Board of Adjustment denies variance for ground‑mounted solar at Shallow Lake Drive

The O'Fallon Board of Adjustment voted to deny a variance request from homeowners Megan Lowe and Kyle Hawkinson that would have reduced the 25‑foot rear‑yard setback to 10 feet to allow a ground‑mounted solar array at 1309 Shallow Lake Drive. Staff had recommended denial, saying the applicants met only one of the five criteria required for a variance and that their request stemmed from disagreement with the code rather than a demonstrated physical hardship.

Staff told the board the city's solar code (referenced in the staff report as section 400.930(a)(2) and the general rear‑yard rule at 400.080(d)(4)(c)) requires ground‑mounted solar to meet standard setbacks and lot coverage rules. The staff presentation also pointed to a submitted photograph that raised a potential property maintenance issue under the residential code.

At the hearing, Kyle Hawkinson, who identified himself as a mechanical engineer with renewable‑energy certification, argued the proposed ground‑mount is functionally similar to an accessory structure such as a shed and said accessory structures can be placed closer to the rear lot line under section 400.275. Hawkinson said the property has a large front‑yard pin oak and other trees that cast significant shade on the south‑facing roof. He estimated a roof shadow length of about 44 feet from the house ridge and said placing the array only in locations permitted by the current setback would substantially reduce generation and make the system uneconomic.

Arnie C., the city's public advocate, opposed the variance during public comment. He requested records from a prior closed session related to the application, invoked Missouri statutes on open meetings (chapter 610, RSMo.), and argued the applicant had not proved a hardship under chapter 89, RSMo. He also raised safety and environmental concerns about solar panels nearing end of life, including recycling and fire/battery risks.

In rebuttal, Hawkinson said the applicants would own (not lease) the system and that modern photovoltaic modules no longer use the hazardous materials he said were experimented with in earlier decades; he reiterated that ground‑mounted solar is permitted in the city and that the variance was sought to preserve vegetation and to maintain usable system output.

After discussion, a motion to approve the variance was called, seconded and put to a vote. The motion did not pass; the board did not grant the requested setback reduction. The transcript does not include a roll‑call tally of individual yes/no votes.