Browse
Search
12.11.24 BOA Agenda Packet
OrangeCountyNC
>
Advisory Boards and Commissions - Active
>
Orange County Board of Adjustment
>
Agendas
>
2024
>
12.11.24 BOA Agenda Packet
Metadata
Thumbnails
Annotations
Entry Properties
Last modified
12/6/2024 4:40:17 PM
Creation date
12/6/2024 4:38:06 PM
Metadata
Fields
Template:
BOCC
Date
12/11/2024
Meeting Type
Regular Meeting
Document Type
Agenda
There are no annotations on this page.
Document management portal powered by Laserfiche WebLink 9 © 1998-2015
Laserfiche.
All rights reserved.
/
124
PDF
Print
Pages to print
Enter page numbers and/or page ranges separated by commas. For example, 1,3,5-12.
After downloading, print the document using a PDF reader (e.g. Adobe Reader).
View images
View plain text
VARIANCE REQUEST <br />CASE BA24-0005 <br />4630 Old Lake Trail <br />(PIN: 9857-87-2089) <br /> <br />APPLICANT PROPOSED FINDINGS <br />ORANGE COUNTY BOARD OF ADJUSTMENT <br /> <br />As permitted under Section 2.10 Variances of the Orange County Unified Development <br />Ordinance (UDO), the Board of Adjustment is authorized to modify or vary regulations of the <br />UDO when strict compliance with the regulation or standard would result in unnecessary <br />hardships upon the subject property. <br /> <br />In accordance with the provisions of Section 2.10.4 of the UDO, the BOA may approve a <br />variance in cases where unnecessary hardships would result from carrying out the strict letter of <br />the UDO, when substantial evidence in the official record of the application supports all of the <br />following findings: <br /> <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 />Per Section 2.12 of the UDO, the Board of Adjustment shall review the evidence at a quasi- <br />judicial evidentiary hearing, allowing for the presentation of evidence and testimony by staff, the <br />applicant, and any parties who establish legal standing, and providing for questioning by the <br />Board members. <br />Per Section 2.10.9 of the UDO, the Board of Adjustment is not empowered to grant a variance <br />without an affirmative finding of fact supported by substantial evidence in the record of the <br />proceedings before the Board. The Board may impose appropriate conditions provided same <br />are reasonable related to the variance request. <br />Per Section 2.12.4 of the UDO the affirmative vote of four of the members of the Board shall be <br />necessary to effect any variation of the Ordinance. <br />In accordance with Section 2.10.9 of the UDO what follows in the Planning Director’s <br />assessment of the application and recommended disposition of the request consistent with the <br />information contained therein. <br /> <br /> <br /> <br /> <br />48
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.