Orange County NC Website
Browse       Search
b. 80-foot water body buffer, when slopes are greater than 7.5%, applied to the outside of <br />the outside of the Special Flood Hazard Area (100 Year FloodZone) <br />c. 80-foot floodplain buffer, when slopes are greater than 7.5%, applied to the outside of the <br />outside of the Special Flood Hazard Area (100 Year FloodZone) <br />d. 150-foot reservoir buffer applied to the outside of the outside of the Special Flood Hazard <br />Area (100 Year FloodZone) <br /> <br /> STAFF COMMENT(S): <br />1. The application has been deemed complete. <br />2. As required under Section 2.12.6 of the UDO, staff notified all property owners within <br />1,000 feet of the subject property of the variance request. This notice also informed <br />parties of the date, time, and location of the public hearing where the request will be <br />reviewed. Copies of the letter, as well as our certification of mailing, are contained in <br />Attachment 3. <br />As of July 8, 2024, the writing of this abstract, staff has not received any <br />complaints/concerns resulting from property owners notified of the request. <br />3. Staff has determined the granting of the variance will not create issues for adjacent <br />property owners with respect to the development/re-development of their properties. <br />4. Staff determined the granting of the variance will not have a negative impact on existing <br />traffic service levels in the area or be consistent with applicable access management <br />standards. <br />5. As detailed within Section 2.10 Variances of the UDO, the Board is authorized to modify <br />or vary regulations when strict compliance with the regulation or standard would result in <br />unnecessary hardships upon the subject property. <br />6. In accordance with the provisions of Section 2.10.3 of the UDO, the Board may approve <br />a variance in cases where unnecessary hardships would result from carrying out the strict <br />letter of the UDO, when substantial evidence in the official record of the application <br />supports all of the following findings: <br />a. Unnecessary hardship would result from the strict application of the Ordinance. It <br />shall not be necessary to demonstrate that, in the absence of the variance, no <br />reasonable use can be made of the property. <br />b. The hardship results from conditions that are peculiar to the property, such as <br />location, size, or topography. Hardships resulting from personal circumstances, as <br />well as hardships resulting from conditions that are common to the neighborhood <br />or general public, may not be the basis for granting a variance. <br />c. The hardship did not result from actions taken by the applicant or the property <br />owner. The act of purchasing property with knowledge that circumstances exist <br />that may justify the granting of a variance shall not be regarded as a self-created <br />hardship. <br />d. The requested variance is consistent with the spirit, purpose, and intent of the <br />Ordinance, such that public safety is secured, and substantial justice is achieved. <br />200