Laserfiche WebLink
t <br /> 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 EXISTING STRUCTURE. <br /> B. THE HARDSHIP IS NOT DUE TO PHYSICAL LIMITATIONS OF THE PROPERTY RATHER THAN THE <br /> CIRCUMSTANCES OF THE APPELLANT BECAUSE: <br /> APPLICANT HAD ALTERNATE BUILDING AREAS. <br /> C. THE VARIANCE WILL BE CONTRARY TO THE PUBLIC INTEREST AS EXPRESSED BY THE OBJECTIVES <br /> OF THE ORDINANCE BECAUSE: <br /> ADDITION ENROACHES ON SIDE LOT LINE NOT MEETING ORDINANCE CRITERIA <br /> 2 <br />