City of Edwardsville Zoning Board of Appeals met June 26.
Here are the minutes provided by the board:
I. ROLL CALL:
Present
Jeannie Krebs
Ann Robertson
David Gerber
Tom Butts
Denver Seay
Deborah Brown
Debbie Stosz
Dannielle Peters
Rex Peters
Katie Bradford
Robert Bradford
Richard Hughes
Matthew Hughes
Kathleen Weber
Joe Weber
Jananne Threlkeld
Amber Boyles-Pellock
Mike Pellock
Fr. Rob Johnson
Ana Harris
Robert Johnston
Robin Black-Rubenski
Jim Pomeroy
George Wolfford
Sean Barth
John (Jack) Hake
Kimberly Hawk
Leon Bradford
Steve Stricklan
Claire Iott
Lisa Schneck
Absent
Bob Hotz
II. PUBLIC COMMENT:
None.
III. APPROVAL OF MINUTES
Motion made by Tom Butts and seconded by Denver Seay to approve the minutes of the regular meeting for May 22, 2023.
IV. ZONING CASES
A. Case 2023-16 – Robert and Katherine Bradford have petitioned the City of Edwardsville for a variance to allow for a 16.7’ front yard setback rather than the required 25’ setback at 904 Michigan Ave. The property is more specifically identified as PID 14-2-15-12-10-101-013 and is zoned “R-1” Single Family Residential.
Staff gave their report on this case as outlined in the Administrator’s Report.
ZONING BOARD OF APPEALS STANDARDS FOR VARIANCE:
1. The particular physical surroundings, shape or topographical condition of the specific property involved would result in a particular hardship upon the owner, as distinguished from a mere inconvenience or loss of revenue, if the strict letter of the regulations were carried out.
The existing home has a non-conforming front yard setback of 16.58 feet instead of the required 25 feet. City Code does not permit additions without bringing the non-conformity into compliance. This would prevent the existing covered front porch from being enclosed. This condition would not be considered a hardship. The addition cannot be added without encroaching into the setback.
2. The condition upon which the requested variance is based would not be applicable, generally to other property within the same zoning classification.
Given the number of older homes and properties throughout Edwardsville, the requested variance could be applicable to other properties within the same zoning classification.
3. The alleged difficulty or hardship has not been created by any person presently having an interest in the property.
The hardship has not been created by anyone having an interest in the property. The home is pre-existing non conforming.
4. The granting of the variance will not be detrimental to the public welfare or injurious to other property or improvements in the neighborhood in which the property is located.
It does not appear that granting this variance will have a negative effect on the public welfare, nor will it be injurious to other property or improvements in the area.
5. The proposed variance will not impair an adequate supply of light and air to adjacent property, or substantially increase congestion in the public streets, or increase the danger of fire, or endanger the public safety, or substantially diminish or impair property values within the neighborhood.
The proposed variance will not impair an adequate supply of light and air to adjacent property, will not increase congestion, nor will it impact public safety or diminish property values in the neighborhood. The proposed enclosure would be within the existing covered porch.
6. The proposed variance complies with the spirit and intent of the restrictions imposed by this code.
The request does not comply with the spirit and intent of the restrictions imposed by the Zoning Code. The setback encroachment is existing. However, the Code regarding non-conforming structures does not allow additions without meeting the current setbacks.
7. There is no self-imposed hardship.
The hardship would not be considered self-imposed.
STAFF DISCUSSION & RECOMMENDATION
Staff recommends denial of the requested variance.
Applicant explained this house is a very old concrete block home. They will be adding the needed square footage to the home along with a disability ramp to the driveway. They will be enclosing an existing screened in sunroom where there is an existing roof. He assured the board he has no intension of flipping the house once the improvements are done. The house has been in the family for many years and will remain in the family. The total cost of the project (addition to both the front and year of the home) will be $88,000.00. The front addition will be 9 feet by 21 feet. A family member was present to speak in favor of the variance requested.
No one present to speak in opposition of the variance.
The board discussed the fact there are no other homes on the block to compare front yard setbacks. The board felt there was no reason to deny the variance since the roof is already existing.
A motion was made by Tom Butts and seconded by David Gerber to approve the variance as requested.
ROLL CALL: 5 Ayes, 0 Nay, 0 Abstain. Motion approved.
B. Case 2023-22 – John Hake has petitioned the City of Edwardsville for a Special Use Permit to allow for a religious institution at 1631 Yellowhammer Crossing. The property is more specifically identified as PID 14-1-15-15-01-102-001 and is zoned “R-1” Single Family Residential.
Staff gave their report on this case as outlined in the Administrator’s Report.
ZONING BOARD OF APPEALS STANDARDS FOR SPECIAL USE PERMIT:
(1) Existing uses and zoning of nearby property and relationship to Edwardsville’s adopted comprehensive plan.
| Direction Zoning Designation Use | ||
| North | “R-1” Single-Family Residential District | Single-Family Dwelling |
| South | “R-1” Single-Family Residential District | Single-Family Dwelling |
| East | “R-1” Single-Family Residential District | Single-Family Dwelling |
| West | “R-1” Single-Family Residential District | Vacant |
(2) Extent to which property value diminishes adjacent to the zoned parcels. Value decrease to be supplied by the petitioner and made by professional appraiser.
No property value information provided by petitioner.
(3) Extent to which the proposed change alters or promotes the public health, safety morals or general welfare.
The proposed use will neither alter nor promote the public health, safety, morals, or general welfare of the community.
(4) The relative gain to the public as compared to the hardship imposed upon the property owners, and there is a need for the proposed special use.
It will not negatively impact the public and will not impose a hardship on the owners.
(5) The suitability of the subject property for the zoned purposes indicated by ordinance.
The property is suitable for the Permitted Uses listed in the “R-1” Single-Family Residential District and could easily be occupied by a permitted use.
Father Rob Johnson with Neuman Catholic Ministry was present to speak regarding the special use permit. He gave the history of their ministry. They have the opportunity to use this house for their ministry. There will be no one living at the home. It will be used for offices, Bible study and an area for a chapel. The hours of operation will be Monday through Friday 8:00 am to 10:00 pm with special events on Saturdays and Sundays.
Robert Johnston expressed that he was in favor of the petition. He felt they would make good neighbors. He has had issues with neighboring homes where college students have lived.
Richard Hughes asked what the occupancy load would be for the home. Father Johnson stated there would be a small group of between 5 and 12 students. For larger gatherings there would be 40 to 50 people. A typical day would consist of 4 to 5 office staff. It was also discussed that they would be adding ADA accessible bathrooms in the home.
Kim Hawk expressed she was in opposition of the petition. This is a residential area which would not allow for parking and the additional traffic.
Robin Black-Rubuski asked where the additional parking would be for large gatherings. It was explained to her that because they are affiated with SIUE, they would be allowed to use the credit union parking lot just down the road for after hours events. Currently, 8 cars can parking in the driveway.
Joseph Weber voiced his concern with the residential area. He didn’t feel this was a good fit for the area. He also pointed there would be a loss of revenue because of the non-profit status. He asked where the income would come from for the maintenance of the property. The response was that the income is donar based. They also get subsidy from the Diocese of Springfield. They are currently located at Cougar Village. Prior to that they were at the basement of St. Boniface.
Rex Peters stated they previously had a religious organization try for a Special Use Permit on Lewis Road. There were the same concerns from neighbors with the additional traffic and parking. He is opposed to this petition as well.
Ana Harris is opposed to the petition. She already has businesses all around her. SIUE has a lot of land to utilize. She feels there are other places which would be better for this organization.
Jane Threlkeld voice her opposition to the petition. She stated there are no curbs. She had served on the SIUE regious center board and the center was developed for all religions.
Mike Pellock stated he has been a resident for many years and have seen a lot of changes to the area. He feels this area should remain residential. He understands the need for spiritual enrichment just not in the residential area.
Sean Barth with Neuman Ministry explained they were allowed to have a max of 10 people at their current location during COVID and the rent went up. Their max capacity now is 12 people. They looked into a new building in University Park which would be at least $5,000,000.00.
Amber Boyles Pellock stated her concerns were with parking. She is opposed to the petition. Jesse McNeely is also opposed to the Special Use Permit.
George Willford voiced his concerns with the traffic. He stated the roads are not developed for a lot of traffic. He asked if the schedule would change for operation times, would the applicants need to come back for another hearing.
David Gerber explained the board can place special conditions on the Special Use Permit if allowed. Ana Harris wanted to add that they don’t have fences to keep college kids from wondering into their yards.
Tom Butts stated there are reasons for zoning classifications and rules for home businesses. He doesn’t feel there would be someone who would want a home that was remodeled for ADA compliant restrooms. He feels this is not right for this area as it could have a potential impact to the neighborhood. David Gerber added that there would be a lot of cost involved to bring the house to code for housing 10 to 30 people.
STAFF DISCUSSION & RECOMMENDATION
Staff recommend approval of the Special Use Permit (SUP).
Tom Butts made a motion to deny the Special Use Permit requested. David Gerber seconded the motion.
ROLL CALL: 5 Ayes, 0 Nay, 0 Abstain. Motion approved.
C. Case 2023-23 –Raising Cane’s Restaurants, LLC has petitioned the City of Edwardsville for a Special Use Permit to allow for a drive-thru restaurant at 2104 Governors Parkway. The property is more specifically identified as PID 14-2-15-23-00-000-068 and is zoned “B-2” Commercial/Business District.
Staff gave their report on this case as outlined in the Administrator’s Report.
ZONING BOARD OF APPEALS STANDARDS FOR SPECIAL USE PERMIT:
(1) Existing uses and zoning of nearby property and relationship to Edwardsville’s adopted comprehensive plan.
| Direction Zoning Designation Use | ||
| North | “B-2”
Commercial/Business | Commercial |
| South | “B-2”
Commercial/Business | Commercial |
| East | “B-2”
Commercial/Business | Commercial |
| West | Village of Glen Carbon | Commercial |
(2) Extent to which property value diminishes adjacent to the zoned parcels. Value decrease to be supplied by the petitioner and made by professional appraiser.
No property value information provided by petitioner.
(3) Extent to which the proposed change alters or promotes the public health, safety morals or general welfare.
The proposed use will promote the public health, safety, morals, or general welfare of the community by providing a new amenity for City residents. The site had previously been occupied by a gas station.
(4) The relative gain to the public as compared to the hardship imposed upon the property owners, and there is a need for the proposed special use.
It will not negatively impact the public and will not impose a hardship on the owners. The site is a commercial outlot of the existing development.
(5) The suitability of the subject property for the zoned purposes indicated by ordinance. The site is suitable for the uses listed in the B-2 zoning code.
Debbie Stosz present to speak regarding the petitio. The restaurant will contain 2 drive through lanes with 22 stacking parking spaces for both lanes. There will be 2 order boards and 2 pick up lanes.
STAFF DISCUSSION & RECOMMENDATION
Staff recommend approval of the Special Use Permit (SUP).
Motion made by David Gerber to approve the Special Use Permit as submitted and seconded by Jeannie Krebs.
ROLL CALL: 5 Ayes, 0 Nays, 0 Abstain. Motion approved.
D. Case 2023-24 - Raising Cane’s Restaurants, LLC has petitioned the City of Edwardsville for a variance to allow for a 28’ front building setback rather than the required 50’ setback at 2104 Governors Parkway.
The property is more specifically identified as PID 14-2-15-23-00-000-068 and is zoned “B-2” Commercial/Business District.
Staff gave their report on this case as outlined in the Administrator’s Report.
ZONING BOARD OF APPEALS STANDARDS FOR VARIANCE:
1. The particular physical surroundings, shape or topographical condition of the specific property involved would result in a particular hardship upon the owner, as distinguished from a mere inconvenience or loss of revenue, if the strict letter of the regulations were carried out.
While there is not a unique condition on the site itself, the physical surroundings are unique. They include a larger right-of-way for Troy Road than what is found on surrounding properties. There is a maximum distance of 75 feet of right of way before the property line.
2. The condition upon which the requested variance is based would not be applicable, generally to other property within the same zoning classification.
The requested variance would not be generally applicable to other property within the same zoning classification.
3. The alleged difficulty or hardship has not been created by any person presently having an interest in the property.
The requested variance would not be generally applicable to other property within the same zoning classification.
4. The granting of the variance will not be detrimental to the public welfare or injurious to other property or improvements in the neighborhood in which the property is located.
Granting this variance will not have a negative effect on the public welfare, nor will it be injurious to other property or improvements in the area.
5. The proposed variance will not impair an adequate supply of light and air to adjacent property, or substantially increase congestion in the public streets, or increase the danger of fire, or endanger the public safety, or substantially diminish or impair property values within the neighborhood.
The proposed variance will not impair an adequate supply of light and air to adjacent property, will not increase congestion, nor will it impact public safety or diminish property values in the neighborhood.
6. The proposed variance complies with the spirit and intent of the restrictions imposed by this code.
The request does comply with the spirit and intent of the restrictions imposed by the Zoning Code. The principle building adheres to the 50 foot setback. The proposed canopies would be further from the road than many commercial buildings with the same zoning along Troy Road.
7. There is no self-imposed hardship.
The hardship would not be considered self-imposed.
Debbie Stosz explained the variance requested is for 2 canopies at the drive through lanes (one for ordering and one for picking up their order).
A motion was made by Denver Seay to approve the variance as requested and seconded by David Gerber.
ROLL CALL: 5 Ayes, 0 Nays, 0 Abstain. Motion approved.
V. OLD BUSINESS:
None.
VI. NEW BUSINESS:
None.
VII. ADJOURNMENT: David Gerber made a motion to adjourn seconded by Denver Seay.
https://www.cityofedwardsville.com/AgendaCenter/ViewFile/Agenda/_07242023-3067
Alerts Sign-up