Laserfiche WebLink
CONCLUSIONS OF LAW <br /> THE VARIANCE MUST MEET ALL THREE OF THE FOLLOWING TESTS: <br /> A. UNNECESSARY HARDSHIP IS PRESENT IN THAT A LITERAL ENFORCEMENT OF THE TERMS OF THE <br /> ZONING ORDINANCE WOULD UNREASONABLY PREVENT OWNER FROM USING THE PROPERTY FOR A <br /> PERMITTED USE BECAUSE: <br /> EXISTING HOME WAS DESTROYED BY FIRE. EXISTING LOT HAS LIMITED AREA <br /> WITH NEW REQUIRED SANITARY AND ROAD SETBACKS. <br /> B. THE HARDSHIP IS DUE TO PHYSICAL LIMITATIONS OF THE PROPERTY RATHER THAN THE <br /> CIRCUMSTANCES OF THE APPELLANT BECAUSE: <br /> LOT HAS LIMITED DEPTH FROM LAKE TO ROAD. <br /> C. THE VARIANCE WILL NOT BE CONTRARY TO THE PUBLIC INTEREST AS EXPRESSED BY THE <br /> OBJECTIVES OF THE ORDINANCE BECAUSE: <br /> THE HOME WILL BE MOVED BACK 15 FEET FROM THE LAKE AND WILL BE LIMITED <br /> TO ONE STORY LESS THE 1500 SQUARE FEET <br />