Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutFindings of Fact - Variance of Subdivision Control Ordinance CARM EL'CLAY PLAN COMMISSION Carmel. Indiana VARIANCE OF SUBDIVISION CONTROL ORDINANCE Docket No.: 0 2- '14 7 Petitioner: C •P f r rla (_� .Y, M f,C V �• Section Variance: 6. 3 Z?— Brief Description of Variance: r`Zzdu_4;,,, k ter,3iL c F+cipzr f 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 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 approved of the requested subdivision variance. I hereby disapprove the subdivision variance request for the following reasons: 1. ,if D.� 3. Dated this lCi 7'14 day of , 9 Commission M be m:\app\ppvarff.001 Rev. January, 1993 CARM.EL'CLAY PLAN COMMISSION Carmel. Indiana VARIANCE OF SUBDIVISION CONTROL ORDINANCE Docket No.: 8 7- mil`' P/� Petitioner: C •P M gq , L P. Section Variance: 6. 3. Z 2- Brief Description of Variance: t2zduc-t-isr, te ,3-(1, 4 {aprr Cor C IrA,NC, 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. ?S- Based on all the evidence presented by the petitioner, I approved of the requested subdivision variance. I hereby disapprove the subdivision variance request for the following reasons: 1. 2 3. Dated this 20 it" day of 4c ter- , 199 47C . Comm' s' ember m:\app\ppvarff.001 Rev. January, 1993 CARMEL'CLVY PLAN COMMISSION Carmel, Indiana VARIANCE OF SUBDIVISION CONTROL ORDINANCE Docket No.: e 2- ‘r‘ Petitioner: C .P lvi r�a �„r, .� . «� P. Section Variance: 6. J L Z Brief Description of Variance: r2e.du.c4iN, i� lz,. �G, c'F �ap.?r -Cor r.-cce(% 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 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 approved of the requested subdivision variance. I hereby disapprove the subdivision variance request for the following reasons: 1. 3. Dated this 20 7t4 day of er e- , 199 17L . Commission liatther m:\app\ppvarff.001 Rev. January, 1993 CARMMLL'CLAY PLAN COMMISSION Carmel. Indiana VARIANCE OF SUBDIVISION CONTROL ORDINANCE Docket No.: S 2- 'it' P/'� Petitioner: C NI �Q (ate Section Variance: 6 J• G Z. Brief Description of Variance: cu c*icr, pF+a.p.?r' or okccv(, (rx„� 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 approved of the requested subdivision variance. I hereby disapprove the subdivision variance request for the following reasons: 1. 2 3. Dated this 20 7114 day of 71c et 2e- , 199 474, . cr, 4,4, , Commission Me ber 1 m:\app\ppvarff.001 �' Rev. January, 1993 CARMEL/CLAY PLAN COMMISSION Carmel, Indiana VARIANCE OF SUBDIVISION CONTROL ORDINANCE Docket No.: 8 2- cl`t' Petitioner: (' .P (c., _„ LI • Section Variance: 6. 3. 2.2 Brief Description of Variance: Rz8uc4is,, In le„,��G. c'� +a �r for r,ccQC, k 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 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 approved of the requested subdivision variance. I hereby disapprove the subdivision variance request for the following reasons: 1. 2 3. Dated this 2.0 It" day of , 199 41t, . Commission Member m:\app\ppvarff.001 Rev. January, 1993 CARNIEL'CLAY PLAN COMM`IISSION Carmel. Indiana VARIANCE OF SUBDIVISION CONTROL ORDINANCE Docket No.: PPf Petitioner: C •P IVt--Pa, C. ,, ,+4, /, P. Section Variance: 6 3. c?— Brief Description of Variance: rZzdu i N, i^ 1�� �1ti ��{ap�r -Cot- ()_cc A. (arc_ 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 approved of the requested • subdivision variance. I hereby disapprove the subdivision variance request for the following reasons: 1. 2 3. Dated this day of, c ter- , 199 41L . jgiriCizJe ' I Commission Member m:\app\ppvarff.001 Rev. January, 1993 CARMEL`CLaY PLAN COMMISSION Carmel. Indiana VARIANCE OF SUBDIVISION CONTROL ORDINANCE Docket No.: 8 7- Petitioner: e •P Section Variance: Brief Description of Variance: ALLL— 4i.N, ;^ (r- -1 L +aT.?r -fso r ()_cc k'(. x„e___ 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 approved of the requested subdivision variance. I hereby disapprove the subdivision variance request for the following reasons: 1. 2. 3. -�I Dated this it" day of , 199 4.1t . L C mmission v e ber m:\app\ppvarff.001 Rev.January, 1993 CARMMEL'CLaY PLAN COMMISSION Carmel. Indiana VARIANCE OF SUBDIVISION CONTROL ORDINANCE Docket No.: s7- cleft Petitioner. C •P M r fla (2. , P Section Variance: 6. 3. 2.Z Brief Description of Variance: lei 3-EL cP +a.r. Co r el, 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 approved of the requested subdivision variance. I hereby disapprove the subdivision variance request for the following reasons: 1. 2 3. Dated this 20 71" day of _ , 199 44. _____ mmission Member m:\app\ppvarff.001 Rev. January, 1993 CARMEL'CLAY PLAN COMMISSION Carmel, Indiana VARIANCE OF SUBDIVISION CONTROL ORDINANCE Docket No.: s 2- Petitioner: .P M o r rrz (*� c. Section Variance: 6 3. 2 Z Brief Description of Variance: Re.du.�ri ;^ L r rr'cL c* +a. ✓r -eor r_cce(, lex,Nt. 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 approved of the requested subdivision variance. I hereby disapprove the subdivision variance request for the following reasons: 1. 2. 3. Dated this Zo 1.14 day of - 9 • Commission er m:\app\ppvarff.001 Rev. January, 1993 CARMEL'CLAY PLAN COMMISSION Carmel. Indiana VARIANCE OF SUBDIVISION CONTROL ORDINANCE Docket No.: 8 2- cl ' P/� Petitioner: C •P M r r)a c', M • ,�;a c l P. Section Variance: (. 3. 2.7— Brief Description of Variance: Rzda�4i T., ;� 1�� {I� ��+arr -f;r o_c.c A, 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 approved of the requested subdivision variance. I hereby disapprove the subdivision variance request for the following reasons: 1. 2 3. Dated this 2 71" day of , 199 4it . mmission _Member m:\app\ppvarff.001 Rev. January, 1993 CARNIEL'CL-.Y PLAN COMMISSION Carmel. Indiana VARIANCE OF SUBDIVISION CONTROL ORDINANCE Docket No.: 8 2— i' Petitioner: C . M �� �; e /, P. Section Variance: 6 3. c Z Brief Description of Variance: Rzdu 1 T., in l&rr\-EL -l-a.p✓r for cc ( 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 approved of the requested subdivision variance. I hereby disapprove the subdivision variance request for the following reasons: 1. 2 3. Dated this !_.0 it' day of 7) , mil_ Dk Commission Member m:\app\ppvarff.001 Rev. January, 1993 CARMEL'CLAY PLAN COMMISSION Carmel, Indiana VARIANCE OF SUBDIVISION CONTROL ORDINANCE Docket No.: 8 7- 'S'' /p/� Petitioner: C •P Itkrqa, r , .. (‘ P. Section Variance: ( 3. Z Z Brief Description of Variance: t2zdac.4i.k, m ler.r\�L c, -i-cLvr 'Cor n-c..: A. (a.,c_ 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. KBased on all the evidence presented by the petitioner, I approved of the requested subdivision variance. I hereby disapprove the subdivision variance request for the following reasons: 1. 2 3. Dated this On it' day of ,c e— e- --N , 199 � . Commission Me ber m:\app\ppvarff.001 Rev. January, 1993