Citation in context

#q0a556284
minutes 2016-11-21 City meeting records #q0a556284 Open original ↗

November 21, 2016 — Meeting Minutes

These are the minutes of the City Plan Commission/Architectural Review Board meeting held November 21, 2016. The document records attendance, approval of the November 7, 2016 minutes, architectural review requests (including a front-yard fence replacement at 168 North Central Avenue and discussion of fence/wall treatments along Hanley Road), and city business items such as an update to ARB guidelines and upcoming presentations on Centene’s proposed Special Development Plan. The excerpts record motions and unanimous approvals on specific applications (e.g., approval of a wall with staff-reviewed material changes and approval of a submitted railing), conditions for fence/planting installation, and the meeting adjournment time.
Cited passage

MINUTES

CITY PLAN COMMISSION/ARCHITECTURAL REVIEW BOARD

NOVEMBER 21, 2016

The City Plan Commission/Architectural Review Board of the City of Clayton, Missouri, met upon the above date at 5:30 p.m. Upon roll call, the following responded:

Present: Chairman Steve Lichtenfeld Joanne M. Boulton, Aldermanic Representative Craig Owens, City Manager Ron Reim Josh Corson William Liebermann Scott Wilson

Absent: None

Also in Attendance: Kevin O’Keefe, City Attorney Susan M. Istenes, AICP, Planning Director

Chairman Steve Lichtenfeld welcomed everyone to the meeting. He then asked that all cell phones be turned off and that conversations take place outside the meeting room. He announced that the 8025 Bonhomme (Clayton on the Park) project has been postponed until the next meeting.

MINUTES

The minutes of the November 7, 2016 meeting was presented for approval. The minutes were approved after having been previously forwarded to each member.

ARCHITECTURAL REVIEW – FRONT YARD FENCE – 168 NORTH CENTRAL AVENUE

Kent and Jeannine Kalkwarf, property owners, were in attendance at the meeting.

Director Istenes explained that this is a request to allow the replacement of an existing 6-foot high wood (painted black) privacy fence along the eastern and northern property lines with a new 8-foot high cedar fence; the top 2-feet of which is proposed to be wood lattice. The existing fence along the northern property line (fronting Pershing Avenue) is set back 7 feet from the public sidewalk

Director Istenes explained that this is a request to allow the replacement of an existing 6-foot high wood (painted black) privacy fence along the eastern and northern property lines with a new 8-foot high cedar fence; the top 2-feet of which is proposed to be wood lattice. The existing fence along the northern property line (fronting Pershing Avenue) is set back 7 feet from the public sidewalk

2 and is approximately 15 feet long. It is located between the eastern property line and the eastern edge of the driveway. To allow more yard area, the owners are proposing to install the new fence 4 feet closer to the sidewalk, leaving a 3-foot wide planting bed between the fence and the public sidewalk. The existing landscaping in front of the fence will be removed and new shrubs, possibly narrow leaf buckthorns (slow growing, deciduous, 10-12 feet tall at maturity and 6-10 feet wide at maturity) and/or dwarf slender deutzia (deciduous, 2-4 feet tall at maturity), will be planted in front of the fence to soften its appearance. The owners plan to paint the new fence black once it has properly cured. Section 405.1900 of the Zoning Regulations requires that all fences located in the front yard in single-family zoning districts be approved by the Architectural Review Board prior to installation. Historically, the Architectural Review Board has considered requests for front yard fences that are not in conformance with the zoning requirements. For example, on corner lots, 6- foot fences have been approved on “secondary” front yards (what functionally would be a property’s side yard) provided the fence is ornamental or decorative (not a solid wood, chain or vinyl fence) and is placed on the property in a manner which provides a sufficient area for landscaping to break up the monotonous appearance of the fence. Director Istenes noted that the proposed design and materials of the fence are not consistent with the Architectural Review Board’s preference for ornamental or decorative fencing in front yards. Additionally, the new fence will be located 4 foot closer to the sidewalk and is proposed to be constructed to a height of 8 feet, thus making it a very prominent feature along a residential street. With respect to landscaping, the existing shrubs, commonly known as “Firebush,”are located in front of the existing fence. They are mature and have provided a seasonally opaque screen of the wood fence from the sidewalk and street; however, the Firebush, and an existing tree at the northeast corner of the existing fence, will be removed and replaced with plantings that will make the fence immediately visible from the street. Director Istenes stated that staff is of the opinion that the portion of the fence that fronts Pershing Avenue and the fence return to the house should be constructed with materials which are more decorative in nature (metal/iron) and should be limited in height to 6 feet and therefore, recommends approval subject to the following conditions:

limited in height to 6 feet and shall be constructed of a decorative iron or metal to be approved by staff prior to the issuance of a fence permit.

Original document

This document is too large to preview here. Open the original ↗.