MINUTES
Board of Adjustment Hearing
March 28, 2019
The Clarkson Valley Board of Adjustment, pursuant to notices posted on the Clarkson Valley website met at City Hall in the Clarkson Executive Center to consider three agenda items.
Board of Adjustment Members present were:
Terry Rosenstauch, Chairman
Tom Berkeley
Jack Hauser
Phyllis Newmark
Dick Ulrich
The City Attorney, Mr. Patrick Butler, and the City Clerk, Michele McMahon recorded the Minutes. The Building Commissioner, Jack Schenck was unable to attend. Board Member Paul Mercurio was unable to attend.
The Chairman explained to the petitioners they are present tonight to ask this Board to grant a variance from the Clarkson Valley Code at Section 405.060.E.3. establishing that no building (or structure) shall intrude upon the area required for front, side and rear yards by proving practical difficulties or unnecessary hardships in carrying out of the provisions of the code due to topographic or other conditions.
The Chairperson then asked the petitioners if they had objections to any of the Members of the Board of Adjustment, to which they responded they did not. He then asked the Board Members if they had an opportunity to view the properties to which all stated they had. After the meeting was called to order and protocol established, the petitioners, architects, contractors and trustees that were to speak this evening were sworn in. Terry Rosenstrauch read the Notice of Public Hearing for the agenda items.
- To consider the request of:
Jerry and Jill Claycomb
14 Crown Manor Drive
to construct a new covered front porch to encroach 3.0′ into the front yard.
- To consider the request of:
Joseph and Lisa (Peel) Stremlau
2215 Kehrs Mill Road
to construct a retaining wall, 10′ at the highest point, to encroach 32.81′, a detached garage to encroach 3.5′, a pool that encroaches 5.25′, and a deck that encroaches 5.0′ all to the rear property line.
- To consider the request of:
Keith and Martha Jacob
15978 Kettington Road
to construct a pool that will encroach 2′ into the side yard setback; a fence that encroaches approximately 20′ into the side yard setback and 38′ into the rear yard setback; and a retaining wall to encroach 32.8′ into the rear setback.
Mrs. Jill Claycomb introduced herself and said her husband was downstairs waiting for their architect who was stuck in traffic. She explained that they were going to make the presentation, but since it is so simple, she might as well begin. She explained the reason they were requesting the variance was to protect a new, mahogany door with side skylights they ordered and were planning to install. After looking at several proposals trying to keep it within the building the lines, the architect felt this proposal would be best.
There were no questions from the Board Members. The Chairman called for opponents or proponents, and there were none. No one from the city spoke on the project.
The City Attorney, Patrick Butler explained to the Board Members the intent of the zoning code and read the merits and conclusion portion contained therein.
Terry Rosenstrauch read the proposal: to construct a new covered front porch to encroach 3.0′ into the front yard. He asked the Members for their factual determination of the proposal to construct the fence to which: question (1) five are, (2) five will not, (3) five will, (4) five will not, (5) five will not, (6) five will.
The Chairperson then called for a vote of approval/disapproval to grant the desired variance to construct a new covered front porch to encroach 3.0′ into the front yard with the following results: Yeas. Berkeley, Hauser, Newmark, Rosenstrauch, and Urich. There were no Nays.
The Chairperson declared Mrs. Claycomb’s request for a variance for the covered front porch as having been approved. Terry Rosenstrauch then advised Mrs. Claycomb, the variance granted by the Board is based upon what took place tonight. Any change making the variance greater than what was presented will negate the variance that was granted at this meeting.
Terry Rosenstrauch read the second agenda item and gave the floor to Bruce Korn, Owner of Higgenbotham Construction. He introduced himself along with the owners of the property, Mr. and Mrs. Stremlau along with their daughter. Mr. Korn handed out an overlay of the property as it once looked with the barns and silo, and spoke of the hardship to 5 trees in the front yard. He said they tried pushing the building forward, so the entire project would be within the building lines, but then they would lose those 5 trees. He said the sewer line was also an issue. Board Member, Dick Ulrich, mentioned the building lines as detailed on the site plan, and thought they were incorrect. Mr. Korn explained they got that from the St. Louis County 1952 records.
The Chairman called for opponents or proponents, to which there were none. There was no comment from the City. The Chairman asked if there were any questions from the Board Members regarding the intent of the zoning code or merits and conclusion portion contained therein to which they responded they did not.
Terry Rosenstrauch read the Agenda item to construct a retaining wall, 10′ at the highest point, to encroach 32.81′, a detached garage to encroach 3.5′, a pool that encroaches 5.25′, and a deck that encroaches 5.0′ all to the rear property line. He asked the Stremlau’s if they wanted the vote to be considered separately or altogether. They responded one vote would be good, and the Factual Determination questions received the following responses: question (1) five are, (2) one will, four will not, (3) five will, (4) five will, (5) five will not, (6) five will.
The Chairperson then called for a vote of approval/disapproval to grant the desired variance to construct a retaining wall, 10′ at the highest point, to encroach 32.81′, a detached garage to encroach 3.5′, a pool that encroaches 5.25′, and a deck that encroaches 5.0′ all to the rear property line with the following results: Yeas. Berkeley, Hauser, Newmark, Rosenstrauch, and Urich. There were no Nays.
The Chairperson declared the Stremlau-Peel request for a variance for the retaining wall, 10′ at the highest point, to encroach 32.81′, a detached garage to encroach 3.5′, a pool that encroaches 5.25′, and a deck that encroaches 5.0′ all on the rear property line as having been approved. Terry Rosenstrauch then advised Mr. and Mrs. Stremlau the variance granted by the Board is based upon what took place tonight. Any change making the variance greater than what was presented will negate the variance that was granted at this meeting.
Terry Rosenstrauch read the third agenda item and gave the floor to Bryan Tabor, General Contractor with Prestige Pool. He introduced himself and said the homeowners apologize for not being there as they had previously been scheduled out of town. He said the Jacob’s are a blended family with one group of children being older than the other. They tried to create a pool that would please both groups of children, which makes for a larger sized pool. He said they moved into the house 1-1/2 years ago and they would like to replace an existing patio with the pool. They would also like to construct a lanai with a small kitchen. Terry Rosenstrauch asked if Prestige Pool started on the project already, to which they responded the Jacob’s removed the brick patio.
Jack Hauser visited the property and asked, where on the site plan is the utility box indicated? When the contractor was unsure, the Subdivision Trustee that attended the meeting, Fred Jaeckle, told everyone where the green box was located on the Jacob’s property. Dick Ulrich asked how the trustees feel about the project, and Mr. Jaeckle responded there are five trustees. Two are in favor of the project, two against the project, and one is vacillating. He said they are dealing with the same issues this Board seems to be. The project takes up the majority of the back yard and they do not want to set a precedence with this. To which Dick Ulrich said he does not view this as a hardship and asked the contractor what constituted the hardship in this case? Bryan Tabor responded the house is set on the 20′ side building line, opposed to the 25′ line, as required.
The Chairman called for opponents or proponents, to which there were none. There were no comments from the City. The Chairman asked if there were any questions from the Board Members regarding the intent of the zoning code or merits and conclusion portion contained therein to which they responded there were not.
Terry Rosenstrauch read the Agenda item: to construct a pool that will encroach 2′ into the side yard setback; a fence that encroaches approximately 20′ into the side yard setback and 38′ into the rear yard setback; and a retaining wall to encroach 32.8′ into the rear setback with the following responses: question (1) three are, two are not (2) five will (3) four will, one will not (4) five will, (5) three will, two will not, (6) five will not.
The Chairperson then called for a vote of approval/disapproval to grant the desired variance to construct a pool that will encroach 2′ into the side yard setback; a fence that encroaches approximately 20′ into the side yard setback and 38′ into the rear yard setback; and a retaining wall to encroach 32.8′ into the rear setback with the following results: There were no Yeas. Nays: Berkeley, Hauser, Newmark, Rosenstrauch, and Urich.
To which the Chairperson declared the request as having failed and instructed the contractor, that the homeowner can come back to this Board with a new proposal at a different time. When asked, Board Members stated they would more apt to respond affirmatively if the plan has a landscape plan that better shields the pool; if they moved the pool closer to the house; and if the percentage of impact was lessened.
The meeting adjourned at 7:10 p.m.
Michele McMahon, City Clerk