Show All Answers
In the case of a variance consideration, it is up to the applicant to prove to the Board that strict application of the ordinance will result in an unnecessary and undue hardship.
In the case of an appeal, it is up to the applicant to provide a reasonable alternative to the administrative decision supported with facts.
- Economic disadvantage.
- Disappointment in learning that the property is not available for the intended use.
- Construction done without benefit of a permit.
- Conditions self-created by an owner or prior owner.
- Special condition affecting the landowner and not the land.
- Claiming ignorance of the zoning requirements when the land was purchased.
- Physical disability to earn a living.
- The desire for unusual architectural features.
- The expenditure of money in anticipation of being granted a variance.
After hearing the evidence, the Board or Commission will make its decision based on the following criteria:
- Whether there are special circumstances or conditions affecting the land such that strict application of the ordinance would result in an unnecessary or undue hardship, and
- That the hardship is solely due to the peculiar circumstances and is unrelated to the conduct or self-originated expectations of the property owners or buyers, and
- That the variance or appeal is necessary for the preservation and enjoyment of a substantial property right, and
- That granting the variance will not be detrimental to the health, safety, and welfare of the community or contrary to the Comprehensive Plan.
A decision to grant a variance or appeal must receive four (4) affirmative votes from the five-member Board or Commission to be approved.