The URL can be used to link to this page

Home My WebLink AboutFindings of Fact ~, Q.)..U FINDINGS OF FACT FORM FOR PRIMARY PLAT CONSIDERATION Carmel Plan Commission 68 . Carmel, Indiana . . 'B~ed upon. allthe evidenc.e presented by the petitIoner and upon the re'pre~entationsand certification. ofthestaff'of the Departtnent of Community Development, I deterinhle that the plat . . complies-with. itandari:ls of the Carmel C.lay Subdivision Conn::ol Ordinance. . I hereby aDurove of -the primary plat as submitted with the following - specific condltif)ns as agreed to by the petitioner. - -,'''-- :,' ~ . Condition 1. .....: Condition 2. . . Conditio~ ~. ffJ . , ... '.u , . .~,.,. VJ~~~_ CO . ssion ember _ '- 10/4/95 , DATED THIS -L1- DAY OF s:\formS\amendpp.app ) I )~-~~-d~~~ l~;~~ j/ . rwl C!.;J'VI 1./"i1'(J'1t:.1.. 1.1../"i T UUl.U I We; ~..."t_ll::,1.:.ru I . c.J..,J~ c.J I CARMEl/CLA YPLAN COMMISSION Carmel, Indiana SUBDIVISION VARIANCE FINDINGS OF FACT Docket No: Petitioner: Section Variance: . s- ~ /. 7 Brief Description of Variance: S~ --0 I,t (.cJ \0 . a _ .. .. S-tl-d '6 S 4) S'c;;v "a.s . In deciding whether or not the applicant has presented eufficicnt proof to permit the granting of a. variance, the Plan Commission should consider the following: :s-<i - 07 u The grant of a variance will not be injuriOUS to the public health, safety, morals arid general welfare of the community. The use and value of area adjacent to the property inducied in the proposed plat will not be affected in a substantially adverse m.anner. 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. . V 'Rl'J"Pd. on .0"1 J 1 thE' I?vi dl?tlce presented by the . petitioner, ..1 approve of the requested subdivision variance. I hereby dU5approve of the subdivi5iol'\ variance L"tX{ut:Z'>l CUt' lh~ following r:easons: 1. 2. 3. u Dated this I t:t day of JhtJ... ll:\lorm;\,ubvarfinclfadinn2000 ~~d Commiss n Member. ~l:l-I::IJ::h~1::I1::I1:::l /' 7'J u u ll:j;~ rU IUQ 1_t-tt'(J'It:L.. '_I..t-t T UUI..U ;I....~....~~I... I . c.Jo-l' c."Il CARMEl/CLAY PLAN COMMISSION Carmel, Indiana SUBDIVISION V ARIANCE FINDINGS OF FACT II-f)I. fw !to 1.'.1 ~(~ fA~(",.1 Docket No: f,-., ~ fl,J If" '.'.1 crt' Petitioner: .I.ItC("'(Ab-(L CfllffII,.". leoClt G- Section Variance: . ~ / I Brief Description of Variance: tOl' 1'.,1-1IfA" J4.c. 61A~'" Dr r~o .fI,~ I In deciding whether or not the applicant has presented eufficicntproof to permit the gronfing 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 arid 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. k R;)~ on;! n HIl:' !;>vidence p~s~nted by thepetitione:r;t approve of the requested subdivision variance. I hexeby dil5llpprove of the 5ubdivision variance L"tXful::bLCuL' th~ following reasons: L 2. 3. Dated this J 1Cday of .Jtlle .20,.1 ~t~ R:\fcrms\,ubvarBndfact,fnn2000 / . ~""-"""" /~r ~~~ u u ll::l;~::> '-I:f LI-1/"(J'Il:.L. LL.1-1 T l.)ULl.) J.J"'t_U:;"I':' f t:J r. 11:..I-" t.J I IUO CARMEl/CLAY PLAN COMMISSION Carmel, Indiana SUBDIVISION V ARIANCE FINDINGS OF FACT J $8-oIQ,~tJ / ~@CJI bS. . Docket No: . Petitioner: Section Variance: Brief Description of Variance: In deciding whether or not the applicant has presented eufficicnt proof to permit the granting of a. variance, the Plan Conunission should consider the following: The grant of a variance will not be injurious to the public health, safety, morals arid general.welfate 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 comprehens:ive ~an. . x; Ra,:;pn on;! n thE? p.vidp.tlce p~sented by thepetitione:r,l approve of the requested subdivision variance. I hereby cUl5Approve of tl,e subdivision. variance L'~ut::z>l CU'" th~ following reasons: L 2. 3. Datedthisftdayof ~~ fI:\lonns\'Ubvar6ndfa<:t.frrt'J.OO~ '~. . " ---..... Commission Member. ) ~-\;:ll::h~\;:l\;:ll::l / / / U l~;~::> VI'I '-Ht<I'It:.L.. '-L..HT UUl..U 10 ;J.Jt..t...JCJI:- r t.J I. f:J-" c.J I Docket No: . Petitioner: Section Variance: Brief Description of Variance: CARMEl/eLA Y PLAN COMMISSION Carmel, Indiana SUBDIVISION VARIANCE FINDINGS OF FACT 6~- 010 SlAJ I fJ5' -0/ b;;uJ 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 arid general welfare of the community. The use and value of area adjacent to the property inducied 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. u The strict application of terms of the ordinance to the property will constitute an unusual and unnecessary hardship ifappIiedto the property for which the variance is sought. ~ The grant of the variance does not interfere substantially with the comprehensive ~an. - 'RR!;Pdnn."lll tnp' p.vidence pT('sented by thepetitione~,l approve of the requested subdivision variance. I hereby dUsapprove of the subdivision variance L'eqUt!:bl fur th~ following reasons: 1. 2. 3. u Dated this 1 tI . day of -?l A11 -' a;\Eorm:;\~ubvarfinc:lfaci.frm2000 '20o.(yt~. ~ Q FINDINGS OF FACT FORM FOR PRIMARY PLAT CONSIDERATION ~.. 'U Carmel Plan Commission Carmel, Indiana ~ DOCKET NO. ~f'O/ ff NAME OF SUBDIVISION: C~~ I"ftr (M/t(/. ("(""fA. "I"'~ '" I..,{ r'~ XBased upon all the evidence presented by the petitioner and upon the representations and If!' ...~' certifications of the staff of the Departlnent of Community Development, I determine that the plat '11-.' complieswitlt standards of the Carmel C,lay Subdivision Control Ordinance. IJfJr rA,t~ (fitJfk,. ..Ito/x- ~ -"-- I hereby apurove of the primary plat as submitted with the following' specific conditions as agreed to by the petitioner. ' Condition 1. u Condition 2. Condition 3. I hereby disaoorove of the primary plat as submitted for the following reasolis: 1. 2. 3. u , d DATED THIS If, DA Y OF Iflllt . 20~ I . .~~ . It. .?\ -JtmDu~i~- -- - '. 10/4/95 s:\fonns\amendpp.app ~o FINDINGS OF FACT FORM FOR PRIMARY PLAT CONSIDERATION Carmel Plan Commission , Carmel, Indiana ,~,'PP,(~ · ,_ J /'_ /! . DOCKETNO:~,= ... N~.:SUBDM~ION: ~He'Z.~ ...p~~~ .......et.t<.7 ~ J-, 'B8.$ed upon, alIthe evidenc.e presented by the petitioner and upon the reprellentatioDsand , "ff ~ _, certification. ofthestaft' 'of, the Depadtnent of CODltnunity Dev~lo ptnent, I detilrinhie that the plat ',' cotnplies,witll itandariis of the Cartnel C.lay Subdivision Contr,oIOrdinance. . --:...:.-.. I hereby apurove of ,the primary plat as submitted with the following' .pecific condltiC}ns as agreed ,to by the petitioner. ',":;,'" .' '" Condition L : . (,J Condition 2. , Condition, ~. , I hereby dlsapurove of the pritnary plat as submitted for the following reasons: 1. 2. 3. , DATED THIS -L.1-- DAY OF , ~ . , . . '-U ~ .JI'f"-~ cr:t~ W-Qt4/95 s:\formS\amendpp.app u ~ Q FINDINGS OF FACT FORM FOR PRIMARY PLAT CONSIDERATION Carmel Plan Commission Carmel, Indiana DOCKET, N,O., 5f,-~ I fli:-, AME OF SUBDIVISION:UJ a. . ;/YJ:lt~ PETITIONER:lil.~ ' ~ , <'" ',,' , '~' , '~ased upon alLthe evidence presented by the petitioner and upon the representations and ',," . Y certificationi ofthest~ffof the Department of Community Development, I determme that the plat f-., complieswitlt standards of the Carmel Clay Subdivision Control Ordinance. " ~ I .....by a.....e .f the primary plat .. .ub..lttedwlth the foUowlng 'p""ifle ,..dlti... a' agreed to by the petitioner. . ,,',".... '.. . Condition 1. u Condition 2. . Condition 3. I hereby dlsaporove of the primary plat as submitted for the following reasolis: 1. 2. 3. u DATED THIS' 111 DA Y OF .@r/ s:\fonns\amendpp.app Q.)O FINDINGS OF FACT FORM FOR , , PRIMARY PLAT CONSIDERATION Carmel Plan Commission ~ . Carmel, Ind~ana. " ' , ' .. .fIIf.b1Yf',f~ . .~ /! ~~~:::~=ION:............e,;(r~ ,'Baa,ed upon, aU the evidence presented by the petitioner and upon the repre~entationsand , certification. otthestaff'of. the Department of Community Development, I deterinhle that the plat ,V~Plieswith. itandaras of the Carmel C.lay Su~divislon Contr~l Ordinance.. , ' L.:::... I hereby aDDrove of .the primary plat as submItted with the following' specific conditions as agreed to by the petitioner',t'''', " .', Condition L .' . Condition 2. , ,Conditio,tl, ~. , I hereby disaDDrove of the primary plat as submitted for the following reasons: 1. 2. 3. , DATED THIS'L.1- DAY OF . s:\fonnS\amendpp.app wQ FINDINGS OF FACT FORM FOR . . PRIMARY PLAT CONSIJ)ERATION , '. Carmel Plan Commission . Carmel, Indiana ;f.oIYf''(14lAiP ~ /:! DOCKET NO. N OF SUBDMSION: 'U4'L~ PEnuONER:. . .. ...... U<'7 ~ . 'BalIed upon. alUhe evidence presented by th.e petition,er and upon the repr'ellen.ta.t!onsand " '. certification. ofthestaff..of. the D~parhn'8nt of Community Development, I deterinJ.De that the plat . . complies.with. stal1dariis of the Carmel ~Iay Subdivision Contr;<<>l Ordinance. , ~ I hereby aDorove of ,the primary plat as submitted with the following 'specific condltiC)ns as agreed to by the petitioner. . .,...:;..., . ~ I . . Condition 1. .' . ConditiOn 2. . Condition, ~" I hel"eby dlsaDOfove of the primary plat as submitted for the following reasons: 1. 2. r- 3. , DATED THIS.4- DAY OF s:\fonnS\amendpp.app 10/4/95 ~ 0 FINDINGS OF FACT FORM FOR , , PRIMARY PLAT CONSIDERATION Carmel Plan Commission , Carmel, Indiana ~,'PP/~ ... '_1 r'_ /! DOCKET NO. ,N OF SUBDMSION: ~UeL~ PE!ITIONER:. . . e~. 7 . . / ,'B9.$ed upon, all the evidence presented by the petitioner and upon the reprellentationsand certification' of the staff of, the Departtnent of Community Development, I deterinhie that the plat . , cOb1pli~s.witlt itandariis of the Carmel <::ray Subdivision Contr~l Ordinance. . --:...:..- I hereby apDrove of .the primary plat, as submitted with the following . spe,cific conditions as agreed to by' the petitioner. ' " ',.':;".. :" Condition L : . Condition 2. , ConditioI1: ~. . I hereby dlsaPDrove of the primary plat as submitted for the following reasons: 1. 2. 3. , DATED THIS ,4- DAY OF ~~ .~VO' ~~~r s:\fonnS\amendpp.app '10/4/95 / I ~) / u u j c ! / /. CD 0 FINDINGS OF FACT FORM FOR PRIMARY PLAT CONSIDERATION Carmel Plan Commission Cannel, Indiana DOCKET NO. PETITIONER: . W a..~~ 0 Q r- rT\ ~ ~ \2~~~ .. Q,.\. J \~:t-n s 8 -c.cr-~{NAMB OF SUBDMSION: '''\I\. A \ ~ ~ \ro. . ~y--.s . Q \.~~'^.\ -... \ Q~ ::\~~ ~ ~<,,~ ~Based upon aU the e~idence presented by the petitioner and upon the representations and certification. of the staff of the Departtnent oC Community Development, I determine that the plat compUeswitlt standariis oC the Carmel C,lay Subdivision Control Ordinance. i I hereby aporove oCthe primary plat as submitted with the following specific condlti&ns as agreed to by the petitioner. . Condition 1. Condition 2. Condition 3. I hereby disaporove oC the primary plat as submitted Cor the following reasons: 1. 2. 3. DATED THIS ' \ ~~ DA Y OF :J v... " -- ,~~O? t 0",">0-- O~---&-- Commission Member .. 3 10/4/95 s:\forms\amendpp.app L ,..9\ ., I"-,,~) i\~ 'v u . . OJ 0 FINDINGS OF FACT FORM FOR PRIMARY PLAT CONSIDERATION Carmel Plan Commission Carmel, Indiana DOCKET NO. ~ NAME OF SUBDMSION: /M-tl-I'r:~ PE!ITIONER: ------!". p~ < , ., ,.' <JBased upon all the evidence presented by the petitioner and upon the representations and ~'. certification's of the staff of. the Departtnent of Community Development, I deterinme that the plat compUeswitlt itandariis of the Carmel C.lay Subdivision Control Ordinance. ~ I hereby apllrove of the primary plat as submitted with the following specific conditions as agreed to by the petitioner. ' .. Condition L Condition 2. , Conditiol1 3. I hereby d~saoorove of the primary plat as submitted for the following reasolis: L 2. 3. DATED THIS' /0/ -fJ'\ DAY OF s:\fonns\amendpp.app 10/4/95 lla: Q .tQ..> \..Ht(J'It::1.. \..L.H T UUl...U IJ.) ;1.,J~..JCJ':' f C'.I I. CJ..P CJ I CARMEl/eLA Y PLAN COMMISSION Carmel, Indiana SUBonnSIONVAJUANCE . 5'b FINDINGS OF FACT Docket No:./Pr-Ols ~ ,~ . Petitioner: ~VA4~M ,.~rN~~ Section Variance: Ct'. ~ . "7 ......,~~, A'~* -J -~ Brief Description of Variance: , ~ ,..... .-.".~ - - _ , . . Indecidirig whel:her or not the applicant: has preeented sufficient proof to permit the granting of a. variance, the Plan Commission should consider the following: The grant of a variance wlU not be injurious to the public health, safety, morals arid general welfare of the community. . . The use andvalue.ofarea adjacent to the property included in. the. proposed plat will notbe affected in a substantially adverse manner. The need .for the variance arises from some condition peculiar to the property and . such conditio~ 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 urmecessary hardship if appIiedto the property for whiCh the variance is sought. The grant of the variance does not interfere substantially with the comprehensive fJI\ il\plan.. ' '. ". . ... y ~lJ,.t Ra<P<l.nn ..Uth. ovid."". _led by the.pot;lionetil approve of ihe ( .requested subdivision variance. . . I hereby di&5Approve of the subdivision variance L'equt:~l lUt, th~d follo'Wing reasons: 1. 2. 3. ~&. ~ Dated this 0- day of !I:\lorms\,ubvarlindfa4frm2,OOO l~: a . w.l l..HI'<J'It:.L.. l..L..H' lJU\..lJ ,Q ';"-'&.I..JCoIc:;. rc.t I.~ CJ' t? D ,6 CARMEl/CLAY PLAN COMMISSION SO' Carmel, Indiana ~. SUBDIVISION.y ARIANCE j'-" FINDINGS OF FACT DockelNo:a:ofllU ____ . .Petitioner: ~~~M ~V~ Section Variance: ~. ~ . '7 BriefDescriptionofVariance:?&;oo' "'.A~~.~ _-i!J- 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 folloVfing: The grant of a vartance wlU not be injurious to the public health, safety, morals arid general welfare of the community. .. . The use andvalue.ofarea 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 conditio~ is not dueto the general COnditions of the neighborhood~ . iJ. ~ . ,." . 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. -~anl cl fue vorlancedoes nol mtenere S~bS~HallY Mfu Ihe comprehmoive . ,,' Ra~dnn .~n thE' r:'V1dence pres.ented by the.pelitionet~:l approve of the. .requested subdivision variance. . I hereby d:Usa.pprove of the subdivision variance L'equ~l [;"r tht= H following reasons: L 2. ,20.' .~ 3. Dated this P- day of ~~- ~ '\ ll:\lcrms\~ubvarfindfacUrm2000 l~: et::> . ~I L.1-Il'(J'It:L.. L.L..I-I T IJUL.IJ .0 ,;J....~..JCJ~ r ~ I. r.J-" 1iU f CARMEl/CLAY PLAN COMMISSION Carmel, Indiana !ft. SUBDIVISION.y ARIANCE . FINDINGS OF FACT .=e::::.:gf!l!~~~~ Section Variance: ~. ~ . '7 Brief Description of Variance:? ~' t"6.A 4~ -~- C- .:~ )' . In deciding whether or not the applicant haS presented sufficient proof to permit the granting of a. variance, the Plan Commission should cOI'lSider !:he following: The grant of a variance will not be injurious to the public health, safety, morals arid general welfare of the community, . . . . ,'. 1. 2. 3. The use andvalue.ofarea adjacent to the property inclucied in. the proposed plat will notbe affected in a substantially adverse manner. The need for. the variance arises from some condition peculiar to the property and . such conditio~ is not dueto the general conditic;ms 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 ~an. .. '. .- - RA~c1, nn -" 11 thE' evidence presented by the .pet:itionet~.t approve of the - .requested subdivision variance. I hereby ciiMpprove of the subdivision variance requt:!:ll [~.H' th~H following reasons: Dated this t!1- day of ?~. - 1I:\!onno;\,ubvar6ndfacUnn2000 l~: a . ~I \..1-I1'(J'1t:L. \..L.I-IT LlU\..J.J J.j .;.r..l"'t_U:;.I':" r CJ I. CJoJ./ C,.I I CARMEl/eLA Y PLAN COMMISSION Carmel, Indiana SUBDIVISION.y ARIANCE . 68' . FINDINGS OF FACT DocketNO:g'()I_U ,.-r- . Petitioner: ~VM-M :dP,UI"""~ Section Variance: (p. -g. '7 Brief Description of Variance:? G;Oo' "'.A .ttt....I~ _-.l~ <:.. :~ J , . . Indecidirig wheth~r or not the applicant: haS preeented sufficient proof to permit the granting of D. variance, the Plan Conunissiori should consider the follo~ng: The grant of a variance will not be injurious to the public health, safety, morals arid general welfare of the community. .' . . ..... ~, 'x 1. 2. 3. The use and value.ofarea adjacent to the property included in. the proposed plat will notbe affected in a substantially adverse manner. The need for the variance arises from some condition peculiar to the property and such conditio~ is not due to the general ~onditi(:ms of the neighborhood~ ,I . ,." . 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 p~ .' '. ..' 'Rl'l~'nn '<Ill th", p.vidl;'nce presented bythe.petitioneJ'~:t approve of the.. .requested subdivision variance. I hereby diMpprove of the subdivi5ioll variance L'eqUt:bl [UL' th~H followi.ng reasons: '-3~-7- 4 "5" {JI 9U-" .. Da.ted this t!i- day of !I:\lcrms\:tubvarfindfacUnn2000 .20~~. ommission Met:nber. . . 11:1; et::> . w.l L.Ht(J'It:L.. L.L..H' IJUL.IJ 'v ;,I..,t&-t..JCJt:. r I:J I. lIU-'" CJ f CARMEl/eLA Y PLAN COMMISSION Carmel, Indiana SUBDIVISION VARIANCE . ~ FINDINGS OF FACT DockeINO:m-o(S U ---- . Petitioner: z:t:"A4~M ~~,.."'~ Section Variance: (p . g . ~ .-, ~~, _ .. ..-A# ..J --~ Brief Deso:iptionofVariance: , ~ ~A___I~ - --- _ - . . Indecidirig whel:her or not the applicant: has presented sufficient proof to permit the gronting of a variance, the Plan Conunissiori should consider the following: The grant of a variance will not be injurious to the public health, safety, morals arid general welfaie of the community. .. . The use andvalue.ofarea adjacent to the property included in. the proposed plat will notbe affected in a substantially adverse manner. The need .for the ,,'ariance arises from some condition peculiar to the property and such conditio~ is not dueto the general conditic:ms of the neighborhood~ IJ. ~ . " . 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. .. .. .. &!':Po. on'", n th~ I?vid('nce presented by the '}'Qt:i.tionet~J approve of the .requested subdivision variance. . I hereby ciliIapprove of the subdivision variance L'eqUt!:bl [;"r th~H followi.ng reasons: 1. 2. 3. ~~, ,20tl' ~ () Commission Member. Dated this .t!l- day of II: \lorms\ ~ubvarlincifact..frm2.000 l~ : et::> , W-1 L.HI'(J'It:.1.. L.L.H T lJUl..lJ .Q ~"'~._U::Jt:. r 1:.1 I. f.,I--" "" I CARMEl/CLAY PLAN COMMISSION Carmel, Indiana 58- SUBDIVISION.y ARIANCE . FINDINGS OF FACT .=::r.c1'>>!l!.~~~ Section Variance: ~. S . '7 Brief Description of Variance;? (,;00' ,..... 4~ _-L...'" <.... , ' , Indecidirig wheth~r or not the applicant haS presented sufficient proof to pci'mit the granting of a. variance, the Plan Conunissiori should consider the following: The grant of a variance will not be injurious to the public health, safety, morals arid general welfare of the community. ' , , . ..... The use andvalue.ofarea adjacent to the property included in, the proposed plat will notbe affected in a substantially adverse manner. The need ,for-the variance arises from some condition peculiar to the property and . suchconditio~is not due to the general conditic:ms of the neighborhood~ ' ~. J , ,. 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. .' ,v, ,. A;..... ---- , " 'F.J;J~. on ,,,11 tlil;' p.vidence ~S:E'nted by the 'f'QiitioneJ'~,t approve of the, .requested subdivision variance. I hereby dilsapprove of the subdivision variance L'equt:~l CUL' tlu~' following reasons: 1. 2. 3. Dated this p-. day of ?u. ~ . -.. .20_~ . ';::sion Member. lI:\lcnns\~ubvar5ndfacUrm2000 , ) . f""-""'" ) ( I ( ( ( } I ) ; ) i I J u u 1l::1;~:::> ~UIYI lwHI'(J'I~L.. lwL..H T UUlwU '0 I .u-u lC..Il ;;I...'"'t...~~rt:J CARMEl/eLA Y PLAN COMMISSION Carmel, Indiana SUBDIVISION VARIANCE FINDINGS OF FACT Docket No: S ~ - 6\ tl Petitioner: Section Variance: -5 & _ ~ \'.... '5:'G..:J Brief Description of Variance: "7 L D ~ C.- 4 \ .... A_. c_~. ~ C\.. In deciding whether or not the applicant has presented sufficient proof to permit the granting of a. variance, the Plan Conunission should consider the following: The grant of a variance will not be injurious to the public health, safety, morals arid general welfare of the community. . The use and value of area adjacent to the property inducied 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 ulUlecessary hardship if applied to the property for which the variance is sought. The grant of the variance does not interfere substantially with the comprehensive ~M. . ~. Rl'1!;Pn nn."! 11 trlE:' ",vidl?t'\ce p%'l:?sented by the petitioner, I approve of the requested subdivision variance. I hereby dil5llpprove of the subdivision variance L'eqUt!:bl fur th~ following reasons: 1. 2. 3. Dated this l.3- day of '3 .200 I ~ r"v\.~...,,- ~""--. COmmission M ber. ~'4I Q, lI:\lorm<;\ ,ubvar!indfadfrm2000 ( I...) j' '.:'~ !U F!:.t1-I:::lI:h~l:::Il:::Il:::I 11:::1; ~::> CC)VI '_I-ft(J'It;L '-LI-f T UU\..U '0 ,;I...,lI'1_U:"'::' r U I. u_" C-' I CARMEI/CtA Y PLAN COMMISSION Carmel, Indiana SUBDIVISION V ARIANCE FINDINGS OF FACT Docket No: S8-O/PP . Petitioner: Section Variance: 5Sf-t>Ia-SW _ /J '- Brief Description of Variance: ">, ~ I . ~ -IKL- .~ 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 wilJ not be InjUriOUS to the public health, safety, morals arid general welfare of the community. The use and value of area adjacent to the property inducied 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 ~an. . ~ R;)!';pnnn;lll HII:' p.vid",nce presented by the petitioner, 1 approve of the requested subdivision variance. I hereby cUl5Approve of the subdivision variance L'IX{ ut::bl Lur th~ following reasons: 1. 2.. 3, Dated this -Li- clay of;r ~ '~fZ~~ , C' . M b omnusslOn em er. . . R:\Eonns\~ubvarfindfacUrm2000 ~ u u CARMEL/CLA Y PLAN COMMISSION Carmel, Indiana SUBDIVISION VARIANCE FINDINGS OF FACT Docket No!!I1.o I b~ Petitioner. y,.".p, 4'MJe'It.r Section Variance: t.. S..r- . Brief Description of Variance: eo,." AI ~ T7DA( e>ps:'Tr.L6 ~~ 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 B- day of ? -... . s: \forms\subvarfo. rm 10/95 ,~.., Commission Member [) Q CARMEL/CLA Y PLAN COMMISSION Carmel, Indiana /A SUBDIVISION VARIANCE :>- FINDINGS OF FACT Docket No: ~.() I h~ . Petitioner: . y~f. 4'MJdItS Section Variance: ~.. S..r- Brief Description of Variance: eo,.", N~T7DA( f!!>p.S"'7'Z:L6 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 B- day of ?... - . s: \forms\subvarfo. rm 10/95 '~..'. 7id ~Lr~ j' Commissi6n Member __ ___..________________1 u u CARMEUCLAY PLAN COMMISSION Carmel, Indiana ~ SUBDIVISION VARIANCE '7-" FINDINGS OF FACT Docket No: 'ift.o I h~ . Petitioner: y~~ 4'#J1!AtS Section Variance: &.. S..r""" Brief Description of Variance: eol-J ^,~T7DA( ~p~"'~.'-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. 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. Dated this R day of s: \forms\subvarfo. rm 10/95 Q) o CARMEL/CLAY PLAN COMMISSION Carmel, Indiana ~ SUBDIVISION VARIANCE JC-/ FINDINGS OF FACT Docket NO!lflt b~ Petitioner: M~ 471JdItS Section Variance: ~. S..r- Brief Description of Variance: eoIJ N ~ nDA( ~p .$"''1'YJ....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 requested subdivision variance. ~. I hereby disapprove of the subdivision variance request for the following reasons: 1. ~~~-_rl -~:P ~1?i --~~~ - --- . . 2. 3. Dated this B- day of 9-...... · s:\forms\subvarfo.rm 10/95 n.~..!1~ //. ~ ~../ Commission ember Q.) u CARMEL/CLA Y PLAN COMMISSION Carmel, Indiana ~ SUBDIVISION VARIANCE 7V FINDINGS OF FACT Docket No:#f.o (b~ Petitioner: y~p. 4'#JdJtS Section Variance: 14;. $..r- Brief Description of Variance: eoAJ. N ~ T7t:1A( ~p. 'S""Td_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 requested subdivision variance. I hereby disapprove of the subdivision variance request for the following reasons: 1. 2. 3. Dated this R day of 9-... ~ · s:\forms\subvarfo.rm 10/95 ;W-Z-I t- ~~'-~S!l. ~- Commission Mem w ( , u CARMEL/CLAY PLAN COMMISSION Carmel, Indiana ~ SUBDIVISION VARIANCE j'" FINDINGS OF FACT Docket No: fl.o I h~ Petitioner: y~{J, 4'#JdItS Section Variance: ~. $...r- Brief Description of Variance: eo'-l N~T7DA( ~p 'S"'7T.I6 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. .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. Dated this IB.!.":: of '7-.... ~ · s:\forms\subvarfo.rm 10/95 ~tU ~ Commlssi n em er v u CARMEL/CLAY PLAN COMMISSION Carmel, Indiana SUBDIVISION VARIANCE 68 FINDINGS OF FACT Docket No: '!I1:.o I h~ . Petitioner: y~p, 4'#JdltS Section Variance: &. S..r- Brief Description of Variance: eou. NI!!Ilf:,.T7O'A( ~p -S"''nJ_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. 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. Dated this R day of ?... ~ . s:\forms\subvarfo.rm 10/95 ~ . --/--~ - Commissioo Member