Laserfiche WebLink
Agenda Item 4 <br /> Date Application Received: 12/11/15 O <br /> Date Application Considered as Complete: 12/11/15 � �O <br /> 60-Day Review Period Expires: 02/09/16 <br /> a � <br /> 6 � <br /> F L� <br /> To: Chair Leskinen and Planning Commission Members lqkf5H0�� <br /> Jessica Loftus, City Administrator <br /> From: Melanie Curtis, Planner h'�GG <br /> Date: 14 January 2016 <br /> Subject: #16-3798, Michael & Holly Rucinski, 3188 North Shore Drive <br /> Variance <br /> Public Hearing <br /> Application Summary: The applicant is requesting a variance to permit changes to the <br /> volume/building envelope in order to reconstruct an existing non-conforming detached garage <br /> in the same location and footprint but with a change to the roof. <br /> Staff Recommendation: Planning Department Staff recommends approval. <br /> List of Exhibits <br /> Exhibit A. Application <br /> Exhibit e. Practical Difficulties Documentation Form <br /> Exhibit C. Existing Survey <br /> Exhibit D. Proposed Survey <br /> Exhibit E. Proposed Garage Plans and Elevations <br /> Exhibit F. Code Sections <br /> Exhibit G. Proposed House Plans <br /> Exhibit H. Applicant Photos <br /> Exhibit 1. Submitted Hardcover Calculations <br /> ExhibitJ. New/Old Garage Overlay <br /> Exhibit K. Aerial &Street view Photos <br /> Exhibit L. Property Owners List <br /> Exhibit M. Plat Map <br /> Background <br /> The applicants plan to construct a new home on the property. They wish to replace the existing <br /> 422 square foot detached garage in the same footprint and location. The variance is necessary <br /> because the proposed shed roof(to match the design of the home)will encroach into area not <br /> currently occupied by roof. Roof. The garage is non-conforming because it is located closer to <br /> the street than the home (to be constructed). <br />