The URL can be used to link to this page

Home My WebLink AboutFindings of Fact - Subdivision Variance CARMEL/CLAY PLAN COMMISSION MUM/Li Carmel, Indiana DEC 20 1996 SUBDIVISION VARIANCE DDCD FINDINGS OF FACT Docket No: Petitioner: ! P. la Cum -� .1,t.s G/ Section Variance: -, 3 z 7- Brief Description of Variance: o .n'i 0,7T, (1,(7.5s,„7 A/57 c 6 -a /ep at 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 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 day of , 199 s:lorms\subvarfo.rm 10/95 Commission Member CARMEL/CLAY PLAN COMMISSION Carmel, Indiana SUBDIVISION VARIANCE FINDINGS OF FACT Docket No: 'L-&/'1 I ?/SHIP Petitioner: (.(7. Meru> Go. Section Variance: Le• 3• ZZ Brief Description of Variance: A-/v- . L%- 4t-rH (''F rSl N*• 13U k. 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 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. , y Qi4 �r,a / - A I hereby disapprove of the subdivision variance request for the following reasons: 1. 3. Dated this ';-' / day of � j , 199 7 (jii(ii-). s: forms\subvarfo.rm 10/95 Commis n Member CARMEL/CLAY PLAN COMMISSION Cannel, Indiana SUBDIVISION VARIANCE FINDINGS OF FACT Docket No: 2,11 ?19P Petitioner: (•p. MeWA41-i Go • Section Variance: (t• 7,. 2-2- Brief Description of Variance: %rarx)- E, L I H l P744,4t i-*- riU - 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 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, approve of the requested subdivision variance. (i I hereby disapprove of the subdivision variance request or the following reasons: 1. 3. Dated this .alday of )"'IPt4't—°°-4;3' , 1 s:`,forms\subvarfo.rm 10/95 Commission• iember . - CARMELJCLAY PLAN COMMISSION Carmel, Indiana SUBDIVISION VARIANCE FINDINGS OF FACT Docket No: ?Fib Petitioner: MerY2- la-µ Go• Section Variance: (,• 7,• ZZ Brief Description of Variance: %rri-,t). (fir-! H P S(NV 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 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 A-S, T,3 Sin �s �' W.) I hereby disapprove of the subdivision variance request for the �1 following reasons: 1. 3. Dated this �i day of 1 s:',forms\subvarfo.rm 10/95 Commission Member lar CARMEL/CLAY PLAN COMMISSION Carmel, Indiana SUBDIVISION VARIANCE FINDINGS OF FACT Docket No: Z-' 7 1211:71',12 Petitioner: ( p. Mel yi - 4 GO. Section Variance: Le• 2. 22- Brief Description of Variance: tz-trit2ty6-E.. rsrN&• f3U`��c2 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 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. 3. Dated this day of �✓� 1997 s:\forms\subvarto.rm 10/95 mmission Member [ CARMEL/CLAY PLAN COMMISSION Carmel, Indiana SUBDIVISION VARIANCE FINDINGS OF FACT Docket No: 2-'1 IF'P Petitioner: (•P. mew,p,k14 -o. Section Variance: Le, ; • ZZ Brief Description of Variance: tZ- 4? ' (4 4 fl-1 /, rSiNl> T3U L 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 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. /�2-te..4.� I hereby disapprove of the subdivision variance request for the following reasons: 1. 2. 3. Dated this day of , 199 s:',forms\subvarfo.rm 10/95 Commission Member CARMEL/CLAY PLAN COMMISSION Carmel, Indiana SUBDIVISION VARIANCE FINDINGS OF FACT Docket No: 2-'1 1917141P Petitioner: (•P. Mevz/ r.t Go. Section Variance: Le• ,• 22. Brief Description of Variance: tz-rr.A-7t.,-e.-f. PP 41NC, 13U -7--FA2. 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 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. 3. Dated this day of , 199 7 s:lfnrmc\ciihvarfn rm I0/9S (' einn \ifemhar CARMEL/CLAY PLAN COMMISSION Carmel, Indiana SUBDIVISION VARIANCE FINDINGS OF FACT Docket No: '2-'7 r7PfAF Petitioner: (•F. MeW-/�.1 Go. Section Variance: Le. ;• 2-Z. Brief Description of Variance: t%frirycy -f, L N ,!,'F P (, ) T3u�77-- 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 variance is sought. - The grant of the variance does not interfere substantially with the comprehensive plan. Based on all the evidence presented b Apetitio er; I approve of the requested subdivision variance. /244Q I hereby disapprove of the subdivision variance request for the following reasons: 1. 2. 3. Dated this 7, i -day of ,,Q4d147 r, 199 7.,,,,r--2 r 'l A ii,c4___ , ,, ('„/(1Li 4 - s:'',forms\subvarfo.rm 10i95 % / Commission Member tom- CARMEL/CLAY PLAN COMMISSION Carmel, Indiana SUBDIVISION VARIANCE FINDINGS OF FACT Docket No: r v/9P Petitioner: / P. ►-1trY2-KAM-t Go. Section Variance: (z, 7. 2-7— Brief Description of Variance: ,re..7ty&f., 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 variance is sought. The grant of the variance does not interfere substantially with the comprehensive plan. Based on all the evidence presented by the etitioner, I approve f the requested subdivision variance)y�, Go4rr{'ralJ in.) kb dA,€�b I hereby disapprove of the subdivision variance request for the following reasons: 1. 3. Dated this / day of \IA," 1,p1/ s:`,forms\subvarfo rm ,0i95 Corn fission Member t CARMEL/CLAY PLAN COMMISSION Carmel, Indiana SUBDIVISION VARIANCE FINDINGS OF FACT Docket No: r71719,pp Petitioner: (• Me12/y 4 Go. Section Variance: (i• 3• ZZ. Brief Description of Variance: tz- it7t)- L%--4 rkf (5'-F P 5(►--)G- 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 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. ,&.5e t0rc.er j,;•n v� c��/ 1'c r� fee-i F, <✓ ,,, /r; . !�i i'P ! 'i-o .H-1!/ /�'( /r/1 r Lt .(m cn n u1 JIr , I hereby disapprove of the subdivision variance request for the following reasons: 1. 3. Dated this - day of -,/,-.7v,cc, , 199 7 //,i, s:\,forms\subvarfo.rm 10/95 Commission Member CARMEL/CLAY PLAN COMMISSION Carmel, Indiana SUBDIVISION VARIANCE FINDINGS OF FACT Docket No: 19171412 Petitioner: (•P. MB'Y=( 1 Go. Section Variance: Le• 2• ZZ Brief Description of Variance: 1%irit>t' / Cr.at/TN 13U R 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 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. so inter ra' , 77c,c5 (06 / /°!�T I hereby disapprove of the subdivision variance request for the following reasons: 1. 3. Dated this day of 3u1/JO/f , 199� r- s:\forms\subvarfo.rm 10/95 Commi s n Member CARMEL/CLAY PLAN COMMISSION Carmel, Indiana SUBDIVISION VARIANCE FINDINGS OF FACT Docket No: 2-, / r'y!P Petitioner: G-•P. Meter p-t Go . Section Variance: Ce• 77• ZZ. Brief Description of Variance: tz rny(f, ("-F F 441 l> 13/ArrA2. 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 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. �-� '< <e IA) I\ I hereby disapprove of the subdivision variance request for the (eV G'61- ._ following reasons: 1. 3. Dated this day of , 199 s:\forms\subvarto.rm 1 0/9 5 Commission Member CARMEL/CLAY PLAN COMMISSION Carmel, Indiana SUBDIVISION VARIANCE FINDINGS OF FACT Docket No: -7 r2P/ Petitioner: (•P. Mey GO. Section Variance: (,e 77. 2-2- Brief Description of Variance: tz-re bi l��ir Ii-r"N 6 &'• 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 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 1 requested subdivision variance, ,s c ec f c. �, 6,�, } e "4 j_ I hereby disapprove of the subdivision variance request for the following reasons: 1. 3. Dated this I ' day of , 199> s: ,forms\subvarfo.rm 10/95 Commission Me,