Laserfiche WebLink
MINUTES OF THE <br /> ORONO PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING <br /> Tuesday,January 19,2016 <br /> 6:30 o'clock p.m. <br /> and a lake setback variance,subject to Staff recommendations,with the flagstone wallzway being <br /> allowed as shown on the plan. VOTE: Ayes 5,Nays 1, Landgraver Opposed. <br /> Landgraver indicated he is opposed due to the flagstone walkway. <br /> NEW BUSINESS <br /> 4. #16-3798 MICHAEL AND HOLLY RUCINSKI,3188 NORTH SHORE DRIVE, <br /> VARIANCE,6:55 P.M.—7:00 P.M. <br /> Michael Rucinski, Applicant,was present. <br /> Curtis stated the applicants are planning a new home on the property and can do so without variances. In <br /> addition,they wish to replace the 422 square foot detached garage with a new structure utilizing the same <br /> footprint and location. The applicants are requesting a variance to permit changes to the volume/building <br /> envelope in order to reconstruct an existing non-conforming detached garage in the same location and <br /> footprint but with a change to the roof. The setback variance is necessary because the proposed shed roof <br /> will encroach into area not currently occupied by roof. The garage is non-conforming because it is <br /> located closer to the street than the home to be constructed. The applicants have provided an overlay to <br /> show the difference in the roof structures. <br /> Staff has provided an analysis ofthe practical difficulties within the report. Staffdoes find practical <br /> difficulties for allowing the new detached garage with a different roof configuration to be constructed in <br /> the location of the existing garage. The high part of the shed roof will be above the entrance to the <br /> garage, which is on the left. As it currently sits, if you see it from the road, it would be lower on the right <br /> side of the garage and a little bit higher on the left because of the configuration and design of the shed <br /> roof. Staff does not believe it will be visible or apparent from the road. <br /> Planning Staff recommends approval of the variance to allow reconstruction of a new detached garage <br /> streetward of the home on the property subject to the total height of the new garage not exceeding the <br /> total height of the existing garage. <br /> Thiesse asked if the variance is about the location and not size. <br /> Curtis indicated that is correct. <br /> Michael Rucinski, Applicant, stated he has nothing to add to Staff's report. <br /> Chair Leskinen opened the public hearing at 6:58 p.m. <br /> There were no public comments regarding this application. <br /> Chair Leskinen closed the public hearing at 6:58 p.m. <br /> Leskinen stated the application is fairly straight forward and that the proposed garage is being constructed <br /> within the same footprint and location as the existing garage. The only difference is the roof. <br /> Page 5 of 30 <br />