pf_03377 - Laserfiche WebLink

Home

6-25 PROCEDURES ~ 6.04 only during certain times of the day or year. For example, a parking space may be allowed only during certain months.129 A temporary variance may expire not on a certain date, but when conditions change. That is, a use variance may be granted on the condition that it expire if and when the zoned area becomes suitable for its intended use.l3O A variance may also be granted to allow a commercial use in a residential zone, but on the condition that the variance expire once the district can be profitably developed for residential purposes. A temporary variance must be within the scope of the authorizing ordinance or enabling statute. Thus, if the statute does not authorize use variances, a variance cannot be granted to allow a use prohibited under existing zoning.131 A temporary variance is also invalid if it defeats the general purpose of the existing zoning ordinance.132 Finally, the temporary variance may be granted only if it satisfies the same standards required of permanent variances.133 Research Reference: For further discussion, see Rathkopf, The Law of Zoning and Planning ch. 40. ~ 6.04 Special Exception (Conditional Use) The Standard State Zoning Enabling Act empowered the board of adjustment to permit special exceptions to the controlling ordi- nance.l34 Most modern state enabling legislation explicitly grants such power.l35 Generally, under such statutory authority the local ordinance lists particular uses as special exception or conditional uses and requires a permit to be issued before property can be devoted to one of those uses. Often there is confusion over the use of the terms "special use permits," "special exception," and "conditional use." In fact, the 129 Burke v. Cohen, 13 N.Y.S.2d 984 (1939). 130 People ex reI. St. Albans-Springfield Corp. v. Connell, 257 N.Y. 73,177 N.E. 313 (1931); Barrett v. Bedell, 2.55 App. Div. 874, 7 N.Y.S.2d 987 (19.38). 131 Goerke v. Middletown Tp., 85 N.Y. Super. 519, 205 A.2d 338 (1964). 132 Beach Haven Jewish Center v. Foley, 13 N.Y.2d 973, 244 N.Y.S.2d 778, 194 N.E.2d 687 (1963), rev'd, 13 N.Y.2d 973, 194 N.E.2d 687, 244 N.Y.S.2d 778 (1963). 133 Light Co. v. Houghton, 141 Ind. App. 98, 226 N .E.2d 341 (1967). 134 Standard State Zoning Enabling Act ~ 7 (1926). 135 See, e.g., Cal. Gov't Code ~ 6.5901 (West 1983); III. Rev. Stat. ch. 24, ~ 11- 13-1.1 (West 1962 & Supp. 1984); Pa. Stat. Ann. tit. 53, ~ 10913 (West 1972). (Release #4, 3/90)