Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Get email alerts on the Natural Resource Variance topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
Board approves relocation of resource-protection line so property owner can build detached garage; no net loss required
Summary
The board granted a variance to relocate part of a natural resource protection line at 3927 Wild Hollow Court to allow a 900-square-foot detached garage, conditioned on recording a revised legal description reflecting an equal exchange that produces no net loss of protected area.
The City of Wildwood Board of Adjustment on June 19 approved a petition to adjust the final natural resource protection line and associated 25-foot foundation setback at 3927 Wild Hollow Court to allow construction of a 900-square-foot two-car detached garage. The board’s approval is conditioned on recording a revised legal description and exhibit reflecting the swap of protected and unprotected area so the lot has no net loss of protected area.
Planner Robin Keith described the Estates at Deer Hollow lot as heavily wooded with approximately 100 feet of relief and noted the subdivision’s natural resource protection standards (Chapter 420.200, Subdivision and Development Regulations) and the 25-foot foundation setback that applies. The petitioner proposed an equal exchange—removing protection from a small area where the garage would sit and adding an equivalent protected area elsewhere on the lot—so the net protected acreage remains unchanged. The department and the petitioner agreed this was a logical placement for the garage given the slope, well location and other constraints; staff recommended approval provided the petitioner submit the revised legal description for recording.
Kevin Ruck, the property owner, testified by Zoom that the lot’s steep topography and an existing private well constrained garage placement and that the requested relocation would allow compliance with HOA rules limiting visible outdoor storage. Ruck confirmed he had discussed the plan with HOA leadership and expected to record the revised legal description and exhibit requested by staff.
No public comment was received by the Department of Planning. The board voted to approve the variance (motion made and seconded) with the conditions outlined in the department’s recommendation; the vote was unanimous.
Planning staff noted past variances in the subdivision for similar situations and said the equal-exchange approach is an accepted flexibility in the natural-resource regulations when it results in no net loss of protected area. The petitioner must record the revised legal description and exhibits with St. Louis County as a condition of approval before final permits will be issued.
