Laserfiche WebLink
CONCLUSIONS OF LAW <br /> THE VARIANCE MUST MEET ALL THREE OF THE FOLLOWING TESTS: <br /> A. UNNECESSARY HARDSHIP IS NOT PRESENT IN THAT A LITERAL ENFORCEMENT OF THE TERMS OF <br /> THE ZONING ORDINANCE WOULD NOT DENY THE APPLICANT ALL REASONABLE USE OF THE <br /> PROPERTY BECAUSE: <br /> APPLICANT HAS USE OF PROPERTY AND STRUCTURE NOW. <br /> B. THE HARDSHIP IS DUE TO PHYSICAL LIMITATIONS OF THE PROPERTY RATHER THAN THE <br /> CIRCUMSTANCES OF THE APPELLANT BECAUSE: <br /> SMALL LOT AND LESS THAN 40 FOOT SETBACK LIMITS BUILDING SITES. <br /> C. THE VARIANCE WILL BE CONTRARY TO THE PUBLIC INTEREST AS EXPRESSED BY THE OBJECTIVES <br /> OF THE ORDINANCE BECAUSE: <br /> AnnITION WII I NOT MEET OR.IECTIVFS OF ORnINANC'F BY Al I OWING AMITION_ <br /> TO NONCONFORMING STRUCTURE LESS THAN 40 FEET TO THE OHWM. <br /> 2 <br />