Board of Adjustment

CITY OF MANCHESTER BOARD OF ADJUSTMENT MINUTES November 14, 2019 ATTENDANCE Chairman Kent Goddard – Present Member Dan Miller – Present Member Anne Altepeter – Present Member Alan Nissenbaum – Present Member J.D. Pohlman – Present CITY OFFICIALS COURT REPORTER Joseph E. Bond, City Attorney Lauren Goodman Melanie Rippetoe, Planning and Zoning Director ATTENDEES Greg Smith Suzanne Smith Samuel Powell Isabel Martinez Matthew Jensen Larry Rudar Mary Bushman CALL TO ORDER Chairman Goddard called the meeting to order at 6:30 p.m. and asked Director Rippetoe to call the roll. The record of attendance is shown above. APPROVAL OF MINUTES A motion to approve the minutes from the meeting held on October 10, 2019, as submitted, was made by Member Miller and seconded by Member Nissenbaum. The minutes were approved 5-0. OLD BUSINESS CASE #19-V-012 Director Rippetoe gave the details of the variance case: Greg and Suzanne Smith, owners, are is seeking a variance from Section 405.200.E.3, pertaining to the rear yard setback, in order to replace an existing a deck on a property with an existing single-family home located at 916 Kinsale Drive, in the R-3 Single-Family Residential Zoning District. The property fronts on Kinsale Drive to the north and abuts properties zoned R-3 Single-Family Residential to the south, west and east. Page 1 of 4 The plans show the replacement of an existing deck with a larger deck. The existing deck meets the City’s regulations, but the increased size will encroach into the required 15 foot rear yard setback. The proposed deck is shown to be 11 feet 4 inches at its closest point to the rear property line and 11 feet at its closest point to the east side yard setback. Director Rippetoe explained that the deck will require a 3 foot 8 inch variance from the 15- foot rear yard requirement in Section 405.200.E.3 of the Zoning Regulations. Testimony #1 – Greg and Suzanne Smith, owners, presented. Mr. Smith summarized the project and explained that the new deck would increase by about 3 ½ feet to increase usability. He also explained that the property was annexed in under St. Louis County’s regulations which allowed for a more shallow rear setback. He further explained that to the rear of the property is common ground and the neighbors on either side had submitted letters to the Board explaining that they have no issue with the proposed size of the deck. With all the questions satisfactorily answered the Board voted on the variance. Member Nissenbaum made a motion and was seconded by Member Altepeter to approve the variance regarding the setback from the property line. The resulting vote was 5-0 in favor of the variance. NEW BUSINESS CASE #19-V-013 Director Rippetoe gave the details of the variance case: Samuel L. Powell, owner, is seeking a variance from Section 405.210.E.3.a, pertaining to the rear yard setback, in order to replace an existing deck on a property with an existing single- family home located at 1644 Country Hill Lane, in the R-4 Residential Zoning District. The property fronts on Country Hill to the north and abuts properties zoned R-4 Single-Family Residential to the south, west and east. The plans show the replacement of an existing deck. The deck is shown to be approximately 10 feet at its closest point to the rear property line and 9 feet at its closest point to the east side yard setback. Director Rippetoe explained that the deck will require a 5-foot variance from the 15-foot rear yard requirement in Section 405.210.E.3 of the Zoning Regulations. Testimony #1 – Samuel Powell and Isabel Martinez, owners, presented. He summarized the project and explained that the deck they are replacing is the same size but was built before the property was annexed into Manchester and was built under St. Louis County’s zoning requirements. He explained that the additional 5 feet encroachment into the 15-foot setback would allow for them to have a staircase to access the rear yard. Page 2 of 4 Testimony #2 – Matthew Jensen stated that he was a neighbor to the property of the proposed variance. He explained that he had requested and been approved a variance for a similar situation with his deck previously. He said that his neighbors had no issues with his deck replacement and that he supports the applicants request for a variance. With all the questions satisfactorily answered the Board voted on the variance. Member Miller made a motion and was seconded by Member Pohlman to approve the variance regarding the setback from the property line. The resulting vote was 5-0 in favor of the variance. CASE #19-V-014 Director Rippetoe gave the details of the variance case: Larry Rudar Jr., applicant, on behalf of Mary Bushman, owner, is seeking a variance from Section 405.200.E.3.a, pertaining to the rear yard setback, in order to replace an existing deck on a property with an existing single-family home located at 1681 Country Hill Lane, in the R-3 Residential Zoning District. The property fronts on Country Hill to the west and abuts properties zoned R-3 Single-Family Residential to the south, north and east. The plans show the replacement of an existing deck. The deck is shown to be approximately 7 feet at its closest point to the rear property line and 18 feet at its closest point to the east side yard setback. Director Rippetoe explained that the deck will require an 8-foot variance from the 15-foot rear yard requirement in Section 405.200.E.3 of the Zoning Regulations. Testimony #1 – Larry Rudar, project manager for the job, presented. He explained that the previous deck was already torn down for safety issues. He elaborated that the project would include putting the new deck in the same spot with the same materials. Testimony #2 – Mary Bushman, owner, presented. Ms. Bushman explained that the property was shaped differently because it is on a cul-de-sac and the original deck was build under St. Louis County’s zoning regulations. She also explained that there is no way of exiting the lower level now that the old deck has been demolished. With all the questions satisfactorily answered the Board voted on the variance. Member Altepeter made a motion and was seconded by Member Miller to approve the variance regarding the setback from the property line. The resulting vote was 5-0 in favor of the variance. BOARD OF ADJUSTMENT COMMENTS Page 3 of 4 Director Rippetoe announced that Member J.R. Brown had resigned from the Board of Adjustment. The Board of Adjustment thanked Member Brown for his years of service on the Board of Adjustment. ADJOURNMENT Chairman Goddard adjourned the meeting at 7:12 p.m. Respectfully Submitted by: Melanie Rippetoe, Director of Planning, Zoning and Economic Development Page 4 of 4