Suppose that the city of Anytown has a zoning ordinance that strictly requires homes to be set back at least 25 feet from all public roadways.

Suppose that the city of Anytown has a zoning ordinance that strictly requires homes to be set back at least 25 feet from all public roadways. Your client owns a parcel of land with a steep ravine and creek running through the back third of the lot. Because of these natural features, your client would be unable to build a home on this lot that was large enough to satisfy local building code requirements and yet also met the setback requirement without filling in the ravine and somehow redirecting the creek—an action that would be prohibited under state law. Your client thinks she could build a home that was set back only 20 feet from the road without having to disturb the creek. However, she knows that such a home would be forbidden under the setback requirements set forth in the city’s zoning ordinance. 

What course of action would you recommend for your client in this situation, and why? What would the client need to be able to prove to succeed under such a strategy?