He added that he acquired the property in 1980 and that he’s been a Clayton resident since 1976; living at 141 Linden Avenue since 1969. He stated

4 that he rented out the subject property for 15-20 years after which he demolished the structure. He added that he has come to a point in his life where he needs to move on.

Mark Winings asked why there is a specific coverage regulation for front yards.

Louis Clayton indicated that although the Code does not specify (except in the UDD), it is likely to maintain open green space.

Jim Liberman asked about the generator.

Mr. Volz stated that it has a 2 hour minimum run time.

Mr. Tiber stated that they don’t yet have the specs, but it is a fairly small piece of equipment.

Josh Corson asked where the generator will be placed on the lot.

Ms. Strutman stated that they did not know yet.

Sally Cohn asked about the possibility of adding an arbor or something across the garage to add the illusion of greenery.

Ms. Strutman stated that she’s sure the owners will put something on the front garage terrace.

Sally Cohn asked what happens to the evergreen hedge on the north side of the house.

Mr. Donnelly indicated that he believes that’s the area being discussed with the neighbor and that he believes they will be removed and replaced with new plantings once construction is complete.

Ron Reim asked the applicant if there would be a problem implementing a condition of approval.

Sally Cohn noted a reference made on the plans and asked if they could avoid trenching.

Mr. Volz stated those two street trees are critical and that to protect those two trees, the water line will be bored.

Sally Cohn asked about the gas and sanitary lines.

Volz stated those two street trees are critical and that to protect those two trees, the water line will be bored. Sally Cohn asked about the gas and sanitary lines.

5 Mr. Volz indicated that because of the direct connection, those lines won’t be bored. He reminded everyone that normally new construction also involves demolition of an existing structure which is not the case here.

Sally Cohn commented that construction is tough on trees.

Mark Winings read an e-mail message from John and Jan Frank, of 144 North Bemiston which states: “We are concerned that the neighbors who live within 200 ft. of the building have not gotten sufficient notice. There are safety concerns with the driveway slope regarding pedestrians on the sidewalk. The trees on the north side of the lot are ours and we will not allow the roots to be pruned. The height and size of the building are a concern for the neighboring homes (for shade and lot size). We as neighbors hope to get another chance in public to air our concerns. Thank you for your understanding and concern with this matter-John and Jan Frank.”

Mr. Volz showed the limits of their disturbance on the site plan; noting it is their goal to stay away from their property. He added that not much grading will take place and none in the back.

Ms. Strutman stated that they lowered the house, heated the driveway and stair-stepped the house.

Chairman Lichtenfeld commented that because there is no basement below the screened porch, there will be minimal excavating.

Ms. Strutman concurred.

A discussion regarding the trees on the north side of the property ensued. Mr. Corcoran stated that he spoke with Baxter Gardens and that they can easily be removed, stored and replanted.

Kevin Stillman, property owner to the south, addressed the members and staff by stating that it would be nice to get more than one week’s notice. He voiced his concern with the height of the structure and questioned the location of the HVAC units.

Louis Clayton stated that the agenda is set one week prior to the meeting date and that’s when it is mailed.

Chairman Lichtenfeld stated that the HVAC units are shown on the north side.

Mr. Stillman asked about the possibility of water drainage onto his property.

Mr. Volz stated there will be no water flowing onto his property. He explained the drainage system to him.

Sally Cohn referred to a letter written by Helen DiFate addressed to the Commission (copy provided previously to the members). The letter reads: “I am sorry I am unable to attend your

7 January 20 meeting. I have reviewed online the submitted materials as well as the staff analyses and recommendations. In 38 years at 131 North Bemiston I have seen a lot of change and also contributed to the change as the architect of 127-129 North Bemiston. The addition of another home on the block is welcomed. However, the height of the new home relative to the adjacent homes concerns me. Could the west facing gable roof (above the second floor) become a hip roof? That would visually reduce the height as the roof plane recedes away from the viewer and the darker color of roof material would be less imposing. The actual height of the home would not change, only the visual perception. Thank you for your consideration. Sincerely, Helen DiFate”.

Jim Liberman asked if we allow people to send in letters during the meetings.

Chairman Lichtenfeld stated that public comments are received and that a decision was made to allow them.

At this time, Mark Winings read an e-mail he just received from Jill Evans Petzall, who expresses concern about the driveway slope and height and mass of the home.

Ms. Strutman indicated that they carefully considered the front elevation and there is only a small amount of stucco in the gable and the owners prefer not to change that. With regard to the height, Ms. Strutman noted that at 31-feet, 7 ½-inches, they are 3-foot, 4-inches under the allowable height for this zoning district. Pictures of other area homes/properties where they believe vehicles are backed out of the driveway onto the street were shown; she noted their driveway will be heated. Ms. Strutman then referred to the fact that they are also under the maximum allowable coverage at 46%, where 55% is permitted.

Chairman Lichtenfeld commented that the front garage features standard design for the area.

Ms. Strutman agreed.

Jim Liberman noted that the height of the house is under the threshold.

Chairman Lichtenfeld asked if they would consider changing the roof to a hip roof to provide visual relief, adding that he did not believe that is unreasonable.

Mr. Corcoran stated that the gable is lower than the peak roof behind it and that they picked features from homes on Central that they liked.

Sally Cohn suggested a different color gable.

Ms. Strutman indicated that it is not white; it’s a cream, off-white color.

Ms. Strutman indicated that it is not white; it’s a cream, off-white color.

8 Sally Cohn commented that it still pops out.

Chairman Lichtenfeld stated that he understands Ms. DiFate’s comments and that a hip roof would lower the “visual appearance” of the house somewhat, but doing that would almost destroy the character of the home. He complimented the fact that the north and south elevations (sides) of the home are not blank brick walls.

Being no further questions or comments, Jim Liberman made a motion to approve as submitted. The motion was seconded by Ron Reim and unanimously approved by the Board.

SITE PLAN REVIEW/ARCHITECTURAL REVIEW – NEW SINGLE FAMILY RESIDENCE – 234 NORTH BRENTWOOD BOULEVARD

Paul Doerner, project architect, Mike Rechan, builder and John Faulk, civil engineer, were in attendance at the meeting.

Susan Istenes explained that this is a request for review of the site plan associated with the proposed construction of a 4,352-square-foot (excluding the basement) single-family residence. The 8,625-square-foot R-4 zoned site is located on the southeast corner of North Brentwood Boulevard and Kingsbury Boulevard. The Board of Aldermen approved a subdivision of the property into three individual lots on January 14, 2014. On March 5, 2014 and May 7, 2014, the Plan Commission and Architectural Review Board approved plans for two new single-family homes on the two southernmost lots which are currently under construction. This request is a proposal to develop the northernmost lot. The height of the proposed residence is 32-feet 1-inch as measured from the average existing grade to the mean height of the roof. A 495-square-foot, 20- foot tall detached garage is proposed with access from Kingsbury Boulevard. The plans show the HVAC units located at the south side of the home and screened by an 8-foot tall privacy fence. Trash will be stored in a 40-square-foot trash enclosure located adjacent to the detached garage and will be screened by a wood gate. The impervious coverage on site prior to the demolition of the previous structure was 57.83 percent. The plans decrease the impervious coverage to 54.35 percent, which is below the maximum allowable impervious coverage of 55 percent. The proposed impervious coverage for the required front yard is 19.22 percent, which is below the allowable 45 percent. The storm water runoff prior to the demolition of the previous structure, according to the MSD 15 year, 20 minute calculation, was 0.547 cubic feet per second (CFS). The proposed runoff is 0.535 CFS, which represents a decrease in 0.012 CFS, and therefore storm water mitigation is not required. Downspouts will be piped to two pop-up bubblers in the front yard along Brentwood Boulevard, and to three pop-bubblers in the front yard along Kingsbury Boulevard. The Public Works Department has reviewed the site plan and finds it acceptable. The proposed landscape design features a variety of trees, shrubs, perennials, and ground cover suited for this region. Two exiting trees totaling 56-caliper inches will be removed which requires onsite replacement. The landscape plan proposes 57-caliper-inches of new deciduous trees on site including Columnar Hornbeam, Bloodgood Japanese Maple, and October Glory Red Maple. Two existing street trees will remain. The City’s contracted landscape architect is of the opinion that the proposed trees are