Where the appeals hearing officer finds that an unreasonable hardship may result from strict compliance with the provisions of this title, the appeals hearing officer may approve variances to the requirements of this title so that substantial justice may be done and the public interest secured, provided that the variance shall not have the effect of nullifying in any way the intent and purpose of this title.

(Ord. 158 § 1 (part), 1998)

(Ord. No. 2012-2, § 19, 6-25-2012)

The appeals hearing officer shall not approve a variance unless, based upon the evidence presented, it finds that all of the following provisions apply:

A.

Literal enforcement of the zoning district provisions of this title would cause an unreasonable hardship for the applicant not necessary to carry out the general purpose of the zoning district or this title. The appeals hearing officer shall not render a finding of unreasonable hardship unless the applicant has demonstrated that the hardship is located on or associated with the property for which the variance is sought and is peculiar to the property rather than conditions general to the immediate area. In addition, the alleged hardship must be found to be related to size, shape or topography of the property for which the variance is sought. No finding of unreasonable hardship shall be made if the alleged hardship is self-imposed or economic;

B.

There are special circumstances attached to the property that do not generally apply to other properties in the same zoning district. No finding of special circumstances shall be made unless they relate to the hardship complained of and deprive the property of privileges available to other properties in the same zoning district;

C.

The variance is essential to the enjoyment of a substantial property right possessed by other property in the district;

D.

The granting of the variance will not substantially affect the goals, objectives, policies or standards of the Iron County general plan and will not be contrary to the public interest;

E.

The spirit of the requirements and provisions of this title will be observed and substantial justice done.

(Ord. 158 § 1 (part), 1998)

(Ord. No. 2012-2, § 20, 6-25-2012)

In approving any variance, the appeals hearing officer may require such conditions regarding the location, character and other features of the proposed structure or use as will, in its judgment, mitigate any harmful or negative effects of granting the variance and secure substantially the purposes of this title. The appeals hearing officer may require a guarantee or bond to ensure that the conditions imposed will be followed. These conditions shall be expressly set forth in the appeals hearing officer's order granting the variance. Violation of any condition or limitation on the grant of a variance shall be a violation of this title and shall constitute grounds for revocation of the variance.

(Ord. 158 § 1 (part), 1998)

(Ord. No. 2012-2, § 21, 6-25-2012)

The granting of a variance shall not authorize the establishment or extension of any use nor the development, construction, reconstruction, alteration or moving of any building or structure, but is a prerequisite to the preparation, filing, review and determination of any approval, permit or license that may be required by this title.

(Ord. 158 § 1 (part), 1998)

No variance shall be valid for a period of longer than six months unless a building permit is issued within that period and construction diligently pursued.

(Ord. 158 § 1 (part), 1998)

The appeals hearing officer and any other person or body may not grant use variances.

(Ord. 158 § 1 (part), 1998)

(Ord. No. 2012-2, § 22, 6-25-2012)

A petition for a variance may be submitted in writing, on the approved application as provided by the county, by the property owner. The application shall state fully the grounds for the variance requested and all of the facts relied upon by the owner.

(Ord. 158 § 1 (part), 1998)

Pursuant to the County Land Use Management and Development Act, Utah Code, this section is provided to enable routine and uncontested matters, as designated by the appeals hearing officer, to be determined administratively by the zoning administrator by following the provisions of this section:

A.

Designation of Routine and Uncontested Matters. The appeals hearing officer may identify matters brought before it as routine and uncontested and provide guidelines which the zoning administrator shall follow in deciding a matter identified as routine and uncontested.

B.

Procedures for Review and Determination.

1.

An application for a routine and uncontested matter shall be filed with the zoning administrator.

2.

The application must include the signatures of approval of all abutting property owners in a form provided by the zoning administrator.

3.

If the signatures of all abutting property owners cannot be obtained by the applicant, the zoning administrator shall refer the item to the appeals hearing officer for determination.

4.

If the required signatures are provided, the zoning administrator may approve, approve with conditions, deny, or refer the item to the appeals hearing officer for a determination.

5.

All decisions of the zoning administrator will be maintained on file in the office of the appeals hearing officer secretary.

C.

Appeals. Any person aggrieved by a decision of the zoning administrator in a determination of a routine and uncontested matter may appeal the decision to the appeals hearing officer pursuant to the provisions of this title.

(Ord. 158 § 1 (part), 1998)

(Ord. No. 2012-2, § 23, 6-25-2012)