Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutApplicationCITY OF CARMEL - CLAY TOWNSHIp HAMILTON COUNTY, INDIANA APPLICATION FOR BOARD OF ZONING APPEALS ACTION DEVELOPMENT STANDARDS VARIANCE REQUEST FEE: Single Family (Primary Residence) $250.00 for the first variance, plus $75.00 for each additio ordinance being varied. 00 for each additional section of the,ordinance being varied DOCKET NO. DATE RECEIVED: ............. Address: 2) Project Name: Engineer/Architect: ~_N_~_~_,I,~~_~ _~:l~ Phone: Attorney: _~~__~~ ~_. ---- (~T ~(;l:~ Phone: 2 3) Applicant's Status: (Check the appropriate response) (a) The applicant's name is on the deed to the property (b) The applicant is the contract purchaser of the property _.~._~ (c) Other:A~_~___~-l-~~r__ .... !__~_ _~__~¢-~~~~---~~--~~'~--~~-~)~~ 4) 5) 6) 7) If Item 3) (c) is checked, please complete the following: Owner of the property invol~,ed: __L~__~L ! ~ ~__~_~~~ ~T~_/ Owner's address' Record of Ownership: Deed Book No./Instrument No. Page ~~~ Purchaso dato: 1_,__~ ..... Legal description' _~~_O Tax Map Parcel No.' Stato oxplanation of roquostod Development Standards Vadance' (State what you want to do and elto tho section number(s) of the Carmel/Clay Zonin~ OrOinance that applies and/or creates tho neod for this roquest). .... ~g~ ~ o~ 8 - z:~h~r~d~or~BZA ~ppli~tion~ D~wlopm~nt ~t~nd~rd~ V~ri~n~ Application r~v. 0~/0~/2004 8) 9) 10) 11) 12) 13) 14) State reasons supporting the Development Standards Variance: (Additionally, complete the attached question sheet entitled "Findings of Fact-Development Standards Variance"). Presentzon~pr~ ~;~~ct cla,;sificat, on): ~_~_~[~~( _ ~"¢ ~S(¢~ Size of lo,parcel in question' ~,'Z~ ~~ ~ acres Present use of the prope~y: ~~ ~¢'I~D(~ Describe the proposed use of the properly: ~~ ¢__~~~~%__~¢~ Is the property: Owner occupied Renter occupied Other __~___~_~_.~ Are there any restrictions, laws, covenants, variances, special uses, or appeals filed in connection with this property that would relate or affect its use for the specific purpose of this application? If yes, give date and docket number, decision rendered and pertinent explanation. 15) Has work for which this application is being filed already started? If answer is yes, give details' ~O Building Permit Number: ~/_~ Builder: ~T'~~ 16) 17) If proposed appeal is granted, when will the work commence? If the proposed variance is granted, who will operate and/or use the proposed improvement for which this application has been filed? ..... NOTE: LEGAL NOTICE shall be published in the Indianapolis Star a MANDATORY twenty-five (25) days prior to the public hearing date. The certified "Proof of Publication" affidavit for the newspaper must be available for inspection the night of the hearing. LEGAL NOTICE to all adjoining and abutting property owners is also MANDATORY, two methods of notice are recommended: 1) CERTIFIED MAIL - RETURN RECEIPT REQUESTED sent to adjoining property owners. (The white receipt should be stamped by the Post Office at least twenty-five (25) days prior to the public hearing date.) 2) HAND DELIVERED to adjoining and abutting property owners (A receipt signed by the adjoining and abutting property owner acknowledging the twenty-five (25) day notice should be kept for verification that the notice was completed) Page 2 of 8 - z:\shared\forms\BZA applications\ Development Standards Variance Application rev. 01/05/2004 REALIZE THE BURDEN OF PROOF FOR ALL NOTICES IS THE RESPONSIBILITY OF THE APPLICANT. AGAIN, THIS TASK MUST BE COMPLETED AT LEAST TWENTY-FIVE (25) DAYS PRIOR TO PUBLIC HEARING DATE. The applicant understands that docket numbers will not be assigned until all supporting information has been submitted to the Department of Community Services. The applicant certifies by signing this application that he/she has been advised that all representations of the Department of Community Services are advisory only and that the applicant should rely on appropriate subdivision and zoning ordinance and/or the legal advice of his/her attorney. I, , Auditor of Hamilton County, Indiana, certify that the attached ( Please Print) affidavit is a true and complete listing of the adjoining and adjacent property owners of the property described herewith. OWNER ADDRESS THE ATTACHED LIST IS CURRENTLY UNDER REVIEW FOR CERTIFICATION BY HAMILTON COUNTY TRANSFER AND MAPPING (AUDITOR). THEIR ESTIMATED TIME FOR COMPLETION IS ON OR BEFORE 7-15-04. Auditor of Hamilton County, Indiana--Signature Date Page 3 of 8 - z:~shared~forms'SZA applfcations\ Development ~-~andard$ Varfance Ap¢ica~'on rev. AF ,~iDAVIT I, hereby swear that I em the owner/contract pumhaser of property involvecl in this application and tllat ttle foregoing signatures, statements and answers herein contained and the information herewitl~ submitted are in all respects true and correct to the best of my kno~dge and belief, I, the undersignedl authorize the applicant to act on my behalfwitfl regard to thie application and subsequent hearings and testimony, ~1)(~.. ]?..~3; ~'~.~sT mC~, .T...~C, $igned,''~ (~r~rt~y'O~-, A~o~n~, or Power of Attor;r~y) (Please Print) STATE OF INDIANA SS: County of ~"~~~ J (County in which notarization takes pl~ce) Before me the undersigned, a Notary Public (~ry Public's county Of residence)' County, State of Indiana, personally appeared (P_rroperty Owne~_~._ Attorney, or Power of At~0rney) and acknowledge the execution of the fore,Icing instrument this My commission expires: Comm. Exp. 9-03-1! CARMEL/CLAY ADVISORY BOARD OF ZONING APPEALS CARMEL, INDIANA Docket No.' Petitioner: _¢[~'~~_'~'~'~-~~ ~~- ---~~ FINDINGS OF FACT - DEVELOPMENT STANDARDS VARIANCe. 1. The approval of this variance will not be injurious to the public health, safety, morals and general welfare of the community because: 2. The use and value of the area adjacent to the prope~y included in the variance will not be affected in a substantially adverse manner because' 3. The strict application o? the terms of the Zonin~ Ordinance to the prope~y will rosult in practical difficulties in tho use of the prope~y bocause: ~CISION IT IS THEREFORE the decision of the Carmel/Clay Board of Zoning Appeals that Development Standards Variance Docket No. is granted, subject to any conditions stated in the minutes of this Board, which are incorporated horein by roforence and made a pa~ befool. Adopted this day of _, 20 ..... CHAIRPERSON, Carmel/Clay Board of Zoning Appeals SECRETARY, Carmel/Clay-Board'of Zoning Appeals ......................................... Conditions of the Board are listed on the back. (Petitioner or his representative to sign). Z:\shared\forms\BZA applications\devstandapp Revised 01/05/2004 Page 8 of 8 - z:\shared\forms\BZA applications\ Development Standards Variance Application rev. 01/05/2004 STATE OF INDIANA 'll6th STREET COMMERCIAL PROPERTIES, R. V. WELCH INVESTMENTS, INC. , Petitioner . CARMEL BOARD OF ZONING ' APPEALS, ' Respondent CAUSE NO. 2S80-579 . ORDER · · Comes now the Court and having previously retained . . juris.dic~ion of these proceedings for ~he purpose of. enforcing its' · · order of August 26, 1981, and being duly advised in. the .premises: now finds as follows: ' · 1., Tha.t: Findings numbered 1 ~.hrough 5 of the Court's · · order of AuguSt 26~ 1981~ ~hall r~ma:i.n :i.n full' force and o. 2. That to the extent that there is any referen, ce · . . . · · in' the Order ~f August 26, 1981, to Exhibit A, .that such reference · o · hereafter shall mean the amended Exhibit A d. ated the 22nd day' of · January,. 1982, at%ached heret-o and.'ma~e a part. hereof; . 3. That Finding numbered 6 of the Order of August : 26, 1981, should be vacated in part and amended in part as follows:' "6. Tha~ the Petitioner shall be entitled . . ' ' . to certain signage as 'follows: (a) One · · . · ' building, in ground d~rectory sign, per · · - tower to be located as shown on Amended . .. · Exhibit A, no~ %o exceed in exterior . dimensions the size of the presently'ex- · · . isting building directory ~ign located at . · It is understood by and between the : parties that there are presently four ... (4). Towers in existence and one (1) · . · additional proposed tower to be con- ' strutted for a total of five {5) possible · %ewers, each' of which would be entitled to · ·a tenant sign. In addition, the Court finds .' · that as to Tower 1, there are presently ' %we (2) existing signs; (one for Fidelity . · Bank and one for Dean, Witter, Reynolds · " Brokerage Firm), which were previously ' approved by variances and w~ich shall remai, n ' . · · o · · o o. as the said-tenants, Fidelity Bank and Dean, Witter,. Reynolds, occupy Tower 'It is further agreed by and between the parties that in order for there to.be .conformity and uniformity of signs in the center, the size of %he ~enan% sign for Towers 3, 4 and 5 shall not exceed an average size of Ninety (90) sq.uare fee~ for the ~hree towers, with no sign exceeding One hundred (100). square feet in any event. The size of the tenant signs on Towers 1 and 2 shall not.exceed Ninety (90) square feet in any event. · (c) Parking, directional and informationai . signage in accordance with the Carmel Sign Ordinance and industrial and commercial committee meeting' of April 1981, wherein Plaintiff represented tha~ the sign shall o. .o o be bronze with ivory lettering. . (d) Ail other signage.presehtly in existence - '. · and approved shall remain in 'place excepting the Anacomp ground sign' and the' ex~sti~g Fidelity Bank identification sign. With . · regard to the Fidelity Bank identification · sign presently in existence, it Shall be · ' removed within thirty (30] days of the grant - of approval of the new Cen'ter identification sign by the Carmel ' ' ' Plann-~ng Commission and Carmel Board of Zoning Appeals, or March .31, 1982, 'whichever is later. With regard to the Anacomp ground sign, it shall be removed on or before the 31st day of March, 1982." 4. The Court further finds that Paragraph #7 of its Order of August 26, 1981, shoUld be in pa. rt vacated and 'in part · · . · . amended as follows: · · · . · '"The Court 'finds that .Amended Exhibit A · . ' is final as to the location of proposed' Tower ' 5 including its precise ground Iocation notwithstanding issues of set-back,~-its total · ' .. dimensions and square footage,' .and parking · . · ' notwithstanding other parking requirements · · of the Carmel Ordinance, The Court further" . . ' ' f~nds ~ this regard that the Petitioner ' ' .shall .be required to submit and prosecute an · . application for architectural design and lighting approval in connection with the · · propos, ed construction of Tower 5 and shall .. be obl~gat, ed to comply with the pertinent . provisions of said Ordinance in regard to architectural design, .lighting and . landscaping only." · · · · · 5. The Court further finds that Paragraphs %1' ' · . .. and %2 of Page #3 under the provisions being ordered, adjudged and · · decreed of the August 26, 1981 order shall remain in ful-1 force o -2- /' .nd. effect. The remaining pro%isions, .~3, %4 and ~5, shall be · ,/' . amended as her:einaboveo The.Court shall, however, retain juris- o diction over these proceedings for purposes of enforcement of the. . , Order of August 26~ 1~81~ and this order, C~ts taxed tO the · · o · · · Petitione~. ALL OF WHICH IS ORDERED this - · · · 1982. ' '. · · · '. '