Mr. Boerding indicated that they will be mitigating additional flow with an infiltration trench.

8 Chairman Lichtenfeld asked if there will be a pop-up emitter.

Mr. Boerding replied “yes”.

Joanne Boulton asked the width of the driveway.

Mr. Boerding replied “just under 10 feet”.

Chairman Lichtenfeld asked the width of the garage door.

Mr. Boerding replied “8 feet”.

Ron Reim commented that it seems challenging.

Joanne Boulton commented that the corner downspout might have a short lifespan due to car backing issues. She asked about the temporary sediment trap.

Mr. Boerding stated that it will only be there during construction. A discussion regarding drainage ensued.

Ben Uchitelle, Clayton resident, questioned the capability of a large vehicle, such as an SUV, accessing the garage.

Mr. Boerding stated that he believes the garage can be accessed without hitting something.

Chairman Lichtenfeld recommended widening the driveway; noting the coverage limitations.

Joanne Boulton commented that it’s a lot of house for the lot size.

Hearing no further questions or comments, Scott Wilson made a motion to approve the site plan per staff recommendations. The motion was seconded by Craig Owens and unanimously approved by the members.

The architectural aspects of the project were now up for review.

Susan Istenes stated the home to the north (340 North Forsyth Boulevard) was constructed in 1949 and is +/- 8.95 feet shorter than the proposed home (as measured from the mid-point of each roof). The existing home to the south (330 North Forsyth Boulevard) was constructed in 1947 and is +/- 9.69 feet shorter than proposed home. As required by Section 410.385 of the Clayton Gardens Urban Design District, to avoid tall, blocky building forms, new structures shall incorporate a transition in height and scale through one of six possible techniques. The applicant has implemented one of the permitted strategies to mitigate the height difference to the south and is requesting Alternative Compliance for mitigating the height difference to the north. According to

The applicant has implemented one of the permitted strategies to mitigate the height difference to the south and is requesting Alternative Compliance for mitigating the height difference to the north. According to

9 the applicant, the following permitted technique is used to mitigate the height difference to the south: “Increasing the side yard setback one foot for every five feet the height of the structure exceeds the height of the adjacent structure at the side yard.” The required side yard setbacks are 5 feet and a minimum 6.9 foot setback on the south side would be needed to meet the mitigation technique. The proposed setback is 10 feet on the south side. The applicant is requesting that the following technique be permitted as a form of Alternative Compliance for mitigating the height difference between the proposed house and the existing home to the north: a hip roof. The applicant has provided the following rationale for the requested mitigation strategy: “While our 2 story home design is approximately 9 feet taller than the immediate adjacent properties, there are new 2 story houses that have also been constructed in the neighborhood that are similar in height and massing to the home we are proposing. We have kept the height less than 30 feet (as required) and utilized a 6:12 (hipped) roof pitch – which is similar to the roof pitch (and overhangs) of adjacent homes. In addition, extensive brick design and detailing minimizes the appearance of all façades, and specifically reduces the massing on the front façade to a more human scale. The one (1) story protected entry into the home further enhances the importance of this scale – and is consistent with adjacent properties.” Staff is of the opinion that the hip roof does reduce the impact of the proposed two story house by eliminating the gables under the roof line that often add to the perceived height of homes. Evergreen plantings are also proposed along the northern elevation, which will provide a buffer between the homes. Clayton Gardens has traditionally been dominated by the use of standard size brick in a variety of red tones. The primary building material for the proposed home is red brick (Bordeaux-acme). The roof will be clad in asphalt shingles, charcoal grey in color and dark brown casement windows are proposed. A 9.5-foot wide paved driveway is proposed on the south side of the home that leads to a detached garage located in the southeast corner of the rear yard. The garage will be constructed of red brick (Bordeaux-acme) and charcoal grey roof shingles to match the primary structure with a sandstone-colored paneled garage door. A 6-foot tall wood (cedar) sight-proof fence is proposed enclosing the rear yard. The project as proposed is in conformance with the requirements of the R-2 Single Family Dwelling District, the Clayton Gardens Urban Design District, and the Architectural Review Guidelines. Staff is of the opinion that the design is compatible in terms of mass, height, and design with existing nearby homes and recommends approval as submitted.

Mr. Glantz asked if there were any questions.

Chairman Lichtenfeld commented that it’s a good-looking house and agrees that the hip roof helps with the mass. He added that the City will see more 2-story houses in the neighborhood.

Ron Reim agreed that the hip roof is a good solution.

Scott Wilson asked if the 3 story deck on the rear is cedar.

Mr. Glantz replied “yes”.

Staff is of the opinion that a more direct driveway path connecting to Tuscany Park in the western portion of the property and heading north to a narrowed turn-around pad would result in a front yard design more fitting of the neighborhood character and would allow multiple existing trees to be preserved. The plans show the HVAC units located along the east elevation of the

11 proposed house. The units will be screened by a 4-foot tall fence to the north, east and south. Trash will be stored in a 42-square-foot trash enclosure located just north of the driveway, along the western elevation of the proposed house. The trash enclosure will be screened by a wood fence along the north, south and west sides, with a gate provided from the driveway. Impervious coverage is limited to 55 percent of the total lot area and 45 percent of the front yard in the R-2 zoning district. The existing total lot impervious coverage on site is 46.2 percent. The new plans decrease the total lot impervious coverage to 37.7 percent. The proposed plan will cover 25.3 percent of the front yard. The existing storm water runoff, according to the MSD 15 year, 20 minute storm calculation is 0.97 cubic feet per second (CFS). The proposed runoff is 0.91 CFS, which represents a 0.06 CFS decrease. All downspouts and the sump-pump discharge will be piped to the proposed pop-up emitter in the front yard. The Public Works Department finds the storm water plan acceptable, but notes that the applicant is responsible for mitigating any discharge from the pop-up emitter that creates a public nuisance after construction. Multiple existing trees on the property have already been removed from the site. The applicant is proposing removing three additional trees that are listed in good condition. The existing Pin Oak located in the front yard is proposed to be removed due to the proposed driveway placement. The existing tree is 24 caliper inches and provides 2,827-square-feet of canopy coverage. Although this tree is not a street tree, it does contribute to the street tree environment and the character of the front yard. As proposed, the Landscape Plan only provides one tree in front of the house, located at the southwestern corner of the lot. The City’s contracted landscape architect also has concerns that the proposed driveway will negatively impact the structural root zones of existing volunteer trees (including a street tree along Big Bend Boulevard), which are marked to remain. Due to their interconnected root systems, removal of one or more of these trees to accommodate the proposed design will require them all to be removed. The additional removals will result in the canopy coverage on site falling below the requirements and will require the replacement of the lost street tree. It is the opinion of the City’s contracted landscape architect that most of the significant/good existing trees on the site are being removed or have already been removed and additional tree protection should be provided. Revising the route and location of the proposed driveway would allow the existing trees in question to remain and canopy coverage requirements to be met. Relocating the driveway connection to Tuscany Park west of the Pin Oak Tree would allow for the preservation of this landmark tree and a more direct path to the garage, which is also more consistent with the neighborhood character. Narrowing the turn-around pad in front of the garage would limit work in the structural root zones of existing trees allowing for preservation of street trees along Big Bend Boulevard. Revisions to the Landscaping Plan and Tree Protection Plan are required beyond the issues outlined previously. Revisions based on comments from the City’s contracted landscape architect include corrections to the Tree Chart, adjustments to the location of tree protection fencing and identifying/correcting structural root zones. The City’s contracted landscape architect is of the opinion that these outstanding issues can be addressed and reviewed for compliance during the building permit process. Exterior lighting is proposed at all exterior doors and at the garage. All exterior lights will be 75 watts or less. The height, setbacks, and impervious coverage as proposed are in conformance with the requirements of the R-2 Single Family Dwelling District. Storm water will be adequately managed on site and the landscape plan features plantings that are appropriate for the size of the site, but the Landscape Plan and Tree Preservation Plan need revision. The

Storm water will be adequately managed on site and the landscape plan features plantings that are appropriate for the size of the site, but the Landscape Plan and Tree Preservation Plan need revision. The

12 proposed driveway and front yard do not fit the exiting character of the neighborhood. Staff is of the opinion that the project meets the criteria for site plan approval with conditions to make the design more compatible with the neighborhood and recommends as follows: to approve with the following conditions, to be reviewed and approved by staff prior to the issuance of a building permit: