Gerry Prinster, Chairman; David Bauer, Vice-Chairman; Kevin DeSain, Secretary; Catherine Dreher, and Vicki LaRose

Transcription

1 MINUTES OF REGULAR MEETING ST. CHARLES COUNTY BOARD OF ZONING ADJUSTMENT DATE: October 5, 2017 TIME: PLACE: 7:00 P.M. COUNTY ADMINISTRATIVE BUILDING 201 NORTH SECOND ST. FIRST FLOOR MULTI-PURPOSE ROOM 116 ST. CHARLES, MO MEMBERS PRESENT: MEMBERS ABSENT: STAFF PRESENT: Gerry Prinster, Chairman; David Bauer, Vice-Chairman; Kevin DeSain, Secretary; Catherine Dreher, and Vicki LaRose Robert Sundermeyer, Alternate Board Member; and Robert Boschert; Alternate Board Member Ellie Marr, Senior Planner; Mark Price, County Planner; and Annisa Kumerow, Recording Secretary SPEAKERS: App. VAR17-05: Jeffrey Duecker, Owner, 48 Piney Ridge Court App. VAR17-07: Randy Burks, Owner, 3188 Willow Bend Drive 1. CALL TO ORDER Board of Zoning Adjustment Chairman Gerry Prinster called the meeting to order at 7:00 PM. Following the Pledge of Allegiance Chairman Prinster welcomed the audience; explained the functions of the Board of Zoning Adjustment and the format of the meeting; and explained the procedures for speakers. Chairman Prinster also introduced The Unified Development Ordinance (UDO) and Zoning Maps of St. Charles County into the record. 2. CHANGES TO THE AGENDA NONE Page 1 Board of Zoning Adjustment Meeting, October 5, 2017

2 3. PUBLIC HEARINGS I DWYER ROAD - VARIANCE REQUEST Application: Owner/Applicant: Variance Requested: Zoning: Area: Location: Council District: 6 Account No.: A000 VAR17-09 Jessica Hugo Section B.2 of the Ordinances of St. Charles County (OSCCMo) - A Variance from one foot above base flood level to adjacent ground level for an accessory structure, in accordance with Section OSCCMo A/FF, Agricultural District, with Floodway Fringe Overlay District 5.10 acres On the north side of Dwyer Road, approximately 3,400 feet north of Church Road Drive Secretary Kevin DeSain read the variance request aloud. Chairman Gerry Prinster then opened the public hearing and asked the owner or owner s representative to approach the podium to explain the request. Jessica Hugo, property owner, stated that at the end of April or near the beginning of May, the garage on her property was ripped off of its foundation by a tornado causing approximately $8,000 in damages. Ms. Hugo stated that she is requesting a variance so that she may rebuild the garage at the existing grade and store livestock, food, and equipment within the garage. Mark Price, County Planner, stated that the applicant seeks to construct 24 x 36 foot structure. Previously, the applicant had a 20 x 30 foot structure. The structure was demolished by the tornado. In this particular location, the ground level is at approximately 436 feet of elevation, and in order to be one foot out of the flood, the structure needs to be elevated at 472 feet, so it requires approximately a 6 foot pad for elevation. Mr. Price noted that the Board should consider Section of the UDO, which basically states the federal ordinances that the applicant will have to meet as a condition for approval. Furthermore, staff recommends that two of the accessory structure s walls be vented to allow water to flow within the building, in case of a flood. There is a standard of 1 inch per square foot of venting for the building. The building would also need to be wet floodproofed up to the six foot level, which essentially means that the building should be made out of water resistant materials that won t be damaged by a flood. Additionally, any mechanical or electrical equipment must be elevated out of the flood, above the six foot mark. David Bauer, Vice-Chairman, asked what type of materials the building would be constructed with. Jessica Hugo responded that the building would be made out of steel. Page 2 Board of Zoning Adjustment Meeting, October 5, 2017

3 Kevin DeSain asked if the applicant would be willing to place venting windows in the structure. Jessica Hugo responded yes. Gerry Prinster inquired about a picture where someone is shown leaning against a truck with storms approaching in the background. Jessica Hugo responded that the photograph is of her daughter, taken when they first moved in. She noted that storms often seem to strike the property. There being no further discussion, Mr. Prinster asked for a motion to approve this appeal. Dave Bauer made a motion to approve VAR17-09 with the following conditions, as recommended by staff. 1. Two of the accessory structure s walls are vented within one foot above adjacent grade with an area of at least one square inch per square foot of enclosure to reduce the likelihood of flood damage by hydrostatic pressure. 2. The portion of the accessory structure below the base flood elevation must be wet-floodproofed. 3. Any related electrical equipment located below the base flood elevation must be dry-floodproofed. The motion was seconded by Catherine Dreher. The vote on the application was as follows: Vicki LaRose - Yes Dave Bauer - Yes Kevin DeSain - Yes Gerry Prinster - Yes Catherine Dreher - Yes Application VAR17-09 was APPROVED, subject to the conditions recommended by the Planning and Zoning staff. The vote count was 5 Yeas, 0 Nays, and 0 Abstentions. II. 11 AUTUMN LEAVES DRIVE - VARIANCE REQUEST Application: VAR17-10 Owner/Applicant: Randall and Deborah Hellebusch Variance Requested: Section E. 2 and Section D. 2. of the Ordinances of St. Charles County (OSCCMo) - To vary the required 50 foot minimum front yard setback to 25 feet for the lot; and to modify the 50 foot minimum front yard setback for accessory structures to 25 feet for an accessory structure Zoning: A, Agricultural District Page 3 Board of Zoning Adjustment Meeting, October 5, 2017

4 Area: Location: Council District: 2 Account No.: A acres On the northern corner of Falling Leaf Drive and Autumn Leaves Drive Vice-Chairman Dave Bauer read the variance request aloud. Chairman Gerry Prinster then opened the public hearing and asked the owner or owner s representative to approach the podium to explain the request. Randy Hellebusch, Owner, stated that he is seeking a variance because he is trying to construct a detached 24 x32 car garage to the south of his existing home and would tie in to the existing driveway. Mr. Hellebusch stated that the variance is necessary because his property slopes significantly. There is a creek located near his property, and when it rains it floods significantly. Mr. Hellebusch stated that with the way the road turns, the proposed location is the only practical location for the garage. He stated that the garage will have brick on it and will match the house aesthetically, and noted that the proposed location is the only location that will increase the property value of the surrounding homeowners. Chairman Gerry Prinster asked if staff had any questions or comments. Mark Price, County Planner, stated that there are a few issues with the proposed location. The proposed location is a steep hill, and staff is concerned about the slope of the property and the size of the foundation walls needed to support the structure. There is a more ideal location on the north side of the property that is more flat, and the garage could be placed there and meet all ordinances. Additionally, the building could potentially block site views for cars coming up the street. Randy Hellebusch stated that his property is located in a private subdivision, where there is only one way in and out. There is little traffic. As far as visibility, Mr. Hellebusch disagrees with staff on that point. He added that placing the garage on the north side of his property is not feasible for him, because the distance between the proposed structure and his home is not practical. He stated that he is trying to tie the garage in aesthetically with his home, and if he placed the garage on the north side of the property, there would be no reason to use brick and beautify the property. He stated that all his neighbors are in support of the proposed structure and location. Vice-Chairman Dave Bauer asked what the structure would be used for. Randy Hellebusch responded that it would be used for cars, tractors, and lawnmowers. Chairman Gerry Prinster stated that the Board of Zoning adjustment must adhere to four strict requirements, and stated that the variance request does not comply with three of the four requirements. He stated that if the application is denied by the Board of Zoning adjustment, the applicant may appeal to the County Council within 14 working days of the decision. Randy Hellebusch asked for the Board to inform him of the three requirements. Page 4 Board of Zoning Adjustment Meeting, October 5, 2017

5 Chairman Gerry Prinster read the requirements from Section (C) of the Unified Development Ordinance. He stated that the first requirement is as follows: is the variance requested due to unique circumstances inherent to the specific piece of property and not to personal considerations of the property owner? The property does slope from the street frontages down into the center of the property and from the northern end of the property to the southern end of the property. The home is constructed on a flat area of the lot. This area extends from the southern edge of the parking area to the northern end of the property. The area where the garage is proposed is to the south of the parking area and on a sloped portion of the lot. If the garage were to be built here, there could potentially be tall foundation walls required to support the structure. However, the proposed garage could be built elsewhere. On the property, on the northern side of the home, a flat area large enough to fit the structure does exist. Randy Hellebusch responded that only one foundation wall at the back of the structure will be of a significant height. He stated that at the portion of the structure that will require the least elevation, he will need at most 6 to 10 inches of elevation. Chairman Gerry Prinster stated that the second requirement is as follows: Is the variance needed as the result of an affirmative act of the property owner that could have been avoided through a different course of action? He stated that the property owner could select a location on the northern side of the home and not require a variance. There would be more cost associated with a new driveway, however, that cost could be offset by not having to erect tall foundation walls, not removing as many trees, and not having to remove the landscaping that exists where the garage is proposed. Randy Hellebusch stated that the structure would not look right on the north side of the property. In the proposed location, however, it will blend in aesthetically with the home and surrounding properties. Chairman Gerry Prinster stated that the third requirement is as follows: Would the approval of this variance merely grant a special benefit to the property beyond what is enjoyed by other properties regulated by the same set of zoning regulations? He stated that the Planning and Zoning staff believes that a potential other building location on the lot would comply with the Ordinances of St. Charles County Missouri. Granting this variance would be granting a special benefit to the property beyond what is enjoyed by other properties regulated by the same set of zoning regulations. Chairman Gerry Prinster asked if there was any further discussion or questions for the applicants. Vicki LaRose asked the applicant why there was so much distance between the home and the proposed structure on the site plan. Randy Hellebusch stated that the distance is 71 feet. He stated that water runoff from the front of his home and off the street come to a certain point, and that is why he is trying to keep the structure out of the natural flow of the water. He stated that even if he shortened the distance, to comply with setback requirements would not be feasible. Mr. Hellebusch stated that his neighbor across the street is supportive of the proposed location, because placing the structure elsewhere would impede his views. Page 5 Board of Zoning Adjustment Meeting, October 5, 2017

6 Gerry Prinster closed the public discussion and called for a motion to approve the application. Vice-Chairman Dave Bauer made a motion to approve VAR Catherine Dreher seconded the motion. The vote on the application was as follows: Vicki LaRose - No Dave Bauer - No Kevin DeSain - No Gerry Prinster - Yes Catherine Dreher - Yes Application VAR17-10 was DENIED. The vote count was 2 Yeas, 3 Nays, and 0 Abstentions. 4. APPROVAL OF THE MINUTES FROM THE JULY 6, 2017 REGULAR MEETING Chairman Prinster asked the Board members for a motion to approve the minutes from the July 6, 2017 regular meeting. Vice-Chairman, Dave Bauer, made the motion to approve and the motion was seconded by Catherine Dreher. The minutes were approved by unanimous voice acclamation. 5. OTHER BUSINESS NONE ADJOURNMENT OF MEETING Chairman Gerry Prinster called for a motion to adjourn the meeting. The motion was made by Dave Bauer and was seconded by Catherine Dreher. The motion to adjourn was approved by unanimous voice acclamation, and the meeting adjourned at 7:30 p.m. Respectfully submitted by: Gerry Prinster, Chairman Date Page 6 Board of Zoning Adjustment Meeting, October 5, 2017