Board of Adjustment

BOARD OF ADJUSTMENT AGENDA April 11, 2022 BOARD OF ADJUSTMENT: Richard Alferman, Chair Latonya Grotegeers, Vice-Chair Maureen Rogers-Bouxsein, Secretary Marita Malone James Ethington Don Garrison Jr., Alternate Brian Andrzejewski, Alternate Bob Kneemiller, Alternate In accordance with Chapter 400 (Zoning Code) of the Code of Ordinances of the City of St. Charles, Missouri, notice is hereby given that the Board of Adjustment will conduct a public hearing on Monday, April 11, 2022, at 6:00 p.m. on the fourth floor of City Hall in the City Council Chambers, 200 North Second Street in St. Charles, Missouri for the purpose of giving interested parties and citizens an opportunity to be heard on the following matters: Call to Order and Call the Roll The Pledge of Allegiance 1. Case No. BOA-2022-03. Address: 902 Apricot Drive (Maris Home Improvement). A request to decrease the rear yard setback for an open, unenclosed deck from fifteen (15) feet to seven (7) feet as regulated in Section 400.620(A)(4) of the St. Charles Code of Ordinances. The property is zoned R-1E Single- Family Residential District (Ward 1). 2. Case No. BOA-2022-04. Address: 228 Morgan Street (Alex & Skye Reichert). Two requests: 1) a request to decrease the minimum setback of a shelter/pen specifically for rabbits from any property line from fifty (50) feet to one and one-half (1.5) feet as regulated in Section 400.400(B)(1) of the City of St. Charles Code of Ordinances, and 2) a request to decrease the minimum setback of a run/enclosure specifically for hens from any property line from ten (10) feet to one and one-half (1.5) feet as regulated in Section 400.400(C)(5)(a) of the City of St. Charles Code of Ordinances. The property is zoned R-1E/FPD Single-Family Residential District within the Frenchtown Preservation District (Ward 1). Board of Adjustment Agenda 1 3. Administrative Item. Election of Chair, Vice-Chair, and Secretary for 2022. This item was tabled at the March 7, 2022 meeting. Adjournment The next meeting of the Board of Adjustment is scheduled for Monday, May 9, 2022 on the fourth floor of City Hall in the City Council Chambers, 200 N. Second Street, St. Charles, MO 63301. The City of St. Charles offers all interested citizens the opportunity to attend public meetings. If you wish to attend this public meeting and require an accommodation due to a disability, please contact the Office of the City Clerk to coordinate an accommodation at least two (2) business days in advance of the scheduled meeting at 636-949-3282 or 636-949-3289 (TTY – for the hearing impaired). The City of St. Charles, Missouri fully complies with Title VI of the Civil Rights Act of 1964 and related statutes and regulations in all programs and activities. For more information or to obtain a Title VI Complaint Form, please call the City Clerk’s Office at 636-949-3282 or visit City Hall located at 200 North Second Street, St. Charles, Missouri, 63301. INCLEMENT WEATHER: In case of inclement weather, please call 636-949-3222 after 4:00 p.m. on the day of the meeting to be informed of the status of the meeting. POSTED ON 4/7/2022@ 3:00pm by CT Board of Adjustment Agenda 2  NOTICE OF PUBLIC HEARING In accordance with Chapter 400 (Zoning Code) of the Code of Ordinances of the City of St. Charles, Missouri, notice is hereby given that the Board of Adjustment will conduct a public hearing on Monday, April 11, 2022, at 6:00 p.m. on the fourth floor of City Hall in the City Council Chambers, 200 North Second Street in St. Charles, Missouri for the purpose of giving interested parties and citizens an opportunity to be heard on the following matters: 1. Case No. BOA-2022-03. Address: 902 Apricot Drive (Maris Home Improvement). A request to decrease the rear yard setback for an open, unenclosed deck from fifteen (15) feet to seven (7) feet as regulated in Section 400.620(A)(4) of the St. Charles Code of Ordinances. The property is zoned R-1E Single-Family Residential District (Ward 1). 2. Case No. BOA-2022-04. Address: 228 Morgan Street (Alex & Skye Reichert). Two requests: 1) a request to decrease the minimum setback of a shelter/pen specifically for rabbits from any property line from fifty (50) feet to one and one- half (1.5) feet as regulated in Section 400.400(B)(1) of the City of St. Charles Code of Ordinances, and 2) a request to decrease the minimum setback of a run/enclosure specifically for hens from any property line from ten (10) feet to one and one-half (1.5) feet as regulated in Section 400.400(C)(5)(a) of the City of St. Charles Code of Ordinances. The property is zoned R-1E/FPD Single-Family Residential District within the Frenchtown Preservation District (Ward 1). All applications, maps and plans for the above items as received from the applicants are available in the offices of the Department of Community Development, 200 North Second Street, Suite 303, St. Charles, Missouri, during regular business hours of 8:00 a.m. to 5:00 p.m. Monday through Friday. If you have any questions regarding the above items scheduled for public hearing, please contact the Department of Community Development at (636) 949-3222. The City of St. Charles offers all interested citizens the opportunity to attend public meetings and comment on public matters. If you wish to attend this public meeting and require an accommodation due to a disability, please contact the Office of the City Clerk to coordinate an accommodation at least two (2) business days in advance of the scheduled meeting at 636-949-3282 or 636-949-3289 (TTY – for the hearing impaired). The City of St. Charles, Missouri fully complies with Title VI of the Civil Rights Act of 1964 and related statutes and regulations in all programs and activities. For more information or to obtain a Title VI Complaint Form, please call the City Clerk’s Office at 636-949-3282 or visit City Hall located at 200 North Second Street, St. Charles, Missouri, 63301.  AGENDA ITEM #1 STAFF REPORT BOARD OF ADJUSTMENT CASE NO. BOA-2022-03 902 APRICOT DRIVE APRIL 11, 2022 BY LARA BERRY GENERAL INFORMATION Applicant: Maris Home Improvements 208 Chesterfield Industrial Blvd Chesterfield, MO 63005 Owner: Steven & Debra Gillham 902 Apricot Drive Saint Charles, MO 63301 Location: 902 Apricot Drive Ward 1 Request: A request to decrease the rear yard setback for an open, unenclosed deck from fifteen (15) feet to seven (7) feet as regulated in Section 400.620(A)(4) of the St. Charles Code of Ordinances. Zoning: R-1E Single-Family Residential District Adjacent Zoning & Land Use: Direction Zoning Land Use North R1E (County) Single Family Residence South R1E (County) Single Family Residence East R1E (County) Single Family Residence West R-1E (City) Single Family Residence ANALYSIS The subject property is approximately 11,760 square feet and is zoned R-1E Single-Family Residential District. According to County Assessor records, the subject property was built in 1998 while the property was in Unincorporated St. Charles County. Subsequently, the property was annexed into the City in March of 1999 as is. The applicant is requesting approval of a varied rear yard setback for a deck attached to the rear of the dwelling. Typically, a lot in the R-1E District requires a twenty-five (25) foot rear yard setback; however, the Code also allows an exception for residential decks to encroach a required rear yard setback by no more than ten (10) feet. When determining a rear yard setback specifically for a Case No. BOA-2022-03 Page 2 902 Apricot Drive deck at the subject property, the Code requires a minimum setback of 15 feet. The subject property has a home that is placed 17 feet from the rear property line which does not meet the City R-1E District standards. As indicated earlier, this home was constructed under the rules and regulations of Unincorporated St. Charles County, which permitted the home to be 17 feet from the rear property line. The proposed deck is 10’ x 16’, if constructed, would be seven (7) feet from the rear property line, thus requiring a variance. A Building Permit is currently under review for this project and is pending approval of this variance request from the Board of Adjustment. Since the existing residence is not compliant with City zoning standards, and the City annexed the property as is, the existing home is considered a Legal Non-Conforming Structure (Grandfathered). Per City Legal Non-Conforming Structure standards, any existing building or structure devoted to a use permitted in the district in which such building or structure is situated, but failing to comply with the yard or building setback line requirements of any district, may be enlarged, extended, reconstructed, or structurally altered in any manner which does not further encroach upon the required open yard space or building setback line not complied with. The addition as proposed would encroach into the rear yard, further reducing the existing non- compliant setback. Therefore, a variance is necessary to further encroach upon this rear area. Applicable Regulations: The applicant is requesting a variance from the City’s Zoning ordinance, as follows:  §400.620(A)(4): Open, unenclosed porches, decks or platforms, including those not covered by a roof or canopy and which do not extend above the level of the first floor of the building, may extend or project into any required front yard setback no more than six (6) feet. Open, unenclosed decks or porches or decks or porches covered by a roof or canopy and/or enclosed by screening may encroach into the required rear yard setback no more than ten (10) feet. Deck enclosures that consist of any material other than screening, such as glass or solid walls or that consist of less than ninety percent (90%) screening, are considered room additions and must meet the required rear yard setback for the zoning district in which they are located. Criteria for Granting a Variance: A variance is intended to provide relief to property owners who, due to their unique circumstances, would face practical difficulties or unnecessary hardship from the strict application of the zoning ordinance. However, while a variance can provide relief to a property owner and still protect the zoning ordinance from invalidation, variances are typically granted because of conditions or circumstances existing that are peculiar to the property or lot of record and not the result of the actions of the applicant. Pursuant to §400.1080, the power to hear and decide variance cases regarding the requirements of Chapter 400 (Zoning Code) lies with the Board of Adjustment. The Board’s decision is considered a quasi-judicial act; thus, the board shall consider the evidence submitted by staff, as well as the evidence presented by the applicant and make a finding with regard to the request for a variance. The decision of the Board is subject to appeal to the Circuit Court of St. Charles County. In addition to the criteria established §400.1090(E & F), G of the same section provides additional Case No. BOA-2022-03 Page 3 902 Apricot Drive policies that should be considered before a ruling on a variance. Therein, it establishes that (1) financial disadvantages to the property owner shall not constitute conclusive proof of unnecessary hardships within the purpose of zoning; (2) the Board does not possess the power to grant a zoning variance permitting the use of land or buildings that is not included as a use in the district involved; (3) in granting a variance, the Board may attach thereto any conditions and safeguards it deems necessary or desirable in furthering the purposes of the chapter; and (4) the Board shall study the effects of such proposed buildings or use upon the character of the neighborhood, traffic conditions, public utilities and other matters pertaining to the general welfare. According to §400.1090 (F), the following factors are relevant to determining whether strict application of the regulation would result in practical difficulties or unnecessary hardship: (1) Size of the variance. The relationship of the requested variance to the requirements of the applicable zoning regulations, i.e. a five foot variance is substantial if the required setback is seven feet; it is not as substantial if the required setback is 100 feet. The request to reduce the rear yard setback for a deck should be considered substantial since it decreases the setback from 15 feet to 7 feet, or a 53% reduction. (2) Effect on government services. The effect of the requested variance on population, density and available government facilities such as water, fire and police protection, and sanitary services. No negative effects on government services have been documented via staff review. (3) Effect on neighbors or neighborhood. The effect of the requested variance on adjoining properties or on the character of the neighborhood generally. Staff does not anticipate any negative impacts on neighboring properties or the neighborhood. The home on the adjacent property sharing this rear property line is situated so that the side of the attached garage faces the rear of the subject property. Additionally, the applicant noted in their application that the adjacent neighbor is “ok with the new deck being installed”. At the time of this report, staff has not received any correspondence in opposition of this request. (4) Alternatives to a variance. The existence of a feasible alternative to the applicant’s proposal or other means of alleviating the hardship. The applicant has not provided an alternative to this request. The home does not currently have egress from the existing door on the main level to the rear of the property (see Figure 3, Page 5). There does not appear to be a feasible alternative to this variance other than not having an egress deck/stairs at all or constructing a much smaller deck, however due to the non-forming structure, even a smaller structure would require a variance. Per the Building Code, egress stairs are not required for this existing structure. However, if something as simple as an egress staircase would be proposed, the Building Code would require the stairs to be attached to a minimum of a 3’ x 3’ landing. In this case, the applicant would still need a variance although it would be less substantial. (5) Justice. The granting of a variance is a just action. The cause of the difficulty or the hardship should be unique to the land rather than to the applicant and should be related to the topography, configuration of the lot, or other characteristics of the land. The applicant Case No. BOA-2022-03 Page 4 902 Apricot Drive or economic conditions should not be the cause of the difficulty. The applicant recognizes in their submittal that the subject property is a legal non-conforming structure as it currently does not meet the City’s standards for property within the R-1E Single-Family Residential District. The configuration of the house on this property also does not allow for much of a rear yard. Given the configuration of the lot and there are no objections from neighboring property owners, staff believes the approval of this variance can be considered a just act. STAFF RECOMMENDATION After review of the pertinent information, the Department of Community Development recommends that the request to decrease the required rear yard setback for a deck from 15 feet to 7 feet be APPROVED. Figure 1: Aerial Photo of the Subject Property Case No. BOA-2022-03 Page 5 902 Apricot Drive Figure 2: Rear aerial of the subject property. Figure 3: Close up of proposed location of deck.  BOA-2022-03 3/10/2022 400.620(A)(4)  March 25, 2022 BEILSMITH LAWRENCE E 912 CLARENCE DR ST CHARLES MO 63301 Re: Board of Adjustment Case No. 2022-03 902 Apricot Drive Dear Property Owner: As the owner of property adjacent to or within 300 feet of the property referenced above, 902 Apricot Drive and also identified by the map on the reverse side of this letter, you are hereby notified that the City of St. Charles Board of Adjustment has received a variance request from Maris Home Improvement. A request to decrease the rear yard setback for an open, unenclosed deck from fifteen (15) feet to seven (7) feet as regulated in Section 400.620(A)(4) of the St. Charles Code of Ordinances. The property is zoned R-1E Single-Family Residential District (Ward 1). The Board of Adjustment will hold a public hearing on this application at 6:00 p.m. on Monday, April 11, 2022 on the fourth floor of St. Charles City Hall in City Council Chambers, 200 North Second Street, St. Charles. You may attend the public hearing to make comments concerning the requested variances, or you may forward written comments to the Board of Adjustment through the Department of Community Development, 200 North Second Street, Room 303, St. Charles, MO 63301. If you have any questions regarding this letter or the variance application, please contact the Department of Community Development at 636-949-3222 and refer to the case number given above. Lara Berry Planner Department of Community Development Owner SiteAddres MailingAdd CITYSTATE ZIP BEILSMITH LAWRENCE E 912 CLARENCE DR 912 CLARENCE DR ST CHARLES MO63301 KOESTER JOSEPH*KOESTER MARIA 908 CLARENCE DR 908 CLARENCE DR ST CHARLES MO63301 CALDWELL CHARLES E III*CALDWELL SARAH A 904 CLARENCE DR 904 CLARENCE DR ST CHARLES MO 63301-0147 POYNTER JAMES M 813 APRICOT DR 813 APRICOT DR ST CHARLES MO 63301-0177 MOONEY JOSHUA*MOONEY ERIN 3212 MAMELLES DR 3212 MAMELLES DR ST CHARLES MO63301 KIPP DANIEL H*KIPP CONNIE J 814 CLARENCE DR 814 CLARENCE DR ST CHARLES MO 63301-0149 LEONHARD BERNARD P*LEONHARD JANET L 810 CLARENCE DR 810 CLARENCE DR ST CHARLES MO 63301-0149 SUTTON GARY L*SUTTON AMANDA D 805 APRICOT DR 805 APRICOT DR ST CHARLES MO 63301-0177 BOOTH KENNETH A*BOOTH AMY M 809 APRICOT DR 809 APRICOT DR ST CHARLES MO 63301-0177 GRUENDLER CLIFFORD J III*GRUENDLER JUDY C 800 APRICOT DR 800 APRICOT DR ST CHARLES MO 63301-0104 VOLLMER JOHN*VOLLMER MARY 804 APRICOT DR 804 APRICOT DR ST CHARLES MO 63301-0104 BECK KYLE 808 APRICOT DR 808 APRICOT DR ST CHARLES MO 63301-0104 LITTRELL CANDICE*ERNEST SCOTT*ERNEST APRIL 901 APRICOT DR 901 APRICOT DR ST CHARLES MO 63301-3205 SIMON ANTHONY A*SIMON MARCIA G 3211 MAMELLES DR 3211 MAMELLES DR ST CHARLES MO 63301-0125 RECKERT MARGARET M REVOC TRUST 900 CLARENCE DR 900 CLARENCE DR ST CHARLES MO 63301-0147 BOYER ROY E*BOYER LAURA A 902 APRICOT DR 902 APRICOT DR ST CHARLES MO63301 THOMSON MICHAEL*THOMSON PAMELA 3223 MAMELLES DR 3223 MAMELLES DR ST CHARLES MO63301 DUNN LAURA LEE 3337 COTTONWOOD DR 3337 COTTONWOOD DR ST CHARLES MO63301 THEDE MICHAEL B*THEDE DIANE M 3336 COTTONWOOD DR 3336 COTTONWOOD DR ST CHARLES MO63301 MENDOZA RACHEL 3332 COTTONWOOD DR 3304 COTTONWOOD DR ST CHARLES MO 63301-0109 SELBY MICHAEL T*SELBY PAMELA J 3324 COTTONWOOD DR 3324 COTTONWOOD DR ST CHARLES MO63301 WEISLOCHER NORMAN N*WEISLOCHER DOROTHY M 3329 COTTONWOOD DR 3329 COTTONWOOD DR ST CHARLES MO63301 HARTIG LAWRENCE P*HARTIG SUSANNA M 3333 COTTONWOOD DR 3333 COTTONWOOD DR ST CHARLES MO 63301-0162 WAPPELHORST FAM LIV TRUST 3224 MAMELLES DR 3224 MAMELLES DR ST CHARLES MO63301 OCHOA-BENITEZ JESUS AMERICA 916 APRICOT DR 916 APRICOT DR ST CHARLES MO 63301-3204 WISKOSKI FAM TRUST 912 APRICOT DR 912 APRICOT DR ST CHARLES MO 63301-3204 FERBRACHE FAM QUAL SPOU TRUST 908 APRICOT DR 908 APRICOT DR ST CHARLES MO 63301-3204 TODD RICHARD R JR*TODD VICKI L 904 APRICOT DR 904 APRICOT DR ST CHARLES MO 63301-3204 BOWIE LEON 905 APRICOT DR 905 APRICOT DR ST CHARLES MO 63301-3205 BIER ELIZABETH E 909 APRICOT DR 909 APRICOT DR ST CHARLES MO63301 LISK JERRI*LISK KENNETH 913 APRICOT DR 913 APRICOT DR ST CHARLES MO63301 WALKER DALE M 917 APRICOT DR 917 APRICOT DR ST CHARLES MO63301 WESTRICH KENNETH*WESTRICH LISA 3357 COTTONWOOD DR 3357 COTTONWOOD DR ST CHARLES MO63301 TURPEN MICHAEL D*TURPEN SANDRA A 3353 COTTONWOOD DR 3353 COTTONWOOD DR ST CHARLES MO63301 MOFFITT ANDREW C*MOFFITT RACHEL 3349 COTTONWOOD DR 3349 COTTONWOOD DR ST CHARLES MO 63301-0162 CURATOLO DONNA K 3345 COTTONWOOD DR 3345 COTTONWOOD DR ST CHARLES MO63301 FKH SFR PROPCO B-HLD LP 3341 COTTONWOOD DR 1850 PARKWAY PLACE STE 900 MARIETTA GA 30067 HARTMAN ETHEL MARIAN WALLIS 3348 COTTONWOOD DR 3348 COTTONWOOD DR ST CHARLES MO63301 HARMON MITCHELL D*BROCK KATHY S 3344 COTTONWOOD DR 3344 COTTONWOOD DR ST CHARLES MO 63301-0109 KISTER RONALD E 3340 COTTONWOOD DR 3340 COTTONWOOD DR ST CHARLES MO63301 IRLANDER JAMES EDWARD*IRLANDER RICHELLE L 3353 SADDLERIDGE CT 3353 SADDLERIDGE CT ST CHARLES MO63301 WUORI DAVID L*WUORI KRISTIN M 3357 SADDLERIDGE CT 3357 SADDLERIDGE CT ST CHARLES MO 63301-3229 MANLEY CINDY L 3349 SADDLERIDGE DR 3349 SADDLERIDGE DR ST CHARLES MO63301  AGENDA ITEM #2 STAFF REPORT BOARD OF ADJUSTMENT CASE NO. BOA-2022-04 228 MORGAN STREET APRIL 11, 2022 BY ANDREW STANISLAV GENERAL INFORMATION Owner/Applicant: Alex & Skye Reichert 228 Morgan Street St. Charles, Missouri 63301 Location: 228 Morgan Street Ward 1 Request: Two requests: 1) a request to decrease the minimum setback of a shelter/pen specifically for rabbits from any property line from fifty (50) feet to one and one-half (1.5) feet as regulated in Section 400.400(B)(1) of the City of St. Charles Code of Ordinances, and 2) a request to decrease the minimum setback of a run/enclosure specifically for hens from any property line from ten (10) feet to one and one-half (1.5) feet as regulated in Section 400.400(C)(5)(a) of the City of St. Charles Code of Ordinances. Zoning: R-1E/FPD Single-Family Residential District within the Frenchtown Preservation District Adjacent Zoning & Land Use: Direction Zoning Land Use North R-1E/FPD Residential Dwellings South R-1E/FPD Residential Dwellings East FD/FPD Commercial/Retail West R-1E/FPD Residential Dwellings ANALYSIS The subject property is approximately 7,500 square feet and is zoned R-1E/FPD Single-Family Residential District within the Frenchtown Preservation District located at the eastern corner of the intersection of Morgan Street and N 3rd Street. According to the county tax records, the brick house was constructed in 1840 (prior to any zoning or subdivision regulations) with the front entry facing Morgan Street. The house is oriented on the west side of the approximately 50’ x 150’ lot and within close proximity to the northern property line, rendering the east side of the property (closest to the alley) as the only real usable yard space. The applicant would like to convert two existing garden bed areas along the northern property line each into a shelter/enclosure, one for chickens (hens only) and the other for rabbits. Given the Case No. BOA-2022-04 Page 2 228 Morgan Street unique orientation and historic nature of the property, variances are required in order to satisfy the distance requirements of the enclosures from a property boundary line. The existing garden beds are 4’ x 8’ (32 square feet) each, and the proposed enclosures will roughly maintain the same dimensions. Figure 1 below is an exhibit provided by the applicant showing the location of the proposed enclosures as well as a conceptual image of their appearance. Additional materials from the applicant are provided in the packet. Figure 1: Location (indicated by stars) and conceptual design of proposed enclosures. Applicable Regulations: The applicant is requesting two (2) variances from the City’s Zoning ordinance, as follows:  §400.400(B)(1) In all residential zoning districts, as well as all dwellings located in any other zoning district, the occupant of a dwelling unit may keep for personal use geese, ducks, turkeys, other species of fowl except for chickens as set forth in Subsection (C) below and rabbits only under the following conditions: Permanent shelters, pens or cages shall be located at least fifty (50) feet from any property line.  §400.400(C)(5)(a) The run (enclosure) and chicken coop may be located within a rear yard setback for the residence provided the following setbacks are maintained: Minimum of ten (10) feet from any property line. Case No. BOA-2022-04 Page 3 228 Morgan Street Criteria for Granting a Variance: A variance is intended to provide relief to property owners who, due to their unique circumstances, would face practical difficulties or unnecessary hardship from the strict application of the zoning ordinance. However, while a variance can provide relief to a property owner and still protect the zoning ordinance from invalidation, variances are typically granted because of conditions or circumstances existing that are peculiar to the property or lot of record and not the result of the actions of the applicant. Pursuant to §400.1080, the power to hear and decide variance cases regarding the requirements of Chapter 400 (Zoning Code) lies with the Board of Adjustment. The Board’s decision is considered a quasi-judicial act; thus, the board shall consider the evidence submitted by staff, as well as the evidence presented by the applicant and make a finding with regard to the request for a variance. The decision of the Board is subject to appeal to the Circuit Court of St. Charles County. In addition to the criteria established §400.1090(E & F), G of the same section provides additional policies that should be considered before a ruling on a variance. Therein, it establishes that (1) financial disadvantages to the property owner shall not constitute conclusive proof of unnecessary hardships within the purpose of zoning; (2) the Board does not possess the power to grant a zoning variance permitting the use of land or buildings that is not included as a use in the district involved; (3) in granting a variance, the Board may attach thereto any conditions and safeguards it deems necessary or desirable in furthering the purposes of the chapter; and (4) the Board shall study the effects of such proposed buildings or use upon the character of the neighborhood, traffic conditions, public utilities and other matters pertaining to the general welfare. According to §400.1090 (F), the following factors are relevant to determining whether strict application of the regulation would result in practical difficulties or unnecessary hardship: (1) Size of the variance. The relationship of the requested variance to the requirements of the applicable zoning regulations, i.e. a five foot variance is substantial if the required setback is seven feet; it is not as substantial if the required setback is 100 feet.  Rabbit shelter/pen – Varying the property line setback from fifty (50) feet to one and one-half feet (1.5) feet could be considered substantial as it reduces the setback 48.5 feet, or a decrease of 97%.  Chicken coop/enclosure – Varying the property line setback from ten (10) feet to one and one-half feet (1.5) feet could be considered substantial as it reduces the setback 8.5 feet, or a decrease of 85%. (2) Effect on government services. The effect of the requested variance on population, density and available government facilities such as water, fire and police protection, and sanitary services. No negative effects on government services have been documented via staff review. (3) Effect on neighbors or neighborhood. The effect of the requested variance on adjoining properties or on the character of the neighborhood generally. Current City Ordinances regarding the property line setbacks for animal enclosures are intended to mitigate any potential negative impacts associated with the animals (i.e. odors, noise, etc.) on adjacent property owners. The purpose of these regulations are to ensure the Case No. BOA-2022-04 Page 4 228 Morgan Street enclosures are accessory to the residence and their visibility/impacts on public areas (such as rights-of-way) and neighboring properties do not create a nuisance. Currently, the subject property has a six-foot sight-proof fence along the north property line between the neighbors at 910 N 3rd Street, and picket fencing exists along the south and east property lines along Morgan Street and the alley, which also include trees/landscaping and other accessory structures. As depicted in Figure 1 earlier in this staff report, both enclosures are proposed 1.5 feet off of the north property boundary line near the sight-proof fence providing screening from the neighboring property owner as well as located as furthest possible from the public street. The Ordinance also has a provision that a chicken coop/enclosure remain at least twenty-five (25) feet from any residence other than the owner’s residence which will be in compliance per the applicant’s proposal. Additionally, letters of support were provided by the applicant from five (5) surrounding residents, including the owners of the adjacent property that shares the north property line at 910 N 3rd Street. Copies of these letters are provided in the packet and generally note that chickens and rabbits at the proposed location are acceptable. Figure 2: View from Morgan Street. (4) Alternatives to a variance. The existence of a feasible alternative to the applicant’s proposal or other means of alleviating the hardship. To install the enclosures as proposed, there are no alternatives to the variance request. The chicken coop/enclosure requires a setback of at least 10 feet from any property line, which could potentially fit in the center of the usable yard space; however, this location would require the coop/enclosure be located much closer to the public right-of-way and sidewalk along Morgan Street. The proposed location remains less visible/impactful to the public right- of-way and passers-by. Pens/enclosures for rabbits require a property line setback of at least 50 feet, which could not be accomplished on this property without a variance as the property itself is only 50 feet wide. The proposed location for the rabbit enclosure is also situated so that it has the least impact/visibility to the public right-of-way and passers-by. Case No. BOA-2022-04 Page 5 228 Morgan Street (5) Justice. The granting of a variance is a just action. The cause of the difficulty or the hardship should be unique to the land rather than to the applicant and should be related to the topography, configuration of the lot, or other characteristics of the land. The applicant or economic conditions should not be the cause of the difficulty. As mentioned earlier, there are no suitable alternatives to the variances to locate small enclosures for chickens and rabbits on the property that would be compliant with City Code. The subject property was constructed in 1840 according to County records prior to the existence of any zoning/subdivision regulations which results in a unique configuration of the lot and existing historic structures. Given the historic nature of the property and its dimensions, current zoning standards do not accommodate this property well, especially in terms of required setbacks. The applicant’s proposal utilizes the most reasonable location for these structures away from the public right-of-way of Morgan Street and the sidewalk while still maintaining compliance with the setback requirement from an adjacent residence. The applicant has also recognized that they intend to comply with all other applicable requirements, and several neighboring residents have provided letters in support of this request. For these reasons, Staff believes the approval of this request could be considered a just action. STAFF RECOMMENDATION After review of the request and all pertinent information, the Department of Community Development recommends that the request be APPROVED as submitted. Figure 3: Aerial Photo of Subject Property.  DEPARTMENT OF COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT 200 North Second Street, Suite 303 Saint Charles, MO 63301 636-949-3227 FAX 636-949-3557 APPLICATION FOR FILING AN APPEAL TO THE BOARD OF ADJUSTMENT BOA-2022-04 CASE # (assigned by Staff): ____________ DATE FILED:_______________ 228 Morgan Street, St. Charles, MO 63301 ADDRESS OF PROPERTY :_____________________________________________________ PROPERTY OWNER: Alex & Skye Reichert __________________________________________________________ (Name) 228 Morgan Street, St. Charles, MO 63301/ 618-604-3777 __________________________________________________________ (Address / Phone / Fax) APPLICANT: Alex & Skye Reichert __________________________________________________________ (Name) 228 Morgan Street, St. Charles, MO 63301/ 618-604-3777 __________________________________________________________ (Address / Phone/ Fax) Cqx8189@aol.com __________________________________________________________ (Email Address REQUIRED) ZONING INFORMATION: Legal Description: (must be attached) PT CITY BLK 61 R-1E SINGLE FAMILY RESIDENTIAL DISTRICT / Frenchtown Preservation District Present zoning:_________________________________________________________________ Current Single Family Residence use:___________________________________________________________________ Single Family Residence, Addition of 4' x 7.5' Chicken Coop/Run and 4' x 8' Rabbit Proposal: ____________________________________________________________ Hutch/Run ________ ______________________________________________________________________ _______________________________________________________________________ Ordinance or Section number from which the variance is being requested:____________________ Chicken Coop - § 400.400(C)(5) / Rabbit Hutch - § 400.400(A) ________________________________________________________________________  The following are the criteria that the Board of Adjustment must consider when hearing an appeal to the zoning ordinance. Please address the following criteria in relation to your request: 1. Size of the Variance. The relationship of the requested variance to the requirements of the applicable zoning regulations, i.e. a five-foot variance is substantial if the required setback is seven feet, it is not as substantial if the required setback is 100 feet. Chicken Coop/Run - Requested variance from 10' to 1.5' __________________________________________________________________ Rabbit Hutch/Run - Requested variance from 50' to 1.5' _________________________________________________________________ ___________________________________________________________________ 2. Effect on Government Services. The effect of the requested variance on population, density and available government facilities such as water, fire and police protection, and sanitary services. No effect on government services. By design, both enclosures will include a living roof and rain water ___________________________________________________________________ collection system to better mitigate storm water collection in the alley, and waste will be maintained through _________________________________________________________________ composting to___________________________________________________________________ be put back into the gardens. Enclosures will not use any government services to be maintained. 3. Effect on the Neighbors or Neighborhood. The effect of the requested variance on adjoining properties or on the character of the neighborhood generally. Both enclosure have been designed to eliminate potential effects on neighboring properties. Noise is reduced by ___________________________________________________________________ current fencing structure and insulated coop/hutch design. Smell is eliminated through use of deep litter method, _________________________________________________________________ hemp husk bedding, and aromatic plants on living roof. Sight is eliminated by being under height of privacy fence. ___________________________________________________________________ Design and usage further meets the "artsy/edgy" character that has been expressed in Frenchtown. 4. Alternatives to a variance. The existence of a feasible alternative to the applicant=s proposal or other means of alleviating the hardship. The property boundaries for this home were established long before city ordinances, and has resulted in the rear boundary resting ___________________________________________________________________ on the home with a narrow overall width. South side placement would be next to the public sidewalk (effecting pedestrians), or would _________________________________________________________________ need to be place in the center of the yard (effecting character of community). Due to configuration of the lot, topography of lot slope, no other place exists that these enclosures could be placed and not require a significant variance and have still have no effect on neighbors/ community (for instance, if place in center of yard the sound barrier of the fence would not be as great due to property elevation). ___________________________________________________________________ 5. Justice. The granting of the variance is a just action. The cause of the difficulty - the hardship should be unique to the land rather than to the applicant and should be related to the topography, configuration of the lot, or other characteristics of the land. The applicant or economic conditions should not be the cause of the difficulty: We have attempted to lay out a variety of alternative locations, but due to the characteristic of the lot (size, pre-code ___________________________________________________________________ boundaries. topography) and the inability to eliminate effects on other properties/pedestrians if alternative location _________________________________________________________________ is used, there is no other location possible and this location can only work with the requested variances. Economics ___________________________________________________________________ and difficulty of other locations have not factored into our requests (for instance, § 400.400(A) requires 50' setback in which our entire property is only 50' in total width). One (1) copy of the following shall be submitted when filing for an appeal to the Board of Adjustment. Digital submittal of application preferred via BOA@stcharlescitymo.gov. Directions for digital submittal are attached. 1. A complete application. Please answer every question as completely as possible. INCOMPLETE APPLICATIONS WILL NOT BE ACCEPTED. 2. A complete site plan of the property and all structures located on the property. Including but not limited to: a. The actual shape and dimension of the lot. b. Any existing or proposed building, accessory building, and their locations upon the lot. c. Any existing or proposed parking spaces, driveway entrances and exits, street, alleys, creeks, etc. d. The existing and intended use of each building or part of a building. e. Photos of existing structures. f. Any other information with regard to the lot and neighboring lots as may be necessary. * Depending on the specifics of the case, the applicant (s) may be required to submit further information deemed necessary. 3. Signature by the legal owner or an attached affidavit by the legal owner authorizing the Board of Adjustment action. I (We), the undersigned, file this petition for a Board of Adjustment action and authorize the Department of Community Development to post the above described property with a notice describing the action applied for and the date of the public hearing on such action, I (We) also understand that property owners within three hundred (300) feet of the petitioned property will be notified by letter of the requested action by the Department of Community Development. Applicants wishing to have a transcript of their hearing must contact the Department of Community Development and request the transcript within 20 days following the appeal. The applicant will be responsible for paying for the expense of the transcript. Transcripts will not be available beyond the 30 days following the date of the appeal. The above statements and the statements contained in all of the attached exhibits transmitted herewith are true, to the best of my knowledge. Signature of the applicant: _______________________________ 03/11/22 Date: ________________________ Signature of the property owner: __________________________ 03/11/22 Date: ________________________ NOTE: APPLICANTS ARE REQUIRED TO ATTEND THE ASSIGNED HEARING. Application fee for 1st variance: $150.00 Application fee for additional variance on same property: $50.00 Existing duplex unit or existing single family home: $50.00  Chickens Rabbits 24' 1'-1.5' 7.5' 8' Clover Patch' 4' 4' Trash Shed Herbs Flowers  Department of Community Development Board of Adjustment Application – Additional Information Alex & Skye Reichert, 228 Morgan Street, St. Charles, MO 63301 Overview: We are seeking to convert 2 current 4’ x 8’ vegetable gardens for chickens and rabbits to provide the needed natural soil nutrients for our variety of garden beds and eggs for healthy organic nutrition. No green space will be eliminated as a living roof will be used on the coop/hutch. Chicken Coop/Run: The chicken coop itself will be 4’ x 4’ and built from an insulated plywood construction along with interior non-permeable surfaces. The coop will have clean-out doors on 2 opposite sides, windows/vents on 3-sides, and predator protection throughout. This design ensures first the best well-being of the animals during all weather conditions and allows for optimal ongoing maintenance. The coop will be elevated 18” from the ground, to allow for a 4’ x 7.5’ enclosed run that extends both below and in front of the coop. The coop/run will have a green living roof that will be planted with a variety of succulents and low-growth aromatic perennials. This further ensures the safety and weather protection of the animals and provides rainwater collection to be filtered and returned to the animals (added benefit of stormwater management to decrease water collection in the alleyway). Our design meets all requirements set forth by city ordinances and the size would allow for us to house 3 hens. Our current plan is to start with 2 hens, with the potential to increase to 3 depending on egg production. Our overall goal for keeping chicken is for personal egg production (no resale) along with waste compost for our various gardens. No rooster will ever be present. (see attachment for design drawing and an example of a similar build [different color scheme being used to match historic colors]). Rabbit Hutch/Run: Similar to the chicken coop, the rabbit hitch will use the same building design and construction methods. The rabbit hutch itself will be 4’ x4’ and sit atop a 4’ x 8’ run. The rabbit hutch will be elevated 18” and will sit centered overtop the run to allow an area behind, underneath, and in front of the hutch. The run will additionally be built with closable access to a small clover patch that sits adjacent to the proposed location. These design aspects have been made for the best interest of the animal, as well as eliminating potential impacts to neighboring properties. Our design meets all requirements set forth by city ordinances and would allow for us to keep 3 rabbits. Once the chicken coop/run has been built and the chickens have been established, the rabbit hutch/run will be constructed. We plan on beginning with 2 rabbits, with the plans to increase to 3 rabbits at a later date. We intend to utilize the rabbits for fertilizer production, as rabbit waste has the highest natural source of nitrogen for garden usage and helps raise earthworms to break down clay-based soil (4x the nutrients than other manures. Variance Request: We are requesting a variance to allow for the coop/hutch to be placed on our property due to the characteristic of the lot. Since our property dates back over 200 years ago, the property lines over time have been drawn so the north boundary lies directly on the house and the south boundary is in the street. Overall, the property was reduced to only be 50’ in total width, and even less when you account for the city sidewalk. The property is further built on a sloped elevation, with the west side of the house partially ground-covered, and the east side having a walkout basement. The property is additionally a corner lot which eliminates usable area on 3 sides of the structure. The narrow width and slope of the lot reduces the potential areas for coop/hutch placement. The variance being requested are as follows: Chicken Variance: City ordinance § 400.400(C)(5) states that a chicken run/coop be placed a minimum of 10’ away from any property line. Since this property is unique in the way the property lines were originally drawn, placing the coop/run 10’ from a property line would either require it to be placed in close proximity to the sidewalk (less than 3’ since the property line includes the entire sidewalk) or placed in the middle of the yard. Placement next to a sidewalk would have a high public and animal impact as every person walking a dog would inevitably lead to dogs barking and disturbing neighbors, pulling away from their owners and/or getting loose, and causing stress to the hens which could lead to death. Placing the coop/hutch in the middle of the yard would cause a higher neighborhood character issue, where it would be more prominently viewable to drivers and cause a higher distraction (rather than tucked away farther from the street/sidewalk). This makes the best placement (and only available option) to be placed next to the current privacy fence with a setback of 1.5’ to allow for the minimum sizing requirements of the coop/run per hen, and requires a variance of 8.5’. Rabbit Variance: The City of Saint Charles does not currently have any ordinance set aside specifically for rabbits. As such, they fall into § 400.400(A) which includes animals such as horses and ponies. Due to these animals’ inclusion, the minimum setback for rabbits is 50’ from any property line. Since our property has a total width of 50’, there is no location in which a rabbit hutch/run could be placed and not require a significant variance. For the same reasons as listed above for chickens, the keeping of rabbits would require us to have a setback of 1.5’ from the fence line with a variance of 48.5’. Note: Though each location requires a significant variance, the placements of both the coop/hutch with a variance allows for us to use the current privacy fence as a sound barrier along with the insulated coop/hutch design. Placing this coop/hutch elsewhere would cause a direct line-of-sight between the coop/hutch and neighboring properties, causing a higher potential for neighbor sound impact. In the event that the privacy fence does not reduce any potential noise, we have a contingency to add soundproofing materials to the fence directly behind the coop/hutch. Neighborhood Improvement: Our goal for our home is to continually improve our neighborhood and community. We have taken an overgrown home (take a look at google street view) and enhanced the overall look and feel of a place welcoming to anyone. We are still in the process of making other additions (such as a library box for local youth and establishing a small Missouri natural wildflower prairie), but these projects allow for us to not only provide for our family, but helps provide resources to our neighbors for their gardening needs too. This also allows us to help youth in the area in local 4-H programs that are unable to keep rabbits or chickens due to their living situation. We will use our resources wherever possible to help others and plan on doing the same with these chickens/rabbits. We know we are asking for significant variances to be granted, but given the unique nature of our property do not see any other way to make this possible. We are happy to discuss any of this further, or answer any questions you might have. Thank you for your consideration of our project request. Sincerely, Alex & Skye Reichert  March 25, 2022 BARTON FAMILY TRUST THE 826 N 2ND ST ST CHARLES MO 63301 Re: Board of Adjustment Case No. 2022-04 228 Morgan Street Dear Property Owner: As the owner of property adjacent to or within 300 feet of the property referenced above, 228 Morgan Street (identified by the map on the reverse side of this letter), you are hereby notified that the City of St. Charles Board of Adjustment has received variance requests from Alex and Skye Reichert. Two requests: 1) a request to decrease the minimum setback of a shelter/pen specifically for rabbits from any property line from fifty (50) feet to one and one-half (1.5) feet as regulated in Section 400.400(B)(1) of the City of St. Charles Code of Ordinances, and 2) a request to decrease the minimum setback of a run/enclosure specifically for hens from any property line from ten (10) feet to one and one-half (1.5) feet as regulated in Section 400.400(C)(5)(a) of the City of St. Charles Code of Ordinances. The property is zoned R-1E/FPD Single-Family Residential District within the Frenchtown Preservation District (Ward 1). The Board of Adjustment will hold a public hearing on this application at 6:00 p.m. on Monday, April 11, 2022 on the fourth floor of St. Charles City Hall in City Council Chambers, 200 North Second Street, St. Charles. You may attend the public hearing to make comments concerning the requested variances, or you may forward written comments to the Board of Adjustment through the Department of Community Development, 200 North Second Street, Room 303, St. Charles, MO 63301. If you have any questions regarding this letter or the variance application, please contact the Department of Community Development at 636-949-3222 and refer to the case number given above. Andrew Stanislav Planner Department of Community Development Owner SiteAddres MailingAdd CITYSTATE ZIP BARTON FAMILY TRUST THE 824 N 2ND ST 826 N 2ND ST ST CHARLES MO 63301 BARTON FAM TRUST 820 N 2ND ST 826 N 2ND ST ST CHARLES MO 63301 810 N 2ND STREET LLC 810 N 2ND ST 103 CIVIC PARK DR OFALLON MO 63366 BUSHDIECKER DANIEL R*BUSHDIECKER NANCY C 900 N 2ND ST 1680 DUVALL CT DARDENNE PRAIRIE MO 63368 KAMABL 910 LLC 910 N 2ND ST 302 E GOVERNOR CT ST CHARLES MO 63301 KAMABL 910 LLC 914 N 2ND ST 302 E GOVERNOR CT ST CHARLES MO 63301 HOT IRON LLC 1001 N 2ND ST 1003 N 2ND ST ST CHARLES MO 63301 BESSELMAN JEFFREY T*BESSELMAN NICOLE J 1002 N 3RD ST 903 N 3RD ST ST CHARLES MO 63301 MISSOURI RENTALS COMPANY LLC 925 N 2ND ST 5759 HALIFAX BEND CT ST CHARLES MO 63304 AKL PROPERTIES LLC 923 N 2ND ST 9 WICKFORD CT ST CHARLES MO 63301 KOHLMANN ARTHUR E JR*KOHLMANN SONIA 913 N 2ND ST 804 FERGUSON ST ST CHARLES MO 63301 J ORF CONSTRUCTION LLC 911 N 2ND ST 3501 BLUFF VIEW DRIVE ST CHARLES MO 63303 LINDQUIST KATHLEEN ROSE 905 N 2ND ST 905 N 2ND ST ST CHARLES MO 63301 WIECHENS BARBARA JEAN 901 N 2ND ST 911 N 2ND ST ST CHARLES MO 63301 HENRY LAURA 903 N 2ND ST 903 N 2ND ST ST CHARLES MO 63301 REICHERT ALEX*REICHERT SKYE 228 MORGAN ST 228 MORGAN ST ST CHARLES MO 63301-2064 THOENEN ALISSA K*THOENEN PAUL 910 N 3RD ST 910 N 3RD ST ST CHARLES MO 63301-2047 ROHLAND ANDREW 914 N 3RD ST 914 N 3RD ST ST CHARLES MO 63301 MCKINSTRY STEVEN J*MCKINSTRY LYN M 920 N 3RD ST 920 N 3RD ST ST CHARLES MO 63301-2047 BRODEUR CHRISTINE R 233 MONTGOMERY ST 233 MONTGOMERY ST ST CHARLES MO 63301 ORF PROPERTIES AND CONSTRUCTION LLC 827 N 2ND ST 2178 ST PAUL RD OFALLON MO 63366 825 N 2ND STREET LLC 825 N 2ND ST 103 CIVIC PARK DR OFALLON MO 63366 MANFULL AARON 815 N 2ND ST 2751 CUMBERLAND LANDING ST CHARLES MO 63303 801 N SECOND LLC 801 N 2ND ST 28 CRUZATTE AVE ST CHARLES MO 63303 PAUL ELIZABETH JULIE*FLYNT JOSHUA LEE 802 N 3RD ST 802 N 3RD ST ST CHARLES MO 63301-2045 BUESCHER SHAWN P 814 N 3RD ST 814 N 3RD ST ST CHARLES MO 63301-2045 HEINE NORMAN A 816 N 3RD ST 816 N 3RD ST ST CHARLES MO 63301 BOND DARREN M*BOND KAREN L 221 MORGAN ST 124 TIMBER RUN ST PETERS MO 63376-7171 MANFULL AARON*MANFULL KATHLEEN S 819 N 2ND ST 2751 CUMBERLAND LNDG ST CHARLES MO 63303 ASARO GINA M 810 N 3RD ST 810 N THIRD ST ST CHARLES MO 63301 TASKER TEDD L*MICCOLI BRUNA MORGAN ST 321 MORGAN ST ST CHARLES MO 63301 TASKER TEDD L*MICCOLI BRUNA 321 MORGAN ST 321 MORGAN ST ST CHARLES MO 63301 HERE AND THERE LLC 311 MORGAN ST 1205 SHOREVIEW LIMA OH 45805 REED JAMES*REED MEGHAN 305 MORGAN ST 305 MORGAN ST ST CHARLES MO 63301 KELLY KRISTIANNA 809 N 3RD ST 809 N 3RD ST ST CHARLES MO 63301 HILL JAMES R JR*HILL CARRIE M 320 FRANKLIN ST 540 WILLOW VALLEY DR OFALLON MO 63366 FIRST ASSEMBLY OF GOD OFALLON MO 805 N 3RD ST 805 N 3RD ST ST CHARLES MO 63301 STRAUSS GARY*STRAUSS LYNN 330 MORGAN ST 330 MORGAN ST ST CHARLES MO 63301 BLACKSTAR INVESTMENTS LLC 916 N 4TH ST 412 COTTAGE GROVE DR WENTZVILLE MO 63385 ANDREUCCETTI KELLY N 929 N 3RD ST 208 PLEASANT ST FRAMINGHAM MA 01701-4702 EDGAR KERRY ANN 925 N 3RD ST 925 N 3RD ST ST CHARLES MO 63301 HETZLER MICHAEL W 919 N 3RD ST 919 N 3RD ST ST CHARLES MO 63301 THOMAS STEVEN J*THOMAS LYDIA 917 N 3RD ST 617 N BENTON AVE ST CHARLES MO 63301 BESSELMAN JEFFREY THOMAS*BESSELMAN NICOLE J 903 N 3RD ST 903 N 3RD ST ST CHARLES MO 63301 CLARK OMER W*CLARK JACQUIE A 320 MORGAN ST 320 MORGAN STREET ST CHARLES MO 63301 MITCHELL TIMOTHY R*MITCHELL LAUREN R 324 MORGAN ST 324 MORGAN ST ST CHARLES MO 63301 LONG ROBERT G JR*MICHELL STACY L 918 N 4TH ST 918 N 4TH ST ST CHARLES MO 63301 EARNEY BRENDA B 928 N 4TH ST 928 N 4TH ST ST CHARLES MO 63301 302 NORTH MAIN LLC 1001 N 3RD ST 1001 N 3RD ST ST CHARLES MO 63301 DAKE DONNA ELIZABETH 320 MONTGOMERY ST 320 MONTGOMERY ST ST CHARLES MO 63301-2062 STEPHENSON THOMAS E*STEPHENSON MARY F FRANKLIN ST 3018 PARK AVE ST CHARLES MO 63301-0744 BESSELMAN JEFFREY*BESSELMAN NICOLE 924 N 2ND ST 903 N 3RD ST ST CHARLES MO 63301 BESSELMAN JEFFREY T*BESSELMAN NICOLE J 918 N 2ND ST 903 N 3RD ST ST CHARLES MO 63301