Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Get email alerts on the Mobile Home Variance topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
Lancaster County BZA denies variance to allow hookup for 1992 manufactured home
Summary
The Lancaster County Board of Zoning Appeals denied a request to allow utility connection for a 1992 manufactured home on a parcel listed as 2086 Santa Barbara Drive after deliberations over UDO age limits and whether the property meets variance criteria.
The Lancaster County Board of Zoning Appeals on March 4 denied a variance request to allow connection of utilities to a manufactured home built in 1992 located at an address listed as 2086 Santa Barbara Drive.
The request, brought by Erica Simpson on behalf of Worldwide Premier Investments LLC, sought relief from the Unified Development Ordinance (UDO) age limit in section 5.2.0.7(b), which prohibits permitting manufactured homes built earlier than 30 years from the current year. April Williams, planning director for Lancaster County, told the board, “This is a variance from the UDO section 5.2 0.7 point b which is the age limit to allow permitting for a mobile home.”
Simpson said the mobile home was moved to the property in 2020 and has remained unconnected to utilities since then. She told the board she is working with a general contractor and that “we feel as though it's very easy to make this in compliance with code.” Staff inspected the property and reported that repairs appear feasible but that the home is now outside the ordinance’s 30-year age threshold; the title and model year on file are 1992.
Board members discussed four statutory variance criteria individually. After debate and separate votes on those criteria, the board read the counts and determined there was not unanimous agreement on all required findings and treated the application as denied. The chair announced the variance was denied.
The board’s decision means the applicant cannot receive the county permit to connect utilities for the existing manufactured home unless the applicant pursues a different remedy, such as replacing the unit with one meeting the UDO age requirement or pursuing other lawful avenues. County staff noted that any certificate of occupancy would still require code compliance inspections and any environmental or septic approvals from state agencies before occupancy.
The denial was the final action recorded on the application at this meeting.
