2. Condition 3. ; 1 I hereby disapprove of the primal'y plat .. submitted (~r tbe foUowiog reasons: t. 2. 3. DATED TInS /tjPDAy OF ~:1~ ' ~ CommissIon Membef Rev. March 1995.gh.s . '~ s:\plancomm\applictn.pc\primplllt.apx ' \ ~ j t.-- FI1Y1)lNGS Of F.~\.CT FOIl,"', FOR ,,'PRIl\tIARY':PLAT CONSIDERATION , , carnie 1 Plan Coninlission Carmel, Indiana DOCKET NO.' 32-01 pp NAME OF SUBDMSION: Woods at Williams Creek PETIl10NER:' Williams Creek Woods LLC I " f ". i. j. , Bated upon all the eyldence presented by the petUloaer aad upon Ihe represcatadons :and " certification. of the staat or the Department of Community DeYel~pment, 1 determine IbaC Iho plat compUe. "tah standard. or tho Carmel Clay Subdlyulon Control OrdlaaJlce. I hereby llpprove o( tho primary plat as submitted with the (oUowing specll1c condUlolU as agreed to by Ibe petitioner. Condition 1. Coadition 2. Condition 3. I hereby dlsaDorove or the priaaary plat as submitted for the (oUowing reason.: 1. 2. 3. /C{ DA Y OF ~0~ ' Commission' ember DATED TInS s:\plancomm\applicm.pc\primplaupx Rev. Much 1995.gbs "- ,- ',~ FINOINGS Oft' F.~\CT FOIU\16FOR ,'PRINIARY,:PLAT CONSIDERATION Carmel Plan Commission Carmel, Indiana DOCKET NO.' 32-01 pp NAME OF SUBDMSION: Woods at Williams Creek PETITIONER.:' Williams Creek Woods LLC '; , ' Y IW.d ,,''':all lh. ..Id.... ,J...... by the ,...,lo..r aad .,.,'h. ..~L..la..... ..d" + cerdOcatioa. or tbe scart of tbe Departmeat of Community Developmeat, 1 determine th.t the plat compUe. wflb scaadard. of tho Carmel Clay Subdivision Conttol Ordloaaee." , I hereby approve of the primary plat as submitted wllb Ibe (oUowing specutc cODdltloDJ as agreed 10 bYlbe petitioaer. Conditioa 1. Condition 2. j ! , i Condition 3. , , , I hereby disapprove or tbo primary plat AI submitted for Ibe (oUowing reaons: 1. 2. ". 3. DATED TIiIS ~ DAY OF J JqJ - , ~ f. ~OP1 Commission Member s:\plancomm\applicbLpc\primplauplC Rev. March 1995.ghs '~...' ..,. ,.' FIN~[NGS OF F.-\CT FOlll)", FOR ..' - ,;,.. ...: . ~." ,,'PRINfARY,PLAT CONSIDERATION Carniel Plan Commission Carmel, Indiana DOCKET NO.' 32-01 pp NAME OF SUBDMSION: Woods at Williams Creek PETITIONER.:' Williams Creek Woods LLC .~ Based upon aU the evidence presented by the petitioner aad upon Ihe representations :and " certification. of the .taft' of tbe Department of Community DeYelcipmen~ 1 determine Ihat the pial compUe. wltb .tandard. of the Carmel Clay Subdivision Conttol Ordlaaaee. .' ' I bereby approve of tbe primlU')' piat as submitted with the foUowing .pecUle conditions lU agreed to by Ihe petitioner. Condition 1. Condition 2. , i Condition 3. , ! I hereby disapprove of the primary plat .. submitted for the foUowinC reaaoas: I. 2. 3. DATED TInS l~ DA Y OF ~cJoJ~ cf/ . ~~ COmmi~~ember 2001 s:\plaocomm\applictn.pc\primplllLllPX Rev. March 1995.ghs ~, f>;, FI~J[NGS OF F.~\CT FOl~FOR >PRIl\tIARY;PLAT CONSIDERATION Carmel Plan Commission Carmel, Indiana DOCKET NO.' 32-01 PP NAME OF SUBDMSION: Woods at Williams Creek PETITIONER: Williams Creek Woods LLC '. ',~ ., L Bated upon, all tbe evidence presented by tbe peaUloaer aad upon tbe rep':':scDtatloaJ ad cerdOc:atioal of tbe .taaT of tbe Departmeat of Community Development, 1 determine tb.t the plat compUe. wltb' .aaadard. of tbe' Carmel Clay Subdivision Coatrol Ordlaaaee..' . I hereby aporove of the primlU')' plat AI submitted wltb'the foUowiag .pec:U1c condltloDl at agreed to by tbe petitioner. CooditioQ I. ConditioQ 2. CooditioQ 3. I hereby dlsaoorove of the prlauu1 plat .. submitted for the foUowing l"CUOaJ: 1. 2. 3. DATED TInS ,q DA Y OF ~ J;Je ' 2001 . ~d'~~~ I Co",,;",o. Mcmbc'- Rev. Marcil t 99S.ghs s:\p'aacomm\appUctn.pc\primptllUplC FI1\J[NGS OF F.~\.CT FOlt1'jFOR 'PRIl\tIARY'PLAT CONSIDERATION Carmel Plan Commission Carmel, Indiana DOCKET NO.' 32-01 PP NAME OF SUBDMSION: Woods at Williams Creek PET.nlo~ Williams Creek Woods LLC / .. . ~ .p~ .n,h. .~;d.... P..;...... by Ih. p.dtl.... aad .p.. Ih. ...J........,... ..d certification. of Ibe s..aT of tbe Department or Community Development, 1 determine Ibllt Ih. plat compUe. witb scaadardl or lb. Carmel Clay Subdivision Control Ordinance. ' ' I hereby llpprove of lb. primary plat IU submitted wilb tbe foUowing specific condUlow u agreed to bylbe petitioner. Condition I. Condition 2. Condition 3. I bereby dlsaoorove of tbe prlmal'y plat as submitted for Ibe foUowing reason.: I. 2. ". 3. DATED TIllS t9. DA Y OF ~U~~ .. < COmWU~ 2001 s:\pllU1comm\applictD.pc\primplaupx Rev. March 1995.gbs , ..~....... FI1'cJ[NGSOF F.~\CT FOIU'dFOR 'PRIlVIARY'PLAT CONSIDERATION , ' Carmel Plan Commission Carmel, Indiana DOCKET NO.' 32-01 pp NAME OF SUBDMSION: Woods at Williams Creek PETITIONER:, Williams cre~k Woods LLC ":" , vrlUCduP~~'aJ1 the eVldenco 'pJentcd by tbo petitioner ~d upon tbe re~:lL~~donllUld , - cerrtOcario~. 01 tho .caff of the Department or Community DeYol~pment, 1 determine that the plat compUel with 'Wldard. or the' Carmel Clay Subdivision Control Ordlaaaee.. '.': I hereby IIPproye or tbe primary plat as submitted witb the (oUowing specUlc c:oDdUloD.l as agreed to by tbe petitioner. CoaditiOD 1. CoaditiOIl 2. I , ! ; '! ConditiOIl 3. I hereby dlsaDDroye or tb. primary plat .. submitted ror tbe roUowing reuons: 1. 2. 3. DATED THIS lq DAY OF J V N C 2001 . C4YlJ~ ~A Commi Ion em -- Rov. March 1995.!lhs s:\plancomm\applicm.pc\primplaupx ".I / ' FI!OlNGS OF F.~\CT FOl{j\j F'O.R PRIlVIARY'PLAT CONSIDERATION Carmel Plan Commission Carmel, Indiana DOCKET NO.' 32-01 PP NAME OF SUBDMSION: Woods at Williams Creek PETITIONER:: Williams Creek Woods LLC ' : .'~"'" UpoDaD .... eYideDee pJ...... by.... p.llt1...r ~d UpOD 'b. ~Jl.J"dO" ...d" -6- ~rdocatfoa. oC Ibe scaff oC Ibe Department oC Community Developmeat, 1 determine Ihat Ihe plat compUe. wflb scaadard. of Ihe Carmel Clay Subdlvisloa Coacrol Ordlaaaee." . I hereby apurove of Ibe prlmlU')' plat as submitted witb Ihe foUowlng specUte coadUlow as agreed 10 by Ihe petitioner. Coodition I. Condition 2. Conditioa J. I hereby dlsaoorove of the primary plat .. submitted for tbe foUowfaC reuoas: I. 2. ". 3. DATED TInS [tt DA Y OF J uJJe: 2001 ~q--~" ~ 1 ----... Commissloa Member S:\plllDcomm\4pplictn.pc\primplat.apx Rev. March 1995.gb.s "j -... u o CARMEL/CLAY I.LAN CO~MISSION Cnl'luel, Indinnn,. SUBDIVISION VAllIANCE 1i'INIJINGS Oli' FACT Docket No: 32-01 a sw Petitioner: Williams Creek Woods LLC Section Variance: sca 6.2. 1 Brief Description of Variance: Sui tabili tv of Land 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 the public health, safety, morals and general welfare of the community. The use and value of area adjacent to the property included in the proposed plat will not be affected in n 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 to the property 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. I Based on all the evidence presented by the petitioner, I. approve of the requested subdivision variance. I hereby disapprove of the subdivision variance request for the following reasons: \ I. 2. 3. Dated this I ~ day of ~ cJrJ ~ s:\forms\subvarfo. rill 10/95 ? u o CAItMELlCLA Y I-LAN CO!\1MISSION Cannel, IndianA, ; SUBDIVISION V AItIANCE I~INIJINGS Ol~ FAel' Docket No: 32-01 a sw Petitioner: Williams Creek Woods LLC Section Variance: sca 6.2. 1 Brief Description of Variance: Sui tabili tv of Land 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 lrljurious to the public health, safety, morals and general welfare of the community. The use and value of area adjacent to th~ '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 to the property 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. r:>( Based on all the evidence presented by the petitioner, I. approve of the requested subdivision variance. I hereby disapprove of the subdivision variance request for the following reasons: 1. 2. 3. 1'- r-T:. _. IJ Dated this ~ day of 0- ~ .~?~ Commission M{m er s:\forllls\subvnrfo. rm 10/95 .r","", / u u , .t. CAltMELlCLA Y I'LAN COMMISSION : ~ I } Carlllel, Indiana' : . , SUBDIVISION V AIUANCE I~IN)JINGS OF FACT Docket No: 32-01 a sw Petitioner: Williams Creek Woods LLC Section Variance: sca 6.2. 1 Brief Description of Variance: Sui tabili tv of Land 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 the public health, safety, morals and general welfare of the community. The use and value of area adjacent to the property included in the proposed plat will not be affected in a subsllUllially 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 ~pplication of terms of the ordinance to the property 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 of the subdivision variance request for the following reasons: 1. 2. 3. Dated this (q, day of ~ U ,j C s:\forms\subvarfo. rm 10/95 .~.- ~- , ';p ,!I u o CAHMEL/CLA Y IILAN COMMISSION Carlllel, Imlialln SUBDIVISION VARIANCE I~INIJINGS Ol~ FACI' Docket No: 32-01 a sw Petitioner: Williams Creek Woods LLC Section Variance: sca 6.2. 1 Brief Description of Variance: Sui tabili tv of Land 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 the public health, safety, morals and general welfare of the community. The use and 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 to the property will constitute an unusual and unnecessary hardship if applied to the property for which the variallce is sought. _ The grant of the varinnce does not interfere substantially with the comprehensive / plan. Based on all the evidence presented by the petitione~, I. approve of the requested subdivision variance. I hereby disapprove of the subdivision variance request for the following reasons: 1. 2. 3. Dated this A day of ~<.JJG s:\forms\subvnrfo.nn 10/95 .-<\- . ..~ u . 1 i; " t u '--I CAltMEL/CLA Y I-LAN COMMISSION COl'luel, hullnnD: SUBOIVISION V AItIANCE IQNIJINGS OF FA.CI' Docket No: 32-01 a sw Petitioner: Williams Creek Woods LLC Section Variance: sca 6.2. 1 Brief Description of Variance: Sui tabili tv of Land In deciding whether or not the applicant has presented sufficient proof to pennit the granting of a variance, the Plan Commission should consider the following: The grant of a variance will not be injurious to the public health, safety, morals and general welfare of the community. The use and 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 to the property will constitute an unusual WId unnecessary hardship if applied to the property for which the variance is sought. The grant of the variwlce does not interfere substantially with the comprehensive plM. x Based on all the evidence presented by the petitioner, I. approve of the requested subdivision variance. I hereby disapprove of the subdivision variance request for the following reasons: 1. 2. 3. ( q day of \ 1\ . '). lC- Dated Ihis '-J UN WJs s:\forllls\subvnrfo. rill 10/95 ....... /r ;+- u w CARMEL/CLAY IILAN COMMISSION , , Carlllel, IndiRnR: SUBDIVISION VAIUANCE I~INIJINGS OF FACI' Docket No: 32-01 a sw Petitioner: Williams Creek Woods LLC Section Variance: sca 6.2. 1 Brief Description of Variance: Sui tabili tv of Land 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 the public health, safety, morals and general welfare of the community. The use and value of area adjacent to tllt~ property included in the proposed plat will not be affected in n 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 to the property will constitute an unusual and unnecessary hardship if applied to the property for which the variance is sought. Based on all the evidence presented by the petitioner, I approve of the requested subdivision variance. I hereby disapprove of the subdivision variance request for the following reasons: 1. 2. 3. Dated this A day of 0v,j~ 20011 .CDil- Commission Member s:\forms\subvnrfo. rill t 0/95 /- { u ; ;. o . j '~~ : ) '!! ' I : . ,. . :' . : CAltMEL/CLA Y I-LAN COMMISSION Cannel, IndionA' ; SUDlJlVISION V AIUANCE I~INIJINGS Ol~ FACI' Docket No: 32-01 a SW Petitioner: Williams Creek Woods LLC Section Variance: sca 6.2. 1 Brief Description of Variance: Sui tabili tv of Land 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 the public health, safety, morals and general welfare of the cOlllmunity. The use and 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 to the property 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. i Based on all the evidence presented by the petitioner, I. approve of the requested subdivision variance. I hereby disapprove of the subdivision variance request for the following reasons: 1. 2. J. ..... Dated this {q day of ~ cJ,je ~g;~. I' Commission Member s:\forms\sllbvarfo.rm t 0/95 ~"'.--.,< w , , t, o CAIlMEL/CLA Y I.LAN CO~MISSION COl'lIlel, huliono: SUBDIVISION V AIUANCE FINDINGS Olr FACT Docket No: 32-01 a sw Petitioner: Williams Creek Woods LLC Section Variance: sca 6.2. 1 Brief Description of Variance: Sui tabili tv of Land 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 the public health, safety, morals and general welfare of the community. The use and value of area adjacent to the property included in the proposed plat will not be affected in n 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 to the property will constitute an unusual and unnecessary hardship if applied to lhe property for which the variance is sought. 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 of the subdivision variance request for the following reasons: 1. 2. 3. Dated this (q day of ~u~r t\. .~ ~---) , . .- c:nmi"ion Member s:\forms\subvarfo.rm 10/95 ~- o i: 'l' ~ Q 'I: ,:1: 'p CAltMEL/CLA Y I-LAN COMMISSION Carmel, Indiana; , , , SUBDIVISION VARIANCE I~INI)INGS Ol~ FACI' Docket No: 32-01 a sw Petitioner: Williams Creek Woods LLC Section Variance: sca 6.2. 1 Brief Description of Variance: Sui tabili tv of Land 111 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 the public health, safety, morals and general welfare of the community. The use and 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 to the property 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. Y... Based on all the evidence presented by the petitionef. I approve of the requested subdivision variance. I hereby disapprove of the subdivision variance request for the following reasons: 1. 2. 3. Dated this I q day of .j cJ,j 2 s:\rorms\subvnrro. rm . t 0/95 " \. \~ u o CAltMEL/CLAY I)LAN COMMISSION Cannel, IndiAnA SUBDIVISION V AllIANCE I~INIJINGS OF FACI' Docket No: 32-01 a sw Petitioner: Wi 11 iams Creek Woods LLC Section Variance: sca 6.2. 1 Brief Description of Variance: Sui tabili tv of Land 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 the public health, safety, morals and general welfare of the community. The use and 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 to the property will constitute an unusual WId unnecessary hardship if applied to the property for which the variance is sought. The grant of the variwlce does not interfere substantially with the comprehensive plan. v Based on all the evidence presented. by the petitioner. I. approve of the requested subdivision variwlce. I hereby disapprove of the subdivision variance request for the following reasons: 1. 2. J. Dated this ( q day of ~U J t s:\forms\subvarfo.rm 10/95 '-j;::~.c-~:" u o CAltMEL/CLA Y I-LAN COMMISSION Cal'lllel, IndianA SUBDIVISION V AIUANCE 1i'INUINGS Oli' FACT Docket No: 32-01 a sw Petitioner: Williams Creek Woods LLC Section Variance: sca 6.2. 1 Brief Description of Variance: Sui tabili tv of Land 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 lnjurious to the public health, safety, morals and general welfare of the comlllunity. The use and 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 to the property 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. :~~ I '. Based on all the evidence presented by the petitioner, I. approve of the requested subdivision variance. I hereby disapprove of the subdivision variance request for the following reasons: 1. 2. 3. Dated this l q day of ~v~e s:\forl11s\subvnrfo. fm 10/95 s.- - . I', u u CAHMEL/CLA Y I-LAN CO!\1MISSION Connel, Indiono, : SUBDIVISION VAIUANCE 1i'INIJINGS Oli' FACt' Docket No: 32-01 a sw Petitioner: Williams Creek Woods LLC Section Variance: sca 6.2. 1 Brief Description of Variance: Sui tabili tv of Land 111 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 the public health, safely, morals and general welfare of the comlllunity. The use and value of area adjacent to the properly included in the proposed plat will not be affected in n 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 to the property 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 petitionert I approve of the requested subdivision variance. I hereby disapprove of the subdivision variance request for the following reasons: 1. 2. 3. Dated this I q day of 0 0 tJe 20f>14/J.(t/t Commission Member s:\formS\SlIllVnrfo. rm 10/95 L~~ I u Q CARMEL/CLA Y I-LAN CO!\1MISSION COl'luel, Indinnn SUDOIVISION V AIUANCE Ii'lNIJINGS OF FACI' Docket No: 32-01 a sw Petitioner: Williams Creek Woods LLC Section Variance: sca 6. 2 .1 Brief Description of Variance: Sui tabili tv of Land 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 the public health, safety, morals and general welfare of the community. 1, The use and value of area adjacent to th~ property included in the proposed plat will not be affccted 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 to the property will constitute an unusual and unnccessary hardship if applied to the property for which the variance is sought. , The grant of the variance does not interfere substantially willi the comprehensive plan. . ~ Based on all the evidence presented by the petitioner, I. approve of the requested subdivision variance. I hereby disapprove of the subdivision variance request for the following reasons: 1. 2. 3. Dated this I 9 day of \) cJ,JC 200\1 s:\rorms\subvarfo.rm t 0/95 u ; ~. o .., CAltMELlCLA Y I-LAN CO!\1MISSION COl'luel, Indiollo,' . SUBDIVISION VARIANCE I~INIJINGS Ol~ FACT Docket No: 32-01 a sw Petitioner: Williams Creek Woods LLC Section Variance: sca 6.2. 1 Brief Description of Variance: Sui tabili tv of Land 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 the public health, safely. morals and general welfare of the community. The use and 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 to the property 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 by the petitione~. I. approve of the requested subdivision variance. I hereby disapprove of the subdivision variance request for the following reasons: 1. 2. 3. Dated this (~ day of ~ cJtJc' 2QJP'1 ' II- ~/J x()~ 'U<ft// , Commission Member s:\forllls\subvnrfo.rm 10/95