Where practical difficulties, unnecessary hardships and results
inconsistent with the general purposes of this chapter may be the
result of the application of the provisions thereof, variances may
be granted as provided in this article.
Any variance granted from this chapter shall be authorized by
the Zoning Board of Appeals in accordance with the standards and procedures
set forth in this article. In granting a variance, the Zoning Board
of Appeals may impose conditions to protect the best interests of
the surrounding property, the neighborhood or the Town as a whole.
A property owner(s) or his/her agent(s) may initiate a request for a variance or special use permit by filing an application with the authorized official using forms provided for such requests by the Town. Such application shall be accompanied by all information deemed necessary by the Zoning Board of Appeals and/or the authorized official and a filing fee as required in the Town's fee schedule, established by resolution by the Town Board consistent with the provisions set forth under Article
XV of this chapter.
The Board of Appeals shall have the authority, on appeal from
the decision or determination of the Zoning Officer, or otherwise
as contemplated by this chapter, to grant use variances and area variances,
subject to and upon the terms and conditions set forth herein.
A. Use variances. No use variance shall be granted unless, in addition
to satisfying all other applicable provisions of law and this chapter,
the Board of Appeals finds that otherwise applicable zoning regulations
and restrictions have caused unnecessary hardship.
(1)
Unnecessary hardship. In order to prove such unnecessary hardship,
the applicant is required to clearly demonstrate to the Board of Appeals
that, with respect to every permitted use under the zoning regulations
for the particular district where the property is located, each and
every of the following four criteria is satisfied:
(a) The applicant cannot realize a reasonable return on the entire parcel
of property, and such lack of return is substantial as demonstrated
by competent financial evidence;
(b) The alleged hardship relating to the property in question is unique,
and does not apply to a substantial portion of the district or neighborhood
involved;
(c) The requested use variance, if granted, will not alter the essential
character of the neighborhood; and
(d) The alleged hardship has not been self-created.
(2)
Reasonable rate of return. In evaluating whether the applicant
can realize a reasonable rate of return, the Board of Appeals shall
examine whether the entire original or expanded property holdings
of the applicant are incapable of producing a reasonable rate of return
(and not just the site of the proposed project). No use variance shall
be granted unless, in addition to satisfying all other applicable
provisions of law and this chapter, the Board of Appeals finds that
the applicant has clearly demonstrated, by detailed, written "dollar
and cents" proof, the inability to obtain a reasonable return for
the entire parcel (and not just the site of the proposed project)
and for each and every permitted use in the district (including those
uses permitted by special use permit).
(3)
Unique hardship. No use variance shall be granted unless, in
addition to satisfying all other applicable provisions of law and
this chapter, the Board of Appeals finds that the entire parcel of
which the project is a part possesses unique characteristics that
distinguish it from other properties in the area.
(4)
Essential character of the neighborhood. No use variance shall
be granted unless, in addition to satisfying all other applicable
provisions of law and this chapter, the Board of Appeals finds that
the proposed project will not alter the essential character of the
neighborhood.
(a) In making its determination of whether the proposed project will
alter the essential character of the neighborhood, the Board of Appeals
shall take into account factors that are of vital importance to the
citizens of the Town, including, without limitation:
[1] The rural residential, agricultural and historic character of the
Town;
[2] Its irreplaceable recreation and tourism sites;
[3] The extent of hazard to life, limb or property that may result from
the proposed project;
[5] The social and economic impacts of traffic congestion, noise, dust,
odors, emissions, solid waste generation and other nuisances;
[6] The impact on property values; and
[7] Whether the applicant will use a style of development that will result
in degradation to the air quality, water quality or scenic and natural
resources of the Town.
(b) In order to find that the proposed project does not alter the essential
character of the neighborhood, the Board of Appeals shall interpret
the public interest in said essential character of the neighborhood
to require, at a minimum, that the project will not do any of the
following:
[1] Pose a threat to the public safety, including public health, water
quality or air quality;
[2] Cause an extraordinary public expense; or
(5)
Self-created hardship. No use variance shall be granted unless,
in addition to satisfying all other applicable provisions of law and
this chapter, the Board of Appeals finds that the alleged hardship
was not self-created. The Board of Appeals may find that the applicant
suffers from a self-created hardship in the event that the Board finds
that:
(a) The applicant’s inability to obtain a reasonable return on
the property as a whole results from having paid too much or from
a poor investment decision;
(b) The applicant previously divided the property and is left with only
a portion which suffers from some unique condition for which relief
is sought and which did not apply to the parcel as a whole; or
(c) When the applicant purchased the property, he/she knew or should
have known the property was subject to the zoning restrictions.
(6) The Board of Appeals, in the granting of use variances, shall grant
only the minimum variance that it shall deem necessary and adequate
to allow an economically beneficial use of the property, and at the
same time preserve and protect the essential character of the neighborhood
and the health, safety and welfare of the community.
(7) The Board of Appeals, in the granting of use variances, shall have
the authority to impose such reasonable conditions and restrictions
as are directly related to and incidental to the proposed project.
Such conditions shall be consistent with the spirit and intent of
this chapter, and shall be imposed for the purpose of minimizing any
adverse impact such use variance may have on the neighborhood or community.
Such conditions may include, but are not limited to, landscaping,
lighting, access and egress, signs, screening, architectural features,
location and layout of buildings, limitations upon the use or characteristics
of the use which are reasonably related to the public health, safety
and general welfare and as may be necessary to carry out the intent
of this chapter. If the applicant refuses to accept such requirements
and conditions, the use variance shall be denied.
B. Area
variances.
(1) In making a determination whether to grant, grant conditionally,
or deny an application for an area variance, the Board of Appeals
shall take into consideration the benefit to the applicant if the
area variance is granted, and balance this benefit against the detriment
to the health, safety and welfare of the neighborhood or community
by making such grant. In making such determination, the Board shall
consider each of the following factors:
(a) Whether an undesirable change will be produced in the character of
the neighborhood or a detriment to nearby properties will be created
by the granting of the area variance;
(b) Whether the benefit sought by the applicant can be achieved by some
method, feasible for the applicant to pursue, other than an area variance;
(c) Whether the requested area variance is substantial;
(d) Whether the proposed area variance will have an adverse effect or
impact on the physical or environmental conditions in the neighborhood
or district; and
(e) Whether the alleged difficulty was self-created. (In contrast to
the context of a use variance, in the context of an area variance
application, whether or not the alleged difficulty was self-created
shall be relevant to the decision of the Board of Zoning Appeals but
a finding that the difficulty was self-created shall not in and of
itself preclude the granting of the area variance.)
(2) The Board of Appeals, in the granting of area variances, shall grant
the minimum area variance that it shall deem necessary and adequate
and at the same time preserve and protect the character of the neighborhood
and the health, safety and welfare of the community.
(3) In addition to the application requirements from time to time established
pursuant to law and this chapter, applications for an area variance
shall contain a typewritten narrative explaining what the application
is for and how the project meets or exceeds all of the criteria for
an area variance.
(4) The Board of Appeals shall, in the granting of area variances, have
the authority to impose such reasonable conditions and restrictions
as are directly related to and incidental to the proposed use of the
property. Such conditions shall be consistent with the spirit and
intent of this chapter, and shall be imposed for the purpose of minimizing
any adverse impact such area variance may have on the neighborhood
or community. If the applicant refuses to accept such requirements
and conditions, the area variance shall be denied.