A variance grants qualifying relief from a zoning requirement; rezoning changes the zoning classification; a legal nonconforming use was lawful before the rules changed but no longer conforms. Ask whether the scenario concerns an exception, a new classification or the history of an existing use.

Worked comparison: An unusually shaped residential parcel cannot accommodate the proposed house while meeting the usual side setback. Its owner seeks limited dimensional relief. That is a variance question, not automatic permission. Seminole County's variance guidance illustrates property-related hardship standards and distinguishes dimensional relief from permission for a prohibited use.

Next door, an owner wants a new retail building where the present district does not allow that use. An application to change the property's zoning classification is a rezoning question. See the county's separate rezoning explanation. Approval is not implied by submitting the application.

Across the street, a lawful repair shop existed before an ordinance changed the district to residential. Its continued operation may qualify as a legal nonconforming use. Sanford's nonconformity provisions illustrate that lawful origin matters and that continuation may have limits.

Pitfall: Old does not necessarily mean lawful. An illegal use does not become legally nonconforming simply through age. Nor does nonconforming status promise unrestricted enlargement, replacement or restart after a long closure. Those questions depend on the applicable local rules and facts.

For an exam, build a three-part timeline: what is permitted now, what the owner proposes, and what was lawfully established before. For a real property, obtain the local zoning determination instead of relying on a neighboring city's example.

Review the Chapter 20 guide and Chapter 20 practice questions.