How to write a practical difficulty statement

Ohio has two tests. A use variance (doing something the district doesn’t allow at all) requires “unnecessary hardship.” An area variance (a number: height, size, setback) requires only “practical difficulties.” The Ohio Supreme Court drew that line in Kisil v. Sandusky (1984), 12 Ohio St.3d 30, and repeated it two years later:

The standard for granting a variance which relates solely to area requirements should be a lesser standard than that applied to variances which relate to use. An application for an area variance need not establish unnecessary hardship; it is sufficient that the application show practical difficulties.Duncan v. Village of Middlefield (1986), 23 Ohio St.3d 83, syllabus

A property owner encounters “practical difficulties” whenever an area zoning requirement (e.g., frontage, setback, height) unreasonably deprives him of a permitted use of his property.Duncan, syllabus

So the question is not “do you suffer.” It is “is this rule, on this lot, for this project, reasonable.” Your statement answers that.

The court said the factors “to be considered and weighed” by a board “include, but are not limited to” these seven. The court’s words are in bold; the plain reading follows each one. Source: the opinion.

1. whether the property in question will yield a reasonable return or whether there can be any beneficial use of the property without the variance;

   Can you still use your property normally without it? For a fence or shed the honest answer is usually yes, so don't lean on this one.

2. whether the variance is substantial;

   How far past the number are you? Two feet on one stretch of fence is small. Doubling a garage is not.

3. whether the essential character of the neighborhood would be substantially altered or whether adjoining properties would suffer a substantial detriment as a result of the variance;

   Would it change how the street looks or hurt the people next door? Photos and neighbor letters answer this.

4. whether the variance would adversely affect the delivery of governmental services (e.g., water, sewer, garbage);

   Does it block a utility, a drain, a fire lane, a plow route? Usually no; say so.

5. whether the property owner purchased the property with knowledge of the zoning restriction;

   Did you know the rule when you bought? Most people didn't, but the board weighs it either way.

6. whether the property owner's predicament feasibly can be obviated through some method other than a variance;

   Is there another way? A different spot, a shorter fence, a smaller building. If you tried it, say what happened.

7. whether the spirit and intent behind the zoning requirement would be observed and substantial justice done by granting the variance.

   Why does the rule exist, and does your project still respect that reason? This is the one to end on.

No single factor decides it. The board weighs them together. A statement that touches each one in a sentence or two, honestly, is doing the board’s work for it.

Check your city’s code too

Many Ohio cities wrote the Duncan factors into their own ordinances and added local ones. Brecksville lists nine (Section 1197.11 of its zoning code): the seven above plus whether there are “site conditions, such as narrowness, shallowness, or topography, unique to the property,” and whether the property sits near a nonconforming use or abuts a less restrictive district. If your code has its own list, write to that list, in its order.

Half a page to a page, in this order:

1. The ask, with the section number. “A variance from Section 1185.03(a) to allow a 6-foot fence where 4 feet is permitted, along the rear lot line only.”
2. The difficulty, in one sentence. What you cannot do if the rule is applied as written.
3. Why this lot. Slope, a ravine, where the utilities come in, a house that already sits inside the setback, wildlife paths. Things about the ground, not about your wishes.
4. What you tried. The other spots, the shorter height, the smaller footprint, and why each one failed.
5. Why the ask is the minimum. Be specific about what stays within code.
6. Neighbors. Who you talked to and what they said. Attach letters.
7. The spirit of the rule. Why the rule exists and how your project still honors it.
8. The attachments. Site plan, photos, and the documents behind every claim.

What doesn’t work

Reading a year of one board’s minutes, the arguments that lost were the ones about the owner rather than the lot: “I want privacy,” or “this material is cheaper.” In July 2026 a Brecksville fence company argued privacy, pets and that white vinyl “is cheaper and lasts longer”; a neighbor objected in writing; the vote was 1–5. Ohio boards are not asked whether you would like the thing. They are asked whether the rule is unreasonable on your lot.

• BZA26-000014

  July 13, 2026 · 10905 Greenhaven Pkwy

  6' solid vinyl fence. Code says 4', and no solid vinyl.

  A neighbor objected in writing.

  Read the minutes

  denied1–5

This one is built from a real case. In June 2026 a fence company asked the Brecksville board for a 6-foot fence on 480 feet of a yard at 9555 Reserve Run, citing the owner’s dog and wildlife. A member asked whether a vet or trainer had put anything in writing; the answer was that trainers had advised it verbally. Denied, 2–3. A month later the owner came back himself, with a narrower ask and documents. Approved, 4–2. Below is how we would have written his statement. It is our example, written from the minutes; it is not his actual filing.

From the July 13, 2026 minutes: “Board members complimented the thoroughness of the application materials, photographs, supporting documentation, and overall presentation, noting that the information provided made the request easy to evaluate.”

• BZA26-000001

  June 8, 2026 · 9555 Reserve Run

  6' fence, 480 feet of it. Code says 4'.

  The fence company presented. The homeowner came back himself in July.

  Read the minutes

  denied2–3

• BZA26-000011

  July 13, 2026 · 9555 Reserve Run

  6' fence on part of the yard. Code says 4'.

  Second try, narrower ask, with photos and documentation the board called thorough. Denied a month earlier.

  Read the minutes

  approved4–2