Scott Wilson asked why this is different from the fence they just considered at 168 North Central. Joanne Boulton stated because of this property’s location along Hanley Road, it deserved different consideration.

5

Scott Wilson commented that it seems inconsistent with the 168 North Central Avenue decision.

Susan Istenes noted that Hanley Road is an arterial road and carries a very high volume of traffic and 168 North Central’s side road is Pershing which is a residential street with relatively low traffic volume.

Joanne Boulton told the owner that she understands their desire for protection from Hanley Road.

Ron Reim indicated that some soil preparation may be needed.

William Lieberman asked if there are Trustees.

Ms. Hartz replied “no”.

Joanne Boulton commented that there was a fence there before.

Ms. Hartz indicated that some fencing was there already. She added that she installed the new fencing before realizing she had to come here for approval.

Ron Reim stated that he, too, understands the reason why the fence is desired.

Chairman Lichtenfeld stated that the alternative seems to be a good one.

Joanne Boulton asked if she would still color the fence.

Ms. Hartz replied “yes”.

Ellen Hartz (owner’s mother) asked for guidance as to what color to use.

Chairman Lichtenfeld stated that a medium-dark brown would be good. He recommended bringing in a color sample to staff for approval.

Ms. Hartz asked if the color shown on the alternative is a good color.

Chairman Lichtenfeld and Ron Reim indicated that they would prefer a little lighter brown.

Hearing no further questions or comments from either the members or audience, Ron Reim made a motion to approve the alternate design to be in the same location as existing fence (alternate design as distributed at meeting) per staff recommendations 2 and 3 and that the stain color and landscaping be approved by staff prior to implementation. The motion was seconded by Scott Wilson and unanimously approved by the members.

Hearing no further questions or comments from either the members or audience, Ron Reim made a motion to approve the alternate design to be in the same location as existing fence (alternate design as distributed at meeting) per staff recommendations 2 and 3 and that the stain color and landscaping be approved by staff prior to implementation. The motion was seconded by Scott Wilson and unanimously approved by the members.

6 ARCHITECTURAL REVIEW – FRONT YARD RETAINING WALL – 80 ABERDEEN

Richard Hente, contractor, was in attendance at the meeting.

Susan Istenes explained that the 8,480-square-foot lot is located on the south side of Aberdeen Place; just east of University Lane (second lot east of the intersection). The property has a zoning designation of R-2 Single Family Dwelling District. The proposed project consists of the construction of a 2-foot tall retaining wall within the front yard area parallel to the sidewalk. Section 405.1900 of the City of Clayton Land Use Code requires that all front yard retaining walls in single-family zoning districts be approved by the Architectural Review Board prior to installation. The wall being proposed is constructed of Mosaic by Versa-lok in a natural color installed parallel to the sidewalk along Aberdeen and will run approximately 23-feet on each side of the front walkway and will turn the corners to be adjacent to the first three front steps before it terminates. Additionally, approximately two feet of wall will turn the corners on the east and west property lines. The property is currently undergoing extensive landscaping. Director Istenes noted that the location, height and materials of the proposed wall are consistent with other approved front yard walls and that the Mosaic system, although a man-made material, consists of varying colors, varying block sizes and tumbled edges; features required for walls visible from rights-of-way. Although the property is undergoing extensive landscaping, the addition of a landscaped green area between the wall and the sidewalk would help soften the appearance of two hard surfaces (the wall and the sidewalk) which will be adjacent to one another under the proposed plan. Director Istenes stated that staff recommends approval with the condition that the wall be set back at least three (3) feet from the back of the sidewalk in order to create a landscaped planting bed; the design and plantings of which are to be approved by the staff prior to the issuance of a building permit.

Mr. Hente stated that the Mosaic system forces 10-inch segments; 6-inch & 4-inch. He noted that the sidewalk slopes and that this charcoal/gray blend is not a tall wall and the ends go into the ground.

Chairman Lichtenfeld asked the result of pushing it 3-feet further back onto the property.

Mr. Hente indicated that the owner would lose yard space and with this product, it’s impossible; he would have to go with a 4-inch stone. He stated he would also be concerned with water drainage.

Scott Wilson stated that there are other walls that were built up to the sidewalk.

Joanne Boulton stated that the wall on the adjacent property is set back and it’s beautiful.

Mr. Hente stated that he’s seen that wall; it is made of natural stone. He agreed that there are some in the neighborhood that were built up to the sidewalk.

Hearing no further questions or comments, Ron Reim made a motion to approve per staff recommendation and that a change in material be approved by staff prior to installation. The motion was seconded by Joanne Boulton and unanimously approved by the Board.

8

ARCHITECTURAL REVIEW - FRONT YARD RAILING – 26 RIDGEMOOR

Ms. Lynn Kipnis, owner, was in attendance at the meeting.

Susan Istenes explained that the +/-12,540-square-foot lot is located mid-block on the east side of Ridgemoor Drive in the Claverach Park Subdivision. The proposed project consists of the construction of 60 feet of 34-inch to 38-inch tall hand-railing in the front yard, adjacent to an existing front walkway. The railing will be constructed with two runs of 1 inch x ½ inch channel iron spaced 4 inches apart with ½ inch square bar vertical pickets spaced approximately every 8 and ½ inches with a half ring (8 inches in diameter) welded between the channels and pickets. The top channel will be capped with a 1 and ¾ -inch wide molded cap rail and 1 and ½ inch x 11g square tubing posts with welded on cast iron collars. The railing will be primed with red oxide and finished in a bronze color. The railing will provide a measure of safety as one uses the walkway, which is stepped. The railing will be installed to follow the curve of the steps. Subdivision Trustee approval has not been submitted. 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. Director Istenes noted that due to existing site elevations in this area, there are several properties in this neighborhood that are developed with concrete walkways and steps leading across the front yard from the sidewalk to the front door. Under the City’s adopted building code, hand rails or a railing is not necessary for these walkway/steps due to the limited number of risers and the separation distance between the risers; however, because the railing is going to be a prominent feature in the front yard, not unlike a fence, staff felt that Architectural Review Board consideration was necessary. Staff is not aware of any handrails of a similar length in the front yard, although a nearby property has several 4 foot long metal decorative handrails along their front yard steps, made of similar materials and color. The railing is minimal in design with decorative elements located below the top rail and on the pickets. Although a prominent feature across the front yard, the materials of the proposed railing are of high quality and the color is neutral, therefore staff feels the visual impact is minimized by its design and recommends approval as submitted.

A material/color sample was distributed. Ms. Kipnis informed the members that the railing will follow the curve of the aggregate walkway and because of the color of the railing, it won’t be that visible.

Chairman Lichtenfeld stated that it is a good color.

Scott Wilson asked if this is being proposed for a safety reason.

Ms. Kipnis replied “yes”.

Joanne Boulton commented that it’s a handsome railing.

Kipnis replied “yes”. Joanne Boulton commented that it’s a handsome railing.

9 Ms. Kipnis informed the members that the Trustees have approved it.

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

CITY BUSINESS – DRIVEWAY MATERIAL

Director Istenes indicated that she has not prepared a report for this discussion; however, she is working with the City’s contracted architect (H3 Studio) on preparing an update to the ARB Guidelines. She reminded them that the City is lacking a Planner. She then informed the members that Centene’s proposed amendment to the Special Development Plan and the proposals for both Sub-district 1 and Sub-district 2a will be presented at the next meeting (December 5th).

Having no further business before this Commission this evening, the meeting adjourned at 6:35 p.m.

_______________________________ Recording Secretary