Also known as: unnecessary hardships
Written by attorneys · grounded in primary & secondary sources — see below
A ground for granting a zoning variance when literal enforcement of bulk or use restrictions would impose an undue burden or make compliance impossible or prohibitively expensive for a particular parcel owing to special conditions.
Select any source to read its text and confirm it supports the definition.
Usman Uddin owns an irregularly shaped parcel zoned for single-family homes with a strict frontage minimum. Strict enforcement would leave no buildable area because the lot narrows sharply at the road. The board grants the variance after finding that the shape creates unnecessary hardship unique to this parcel and that the requested relief preserves the spirit of the ordinance.
Umar Usmani seeks a variance to expand a retail building on land subject to a 35-foot height limit. Compliance would require costly excavation that eliminates any reasonable return. The board denies relief because the expense stems from the owner's chosen design rather than unique site conditions that render literal enforcement unnecessary hardship.
Uliana Ustinova owns a corner lot zoned residential where a prior owner installed a commercial garage. Strict enforcement would force removal of the structure at prohibitive cost. The board refuses the variance because the hardship is self-created and not caused by special conditions of the land itself.
Usha Upton lives in a single-family district that limits occupancy to related persons. Her extended family arrangement exceeds the cap and creates financial strain if she must relocate. The board grants a variance after determining that the ordinance imposes unnecessary hardship on this household given the unique family circumstances.
Unity Capital requests a variance to build a mixed-use project barred by current height rules. Voters later approve a referendum that effectively blocks the relief. The court upholds the process because the underlying variance standard of unnecessary hardship remains available through proper administrative channels.
Umeko Uchida applies for a variance after a steep slope prevents standard setbacks. The board interprets the ordinance to allow relief where literal compliance would destroy any reasonable use. The court affirms that the board properly applied the unnecessary hardship test to the parcel's distinctive topography.
The applicant must show that the land cannot yield a reasonable return as currently zoned, that the hardship arises from unique conditions of the parcel rather than general neighborhood conditions, and that the variance will not alter the essential character of the district or be inconsistent with the comprehensive plan.
Supporting sources
…claiming to be adversely affected by any such decision. The board is given power in specific cases of practical difficulty or unnecessary hardship to interpret the ordinance in harmony with its general purpose and intent, so that the public health, safety and general welfare may be secure and substantial justice done. Penalties are…
…to consider variances from this facially stringent single-family limit when necessary to alleviate "practical difficulties and unnecessary hardships
…related to a specific piece of the land, the literal interpretation of the applicable zoning provisions would cause "an undue or unnecessary hardship
…Variance? Chapter 28.92 of the ordinance contains these sections: “28.92.010 Variances. “When practical difficulties, unnecessary hardships
No. Mere reduction in value or increased cost of compliance is insufficient. The applicant must demonstrate that strict enforcement leaves no economically viable use or reasonable return on the property.
Supporting sources
Unnecessary hardship typically applies to use variances and requires proof that the property cannot be used reasonably under existing zoning. Practical difficulties usually govern area or dimensional variances and impose a somewhat lower threshold focused on physical constraints.
Supporting sources
No. Hardship that results from the applicant's own actions or from conditions the applicant could have avoided does not qualify. The plight must stem from special conditions inherent in the land itself.
Supporting sources
A use variance is appropriate when the ordinance already contemplates relief from strict application for a single parcel through the unnecessary hardship standard. Rezoning is legislative and changes the district rules for an area rather than granting parcel-specific relief.
Supporting sources