On What Basis Does ZBOA Decide?

How does the Valdosta-Lowndes County Zoning Board of Appeals (ZBOA) base its decisions? Well, its members are appointed by two different local governments, of the City of Valdosta and Lowndes County, and each government provides its own criteria. Here they are:

The City of Valdosta’s Review Criteria for the Granting of Variances

Pursuant to the City’s Land Development Regulations (LDR), the Zoning Board of Appeals shall not grant a variance unless it has, in each case, made specific findings of fact based directly upon the particular evidence presented and supporting written conclusions that the variance meets each of the following criteria:
  1. Arises from a condition that is unique and peculiar to the land, structures and buildings involved.
  2. Is necessary because the particular physical surroundings, the size, shape or topographical condition of the specific property involved would result in unnecessary hardship for the owner, lessee or occupants; as distinguished from a mere inconvenience, if the provisions of Title 2 of the LDR are literally enforced.
  3. The condition requiring the requested relief is not ordinarily found in properties of the same zoning district as the subject property.
  4. The condition is created by the regulations of Title 2 of the LDR and not by an action or actions of the property owner or the applicant.
  5. The granting of the variance will not impair or injure other property or improvements in the neighborhood in which the subject property is located, nor impair an adequate supply of light or air to adjacent property, substantially increase the congestion in the public streets, increase the danger of fire, create a hazard to air navigation, endanger the public safety or substantially diminish or impair property values within the neighborhood.
  6. The variance granted is the minimum variance that will make possible the reasonable use of the land, building or structures.
  7. The requested variance will not be inconsistent with the general spirit and intent of Title 2 of the LDR or the purpose and intent of the Comprehensive Plan.
* It shall be the responsibility of the applicant seeking relief to assume the burden of proof and rebut this presumption by presenting sufficient facts and evidence to explain how the proposed appeal or variance is consistent with the general spirit and intent of the LDR and the Comprehensive Plan. It ist he duty of the Zoning Board of Appeals to review such facts and evidence in light of the intent of the LDR to balance the public health, safety and general welfare against the injury to a specific applicant that would result from the strict application of the provisions of the LDR on the applicant’s property.

** The Zoning Board of Appeals may attach reasonable conditions to a variance when necessary to prevent or minimize impacts upon property or the environment.

Lowndes County’s Review Criteria for the Granting of Variances

The ULDC provides that variances may be granted upon a finding by the ZBA that one [of] the following conditions have[sic] been met:
  1. There are extraordinary and exceptional conditions pertaining to the particular piece of property in question because of its size, shape, or topography;
  2. Such conditions are peculiar to the particular piece of property involved;
  3. The application of this ULDC to this particular piece of property would create an unnecessary hardship;
  4. Relief, if granted, will not cause substantial detriment to the public good or impair the purposes and intent of this ULDC;
  5. A literal interpretation of the provisions of this ULDC would deprive the applicant of rights commonly enjoyed by other properties of the zoning district in which the property is located;
  6. Granting the variance requestged will not confer upon the property of the applicant any special privileges that are denied to other properties of the zoning district in which the applicant’s property is located;
  7. The requested variance will be in harmony with the purpose and intent of this ULDC and will not be incompatible with the neighborhood or the general public welfare;
  8. The special circumstances are not the result of the applications of the applicant;
  9. The variance requested is the minimum variance that will make possible the legal use of the land or structure;
  10. The variance is not a request to permit a use of land or structures which are not permitted by right in the zoning district involved;
  11. The extension of said nonconforming use will not further injure a permitted use on the subject property or on an adjacent property;
  12. The design, construction, and character of the nonconformance is not suitable for uses permitted in a district in which the nonconformance is situated; and
  13. The nonconforming use is similar to the prior nonconforming use.

Discussion

The two lists of criteria cover much the same territory. For example, the city’s #5 is a more wordy version of the county’s #G plus #D, and the city’s #4 is similar to the county’s #F.

However, there is one big difference: the city requires all of theirs to be met by the applicant, while the county requires only any one of theirs.

Another common feature of both lists of criteria is that neither appears to be online in any readily accessible place. Except this blog entry.

To be fair, both governments do provide their relevant codes online:

Probably these ZBOA review criteria are in there somewhere. If somebody wants to dig them out and send me the links, I will update this blog entry to include them.

-jsq