Citation in context
April 3, 2017 — Meeting Minutes
Cited passage
proposed in the rear yard.
7 Ms. Strutman presented a site plan to the members. She noted the front entry garage and stated that they tried to keep as much greenspace on the lot as possible and that they are providing more landscaping than is required.
Mr. Goffstein referred to the 3-story condo building behind this property and the attempt to provide some privacy.
Chairman Lichtenfeld asked about run-off towards the south.
Ms. Strutman indicated that there will be less run-off than there is currently, and that they are installing a trench drain.
Ron Reim asked where the pop-up is located.
Mr. Goffstein replied “the front”.
Chairman Lichtenfeld asked if the driveway slopes down.
Mr. Goffstein replied “no” stating that the natural flow is to the street; that the garage is slightly above the street.
Ron Reim asked how long the retention system will retain water.
Mr. Goffstein indicated that there are two tanks. He stated that the north gutters will drain to the drywell and the south gutters will go to the street and to the storm drainage system.
William Liebermann commented that this is a good-looking house.
Robert Sears, 7801 Pershing (to the south of the subject property) asked about drainage and mentioned a wall between the two properties.
Chairman Lichtenfeld stated it appears as though drainage will be handled and suggested the two owners discuss the wall at a later time.
Hearing no further questions or comments, Ron Reim made a motion to approve the site plan per staff recommendations noted previously and with the suggestion that the location of the wall along the southern property line be verified and that any issues be worked out between the two property owners. The motion was seconded by Scott Wilson and unanimously approved by the members.
The architectural aspects of the project were now up for review.
the approved site plan with St. Louis County, and submit proof of recording to the City prior to the issuance of a building permit.
proposed in the rear yard.
The motion was seconded by Scott Wilson and unanimously approved by the members. The architectural aspects of the project were now up for review.
8 Susan Istenes explained that the proposed project consists of the demolition of an existing two- story home and the construction of a two-story, 5,030-square-foot (excluding the garage) single- family residence. The height of the proposed residence is 34-feet 7.5-inches as measured from the average existing grade to the mean height of the roof. The two-story home to the south (7801-7807 Pershing Avenue) was constructed in 1985 and is +/- 11-feet 5 3/8-inches shorter than the proposed home (as measured from the mid-point of each roof). The proposed house is located approximately 12-feet from the existing structure to the south. The two-story home to the north (211-213 North Bemiston Avenue) was constructed in 1988 and is +/- 5-feet 2 5/8 inches shorter than the proposed home (as measured from the mid-point of each roof). The proposed house is located approximately 14-feet from the existing structure to the north. The primary building material for the proposed home is white painted brick with secondary materials being stucco and cast stone window trim. As proposed, the secondary materials will not exceed 5 percent of any façade. The roof is clad in charcoal blend architectural shingles and black casement windows are proposed. The exposed aggregate driveway will leadto an attached front entry garage with two black louvered doors. A +/- 3.25-foot tall brick faced retaining wall is proposed along the south side of the driveway. No permanent fences are proposed. Director Istenes continued by stating that the project as proposed is in conformance with the requirements of the R-3 One and Two Family Dwelling District and the Architectural Review Guidelines. Staff is of the opinion that the design and materials are compatible in terms of mass, height and design with existing nearby homes and recommends approval as submitted.
Ms. Strutman presented a color rendering to the members.
Samples of the proposed brick, stone, stucco, window and roofing material were shown.
Ms. Strutman stated that the brick will be painted white and that the mortar will be white as well.
Joanne Boulton asked about the garage doors.
Ms. Strutman stated that they will be black composite wood.
Chairman Lichtenfeld asked if there is a Juliette balcony on the third floor.
Ms. Strutman replied “yes”.
Ron Reim stated that this is a good looking house.
Chairman Lichtenfeld stated that it will fit in well in the neighborhood.
Hearing no further questions or comments, Scott Wilson made a motion to approve as submitted. The motion was seconded by Ron Reim and unanimously approved by the Board.
Hearing no further questions or comments, Scott Wilson made a motion to approve as submitted. The motion was seconded by Ron Reim and unanimously approved by the Board.
9 REZONING/RESIDENTIAL PLANNED UNIT DEVELOPMENT/ARCHITECTURAL REVIEW – NEW CONSTRUCTION – APARTMENT BUILDING – 15-23 LEE AVENUE
Robert Saur, developer/owner under contract and Kevin Logan, consultant, were in attendance at the meeting. Also in attendance were Paul Turner, project architect and Matt Moynihan, landscape architect.
Susan Istenes explained that this is a public hearing to solicit input regarding the rezoning of property located at 15 Lee Avenue from R-4 Low Density Multiple Family Dwelling District and Forsyth Station TOD Overlay District to a Planned Unit Development (PUD) District and to consider the terms and conditions of the PUD if the property is rezoned. The rezoning and PUD are being considered together in this memo because of the interconnectivity between the two reviews; however, they are separated on the agenda and must be voted on separately. In addition to approval of the rezoning and PUD, this project also requires approval by the Architectural Review Board and a Subdivision Plat for right-of-way dedications. This project was first presented to the Plan Commission/Architectural Review Board on May 16, 2016 for conceptual review. The property is located on the west side of Lee Avenue between Forsyth Boulevard and Maryland Avenue. The property is bordered by a public alley to the west and north. Two and three story commercial and retail buildings are located south of the property and single family residences are located to the north. A vacant lot and a surface parking lot are located west of the property and a mixed-use commercial building with a parking structure is located to the east. The 23,374-square-foot property has a zoning designation of Low Density Multiple Family Dwelling District (R-4) and is located in the Forsyth Station TOD Overlay District. In 2014, a 36-unit multi-family structure on the site was demolished and currently the property is primarily vacant land with a surface parking lot. The proposed project consists of the construction of a 36,218-square-foot, 3-story (+/- 54.5 feet) building located on top of a 20,568-square-foot parking podium. The building will contain 72 residential units and 62 parking spaces. While the development is classified as one building on a podium, it will consist of 11 towers with access to each story provided by exterior stairwells. Eight access points are proposed along the western alley to serve the parking structure. City streetscape will be installed along the project limits on Lee Avenue. The applicant is dedicating a 9-foot wide strip of property to the City in order to make the northern alley 24-feet wide and in conformance with City standards for public alleys. Properties in the Forsyth Station TOD Overlay Zoning District are required to submit an application for a rezoning to a Special Development District or Planned Unit Development District if the proposed development includes construction of a new building or structure. The proposal meets this criterion. PUDs are intended to encourage the efficient use of land and resources, promote greater efficiency in public and utility services and encourage innovation in the planning and building of all types of development. The purpose of the PUD process is to foster appropriate use of existing buildings and enable compatible redevelopment which provides public benefits (as itemized in Section 405.1380), and certain objectives. The Zoning Regulations stipulate that PUDs are a distinct zoning district and therefore require approval of a rezoning concurrently with approval of the PUD. The following table summarizes the applicable zoning requirements and whether the proposed development complies with each standard. The PUD process gives the Board of Aldermen the authority to approve