Laserfiche WebLink
.' •� . <br /> � - <br /> Clt� o� ORONO <br /> • � RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL <br /> � NO. 2289 <br /> • <br /> ' • - • • <br /> 3. Applicant's property has a width of approximately 192' and widens <br /> to approximately 265' further to the rear. This leaves an area <br /> ranging from 42' to 115' in width on the property in which a horse <br /> barn could legally be located without the need for variances. <br /> 4. The allowable Iocation for a horse barn without variances is <br /> somewhat limited by the Iocation of the existing septic system on the <br /> property. However, the location of that septic system does not <br /> preclude the construction of such a barn in a Iocation that does not <br /> require variances. <br /> 5. The Council finds that the location of existing horse corral <br /> fences does not constitute a valid hardship that would justify the <br /> requested variance. <br /> 6. The Council finds that the increase in distance between the house <br /> and the barn, that would be necessitated by placing the barn in a <br /> location that does not need variances, is not a valid hardship. <br /> • 7. The Council finds that the fact that a barn located where no <br /> variances are necessary would be screened by existing vegetation from <br /> the house does not consitute a valid hardship. <br /> 8. The Council finds that the existence of installed underground <br /> electrical wiring to the general location of the requested proposed <br /> barn site, does not constitute a valid hardship. <br /> 9. The Council finds that the fact that the existing house is very <br /> close to a side lot line is not justification for construction of a <br /> barn directly behind the house and close to the lot line. <br /> 10. The neighboring affected property owner has gone on record as <br /> opposing the variance request, based on the potential of increased <br /> run-off to his property and based on the visual and physical proximity <br /> of the barn and associated horse traffic near his property line. <br /> 11. The applicant has not prbposed an alternative barn location which <br /> would lessen the degree of variance requested or which would have' Iess, <br /> of an impact on the neighborhood. ' <br /> 12. The property in question can be put to reasonable use under the <br /> conditions allowed by the zoning code. <br /> 13. The granting of the requested variance will serve merely as. a <br /> convenience to the applicant and is not necessary to alleviate <br /> � demonstrable hardship or difficulty. <br /> Page 2 of 3 <br />