Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutFindings of Fact 05-29-02 [1:.1'. ( . , . ."'- . :.~: )a-k[L P l <<.-tA.-1 CARMELJCLA Y SOARD OF ZONING J. CARMEL, INDIANA (Jr--€- \j O-VI Docket No.: UY-23-02 ~ 0.. \lo-n- G. ~ fi~~s Petitioner. Martin Marietta, MaterialsJnc. 1. FINDINGS OF FACT -USE VARIA The grant of this variance wilL not be cantic1ry to the. pubJic.. interest,. such that enf.orcement. of the zoning ordinance will result in unnece 5 { ~1 ( 0 1..- see attached Exhibit H o (Je'l'L- 2. The grant of this variance will not be injurious to the public health. safety, morals and general welfare of the community because: " .... see attached Exhibit H 3.' The use or value of the ?lrea adjacent to the subject property will not be substantially affected in any adverse manner because: . see attached Exhibit H 4. The need forthe variance arises from a natural condition peculiar to the subject because: see attached Exhibit H 5. . The granting of this variance does not substantially interfere with the Carmel/Clay Comprehensive Plan beaause: see attached Exhibit H DECISION IT IS THEREFORE the decision af the Carmel/Clay Board of Zoning Appeals that Use Variance Docket No. is granted, subject to any conditions stated in the minutes of this Board, which are incorporated herein by reference and made a part hereof. Adopted this. ex e; day of -may- ,~o~ .,. ~.~. ----.~.- . .~rJr~~ Conditions of the Soard are listed an the back. CHAiRPERSON, CarrnellClay Soard of Zoning Appeals SECRETARY, Carmel/Clay Soard of Zoning Appeals >:\tctrn:I\u:sewr.app R....-d 01JO:2ST ?-age a at a"_ Use V-ananQt ApPuc:ulan If; CARMEUCLAYBOARD OF ZONING APPEALS Carmel, Indiana Docket No. : UV-23-02 Petitioner: Martin Marietta Materials, Inc. FINDINGS OF FACT - USE VARIANCE (Ballot Sheet) 1. 2. 3. 4. 5. fo- DATED THIS <!l~DAYOF .~~ .~ ~~,,\:) ~~~ Board ember . . . Page 7 of 8 - Use Variance Application t . CARMEUCLAYBOARD OF ZONING APPEALS Carmel, Indiana Docket No. : UV-23-02 Petitioner: Martin Marietta Materials, Inc.' 1 FINDINGS OF FACT. USE VARIANCE (Ballot Sheet) 2. ~/~ ~~ ,~ 3. 4. 5. Jo'- DATED THIS 71 DAY OF .>>z;; ~9B Page 7 of 8 - Use Variance Application v /' :r CARMEUCLAYBOARD OF ZONING APPEALS Carmel, Indiana UV-23-02 Docket No. : Petitioner: Martin Marietta Materials. Inc. Il~tl ~~E VARL4NCE (BallotSheeti 1. 2. 3. 4. 5. ,.. DATED THIS 29 DAY OF k ',~. --eLf- Board Member Paga 7 of 8 - Usa Variance Application y i I .... CARM EUC LAY BOARD OF ZONING APPEALS Carmel, Indiana Docket No. : UV-23-02 Petitioner: Martin Marietta Materials, Inc. FINDINGS OF FACT - USE VARIANCE (Ballot Sheet) 1 -ff4l1rC 2. 3. 4. 5. .-' DATED THIS :2 f DAYOF .~ .J~ ,2t;27/ ~. '~ I'd ember Page 7 of 8 - Use Variance Application ~\ rY , CARMEUCLAYBOARD OF ZONING APPEALS Carmel, Indiana Docket No. : UV-23-02 Petitioner: Martin Marietta Materials, Inc. FINDINGS OF FACT - USE VARIANCE (Ballot Sheet) 1. 2. 3. 4. 5. JO' DATED THIS 611 q DAY OF ?/Jar- Page 7 of 8 - Use Variance Applicalion l 1if- ~ u .... ~'" ,,:;.. IN THE CARMEL CLAY BOARD OF ZONING APPEALS IN RE APPLICATION FOR USE VARIANCE of ) ) ) ) ) Docket No. UV -23-02 MARTIN MARIETTA MATERIALS, INC., Applicant ) ) May 29, 2002 DECISION Upon application and after a public hearing pursuant to the Advisory Planning Law of the State oflndiana and the Rules of Procedure of the Board, the Board hereby denies, by a 3-2 vote, the application for a Use Variance filed by the Applicant. Members voting to deny: Mohr, Rice, Weinkauf. Members voting to approve: Dierckman, Plavchak. FINDINGS The Board finds that the Applicant has not met Criteria #1 and #3 under Section 30.4 of the Carmel Clay Zoning Ordinance: A. Criterion # I-The Board finds that the approval of the Use Variance would be injurious to the public health, safety, morals, and general welfare of the community, in that the Applicant's proposed intensification of a mining operation next to existing parkland would create potential health and safety hazards that are not normally present next to a park area in the Carmel Clay community, such as the possibility of contamination of ground water from spills occurring on the site and the possibility that unsupervised children who are using the adjacent parkland will gain access to the site and thereby be exposed to injury or unhealthy substances. The Board further finds that the Applicant is unable to erect a fence around the premises to mitigate these ~~--- . -:,. r ~ possibilities because the premises are located within a floodplain. B. Criterion #3- The Board finds that the need for the Use Variance does not arise from some condition peculiar to the property involved, but rather arises primarily out of the Applicant's desire to win the support of certain neighboring property owners for the approval ofthe related Special Use applications that have been submitted by the Applicant. Filed in the Office of the Carmel Clay Board of Zoning Appeals this day of 2002. Michael Mohr President ATTEST: Connie Tingley Secretary 2 ;-... ~_:.;-.. ,'".--,. ~ . " ,. f ~ w w 1 IN THE CARMEL CLAY BOARD OF ZONING APPEALS IN RE APPLICATION FOR USE VARIANCE o -23-02 of MARTIN MARIETTA MATERIALS, INC., Applicant May 29, 2002 DECISION Upon application and after a public hearing pursuant to the Advisory Planning Law of the State oflndiana and the Rules of Procedure of the Board, the Board hereby denies, by a 3-2 vote, the application for a Use Variance filed by the Applicant. Members voting to deny: Mohr, Rice, Weinkauf. Members voting to approve: Dierckman, Plavchak. FINDINGS The Board finds that the Applicant has not met Criteria #1 and #3 under Section 30.4 of the Carmel Clay Zoning Ordinance: A. Criterion # I-The Board finds that the approval of the Use Variance would be injurious to the public health, safety, morals, and general welfare of the community, in that the Applicant's proposed intensification of a mining operation next to existing parkland would create potential health and safety hazards that are not normally present next to a park area in the Carmel Clay community, such as the possibility of contamination of ground water from spills occurring on the site and the possibility that unsupervised children who are using the adjacent parkland will gain access to the site and thereby be exposed to injury or unhealthy substances. The Board further finds that the Applicant is unable to erect a fence around the premises to mitigate these ;- ..., r / -1 ~ o (,) ., . possibilities because the premises are located within a floodplain. B. Criterion #3-The Board finds that the need for the Use Variance does not arise from some condition peculiar to the property involved, but rather arises primarily out of the Applicant's desire to win the support of certain neighboring property owners for the approval of the related Special Use applications that have been submitted by the Applicant. Filed in the Office of the Carmel Clay Board of Zoning Appeals this day of 2002. Michael Mohr President ATTEST: Connie Tingley Secretary 2 u u of . ..... \ .. :....:;-:-~.i~~__ IN THE CARMEL CLAY BOARD OF zONlNG'AIlPEALS , . . ~\ " ~. lI... '/ .\ I' " '1>\' \ /_~:: Rt.C,t\\lt.~'\~ \~-~.'. ~ ~ :, \\~~ tl <uu ~t"" ) . ~~'I ) , Dock~t N~C-U:V -23-02 ) ) ) IN RE APPLICATION FOR USE VARIANCE MARTIN MARIETTA MATERIALS, INC., Applicant May 29, 2002 DECISION Upon application and after a public hearing pursuant to the Advisory Planning Law of the State of Indiana and the Rules of Procedure of the Board, the Board hereby denies, by a 3-2 vote, the application for a Use Variance filed by the Applicant. Members voting to deny: Mohr, Rice, Weinkauf. Members voting to approve: Dierckman, Plavchak. FINDINGS The Board finds that the Applicant has not met Criterion #1 under Section 30.4 of the Carmel Clay Zoning Ordinance: w u A. Criterion #l-The Board finds that the approval of the Use Variance would be injurious to the public health, safety, morals, and general welfare of the community, in that the Applicant's proposed intensification of a mining operation next to existing parkland would create potential health and safety hazards that are not normally present next to a park area in the Carmel Clay community, such as the possibility of contamination of ground water from spills occurring on the site and the possibility that unsupervised . children who are using the adjacent parkland will gain access to the site and thereby be exposed to injury or unhealthy substances. The Board further finds that the Applicant is Unable.to erect afence around the premises to mitigate these hazards because the premises are locafed within a floodplain. Filed in the Office of the Carmel Clay Board of Zoning Appeals this day of ,20 Michael Mohr President ATTEST: Connie Tingley Secretary 2 ,.., ." p' -.,0-_- ~ ( , -! ~~, ~..- ;') o o ~. IN THE CARMEL CLAY BOARD OF ZONING APPEALS IN RE APPLICATION FOR USE V ARlANCE ) ) ) ) ) ) ) Docket No. UV-23-02 of MARTIN MARIETTA MATERIALS, INC., Applicant May 29, 2002 DECISION Upon application and after a public hearing pursuant to the Advisory Planning Law ofthe State of Indiana and the Rules of Procedure ofthe Board, the Board hereby denies, by a 3-2 vote, the application for a Use Variance filed by'the Applicant. Members voting to deny: Mohr, Rice, Weinkauf. Members voting to approve: Dierckman, Plavchak. FINDINGS The Board finds that the Applicant has not met Criteria #1 and #3 under Section 30.4 of the Carmel Clay Zoning Ordinance: _,,,,-ltJ I' I A. Criterion #l-The Board fmds that the approval of the Use Variance would be injurious to the public health, safety, morals, and general welfare of the community, in that the Applicant's proposed intensification of a mining operation next to existing parkland would create potential health and safety hazards that are not normally present next to a park area in the Carmel Clay community, such as the possibility of contamination of ground water from spills occurring on the site and the possibility that unsupervised children will gain access to the site and thereby be exposed to injury or unhealthy substances. ') ~ -,~ .~ 0: June 2002. u u Criterion #3-The Board finds that the need for the Use Variance does not arise from some condition peculiar to the property involved, but rather appears to arise solely out of the desire to win the support of certain neighboring property owners for the approval of a related Special Use application that has submitted by the Applicant. Filed in the Office of the Carmel Clay Board of Zoning Appeals this day of Michael Mohr President ATTEST: Ramona Hancock Secretary 2