ARCHITECTURAL REVIEW – EXTERIOR ALTERATION – COMMERCIAL - 135 NORTH MERAMEC AVENUE (MIDWEST REGIONAL BANK)

Terry Dawdy, project architect, was in attendance at the meeting. Susan Istenes explained that the proposed project includes adding a door to the northeast corner of the building, installing a walkway leading to the North Meramec Avenue sidewalk and installing a

2 retaining wall to support the sidewalk. The applicant is proposing a concrete walkway and versa- lok retaining wall. The proposed changes will provide an access point to the building from the northeast corner of the site. A retaining wall is required due to the difference in finished floor height inside the building and grade of the sidewalk. The proposed wall varies in height with the highest point being 2.5 feet above grade. The applicant has not provided details on the proposed versa-lock wall. Modular stone or versa-lok is an allowed retaining wall material if it includes three different size blocks, a varying color pattern and tumbled or rolled edges. Staff believes that a retaining wall in this location is compatible with the existing building and surrounding properties. The applicant is also removing a tree to make room for the concrete walkway. The proposed project does not require Site Plan Review, and therefore, the applicant is not required to replace the tree. Staff recommendation is to approve with the condition that the versa-lok retaining wall contain three different size blocks, a varying color pattern and tumbled or rolled edges.

Mr. Dawdy presented a block sample to the members.

A discussion regarding the tree removal ensued. Mr. Dawdy stated that they will come back with a landscape plan.

Chairman Lichtenfeld asked if the block wall being proposed is laid/installed dry.

Mr. Dawdy replied “yes”.

Slides depicting sites that contain the wall they are proposing to use were shown.

Hearing no further questions or comments, Ron Reim made a motion to approve per staff recommendation and that the tree to be removed as part of this project is to be replaced or otherwise compensated per staff review and approval. The motion was seconded by Joanne Boulton and unanimously approved by the Board.

ARCHITECTURAL REVIEW – EXTERIOR ALTERATION (REPLACEMENT FRONT YARD WALL) – 7653 CARSWOLD DRIVE

Amber Jordan, owner, was in attendance at the meeting.

Susan Istenes explained that the project consists of the installation of a new walkway leading from the driveway to the existing front walkway and installing retaining walls along both sides of the new walkway and existing front patio. The project was constructed without a permit or review from the Architectural Review Board and therefore, the applicant has been asked to retroactively apply. The retaining walls replaced existing deteriorated walls. The retaining walls range in height from 3 inches to 3 feet. The walls are constructed of Anchor Highland Stone System. Director Istenes noted that the City’s Zoning Regulations requires that all walls located in the front yard in single-family zoning districts be approved by the Architectural Review Board prior to installation. She added that the proposed design and materials of the retaining walls are consistent with the

Director Istenes noted that the City’s Zoning Regulations requires that all walls located in the front yard in single-family zoning districts be approved by the Architectural Review Board prior to installation. She added that the proposed design and materials of the retaining walls are consistent with the

3 Architectural Review Board’s preference for masonry walls in front yards. The modular block wall includes three different block sizes, color variation and tumbled edges. Anchor Highland Stone is listed as an example of an accepted modular block system in the Architectural Review Guidelines for retaining walls. The location of the wall is perpendicular to the public sidewalk and setback from the sidewalk. Additionally, the new wall supports existing planting beds in the front yard. Director Istenes continued by informing the members that staff is of the opinion that the wall is compatible with neighborhood character and the existing house and recommends approval as installed.

Ms. Jordan apologized for not realizing she needed review by this Board. She then distributed photographs of the property depicting the subject wall.

Chairman Lichtenfeld asked what was there before.

Ms. Jordan indicated that there was a failing brick wall before.

Chairman Lichtenfeld asked if the new wall has color variations.

Ms. Jordan replied “yes” noting dark and light grays.

Chairman Lichtenfeld noted that the house is buff and red. He asked if the wall matches.

Ms. Jordan stated that the wall matches well with the roof on the house; she added that she also plans to install gray shutters on the house.

Ron Reim commented that this is the second after-the-fact install in a short time; suggesting there must be confusion between homeowners and contractors. He asked how this confusion can be addressed and suggested the possibility of requiring a permit.

Ms. Jordan referred to incorrect information in the City’s brochure about retaining walls.

Joanne Boulton noted the importance of getting the right information out there to the public; adding that she likes Ron’s idea of a requiring a permit.

Hearing no further questions or comments and hearing none from the audience, William Liebermann made a motion to approve as installed. The motion was seconded by Ron Reim and unanimously approved by the Board.

ARCHITECTURAL REVIEW – EXTERIOR ALTERATION – COMMERCIAL – 230 SOUTH BEMISTON AVENUE

Bob Winters, project architect, was in attendance at the meeting.