unnecessary hardship

As considered, sufficient to establish basis for granting zoning variance, is shown by establishing that: physical characteristics of property are such that it could not be used for any permitted purpose; property could be so used only at prohibitive expense; or that characteristics of area are such that property has no value or any distress value for any permitted purpose. Eighteenth & Rittenhouse Associates v. Zoning Bd. of Adjustment, 26 Pa.Cmwlth. 554, 364 A.2d 973, 975.

Within zoning ordinance so as to authorize granting of variance on such ground if land cannot yield a reasonable return if used only for a purpose allowed in zone, such exists where the plight of owner is due to unique circumstances not to general conditions in the neighborhood and use to be authorized will not alter essential character of the locality. Calcagno v. Town Board of Town of Webster, 265 App.Div. 687, 41 N.Y.S.2d 140, 142.

It has also been said that test whether terms of zoning ordinance impose an "unnecessary hardship" depends on whether use restriction is so unreasonable as to constitute an arbitrary interference with basic right of private property. Scaduto v. Town of Bloomfield, 127 N.J.L. 1, 20 A.2d 649, 650.

See also variance (zoning)