The URL can be used to link to this page

Home My WebLink AboutFindings of Fact FINDINGS OF FACT FORM FOR PRrMARY PLAT CONSIDERATION Carmel/Clay P~.n Co,,,, ~m of~ ~of~ ~ ofCo~m~ 5~c~ I d~ p~ co~ ~ ~ of~ ~ Ch~ S~on Co~I ~. __ I hereby ap_tn'ove of the prkmry plat as submkted with the follow~ng spec/tic cond~ons as agreed to by the petkioncc. Condition 1. Condkion 2. Co-di~-n 3. __ I h~reby ~ of the primary plat as submitt~ for the following reasons: 1. DAT]~D THIS / 5 DAY OF ~'-'e.~/,d~/~ , ,199 a~/ , FINDINGS OF FACT FORM FOR PRI~I.&RY PLAT CONSIDERATION C~rr,~'Clay Plan Co ...... ~sion co~ ~ ~ of~ ~t C~y Su~oa Co~l ~. __ I hereby approve of thc prinmry pht as suhK, tted w/th the following specific conditions as agreed to by the petitioner: Cond/tion I. Condition 2. I hereby disao~rov¢ of ttm ptku~ry plat as subleted for th~ following reasons: I. DAT'~ THIS /~'~ DAY' OF s:\pla~omm~i~p~pc fnadfact FINDINGS OF FACT FORM FOR PRI~IARY PLAT CONSIDERATION' __ I hereby approve of the prkrvary plat as suhnitted with the followhng spec/ftc covdhqons as agreed to by the petitioner: Condition 1. Condition 2. I hercqV disamJrove of the prima~ plat as submitted for the following reasons: 1. DATED T~S s:\planmm,a~pp\pcfindim /f~q~DAY OF Co~on Member Rev/sed May 1998 FINDINGS OF FACT FORM FOR PR.I~IARY PLAT CONSIDERATION Carmel/Clay Plan __ I hereby ~pprove of the primary pla~ as submitted with the following specific conditions as agreed to by the petfdoner: Condition 1. Condition 2. I herc4~ ~ of the primm~ pm as submitted for the follow~-~ reasons: I. DATI~ THIS ,/5"' DAY OF FINDINGS OF FACT FORM FOR PRIMARY PLAT CONSIDERATION CarmegC~y Plan Co..~,~i--~on Based upon all th~ ~videnc~ ~ by the p¢~ and utmn the repre~mauom and c~ifications oftt~ staffofth~ Dep~ ofCo~.-:--a,y Serv/c~s, I det~,,-;,~e that the plat complies with s~,----t~,,'ds of the Carmel Clay' Subdivision Control __ I hereby ~t~prove of the primary pht as subu/tted ~ the follow/ng specific covd~ons as agreed to by the pe~it/oner: Condition I. Condition 2. I hereby ~ of the primary plat as subm~ed for the follow~E reasons: I. FINDINGS OF FACT FORM FOR PRI1HARY PLAT CONSIDERATION Catltlal/Cl~y Plall CO..-,~;~ion ~~ of~ ~of~ ~ ofCo~ S~c~ I ~c p~ co~ ~ ~ of~ ~t ~ S~on Co~l ~. hereby approve of the pr;,'cary plaI as submitted with the following spec[tic conditions as agreed to by the petitioner: Condition 1. CoMMon 2. __ I hereby ~ of the p,i,,~y p~ as submi~ed for the fnllowins rea.sons: I. DATED TI::n'$ DAY OF ~///Co ion Meml~r R~s~l ~ 1998 DOCKEr NO. PETITIONER: FINDINGS OF FACT FORM FOR pRIMARY PLAT CONSIDERATION Carm~Chy Plan Co~aion certifr, ations of the staffofth~ IX-p, uu~n~ ofCo.~.,,-~ty Sm-v/c~s. I detc-r~¢ ~hat plax complies with standards of the Carmel Clay Subdividon Comxol Or~ce. __ I hereby..a~_~_ove of thc p~iumr7 plat as subm/ttcd with the follow~g specific con~;~ons as agreed to by the petitioner: Condition 1. Condkion 2. Cona~,~u 3. I l:mreby ~ of the primary plat as submitted for the follo~dng x~sons: I. FINDINGS OF FACT FORM FOR PRIMARY PLAT CONSIDERATION Carm~Clay Plan Couaulssion c~ of~ ~of~ ~ ofCo~ S~c~ I d~ ~,~ t~ ~ __ I hereby .~rrove of the pr~uvxr7 plat as submitted with the following specific conditions as agreed to by the petitioner: Condition 1. Condition 2. I ~ ~ oftt~ primary plat as subm~ed for the following r~msons: 1. Revis~ Ma~ 1998 FINDINGS OF FACT FORM FOR PRI'MARY PLAT CONSIDERATION Can:n~Clay Plan. Co.~',.~;~ion c~m of~ ~of~ ~ of~ S~c~ I d~ p~ co~ ~ ~ of~ ~1 Chy S~on Co~l ~. __ I hereby a_~prove of the prlmary plat as sulxnitted with the followh~g specific conditions as ag~ed to b7 the petitioner: Condition 1. Condkion 2. Cond~on 3. I h=~by d'.q~,mve oftt~ p.;,~tar7 plat ~ ~ed for the following r~asom: l. DA~ THIS FIND12NGS OF FACT FORM FOR PRIt~La~Y PLAT CONSIDERATION Camlct/Clay p~a. Commission fo~o~g ~¢l~ ~ to ~ ~e perone: Condition 2. Comti~n 3. I hereby disama'o_ ye of the primary plat as submitted for the follow/rig rea.sons: 1. DATED T~tS DAY OF Comr-i~qlon Revised May 1998 FINDI2NGS OF FACT FORM FOR PRIMARY PLAT CONSIDERATION Carmel/Clay Plan Co,.'!~;r~ion ~ upon all tt~ e~ la~S~d by tt~ l~tifion~r and upon tl~ rqa~om and ¢~*h~t~ons of tho staffoftt~ I:)q~ t,.u~ ofCommnni~y $~wie~s, I dg~'r~e that tile plat eom?ties with standards oftt~ Cartml Clay Sulxtiviz/on Control I hc-reby ~prove of the primary plat as submffted with the follow/rig specific conditions as a~m'eed to by the petitioner: Condition 2. Co,,a~on 3. I l~r~by dk-~Oiove ofttm p~imary plat as submitted for th~ follow~g reasons: l. Comm/s~'on M~r s:\plancomm~p~ Revised May 1998 FINDINGS OF FACT FORM FOR PRIMARY PLAT ,CONSIDERATION . I hereby _e~gv_~ of the prknary plat as submitted wifia the follow~g speci~¢ covdi~ons a~ agreed to by ~e pet~oner: Condition 2. - Condign 3. I hereby ~ of the p~'iam'y plat as sub~ecI for the following reasons: l. DATED THIS 'kg DAYOF s:\plaaco..- .~rp\pcfmdfa~ Co--'on Member Rev/s~ May 1998 CARMEL/CLAY PLAN COMMISSION Carmel, Indiana SUBDIVISION VARIANCE FINDINGS OF FACT Docket No: Petitioner. ~ A'zX~ Section Variance: Brief Description of Variance: 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 commtmity. The use and value of ~rea 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 tertns of the ordinance to the property will constitute an unusual and -nneeessary 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. all the evidence the I of the Based presented by petitioner, on approve requested subdivision variance. I hereby disapprove of the subdivision variance request for the following reasons: Dated this s:\forms\subvarfo.rm CARMEL/CLAY PLAN COMMISSION Carmel, Indiana SUBDIVISION VARIANCE FINDINGS OF FACT Docket No: I1-~ ?. F- Section Variance: b-~ Brief Description of Variance: 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 end 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 stxic~ application of terms of the ordinance to the propen'y will constitute an unusual and unnecessary h~rdship if applied to the property for which the vadence is sought. The grant of the variance does not interfere substantially with the comprehensive plan. Based on sil 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: 199 .- · -- ' Comm~sion ~/e~ber CARMEL/CLAY PLAN COMMISSION Camel, Indiana SUBDMSION VARIANCE FINDINGS OF FACT Docket No: ['I-O~ F-F- Petitioner: Vig"Z,r~, ~ ~o~tT fi, O. Section Variance: ~).vl Bt/el Description of Variance: ~iI~.v-,~a'~e- In deciding whether or not the applicant has presented sufficient proof m 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 properV/and such condition is not due to the general conditions of the neighborhood. The strict applicalion of terms of the ordinance ~o the property will constitute an unusual and unnecessa~ hardship if applied ~o the property for wh/ch the variance is sou~t. //~he 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: s:\fonns\subvarfo.rm 10/95 C o m mis~dn \~, ember CARMEL/CLAY PLAN COMMISSION Carmel, Indiana SUBDIVISION VARIANCE FINDINGS OF FACT Docket No: II-~ Pe~tioner. ~ W~, Section Variance: Brief Description of Vzr/ance: 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 properW 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 unnecessaly hardship if applied to the property for which the variance is sought. The grant of the variance does not interfere substantially with the comprehensive "~~ed on all the evidence presented by the petitioner, I approve of the requested subdiv/sion variance. I hereby disapprove of the subdivision variance request for the following reasons: Dated this ,/.~ day of s:\forms~subvarfo.rm ] 0/95 , 199 'I ' Commission Member CARMEL/CLAY PLAN COMMISSION Carmel, Indi~a SUBDIVISION VARIANCE FINDINGS OF FACT Docket No: {"l-~ ?. Petitioner: V{~7,~,,c. Section Variance: Brief Dascdption of Var/ance: 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 end 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 end ,mnecessary 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 ~11 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: s:\forms\subvarfo.rm 10/95 Ceommission Member CARMEL/CLAY PLAN COMMISSION Carmel, Indiana SUBDIVISION VARIANCE FINDINGS OF FACT Docket No: I'l"a~ ?' ~- Petitioner: H~I,r~ ~ ~-~,~-t'F Co, Section Variance: b-~ Brief Descript/on of Vaxiance: ~l ~ In deciding whether or not the applicant has presented sufficient proof to permit the granting of a variance, the Plan Commission shoed 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 properly 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 tile subdivision variance request for the following reasons: o Dated this ~ day of s:\forms\subvarfo.nn 10/95 CARMEL/CLAY PLAN COMMISSION Carmel, Indiana SUBDIVISION VARIANCE FINDINGS OF FACT Docket No: Petitioner: Section Variance: ~.q Brief Description of Variance: In decklj~g 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 var/ance is sought. The grant of the variance does not interfere substantially with the comprehensive plan. Based on all the ev/dence presented by the petitioner, I approve of the requested subdiv/sion variance. I hereby disapprove of the subdivision variance request for the following reasons: 4 s:\forms\subvarfo.rm 10/95 · 1999 . ~ ./] ~ommission Member CARMEL/CLAY PLAN COMMISSION Carmel, Indiana SUBDIVISION VARIANCE FINDINGS OF FACT Docket No: {"l-~ ?. ?- Petitioner: ~W/,4,t, ~ 6~4tT Section Variance: ~.fl Brief Description of Variance: 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 har,~hlp 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: s:\forms\subvarfo.rm 10/95 Commission~'M~m~er CARME/.~CLAY PLAN COMMISSION Camel, Indiana SUBDIVISION VARIANCE FINDINGS OF FACT Docket No: ffl-~t~ ~-I~- Section Variance: ~.~ Brief Descr/pl/on of Variance: ~.t.,l ~ t t,t n~ rna 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 ,mnecessary 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: Da~ed this //~"day of s:\forms\subvarfo.rm 10/95 Commission Member CARMEL/CLAY PLAN COMMISSION Carmel, Indiana SUBDIVISION VARIANCE FINDINGS OF FACT Docket No: ]']-~ F- F- Petitioner. V~,r~, ~ ~T ~-O. Secdon Variance: b.~! Brief Description of Variance: ~t~,~a'b~ 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 -nnecessary hardship/f 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 tile subdivision variance request for the following reasons: Dated this ~ ~ day of ~-~ ~ ~- ~ s:\forms\subvarfo.rm 10/95 Commission Mem~ CARMEL/CLAY PLAN COMMISSION Carmel, Indiana SUBDIVISION VARIANCE FINDINGS OF FACT Docket No: Petitioner: Secl/on Variance: b-~ Brief Description of Variance: In dec, ding whether or not the applicant has presented sufficient proof to permit the granting of 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 ,mnecessary hara~hip 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 ~pprove of the requested subdivision variance. I hereby disapprove of the subdivision variance request for the following reasons: s:\formsLsubvaffo, rm 10195 Comm~ission Member CARMEL/CLAY PLAN COMMISSION Carmel, Indiana SUBDIVISION VARIANCE FINDI[NGS OF FACT Docket No: ["[~,~ ~'.F- Petitioner: ~R~,c, ~ ~-~lT Section Variance: ~-vl Brief Description of Variance: 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 Based on all the evidence presented by the peti~oner, I approve of the requested subdivision variance. I hereby disapprove of the subdivision variance request for the following reasons: s:\forms\subvarfo.rm 10/95