Variance Applications
- Administrative Appeal Application - To hear and decide where any person affected by a decision, order, rule, or failure to act alleges there is an error in the procedure followed by either the Code Enforcement Officer or the Planning Board, or in the interpretation of the Ordinance by the Code Enforcement Officer or the Planning Board. Interpretive and administrative procedural error may be modified or reversed by the Board of Appeals by concurring vote of at least three (3) members of the Board.
- Variance Application - To hear and decide, upon appeal, a specific case where a relaxation of the Zoning Ordinance may be effected only on the areas of height, area, structure size and setbacks. Additional conditions and safeguard may be prescribed by the board upon the landowner appropriate to the conditions of this Ordinance. Expansion otherwise prohibited shall not be allowed by variance, nor shall a variance be granted because of the presence of nonconformance in the zoning district or uses in adjoining zoning districts.
- Single Family Dwelling Setback Variance Application - The Zoning Board of Appeals may grant a variance from the setback requirements for a single family dwelling only when strict application of the zoning ordinance to the petitioner and the petitioner's property would cause undue hardship. This subsection is strictly limited to permitting a variance from a setback requirement for a single family dwelling that is the primary year-round residence of the petitioner. A variance under this subsection may not exceed twenty (20%) percent of a setback requirement and may not be granted if the variance would cause the area of the dwelling to exceed the maximum permissible lot coverage.
- Mislocated Structure Variance Application - The Board of Appeals may grant setback reduction in specific cases where existing structures are found to be in violation of the setback requirements and where the board concludes it would not be in the public interest to require that it be relocated or removed, and that allowing the structure to remain in its existing location would not be contrary to the public health, safety, or welfare. Before granting an appeal under this subsection, the board must find that the setback violation is not the result of a willful, pre-meditated act, or gross negligence on the part of the applicant, a predecessor in title to the applicant, or an agent of either of them. The structure had to be built prior to May 18, 1996 and found to be in violation of the setback requirements in effect at the time of construction.