Citation in context
June 15, 2015 — Meeting Minutes
Cited passage
Mr. Delong addressed the members by explaining the landscape plan and showing the location of new and existing trees/shrubs.
7
Sally Cohn referenced evergreens around the AC units; noting that there is not ample room. She recommended using an “L” shaped fence rather than landscaping.
Mr. Wall asked to plant shrubs on the east side (front) and fence the side.
Sally Cohn agreed. She noted that there is no canopy tree in the plan. She asked if one could be planted.
Mr. Delong indicated that there is no place to put one.
Sally Cohn asked if the proposed Cherokee Chief Dogwood could be replaced with a small, 35-40 foot tree, i.e. Black Gum (right next to the terrace).
Mr. Delong stated he wouldn’t want to put a canopy tree there and the owners want more of an open lawn area.
Chairman Lichtenfeld asked if the terrace is covered.
Mr. Delong indicated that it is not.
Being no further questions or comments and hearing none from the audience, Sally Cohn made a motion to approve as submitted per staff recommendations with the following revision to recommendation No. 3: to require a fence rather than landscaping on the front side of the AC unit and one or more evergreens at the north edge of the fence (around the AC units). The motion was seconded by Mark Winings and unanimously approved by the members.
The architectural aspects of the project were now up for review.
Susan Istenes explained that the proposed addition is located at the rear of the home and is not visible from the street. The primary building materials for the proposed addition are brick with minor white Hardie Board siding accents. The height of the addition is +/- 28.3 feet from average existing grade to the mid-point of the roof. The proposed roof of the addition will be clad in gray slate, and white double-hung windows are proposed. The proposed detached garage is located at the southwest corner of the property and is +/- 14 feet tall as measured from grade to the mid-point of the roof. The building materials will match those on the home. A single garage door painted white is proposed. The existing driveway will be removed and replaced with exposed aggregate. The existing vinyl, wood, and metal fences will remain. A 3-4-foot tall modular-block retaining wall featuring various sized blocks, tumbled edges and various colors is proposed at the rear of the home. Susan noted that the project as proposed is in conformance with the requirements of the R-2 Single Family Dwelling District and the Architectural Review Guidelines. Staff is of the opinion that the proposed design of the addition and detached garage is consistent with existing design
line.
Mr. Wall presented a site plan. He noted that the rear addition includes removing a back patio and porch area. He stated that the existing driveway will be expanded somewhat, but that some of the hardscape on the north side of the house will be removed to compensate. He noted that a new 2 car garage will be at the southwest corner of the property. He stated that they are happy to shield the existing AC units as staff recommends.
Mr. Delong addressed the members by explaining the landscape plan and showing the location of new and existing trees/shrubs.
Susan noted that the project as proposed is in conformance with the requirements of the R-2 Single Family Dwelling District and the Architectural Review Guidelines. Staff is of the opinion that the proposed design of the addition and detached garage is consistent with existing design
8 and materials on the home and on other homes in the neighborhood and recommends approval as requested.
Mr. Wall stated that they will match existing materials. They want the addition to closely match the existing structure.
Chairman Lichtenfeld asked if a brick sample is needed. He stated that he believes it can be easily matched and suggested allowing staff to approve the brick before permit issuance.
Mr. Wall stated that they are only waiting for MSD approval.
Being no further questions or comments and hearing none from the audience, Mark Winings made a motion to approve as submitted. The motion was seconded by Sally Cohn and unanimously approved by the Board.
Chairman Lichtenfeld asked when they hope to break ground.
Mr. Wall replied “as soon as possible”.
Chairman Lichtenfeld wished them luck.
ARCHITECTURAL REVIEW – COMMERCIAL ALTERATION – 226 SOUTH MERAMEC AVENUE
Michael Bauer, project architect, was in attendance at the meeting.
Susan Istenes explained that the property has a zoning designation of High Density Commercial District (HDC) and Central Station Transit Oriented Development Overlay District, and is located on the east side of South Meramec Avenue between Bonhomme Avenue and Shaw Park Drive. The lot measures 9,010 square feet (.207 acres) and is improved with a 3-story, 11,040 square foot commercial building built in 1961. The applicant proposes a complete interior and exterior renovation of the building. On March 5, 2015, the Board of Adjustment approved variances for the addition of the following to the front façade: new entrance canopy, building skin, overhead coiling grill unit, architectural columns, architectural cornice, and a decorative canopy. The applicant has reduced the scope of alterations and currently proposes to cover the existing brick on the west (front) and south (side) elevations with tan colored granite panels in both polished and honed (matte) finishes. The parapet wall will be raised +/- 5 feet. The building will also receive a new aluminum entrance canopy, and wall mounted light fixtures. Susan stated that staff is of the opinion that the proposed exterior alterations feature high-quality materials and will give a contemporary update to this traditional commercial building and recommends approval as submitted.
The building will also receive a new aluminum entrance canopy, and wall mounted light fixtures. Susan stated that staff is of the opinion that the proposed exterior alterations feature high-quality materials and will give a contemporary update to this traditional commercial building and recommends approval as submitted.
9
Mr. Bauer explained the project and presented a sample of the granite material (composite thin granite panel; honeycomb skin) to go over the existing building. He noted that there is not a lot of structural work associated with the project.
Chairman Lichtenfeld asked if any of the existing skin will be removed.
Mr. Bauer replied “no”.
Chairman Lichtenfeld asked if the parapet needs to be redone.
Mr. Bauer stated that it is being raised.
Chairman Lichtenfeld asked if the light and dark granite samples represent the light and dark on the building.
Mr. Bauer replied “yes”.
Chairman Lichtenfeld asked if the building directly to the north will remain.
Sally Cohn asked if a green roof was considered.
Mr. Bauer stated that it is a possibility in the future.
Sally Cohn noted that she was thinking of a green roof for storm water, not necessarily for people to use.
Being no further questions or comments and hearing none from the audience, Craig Owens made a motion to approve as submitted. The motion was seconded by Sally Cohn and unanimously approved by the Board.
*******************************************************************************
Sally Cohn referenced the trees planted by the City in front of Starbucks along Wydown; noting that they are columnar trees, not canopy trees, so they won’t create shade. She mentioned that the City will lose a lot of canopy in the next few years.
Craig Owens noted trees like that are planted when there are sight distance issues or near o outdoor dining. He stated that trees are selected to try and fit the environment.
Sally Cohn stated that she would think shade trees would be desired for outdoor dining areas. She stated that Minneapolis made it happen; maybe they have larger tree wells.