The Floodplain Administrator shall request comments on variance
applications from MDE (NFIP State Coordinator) and shall provide such
comments to the Board of Appeals. In considering variance applications,
the Board of Appeals shall consider and make findings of fact on all
evaluations, all relevant factors, requirements specified in other
sections of these regulations, and the following factors:
A. The danger that materials may be swept onto other lands
to the injury of others.
B. The danger to life and property due to flooding or erosion
damage.
C. The susceptibility of the proposed development and its
contents (if applicable) to flood damage and the effect of such damage
on the individual owner.
D. The importance of the services to the community provided
by the proposed development.
E. The availability of alternative locations for the proposed
use which are not subject to, or are subject to less, flooding or
erosion damage.
F. The necessity to the facility of a waterfront location,
where applicable, or if the facility is a functionally dependent use.
G. The compatibility of the proposed use with existing and
anticipated development.
H. The relationship of the proposed use to the Comprehensive
Plan and hazard mitigation plan for that area.
I. The safety of access to the property in times of flood
for passenger vehicles and emergency vehicles.
J. The expected heights, velocity, duration, rate of rise,
and sediment transport of the floodwaters and the effects of wave
action, if applicable, expected at the site.
K. The costs of providing government services during and after
flood conditions, including maintenance and repair of public utilities
and facilities such as sewer, gas, electrical, and water systems,
and streets and bridges.
L. The comments provided by MDE (NFIP State Coordinator).
The Board of Appeals shall make an affirmative decision on a
variance request only upon:
A. A showing of good and sufficient cause. Good and sufficient
cause deals solely with the physical characteristics of the property
and cannot be based on the character of the improvement, the personal
characteristics of the owner/inhabitants, or local provision that
regulate standards other than health and public safety.
B. A determination that failure to grant the variance would
result in exceptional hardship due to the physical characteristics
of the property. Increased cost or inconvenience of meeting the requirements
of these regulations does not constitute an exceptional hardship to
the applicant.
C. A determination that the granting of a variance for development
within any designated floodway, or flood hazard area with base flood
elevations but no designated floodway, will not result in increased
flood heights beyond that which is allowed in these regulations.
D. A determination that the granting of a variance will not
result in additional threats to public safety, extraordinary public
expense, nuisances, fraud or victimization of the public, or conflict
with existing local laws.
E. A determination that the building, structure or other development
is protected by methods to minimize flood damages.
F. A determination that the variance is the minimum necessary
to afford relief, considering the flood hazard.