Zoning Board of Adjustment - Regular Meeting

Soon as you're set, you you can open the meeting. Call the meeting to order. This is uh work address city of July 10th, 2025 at 8:00 p.m. or 7 p.m. Sorry. It is being recorded. So, uh roll call. Uh right, chairman. Uh just to make sure to to press the uh the speaker button. We do have one. No, Robert. Okay. Member Rob. Sure. Yeah. Here. Yeah. Here. Missy Walden here. Ryan Winsack

here. David Zobel here. Uh me. I'm here. Okay. Go ahead. I'll turn it over to you, Carla.

All right. And I also let the records note that uh uh we have our plan our city council leaison uh Kate Pashan Helman. Uh also uh our planning and zoning administrator Jack Carwell along with our senior planner Don Dodie who is online and then myself uh my name is Carlos Trejo. I'm the director of planning and community development. Bear with me one second and I'll get the We are recording this meeting and it's also being streamed and people can participate via uh uh via streaming too. There is nobody uh currently on on the streaming or online uh outside of staff members right now. But uh please note that everybody will have an opportunity to speak before the board. Uh when you do speak before the board, we ask that you state your name and address. uh ensure that mics are on especially if you're uh online. Um speakers during the public hearing session have to be sworn in and we'll swear you in as soon as you come up to the mic here at the podium. And then we try to limit all public comments uh to three minutes uh uh in there and if there's anything that you're re restating or just reinforcing just uh just to note it uh in there. The previous speaker had mentioned it on there. The meeting process is that we're going to provide a staff overview. Uh then applicants present to the board and then there's opportunity for the public to comment about the uh the presentations from staff and the applicants and the petition on hand. And then the board breaks into a discussion and then uh makes a motion. All motions have to be positive. So you're going to hear the motion to grant the variance requests that have been submitted. That does not necessarily mean it's granted. They have to vote. And since this is a a board of zoning appeals by state statutes, of the five members here, four, not a simple majority, four have to confirm or approve that that that vote uh in order for it to be come into effect.

Just again a little bit format about the uh the the the board. Uh the chair will open the public hearing that for each petition staff presents and then there's a question opportunity for questions and answers with the board. Then the applicant will present. Then there's an opportunity for questions and answers with the board and then the board can ask if there's any updates or or comments from staff and then they'll allow the audience to address the board and then the board will close the the the hearing. We actually do call these hearings uh and there they'll start their deliberation up here on the dis. you'll be more than welcome to listen in and then they'll motion for the variance request and again four of the five members have to vote to uh authorize the variance. Uh let me note about the the zoning board of adjustment. The zoning board of adjustment through our municipal code and by state statutes has the jurisdiction to hear hear uh appeals to the interpretation of the code. So if somebody disagrees with Jack, Don, or myself regarding how we're interpreting the code, they can uh challenge that interpretation and go before the zoning board of appeals. Uh also to clarify specifics on a zoning map. Every property in the city of Alvette has a designated zoning. Uh those zonings are illustrated in a map that we have available. Uh you'll see them in the uh the hallways here. They're also online. and where there's discrepancies or we can't tell, the board has jurisdiction to uh confirm or or decide what that zoning should be. Uh they also oversee if there's any public service facilities that are being built. And then they have the ability to authorize somebody to replace a a use or a structure if it's destroyed uh by by some act of god nature or so uh in there in which it would have not been permitted if it was being built today uh in there. And then finally what we call an area or use variance and that's when someone's requesting relief from the code and

rules and regulations of the municipal code that apply to all specific properties in there. And that's what you're probably going to see today. Uh the two petitions are uh are area variances. And in an area variance variance, the board must find that the property has a unique condition. It can't just be a typical ideal property and they just can't don't want to don't or can't comply with the code. Um that applying the city's standards from the municipal code will result in practical difficulties on the property. Uh and it is up to the property owner to distinguish that that it's not an inconvenience. So, it's like, well, we would like to be um right up to the street. Uh, you know, they they need to show what about what conditions of the property prohibit that as opposed to we would just like to be up by the street. Uh, that it doesn't any variance doesn't affect adjacent properties. uh that it still observes the overall spirit of the code itself and that it would not impair light and air, increase congestion, increase public danger, diminish or impair property values or impair public health, safety, comfort, morals, welfare of the city. So, that kind of gives you just a broad overview um regarding the the the role of this board and the process and how we're going to be going through. Uh we got two petitions today. Uh the first one is 733 Lantern Lane and they'll get into the specifics of that as we go into that. And then the second petition is 1016 Dolores Avenue. So chairman if there's any questions then we'll be set to proceed with your first.

I think just proceed. All right. Uh Mr. Carwell will be uh doing the presentation but beware before swearing in in uh if I can uh get a volunteer from the board uh to read the the hearing notice. just uh item AI uh the 733 Lantern Lane uh those first three paragraphs. Is it on the board on the Yes,

I'd be happy to do it. So 733 Lantern Lane uh the board of the board of adjustment of the city of Olivet, Missouri will hold a public hearing on Thursday, July 10th, 2025 at 7 p.m. The meeting will be conducted in person and virtually with the agenda and linked available at www.vetmo.com. The meeting is regarding the following petition. Um, petitioners, uh, John Methany and Sarah Olsen. Property address, 733 Lantern Lane. Property owner is Trent Silbo. And I, excuse me if I mispronounce anybody's Oh, good, good, good. Um, and uh, Cariss Cres Cresaria Mikova. I'm I apologize. Um the zoning is SR single family residential district appeal request is sideyard setback variance. Uh the petitioner seeks a variance of six feet from the side setback along the north property line to construct an addition to the existing garage. Um 13.7 ft from the south or from the side lot line. The required sideyard setback for this lot is 19.7 ft. Code section section 400.26 260 yard and setback requirements subsection B sideyard setback lots greater than 60 ft in width uh 12% of the lot width okay thank you uh staff and again chairman as part of this process anybody that speaks before the board I do have to swear them in the propos the purpose of this is that This is a semi-judicial type of procedure. Uh

so if there was any questions or or no, they're only going to be looking at information for those that were sworn in and to ensure that they were telling the truth. So uh Mr. Carwell, do you swear that the evidence you shall give to the board in this action shall be the truth, the whole truth, and nothing but the truth? So help you God. Yes. Great. Thank you, sir.

Good evening, board. Uh tonight before you is 733 Lantern Lane. Um so some unique characteristics about the lot is that the lot is um not typical with uh requirements or well it is typical with the lot width and depth but the orientation as you can see on your dis in front of you it has you know a wonky shape more outside of the regular rectangular lot that you see commonly within Alvette. Um there are unique features based on the plans and the data submitted by the owner. The lot is unique due to the shape and it's also a dual street frontage lot. So, it has two front yards. Um, which this impacts the buildable area on the property. Um, the petitioner is requesting a sideyard setback variance along the northern property line to allow for the construction of a garage addition. The garage was already previously existing. However, they want to do a garage extension. They're not going any more clo or any more closer to that property line than what was already existing. This garage that was there in place was built in 1987. That was before the setback code was adopted in 2005. So that um 1987 garage at that time the minimum or the sideyard setback was set at 5T. So they were within that setback at the time in 2005 that new code change happened which regards or which results in the garage now or you know sideyard setback being 11 oh jeez 11.97 ft. I'm sorry. Um, so we're bringing this before you today because of that garage extension towards the northwestern side. Uh, that portion there, that corner is roughly about 25 square feet that they're doing. And they're not getting any more clo they are not exceeding the rear yard setback either. So they're staying within the rear yard setback, not encroaching any more closer to the sideyard, but want to extend their garage a little more to the western side. Um, Carlos, could you go to the next slide?

So in front of you there's also the streetscape and the aerial of the property. And then the next one has the setbacks. On this one you can see where the diet are on your DIS. You can see that the blue line is the rear yard setback. The yellow is the sideyard. The red or the orange is the two front building lines. And then the portion and the green square is the area that would be where the variance is requested for. Uh you can just go to the next one. Yeah. So within the findings obviously you know single family residential legally known as lot 38 of the Hill andale subdivision legal lot of record. The existing home was built in 1955. Like I said the garage edition was constructed in 1987. Um and then within 2005 ordinance 2292 changed how the sideyard setbacks were calculated. Uh, the current homeowners are the fifth owners of the home and have purchased and occupied the home since April of 2024.

Okay, any questions? Move forward. No questions. That was Yeah. So then just my apologies at the top. That should be, you know, 733 Lantern Lane, not 10,000 Llewellen Lane. But um in front of you are the five areas that we would look at for an area variance. If the property has a unique lot condition, uh if it's practical difficulty, how it affects the adjacent properties, if it's within the spirit and intent of the code, and then observing the criteria just based off of, you know, the general community, welfare, health, public safety, and then the petitioners here as well. if there's any questions regarding the property.

Any additional comments or questions from uh staff? Okay, we we can move along then. Thank you, chairman. Next, I'll call up the petitioner, Mr. Matheni. No problem. And Mr. Mr. Matheni, if I can get you sworn in first, sir. Okay. Do you swear that tell do you swear the that the evidence you shall give to the board in this action shall be the truth, the whole truth, and nothing but the truth. So help you God. I do. All right, sir. Just state your name and address for the board.

Uh John Matheni, um the uh architect and owner of Matheni Architects. Um I also did the house at 9501 Old Bottom Road. Uh, I was here for the architect review board on that one. Hopefully that one will be done soon. Um, uh, yeah, my, uh, address is, um, sorry, what is it? 332, uh, South Kirkwood Road. Uh, Kirkwood, Missouri. Uh, it's the old, uh, Kirkwood theater building. That's where my office is. Um, so yeah, uh, to kind of reiterate, I did a number of overlays basically showing the same thing. And you can see the light orange portion is the existing garage that we're tearing down to the foundation and rebuilding so we can get more head height obviously because it's really low. You can barely get I couldn't get my truck into that garage. So, we're just trying to modernize and update the garage. But again, uh the entire addition that we're doing is paying great respect to the original house. Um it's basically an extension of the original house. I kept that design in mind. So, I think it's going to fit in real well with the uh with the lot that's there. Uh but yeah, so the light orange portion is existing. Uh it's the dark orange portion that we're asking uh to come out five more feet to again just to give a little extension to a little depth to that garage.

So the light orange at this at this juncture is the existing space, but you're going to remodel that. Correct. Give you more headroom. Yeah, it has an existing footing foundation that's going to remain in place. And the newest piece is to the the left is located. Correct. Uh dark orange would be new construction.

I have a question. So the garage space that's white um is what's the height in there? Like are we taking the height of the orange to what the white is? Yeah, we're we're basically going to build taller walls and then we're going to uh put the roof back uh that's going to going to match adhere to the existing roof existing roof slope. Yes, I'm assuming the white space is working like there's no issue with the height or anything.

Uh it's pretty low. Yeah, it's pretty low. And to be honest, the structurally speaking, it's really cut up. Uh there's been a number of you can tell there's been a number of uh modifications to uh trusses rafters over the years, but you're not going to change that. Yeah, they're going to Yeah, we are taking the roof off. They're going to demo the entire garage. The entire garage roof is being demoed. Correct. But since it's was there before, they can, you know, build on the same foundation. Okay. Right. Yeah. Uh again, the the structure of that roof is a little iffy right now. Right. Okay.

So, in this picture right there, you're just going to take that roof and what? Move it up to roughly the height of the Yeah. We're going to come up higher, adhere to that slope. Yeah. Yeah. Just come up a little bit higher. Okay. And then extend the entire length of the garage 5t to the west. Okay. What is the uh portion to the left? That's narrow strip all the way down this here. Yeah, that's new construction, too. Yeah. Yeah. Basically from this line this way. We're extending the the the garage to the west 5T. So, the entire garage will be 5 ft deeper than it is. Is that existing?

No. No. That would be new construction. all all the so it's not just the red portion is the whole uh the dark orange is what's in question but this whole line gotcha is the yeah is extension but that's within the code correct that's within the side understandably sure have you talked to the neighbor I've not okay yeah not directly Mr. Sure. If I if I could pass

in in in memory of Greg Herker, if anybody remembers when he was almost bored, uh what is your true hardship with regard to what they're asking? What's the hardship? Because that's what we have to show. The the design problem we're trying to solve and we're going to solve is that the new garage will get two, you know, modern-day cars into it. And that's a hardship. How it's a hardship that they can't get their you can't get a normal minivan in and it now.

Well, isn't it the change of the sideyard setback? The change of the sideyard setback that's, you know, causing, you know, you to build have to reduce the width so it wouldn't be a twocar garage anymore if you built it to code. other than other than the existing that's there now. Yeah. Yeah. Uh yeah. Yeah. That part would Right. So you wouldn't be able to you wouldn't be able to get two cars in there if if it was built to co meaning if that corner was removed. Right.

Um I would say no because we need that we need the overall depth of that garage. Yeah. Yeah, because if you can recall this house in that neighborhood is was built many times and it started as a onecar carport. So, originally it had no walls, you know, so it had a little more room to breathe and for bumpers to go wherever they needed to go and that sort of thing where now of course we have, you know, a garage around it. So, if I could ask one more question, you're going to put a frost wall on that new one if you get the permission to do this. Correct. Of course. Okay. Yeah, that's been designed uh structural engineer.

Isn't the created by the the nature of the lot? I'm sorry. Isn't the hardship uh actually created because of the unique nature of the uh yard? Uh the unique nature of this code, I guess. Yeah. I mean, there's plenty of there's plenty of uh yard to the west of the house. Yep. But your addition is is going to be encroaching on on the setback thing that is determined by the lot. Correct. Yeah. Yeah. Yes. So what you're your hardship then is therefore the side of the lot or the nature of the the lot.

Uh yeah with the with the 19.7 ft Gotcha. set back. Yeah. I just want to make clear. So, we determine setbacks based upon the percentage a percentage of the overall square footage of the lot and they're getting penalized for this strip of land that they can't do anything with. Yeah. So, if we I wonder if they would be in in the right if you would if we didn't have this extra strip of land here because the whole lot size would be much smaller at that point.

I don't know. I think we should ask staff for to clarify how they calculated that side you're at setback staff. Sure.

So it's also the lot is also unique just due to the condition of it having that two front yard um with it being the corner lot. So the way that we determine that is going to be based off of um the shortest front yard um is going to be opposite of that is going to be the rear. So, if you're looking at this property, they're going to have a front yard on the east side, a front yard on the south side, the rear is going to be on the western side, and then the sideyard is going to be the northern lot line. So, that's going to be determined. And then the way that we do it is we take um 12% of what that lot depth would be or the lot width, you know, determining for different setbacks, whether it's rear or whether it's side. We have different uh percentages, but they will take that 12% of that to get that 19.7. Could you point out which dimension you used to multiply against

uh on the DIS? Uh Carlos did the calculations for the rear yard there where he takes that 125 averaged it. Yep. Average those two. Okay. Yes, sir. So you didn't take in the the the thin strip in measurables at all. Okay. Okay. And it still came out to 12%. Okay. Any other questions? So, just recognizing that um the two additions, well, the one addition off the off the back side

um and then the tear down of the original garage and the rebuilding of a new garage. That those are um choices. And obviously when you do an addition or significant construction like this, you have to make choices. Did you look at other locations for the garage?

Uh, no, we did not. No, because my recommendation to do this was based on structural concerns of the existing structure that's there now. It's it's pretty dangerous to be honest. So that was that was the decision to do it the way we're doing it. But you're tearing it down. You're tearing down the dangerous structure. Correct. Yeah. Which lies in the rafters that have been all cut up through the years.

Yeah. So I think safety wise we're doing the right thing. I guess the question for me is if you are tearing down the existing garage, then on the site where the existing garage was could theoretically be anything and the garage could potentially locate at a to a different spot as well. Like the garage doesn't have to go where the current garage is. Certainly it's easier um but it doesn't have to go there. So that's why I was asking if you looked at other options that could keep you within the setback requirements for the garage and the addition.

No, basically because you know the architecture it it relates to the kitchen. Everybody's garage steps into some type of a some type of a mud room and has adjacency to the kitchen. you don't get out of your garage and step into your living room. So, uh because of that is where we're keeping it. I mean it was c for you know cost is most efficient to use what's there and you know improve upon it and it still keeps the relationship with the kitchen in the backyard as it is now. Carlos, can you pull up the drawing that has this the setbacks?

Yeah. And and you're this is not impacting any other neighbor at this point in time with this design. Correct. Correct. I mean, just looking at the the plan, it there doesn't seem to be a practical place for the garage. And I think it does keep with the nature of the existing house.

Yeah. Yeah, if you can see on the south side of the house, the 40ft building line, I mean, theoretically a garage could fit on that within that triangle, but it's going right into the living room of the house and it's totally separated from the kitchen. So, practicalitywise of, you know, groceries and all the things we we do from the garage to the kitchen won't be met. Is there any way to get back to the photographs and kind of keep this up as well? I don't know if that's possible. I've never asked such a question before. Screen. Yeah. Yeah. Sorry. Okay. Okay. Okay. All right.

Um Oh, okay. So, this is the aerial. Okay. So, you know, I don't see you impacting or becoming an inconvenience to the neighbor uh in this process. Um, I think a better way of describing what your hardship is is um uh uh is is what I I want to hear and and be comfortable with because that that's the law and that's what we're supposed to be looking at. Um and right now I can see that's not impacting somebody else. So, um

yeah, the house to the north next door neighbor that's their pool. They have a pool, then there's a, you know, there's a utility easement there, and then the garage. So, there's a nice buffer between their privacy and my client's privacy. And and you're really not moving any further north, you know, correct? To that property. Yeah. Not an inch. Have the neighbors been alerted, staff? They have. Any objections from the neighbors? It's going to be a very tasteful addition and improvement to this neighborhood.

Uh is that is what is the materials of this house? Is it um a paneling? Is it brick? What it's going to be a combination of brick and cementitious board. Uhhuh. You know, which we call hardy board. Uhhuh. You know, I think most people can relate to that. It is a cement product. Okay. Yeah. Okay. Very durable. And you have brick up on that's coming to the PCDC. But okay. Yeah. And then we're going to match the brick of the house to again keep it the, you know, respect the original design and just add to it. Yeah. The scale, the proportions. It's going to nothing's going higher. Things are just kind of going out in different directions.

Any other questions for the board members or the staff? Go ahead. I'd also say that the garage is probably in the ideal location just because if they're going to use the location where the driveway is, it works out pretty well to keep the existing driveway and then work on the garage in that location instead of having to redesign the driveway. Understand. Good point. Thanks. Any other comments from the board? Any questions at all? What is our motion? We need a motion. comments. I'm sorry. Public comments. Yeah.

Any public comments? Hearing none, we'll move along. Do we have anybody online? Chairman, the if the owner is here, I think that you should address the board and and uh and again, you you have the closer relationship with other neighbors or if you've talked to anybody adjacent to the property. Uh hello, thank you for hearing from me. My name is Trent Silva. the property owner at 733 Lantern Lane. Mr. Yeah, I forgot about this. Sorry. One second. All right. Do you swear that the evidence you shall give to the board in this action shall be the truth, the whole truth, and nothing but the truth. So, help you go out. I do. Thank you, sir.

Go ahead. Um, yeah. So, uh, kind of building off of what what John um talked to you about. So, um, the main reason for redesigning the garage is that I I have to duck to walk in and I've I've hit my head on the garage door opener metal corner at least four or five times. It hurts. Um, and uh, and currently um, neither of our vehicles really fit in the existing garage. Um, and so that's that's the main reason for wanting to rebuild that. Um, and um, kind of reiterating um, our reasoning for for locating it. uh in the existing footprint is that uh the existing driveway is in excellent condition. It looks like it was rebuilt fairly recently. I don't know the exact year, but no cracks. It's it looks brand new. Um and and proximity to the kitchen. So, as you can kind of see, there's a little stairwell down, which is currently open air. So, the garage is it's attached but detached. You have to walk outside. And so, we wanted to put in a mud room and and build that so you can enter into the kitchen. So, to kind of keep that flow. Um, and so that's sort of our our reasoning uh of designing it that way. Um, but we want to keep it um looking as close to the existing structure as possible while still raising that height um a little bit. So you'll notice um to keep the roof line slope. Um we worked with John to um design the slope to to kind of keep the same slope as it has and there's a flat section off the back um that allows us to get that extension without having to alter the the roof line. So really trying to keep everything looking um in keeping with the design. It's really why we liked the house was we really loved the the design of the house and we want to try to keep it as as close to it is as possible.

Okay. Thank you. Yeah. Any other questions for the owner? No. Thank you. I'd like to make a motion. Go ahead. I'd like to motion motion to grant a sideyard setback variance of no more than six feet along the north property line for a garage extension as illustrated in the plans dated May 27th March 27th. Thank you. Uh 27th, 2025 and May 23rd, 2025. Second. Okay. Thank you, chairman. Before going into a vote, I think there should be some discussion on for each member.

Oh, yeah. But I forgot.

I'll I'll start since I made the motion. Um I I do think um um the the property is unique with the two, you know, uh front yards that they have. It's an irregular shape. I think the practical difficulty is is a little bit more challenging, but I I do think the fact that u the garage is is not up to code, not code, but it's it's not up to standards right now that really makes it usable. And I do think they're trying to maintain the spirit of the existing building um and the actual size and appearance from the streets and things like that that if they're trying to keep with those uh those that style and standard um that that corner part is is what's making it difficult to do, you know, and I think any other change like this would really um be a big drastic change for the style of the house. Um, and I don't see any problems with the uh adjacent properties. I think they're following the spirit of the code, especially since they're not moving further north. And u I think we they are satisfying the u the spirit of the of the sideyard subex. Or member Waldman, do you have any?

Um I I I concur. Um I feel that they're not impacting the adjacent properties. It clearly is in the spirit of the code. Yes. Back in 2005, we had the 5 foot and and the measurables have changed. Um uh uh the practical difficulty of um you know, being able to do an improvement. You know, that driveway alone, if you had to tear that out, I'm sure that's at least $8,000 to $10,000. Although I never say money is the issue for me. Um, but in the spirit of the code, it doesn't impact adjacent properties. There is a bit of practical difficulty. It would be a wonderful improvement for that property that you just thank you in 2024 moved into our community and you are now wanting to invest in our community. So, I I I'm in agreement that you know uh there is good reason to provide approval of the variance.

Thank you. for uh Zo. I'm just going to say ditto. I mean, you said it's the same thing. I It was It was impactful that the this wall is already there and they're going addition additional five feet. You can't go forward. You can't go backwards without violating that sideyard uh setback. So, I don't really see how this garage can be anywhere else. River Weinsteck.

Uh thank you, chairman. Uh just real quick, I'd say that there's to me there's no impairment of uh adequate supply of light or air. Doesn't seem to be unre reasonably increasing the congestion of the streets. It doesn't seem to be incre or increasing public danger, fire or safety. Um it doesn't diminish property values. I think it's actually going to enhance property values. and uh don't see it impairing the public health, safety, comfort, morals, or welfare of the city of all that. My only other input would be to just ditto did. I agree with all your comments. Uh at this point, are we ready for a vote?

Call for the vote like we do on council or no? Okay, call for the vote. Board me. Board member Zobel. Uh, it's in the affirmative, correct? Yes. Approve. Board member Weintop, approve. Board member Waldman, yes. Approved. Board member Juel, approved. And Chairman Cisero, approved.

Okay. The motion passes unanimously. Uh so the next phase in in this petition uh would be that the the petitioner will now be um engaging with the city's planning and community design commission which is another opportunity for public comment that there are some concerns regarding overall design or architecture uh on that building. That meeting would be set probably the second Thursday in August. No, the third Thursday in August at the earliest. Right. Okay. to the next one. We can move on to the next.

We have to square you in again. Do I have to get sworn in each item? No. Okay. No, but the the hearing notice does have to get get read. Understood. Oh, I'll read the hearing notice. Yeah. Yeah. Yeah.

Yeah. um 106 Dolores Avenue. The Board of Adjustment of the City of Elevate, Missouri will hold a public hearing on Thursday, July 10th, 2025 at 7 p.m. Uh the meeting will be conducted in person and virtually with the agenda and link available at www.alvettemo.com. The meeting is regarding the following petition. Petitioners Jason and Denise uh Kustas. All right. Thank you. A property address is 116 Dolores Avenue. Property owners, the same as the petitioner. Zoning is SR single family residential district. The appeal request is a sideyard setback variance. The petitioner seeks a variance of 9.97 ft from the sideyard setback along the north property line to construct a second story addition to the existing home 2 feet from the side lot line. Uh the required sideyard setback for this lot is 11.97 ft. Code section is section 400.260 yard and setback requirements subsection B sideyard setbacks uh lots greater than 60 ft in width uh shall be 12% of the lot width.

Okay. Thank you staff.

Okay. Before you tonight is 1016 Dolores Avenue. Um the petitioner is requesting to add a second floor to the existing home. The existing home is about 2 ft from the northern side setback or sideyard setback line. Well, side property line. Um the the code requires an 11.97 ft sideyard setback from that northern property line. However, Carlos can show on the next slide um that this lot does have some unique characteristics that are different from a typical lot. It is not a rectangular or a square lot and it is um wider along the front setback as opposed to the rear setback. Thus, a wider setback is required. There is also a creek that runs diagonally along the south setback which is protected via a stream buffer of that 25 ft stream buffer. Um the owner has met with staff several times to discuss options um to expand that current residence. Due to the stream along the southern boundaries, there were limitations in the south of the buildable area. Other options were discussed with staff to limit the upper addition, adding the addition to at the midpoint of the roof, but due to these limitations, the um they've come up with this design, and the final design option of raising the existing home and building a new one was discussed, but not preferred. Um in 2022, the owner uh at the urging of staff uh widened the existing property along the street side of Dolores by trading property with a developer south of the creek. So that lot B they traded that um some of that property while trading that property it was in the city's best interest and it increased the sideyard setback along the northern property line from 5 ft to 11.97. Now the property used to be 50 ft wide thus it only had to have a 5ft setback but then the adjacent property owner used to have that used to have the full creek on their property and when the property to the south was subdivided it made sense to exchange the property grounds north of the creek to 1016 Dolores. So the petitioner agreed and by doing so their width along the street

has increased from 50 ft to 99.7 feet which is now where we get that 11.97 set back. Um given that stream along the property too that causes that 25 ft buffer setback. So ideally like a lot of their buildable area is kind of taken up by this creek and these other additional east bits. Um, so you can see that this is the design. They want to uh bring that house to a second level. Um, they're not going any closer than what was already there as well. However, they're just make adding a second story addition to get that extra space because when looking at the property and talking with staff, there were really few options of how to expand their home and they would like to stay, you know, in the existing home on their lot. Um, [Music] Other information is just, you know, general information in terms of that it's SR, single family residential. It's part of the Avette Terrace block. Um, but through lots 11 through 15, the subdivision. It's a legal lot of record. It's not conforming just due to the city's lot minimums. Um, the existing home was built in 1926 and the current owners purchased the home back in March of 20 20. And then in March of 2022, the ordinance 2742 adopted the boundary adjustment which increasing the lot width from 50 to 99.7 feet, which thus increases the width of that required sideyard setback. And then as well as the street stream information um that exists on the south side of the property grounds protected by that 25 ft stream buffer. Uh Carlos and I staff can answer any questions as well as the petitioner is present. Thank you. Any questions?

If if they didn't take the property on the other side of the creek when the last subdivision happened or whatever, would they be fine with this addition? No. No. The uh the minimum would have been uh uh 10% of the lot width as opposed to 20 12%. And the lot would have been 50 ft wide. So, it would have been a 5ft setback, but they're already 4 feet, correct? Correct. Well, it's 2 feet to the property line. Four feet from to the next house. Yeah. Yeah.

Each house is two feet from each other. The the the the request of the variance would have been a lot smaller because it would have been two feet from four feet versus two feet from the larger. There would have been. Yeah. Yeah. the the request if if the trade did not take place the request would have been for would the required bar required setback I apologize would have been 5T which there are two feet from the property line so it would have been a three-foot variance request as opposed to uh what you have a okay Carlos the original house was built in 1926 what was the sideyard setback

that I we were not a corporation Yeah,

most of us weren't even alive. Farland behind the Any other questions or comments that? Okay, let's move along with the uh dishers again. State your name and address your sworn. Do I got to be sworn in person? Yes, you do. Okay, Chris. Uh, do you swear that evidence you shall give to the board in this action shall be the truth, the whole truth, and nothing but the truth. So, help you God. I do. Thank you.

Um, hello. My name is Denise Kustos. Um, I don't have any big boards for you. Sorry. But um I so obviously this lot is um you know it's it's kind of a weird angle and uh when we first bought the house you know it it's a cute little house and um I like the old character of the houses and um but you know we we thought okay we would like to expand it and so originally to answer your question about the we acquired the side lot because I thought that we would be able to knock the house down or move it over or add to it to the side so we can make it bigger. But we weren't aware until we had the um survey done that there's also a MSD sewer line running across it. So we can't build on top of that. So by us acquiring the additional space, it didn't matter because we can't build above that five uh that sewer easement right there. So, um, you know, we did look at other options like, you know, what if we knock it down and rebuild, but because the there's the front set the front set back and the back set back and the side setbacks and the creek setbacks, they're all super close, even if we tore it down, we couldn't really shift it to meet the side code. Um, so, you know, our thought was, well, the only thing that we could do is maybe go up and leave the existing foundation and and just uh move it up. Um, the part of the the reason also is the front porch, I mean, the house was 1926, but the front porch was um built right above the basement, and there's no barrier in between. So every time it

rains, water comes in on that basement. And so um the architect, you know, that we talked to advised it's better to enclose the porch, make it part of the living space, and then go up so you can, you know, we can get a bigger house and have more square footage. But that was really the only way that we saw we could do it um is to build up versus moving. We can't really move anywhere else. Um, and then yeah, as they showed, I mean, the neighbor is pretty close, but it's 4 feet from their carport, not their house. Um, we've talked to our neighbors before. Uh, they're currently renting the property out. So, um I haven't really talked to the main owners because they had there's a language barrier, but I've spoken to their son and you know I advise them that you know we were looking into this and they haven't seemed to have any concerns with us doing this. But I don't know.

Did somebody directly contact them? So mailings and notifications for the public hearing were sent out 15 days, you know, for it to be in the county and everything. We've gotten no concerns back from any other neighbors and all the properties within 300 ft were notified. Y any questions for the owner? Could I ask a question? Two houses that are to your left are new, right? All three of There's three of them. And then there's a third house after that one. Yes, that is new. And then the house that is to your opposite side, is that was that a new or an addition on that home?

No, that one's been there since Well, I don't know how long it's been there, but it's been there since we bought ours. Okay. And you are trying to provide yourself more space, more livable space. You've you've invested in this community and uh given the fact that you've also cooperated with regard to that creek, you know, you know, thank you very much. That that was a good thing. Um, uh, what do you feel? I I mean, I kind of heard you, but how do you feel that's a hardship to you?

Well, I think the hardship is obviously that, uh, I feel like it's an old house, right? So, it was built different times, different codes. And so, um, they didn't have those setbacks, you know, where you can't build too close to your neighbors. And um and so I think that is the main setback is the is the hardship is the way the property is laid out with a wider lot in the front versus the back. And so it doesn't um it doesn't give us any options of of of where we could do with the house. And then the creek setback is the other um hardship because I can't move the creek, right? I can't control the creek and there's nothing I can do about that. I mean it's fenced up and but you know there's still that setback

and the sewer easement is also Yes. Oh and the and the MSC Yes. And I will tell you that I also contacted MSD to see if there was a way that what their process is to see if we can build over that easement. And uh um I spoke to the engineer and he said it's probably not likely. We'd have to go to their variance board to get it approved but more than likely they won't they won't allow it. Yeah. So your hardships are the creek and then stay along with 1920. Okay. Yes.

But we love the neighborhood. We love the schools. My kids love the school district, you know. So, you know, if we can improve upon it and make it nicer and um obviously by doing a second floor addition, we would probably have to remove all the siding to make it all consistent and make it, you know, look nice for the the neighborhood. But um yeah. Yeah. Any questions for the board for the owner or for the owner? It's just a weird lot. So, you know, should Sorry, I have a question. Yes.

Um Carlos, do you know for the house that's to the north of them, um would that be a 50 foot lot with the 5 foot setback? theoretically. I mean, clearly they're not

correct. To the best of my knowledge, the properties north of this are are 50 feet wide, uh, each. Uh, and the reason I would say that is we had one at our last plan commission meeting, uh, three lots to the north as there's been some recent tear downs in this neighborhood, uh, that that that lot was also 50 ft wide. So, I guess my my question is more kind of thinking into the future. Um, with that particular house to the north, should they um if they were to keep their house on that that same plane like this the same location where the edge of the carport is, just thinking into the future that it's very common in, you know, in Olivet for the tear down, rebuilds or just enlarging homes. Um, from a planning perspective, what what are the difficulties that we or the safety issues that we might not be aware of in having two houses so close together?

Is that okay? Good question. There there would be two components. uh one one uh I'll go first not my my specialty but through the building code uh when the proximity of structures is less than 10 ft uh there are standards uh that are required for the exterior of those walls uh to meet to enhance the fire rating of of the two uh that's one of the important things I I do want to note that as as that even though this is more about zoning and planning uh in there on the second aspect of it more from a planners perspective and all that it is it is a concern and that's why the setbacks are set as 5 ft. Um but you know an ordinance doesn't always work. You know it's not perfect to every shoe box um that that comes across and it it would be a concern uh and there now this is a neighborhood in transition. I think back in in my professional belief, you know, in 2004, we missed an opportunity to have this as part of a re a commercial redevelopment that took place uh next door. And what that did is that it left the city with a multitude of of these 50- foot wide lots, most of them being non-conforming, several of these being pretty close. Uh and we've seen this neighborhood transition. There are now a lot of kids. We saw that during a recent uh petition event for commercial property just to the north um and there. So we we're starting to see some reinvestment uh and that reinvestment is is kind of fragile because you're seeing some tear downs. There's a $1 million home within this neighborhood uh in there. But then we we were made we were introduced to several residents in there that uh found this area very affordable and like that like the area. It's uh community oriented and uh and the school

district uh and there so it's a tough one. We looked at multiple ways to try to look at this addition uh even looking going there was some opportunities to go forward. Uh but what that would do is it would break the streetscape a bit. And uh to me that I think as a planner was a little bit more important in terms of what you see in between the properties. I think it'll be important in terms of how that side elevation will look even though that's not a row of the board but I think they they took that opportunity to make sure that that those windows weren't oversized uh along there. So if this house ever came in for the same petition or appeal, which they could to say, "Hey, we just want to go up. You know, the roof's already there. We just want to go up." and they have that possibility is to make sure that you know that that those two walls are are reasonable. Not the ideal situation

discussion part is that really relevant for our discussion.

I think it it does impact what could happen. I mean, you know, there you know, while there's other attributes on the south of this property that are unique. This is this the lot next door is a 50- foot wide lot too uh in there. And you know any justification could be used um though this doesn't serve as a precedence but they could use the same uh information that was provided or was that discussed or looked in into in in the minutes and all that and I think it's it's a good point uh in there and you know there's no ideal situation. However, the footprints are there already. I think, you know, the the key here is, and it's not on the the board's purview, but looking at the design to make sure that those two, if something like that were to happen, those two could still be compatible. Uh, is it ideal? I mean, would you want to walk in between a 4ft gap with, you know, 20, you know, at least 16 ft at a minimum of height in there? Um, but that is an, you know, this is one of our more urban neighborhoods and that it's kind of the character that kind of gives. I don't think it would alter the character of the neighborhood um significantly. Um, but it wouldn't be the same either. And I I I know I'm kind of, you know, wafering on on that, but I don't I I think the way this street is set up, um I don't think it would call out between the the, you know, the 4ft gaps between these two new homes that have, you know, the the, you know, uh 10 foot gaps respectively. But given that they're mass, it looks like they're narrowed in

uh in there. Yeah. Did you have a It's a tough one. It it is a tough lot and I don't mean to advocate for the petitioner but we looked at all various ways of what could be done. Uh and for me it's easy. It's not my money you know and to told them of all these things that they could look at to do uh and uh and then waited to to see what design they they decided to come back with. Isn't that just really point out the uniqueness of this particular there there was a yeah there was there there wasn't many wishful opportunities I could afford to to them to take advantage of. That's what I meant by relevance here earlier. I I don't think there's a an option here. The houses are what they are.

But then again, that that is a policy that the council's created. And it may be a situation that they're looking at that, hey, you're not going to build your addition. So, you're you're going to go look for another house. So, I can consolidate this lot and then build a bigger house, you know, in there. And again, sometimes those are, you know, back in 2000, the city's policy was to have these lots consolidate. Yeah. Before it backed off and changed that policy uh to to recognize and acknowledge lots that were 50 ft uh or greater.

Right. One other challenge with the houses being so close is while it's under construction is totally probably going to need permission from the the other neighbors to put ladders up against, you know, to put the siding up, you know, things like that. So, makes good neighbors if works together.

Um, like I said, I mean, we've discussed it with their son and he said he spoke to their parents. Um uh I don't they don't really speak English wells but so I don't know but he told me that uh the son told me that you know his parents are fine with I mean they don't live there um they it doesn't bother them if we because I you know we've talked about the side and um I didn't you know install a French drain to kind of just to get all the water issues that the property also has and so you know they were okay with me doing that. Um, you know, the other thing is I know that the law the the street is a little narrow, but being that now we own the all the other side next to the creek, we have enough space so the dumpsters can go in there and so it's not nothing's going to be blocking the street or anything like that. It would just be like you said the inconvenience of letting our neighbors know, hey, we're going to be working on this side.

Any other questions for the owner? Any questions out to the obvious resistance from the staff? I do believe someone on the board asked a question about the property not directly to the north but right the one after that. Um that one is actually going to be was before the commission that was 1022 Dolores. So that is going to be a tear down new build. So just to answer that question there's a new home going there now. Were there any other comments online? Uh, no, sir. Miss Dodie. No, sir.

Any other comments or questions of the board? I think we close it to have discussion like we did before. Well, let's close the meeting then and we'll discuss it. You're free to stay.

I'd be glad to start off. I think if there's any uh property that really shows unique issues, practical difficulties um and and meeting the spirit of the code and you know complying with us, I I think this is one that uh definitely it's it's I think it's easy to uh uh to address each each item that we need to be thinking about. So I could go through each one individually, but I think we've all we've we've done that already. So any comments from board member Waldman?

Um, can I say 1920? Um, you know, I don't think there's too many homes. I know I've walked a lot and sure council member Pashan has too. I, you know, at this point I do not know of many homes that are like University City, you know, where you have only that five foot and a little bit of a sidewalk in between each home. I think that is a rarity and I'm going to say that is unique. Okay. Also, the uh practical difficulties I see are uh that you worked well with regard to the creek that's there that helped alleviate something else um uh for a better outcome uh for the city and and for your area and the fact that there's an embassy sewer there and if we can't get what we've needed for 20 years down on Donnie Lane, I know you're not going to get what you need, you know, where you're at um on uh on Dellores. So um you know I believe you're attempting to deal with the spirit of the code by just building up um um you the design and where the windows will go that'll be the PCDC. Um uh you are really attempting the spirit of the code and and trying to be a good uh um uh steward of the property that you've purchased and that you've invested in. So, you know, I clearly I I can see that there is a hardship here um for this situation.

Great. We're Yeah, those setback lines you see how they just they pin that house in. It's just I don't know where what else you can go. Um I'm the only bother I have is just you know having two houses right next to each other and and um you know but I don't think that it would impair the light supply and some of the other considerations here. So uh I'm I'm satisfied with this member

I was going to say what board member Zel said. So I don't have anything to say. Yeah. Sure. I don't have anything further to add either. Can we have a motion? Be glad to make a motion. I'll make a motion. Motion to grant a sideyard setback variance of no more than 9.97 ft along the north property line for a second level addition to the existing home as illustrated in the plans dated April 24th, 2025. Thank you. Second. Call a roll.

Chairman, on the motion made by Commissioner, excuse me, board member Jurgel, seconded by board member Zobel. Uh, board member Weintock, affirmative. Board member Waldman, affirmative. Board member Zobel, affirmative. Board member Jurgel, affirmative. And Chairman Cisero, affirmative.

The motion does pass unanimously. Therefore, the variance has been granted. Uh the next step in this process is to proceed through the city's planning and community design commission. Uh again, that would the the earliest meeting that that could be set up would be the second the third Thursday in August and we'll coordinate with you for that. Okay. Guess do we need a motion for a German? Do we have anything else on our agenda typically for the board? Because it's I I don't have anything else. But after you adjourn if there's any questions and we'll keep it up. I'll be glad to answer.

Some moved. All right. Everyone in favor? I I passes unanimous to close the meeting. Yeah. We'd like to hear any updates you've got.

Uh sure. We'll uh let's see. Uh we'll note uh of course April elections we had quite a bit of changes in the council uh and there we have three council members that are been either appointed or elected uh for 2025 uh Mike Salon I apologize if I got the the last name uh Miss Pan Helman and then uh Brian Lewis our new council members and of course the Missy Waldman who had been a council member for 25 years uh decided not to run uh in there and that that uh that changed. current mayor is um Sydney Clark who's been a council member I think uh two terms or so and then uh uh Maxine Wild who's also been a council member for at least three terms uh and there uh regarding development activity uh of course you see the construction up there at I70 that is what we call lot three of the auto crossing development that is going to have uh two eating establishments one called Panera, excuse me, the Paris Baguette, which is kind of like a Panera. Uh, and then the Brass Tap, uh, which is kind of like a Buffalo Wild Wings, uh, establishment. And then they'll have three interior tenants. Um, I believe the Tropical Smoothie and Verizon are two of the three. I think the other third is still open. uh in there. If you go across the street from there behind Chevys, you'll see uh the 205 unit Irvington Place Apartments under construction. Uh they're moving pretty briskly. Uh we anticipate that they will be ready for occupancies probably uh that late winter uh early 2026. Uh and there um across the street here uh they're building the 35 town town houses uh in there. Uh we've been meeting with the

developer on a weekly basis now get trying to get things uh moving along. Uh but there's a lot of complexities and utilities and things that take long that come into place, but we should start seeing some framing. You know, I keep saying in in another two weeks in another two weeks, but I think they're they're about there. And he's already had several units sold, which is a good positive. So, I think he's committed uh well, I don't want to say he wasn't, but uh the committed to moving briskly on that project, though. Um, and there we have a couple of vacancies that we're working on. Uh, you know, some businesses that had left. One was, uh, uh, Enterprise Fleet Management, the vacated 9315 Olive Boulevard, which is kind of tucked behind, um, uh, that CVS uh, and uh, I think it's called a Intel or Intelgraded uh, in there. Uh, they be that space. It's one of the It is the largest private property that we have in all of that is now being occupied by a subsidiary of Emerson. Uh so they're moving about 200 people 250 people from their Ferguson campus over to here. So that's a a good one for us. It's a good user uh in there. But right adjacent to that on Olive is a former US Bank call center that goes all the way back to Mark Twain Bank. and that property is now vacant and the bank uh is uh entertaining u u proposals for for for that site uh in there and that's a big site and it's on Olive so it's an important site uh in there um we met today with the owners of ABC trading uh they uh they've been at the corner of Olive Executive and Olive for I think she said 1993 or or so and uh she's going to be retiring and has had the property up for sale uh for at least the past 3 to four

years. Uh but finally they're looking to slowly uh go through a you know selling their items within the next two months and I think she said uh her goal is to be out of there by November 1st. Um and there and she is entertaining um different uh offers for the for the reuse of the property grounds. Um, further down, uh, Jack's been working with a, uh, a restaurant interest, uh, right there where the, uh, retail space is for easy storage, uh, on that base next to, uh, the the ice cream shop. I think it'll be a really good complement between the two. Um, in there, uh, Party City, uh, of course, they had declared bankruptcy and then closed down the facility here. Uh, we've been talking with the, uh, the brokers, uh, and the oper the property managers on that. They do have somebody they of interest, but they've been talking since April and still waiting for them to submit something, but it would be a good retailer and something that would be great for the city. Uh, if it proceeds uh in the last I checked up with them was a couple of weeks ago, they were still negotiating on their contract u in there. And then the Enchanted Brides, uh, sad story, I think, uh, they they they've been there for quite some time. I started in 2002 and I know they were in operations in there, but um the owner also is is retiring. Uh it's a really tough site. It's tough site. It's really slender. Uh and then the building's kind of been added on in pieces and it's not in that great a shape um anymore. But uh they'll they'll be closing that well the facility is already closed uh in there. Uh and then tomorrow I'll be talking with somebody that has interest uh in trying to redevelop that side ground too. So I hope that goes well. Um, laundry.

It was a laundromat. That building was originally a laundromat. Yes. Yes. Yes. Yeah.

So, I think that kind of covers the major developments along the quarter. If I missed something, let me know. Uh, uh, in there, the council just adopted its uh, next fiscal year budget. Um, in there and challenges that the city faces similar to what the state has been talking about is a drop in in revenues, specifically sales tax. Um and that uh and while you saw your property tax bills go up, that doesn't necessarily mean that what you're paying goes up uh in there because of the Hancock rule. It's limited to the the rate of inflation. Uh all of that gets that 13% of your property tax bill uh in there. So uh retail sales taxes is important. Uh but it's not our sole source of revenue.

Okay. Thank you. Helpful. Any others? Pardon? If I could bring something to your your attention, Carlos, Jack, and Council Member Pashan. Um, the the the guys doing the apartment complexes off a price, they're blocking the road. They're blocking the sidewalks. They're not they're not placing their vehicles where they should be. It's impacting people's ability to walk around in that community. it's impacting the ability for vehicles to get around and uh uh

we'll we'll take a look at that. That inquiry was brought up and we we did some investigation. Uh at no point has the police or fire found that access on this on those roads has been inaccessible. Uh so that that that is not set. Now, Spire has been doing some excavations uh in there and state utilities are are really hard to kind of regulate, but when they are out, they do have a person in there. So, we're cognizant of that. And then we had a conversation because we know that the school and buses are are coming thing. The issue regarding the sidewalk and only we know this because public works is right next door. Last week, they had to esavate the entrance uh in there. So, it's been one week that that sidewalk has had to be closed in there. Now, there may have been vehicles unauthorized that have blocked some of that sidewalk and we will follow up on those. But the the sidewalk itself itself in in coordination with the GRG, we need to get the apron and the GRG trail to cross there, but that was interrupted last week. So, I've instructed them to close the sidewalk at CVS and alert people that they need to go either to Deilman Industrial or Hilltop, which is very common in the construction practice uh in there. We did that with uh with uh uh Olive Crossing, Firestone, and then our neighbors did it several times uh down here uh with their development in U City. Um the other thing on that is that um so we want to get that sidewalk and then just to note there never have been sidewalks on Alice. So you know the intent of if you were using the street for for well the street would be the only means of pedestrian movement along there uh in there. But uh we are fortunate our public works is right there and they oversee all that construction uh in there. we did have a meeting to talk and make make sure that they're aware um and they're and what

we're hearing from from our residents and them to be a little bit more courteous about that. Uh but in terms of violations of blocking the street or anything that impacted safety, uh we we we were not able to find something. Well, thank you. All right, I guess we're journ now. Thank you.