Alton ZBA denies request to formalize contractor's yard at Swan Lake Trail

The Alton Board of Adjustment denied a special-exception request Oct. 2 for a contractor’s yard at Map 11, Lot 2813 (Swan Lake Trail), concluding the use is not appropriate for the subdivision and presents nuisance and covenant concerns. The vote followed about two hours of testimony from the applicant, neighbors and board members.

The application asked the board to allow a contractor’s yard in the Rural Residential zoning district under Article 400 §401(d)(17). The site — a roughly 16-acre residual lot accessed from Swan Lake Trail — already contains a 42-by-95-foot metal building used to store lawn-care equipment, several pickup trucks and multiple snowplows. The applicant said five employees typically meet at the site in the morning and then leave for jobs; the building currently has no electric service and there is no septic on the parcel. The applicant said materials are not sold from the site and that a compost pile of leaves and grass is contained in a former excavation hole on the lot.

Supporters said the operation is small-scale and considerate of neighbors. David Ohlwein, of 55 Swan Lake Trail, told the board, "we hardly notice that it's there," and said he has no safety concerns with the operation. Terry Hollacker, a neighbor, also provided written support, saying the business has been a positive contribution to the area.

Opponents — including several abutters who presented time-stamped video and daily traffic logs from home security cameras — argued the volume and character of commercial traffic have changed the character of the dead-end subdivision and created safety and privacy problems. Johnny and Jacqueline Dodge, abutters who provided extensive time-stamped clips and a daily tally, told the board that commercial vehicles accounted for a majority of daily traffic on many days this summer and that the activity is "a major infringement on my privacy," according to Jacqueline Dodge. The opponents also submitted broker assessments asserting the presence of a contractor’s yard would lower nearby residential property values.

Board members ran the application through the special-exception worksheet. Members differed on parts of the worksheet, but the panel found the site inappropriate and that valid objections had been presented by abutters; members also concluded there was an undue nuisance from vehicular traffic. One member recused earlier in the hearing. After discussion, the board voted to deny the special exception. The motion to deny was made by Tim Morgan and seconded; the board recorded a 4–0 vote to deny (four members voting, one recused).

The denial means the applicant cannot rely on the proposed special-exception use at that location; any future use change would require a new application. The applicant and his agent indicated they would pursue other avenues (such as planning-board review if eligible) but no planning-board approval for a contractor’s yard was granted prior to the ZBA decision.

Case details and clarifying items: the lot is described by the applicant as roughly 16 acres; the existing metal building is about 42 by 95 feet; the applicant reported five employees who meet on-site in the morning and occasional stockpiled snowplows and equipment; no on-site electric service to the building was reported and no septic system serves the building at the time of the hearing. Neighbors estimated the compost pile at roughly 50–100 cubic yards and said it is contained in a former excavation hole; the applicant said the pile is leaves and clippings and is periodically turned. The board considered a deed restriction described in earlier conveyances that opponents say limits Swan Lake lots to single-family residential use, and members said that restriction weighed against allowing the contractor’s yard.