Board of Adjustment - Regular Meeting

I don't know.

No. Carol. Carol.

Robin is three.

Oh, okay. Just one page. He doesn't have a packet, though.

He was. Something was wrong with that phone.

Go ahead. Could I see what that looks like? Yes, thank you. Are we ready? Ready. Ready?

Welcome to the Board of Adjustment meeting for August 18th, 2026. I'll call the meeting to order.

And if we would all stand for the Pledge of Allegiance.

Mayor Moose.

Call, please. Chairperson Kloss. Here. Vice Chairperson Phillips.

Here.

Member Mooney.

Here.

Member Phillips-Pigg. Here. Alternate Member Kretz.

Here.

We have five for quorum. Thank you. City Attorney.

For the record, the proceedings in tonight's meeting will be recorded by a court reporter for future transcription if needed. All speakers will be sworn in before speaking. Please remember to speak directly into the microphone in a clear voice and only address the board at all times. No discussion between parties will be permitted as a court reporter will not be able to accurately transcribe multiple persons talking at once. The city code, all ordinances, and the notice for tonight's public hearing are present for review and made part of the official record. For each petition, the applicable application with all submitted attachments, the city is official denial of the permit request and the staff reporter also available for review and made part of the official record. Each applicant is reminded that the burden of proof of the necessity of the variance is on him or her. A variance is granted to relieve unnecessary hardship or a practical difficulty in the way of carrying out the strict letter of the municipal code as determined from the facts presented and is not to be construed to be setting a precedent for future variance requests. The board will only consider the nature and conditions of the property and whether these factors mandate a variance. The concurring vote of four members of the board shall be necessary to reverse any order requirement decision or determination of the community development director. Approval is subject to written acceptance of the terms herein by the petitioner within 30 days after receipt of the written notice of approval from the city of Fenton. Board members may ask questions to clarify the facts presented. The applicant may request a continuance at any time during the hearing prior to a call for a vote to bring in additional documentation. The board may also request a continuance to gather additional information or for further visit to the site.

Thank you. Our petitioner is not here and there are no other people.

Oh, they're on Zoom. The petitioner is on Zoom. What? Petitioner is on Zoom.

Good, so we would like you to swear to the oath of testimony. Do you swear that the information you will share here before this board tonight is the truth and the whole truth and the best of your knowledge? Yes. Thank you.

Can we just have him state his name for the record, please?

Yes, could you state your name?

We need to address Yes, my My name is Daniel state. I'm with Wallace design collective and my address here is 1703 wine dot street suite 200 Kansas City, Missouri 64108 Thank you.

And then I will take the oath as well. Amy start community development director

Again. Okay, this is for Amy. Do you swear to the information you will share here before this portion is the truth, the whole truth and to the best of your knowledge?

I do.

Thank you, Amy. Next item is old business. We have no old business. Next item is the new business, Amy.

Yeah, this is the subject location is currently operated as an outdoor recreation facility. The petition tonight is a petition by Daniel Sneed of Wallace Design Collective on behalf of Shannon and Kyle Real Estate, LLC, owners of Swing Around Fun Town for variances from the zoning code as follows. Number one, from section 415-080-E2 and section 430-020-B to encroach the required front buffer area with an off-street parking area. And number two, from section 415-080-E1 to encroach the required front and rear setbacks with existing structures related to the principal use of the property as an outdoor limited recreation facility. The property is addressed as 335 Skinker Drive and is zoned OT2 Old Town Commercial District. As stated, this is currently developed as an outdoor recreation facility known as Swing Around Fun Town. The site also includes an indoor arcade and playground building, and the petitioner would like to expand this building with an addition. And in order to meet the parking requirements for the use, the petitioner is also proposing a parking lot expansion onto the lot to the south. That's shown as track two on this plat. The owners of Swing Around Funtown also own this lot. The parking lot expansion will require a boundary adjustment plat to consolidate the two lots. So while reviewing the boundary adjustment plat, it was found that portions of the existing go-kart track, the existing go-kart maintenance building, and the mini golf course encroached the required rear and front setbacks. So before the boundary adjustment can be approved, variance from those encroachments is required. It should be noted that no changes are proposed to those existing structures as part of the overall improvements that they're planning. It's just for the existing structures to encroach. It was also noted that the parking lot will encroach the required front landscaped buffer area. But as stated in your memo, changes to the buffer area requirements for this district have been proposed and the Planning and Zoning Commission did recommend approval of those amendments. So those amendments will now go to the Board of Aldermen at their August 27th meeting for final consideration of approval. And if approved, this portion of the variance request will be moot. And that is noted in the conditions of approval that it would no longer be applicable.

Mr. Sneed, do you have something that you would like to add?

I don't believe so at this time. I can answer any questions that anybody has.

Does anybody on the board have any questions for Mr. Sneed?

Mike Mooney, I have a few questions. Regarding the new parking area, do you have a drawing that shows what it would look like if you did meet our requirements for subpacks?

I currently don't have that drawing. It would significantly reduce the parking count that they currently have.

Just a comment from me. I think the existing go-kart track in kind of the north side of the lot that's adjoins MoDOT right-of-way, and then the part of that that is basically at a dead-end street, that seems like reasonable. But I'd like to see what the parking area would look like if you met the 30-foot required setback.

Yeah, so if you see what's up on the screen currently, that shows the 30-foot setback. So if you can imagine that, drive aisle's got to push back all the way to that point. And so you're going to lose another at least... probably maybe up to 16 parking stalls additionally to push that on back. Currently, what we're showing there is pushing back the edge of the dry vial at least 10 feet from the property line. And additionally, there's some parking lot that's actually into the right-of-way, which will obviously be removed. We're adding new landscape islands that aren't currently in the parking lot, which is going to make it appear a lot better than just the sea of parking that it is currently in.

Is it possible to lose those islands that you have if you had the proper setback that would add some more spaces to your lot?

I mean, it's not ideal for traffic flow to not have islands. I mean, you would at least have to have a painted island to protect cars from turning around a parking lot.

What about extending that lot that's in track two further to the east?

So the problem with that is, according to the International Fire Code, A fire truck will only go into a dead end 150 feet. That's the maximum that they'll back straight out of. If you go farther than that, you have to provide either a turnaround or some other means of access out. And so we looked at that. And by the time you put the turnaround in there, you actually lose more stalls than you can get. Plus, we don't have a place for the trash enclosure. We also looked at potentially seeing if they could connect some outlet to the property to the south. Again, it doesn't really gain any more parking stalls by the time you make that turn for a fire truck to be able to get out of that area.

That's all the questions I have.

Anybody else have any questions?

Yeah.

Go ahead, George.

I'd like to ask how many you're putting an addition on, correct?

Yeah, that's correct.

How many parking spaces are you losing because of the addition?

Actually, you're losing 13 of those handicapped spots.

Yeah, we're moving the handicap to the south side of the building, pushing the drive aisle closer to the building already and losing those stalls along the front.

Okay, so you're going to lose 12 along the front. And then how many are you going to lose, you think, with the islands in there?

I should pull up my drawing so I can see the parking counts that we have. They're on that drawing. I don't know if you can pull that up, Amy, or not.

The expanded parking lot would provide 140 spaces.

Total of 140?

That's correct.

How many are there now?

Currently, I believe Don't know how many are currently on the lot, but the use would require 127.

Currently, there's 119.

Well, my thing is, okay, how many are you going to gain in the new area on track two? Sir?

Yeah, so, I mean, we have, like, the total provided in what you see in front of you is 140. I don't have the numbers of, like, how many are being removed from one area and how many are being added in the new area.

Yeah, my thing is I was just wondering if you would meet all the requirements without that last row there. As far as the new parking on track two. Yeah, like I said, it was what's there without those without which I'm sorry, without which parking the ones I guess it would be on the south side of track two. So, so the other building new parking spot.

Are you talking about these here? If they remove those, they would not meet the minimum parking requirements for the use. No.

Okay. Why would those need to be removed on the south side? Those are outside of the setback. It's just the ones on the west side of the property that are in question.

Yeah, the ones that would encroach would be anything within this area here. And again, if the proposed amendments are approved next week by the Board of Aldermen, this parking lot will be in compliance and there will be no issue with the parking lot at all.

Okay.

And so then the only variances that would be needed would be these existing structures.

I thought that they were going to... need permission on the other side too, but I was wrong.

Oh, and that would be if, if the amendments don't pass. Um, and since they haven't yet, that is included.

And just so you know, that one of the reasons that Amy proposed these amendments was she actually did a study of the area. Um, and there is only one property in all of those districts that actually currently use that. And it's not actually many. I'm so that is the reason the board of all the planning and zoning Commission animals recommended approval and if they go to the committee.

The reason the of the amendments are proposed.

Thank you any other questions anymore discussion.

Am I misunderstanding? They want street parking or they just want the gravel area for parking?

No, they're going to expand the parking lot.

So they will be where the gravel is now.

Correct. Yeah. That is on a separate lot. So when you combine the lots through a boundary adjustment and we have to address the variances before the boundary adjustment could be approved.

Hearing no other discussions. So Mr. Sneed, the current proposal is for section 415.080E1 for existing structures related to the principal use of the property for an outdoor limited recreation facility to encroach on the required front and rear setbacks and section 415.080E1 the section 430.020B for off-street parking to encroach the front area. Do you agree, should the board agree to approve the request of the areas, the staff suggests not less than the following conditions of approval to be considered. Number one, this approval is solely for the variance for the following sections of zoning code related to the proposed boundary adjustment for 335 Singer Lane A, section 415.080E1, for existing structures related to the principal use of the property as the outdoor limited recreation facility to encroach on the required front and rear setbacks as indicated in the site plan submitted with the application dated July 22nd. 2026 and B section 415.080E2 and section 430.020B for off-street parking A parking area to encroach the front buffer area, creating a 10-foot buffer area. Do the amendments to the buffer area requirement for the Old Town Commercial District be approved under case 2026-TXT-08. This portion of the variance request shall be null and void. Does the proposed boundary adjustment plan be approved by the City and not recorded by the St. Louis County Recorder of Deeds of Office within 90 days? disapproval of variance will be deemed null and void, compliance with all other applicable city of Fenton codes. Do you agree to these, Mr. Sneed?

Yes.

Okay. So we vote. So we would, do you do that?

Someone would need to make a motion in a second.

Mr. Kretz.

I'll make a motion that we approve it as approved.

All in favor. Roll call roll call that's OK. Member cuts. Member phillips pick I chairperson class I vice chairperson Phillips I member Mooney I motion approved.

Thank you, Mr. Sneed. We appreciate you coming, joining us to Zoom.

Thank you. Yeah, no problem. Thank you so much. Have a good night.

Our next order of business is approval of minutes. I need a motion.

A minute.

Thank you, George.

And a second. Second.

Peg will second.

OK. Vice Chairperson Phillips.

Aye. Aye.

Member Phillips-Pigg. Aye. Chairperson Kloss. Aye. Member Mooney.

Aye.

Member Krutz.

Aye.

Motion approved.

We have no other business. So we can have a motion to close the meeting. Mr. Krutz.

I'll make that motion to close the meeting.

I'll second.

George seconds the motion. All right. Member Kratz.

Aye.

Vice Chairperson Phillips. Aye. Chairperson Kloss. Aye. Member Mooney.

Aye.

Member Phillips-Pigg. Aye. We are adjourned. Thank you.