Laserfiche WebLink
3. Unnecessary hardship (To be completed by the applicant) <br /> An applicant may not claim unnecessary hardship because of conditions which are self-imposed <br /> or created by a prior owner(for example: excavating a pond on a vacant lot and then arguing that <br /> there is no suitable location for a home). Courts have also determined that economic or financial <br /> hardship does not justify a variance. When determining whether unnecessary hardship exists,the <br /> property as a whole is considered rather than a portion of the parcel. The property owner bears <br /> the burden of proving unnecessary hardship. <br /> • For an area variance, unnecessary hardship exists when compliance would unreasonably <br /> prevent the owner from using the property for a permitted purpose (leaving the property <br /> owner without any use that is permitted for the property) or would render conformity <br /> with such restrictions unnecessarily burdensome. The Board of Adjustment must <br /> consider the purpose of the zoning restriction, the zoning restriction's effect on the <br /> property, and the short-term, long-term and cumulative effects of a variance on the <br /> neighborhood, the community and on the public interests. This standard reflects the new <br /> Ziervogel and Waushara County decisions. <br /> • For a use variance unnecessary hardship exists only if the property owner shows that <br /> they would have no reasonable use of the property without a variance. <br /> Note: While Wisconsin Statutes do not specifically prohibit use variances, there area <br /> number of practical reasons whey they are not advisable: <br /> • Unnecessary hardship must be established in order to qualify for a variance. <br /> This meansthat without the variance,no reasonable use can be made of the <br /> property. <br /> • Many applications for use variances are in fact administrative appeals. Often <br /> the Board is asked to determine whether a proposed use is included within the <br /> meaning of a particular permitted or conditional use or whether it is <br /> sufficiently distinct as to exclude it from the ordinance language. Such a <br /> decision is not a use variance but an appeal of the administrator's <br /> interpretation of ordinance text. <br /> • Zoning amendments are a more comprehensive approach than use variances. <br /> Elected officials consider the lager land area to avoid piecemeal decisions that. <br /> may lead to conflict between adjacent incompatible uses or may undermine <br /> land use plan and ordinance objectives. Towns have meaningful input(veto <br /> power) for zoning amendments to general zoning ordinances. <br /> o Zoning map amendments can change zoning district boundaries so as <br /> to allow uses provided in other zoning districts. <br /> o Zoning text amendments can add(or delete)permitted or conditional <br /> uses allowed in each zoning district. <br /> Is unnecessary hardship present? <br /> /} YES. Describe. �/4"A <br /> ❑\ NO. A variance cannot be granted. <br /> Page 3 <br />