Citation in context
March 3, 2016 — Meeting Minutes
Cited passage
Voellinger indicated that Polo Drive is unique due to the lot shapes and that there are 8 or 9 front facing garages. Chairman Soule asked staff if there is a regulation prohibiting front (street) facing garages.
6
Louis Clayton replied “not in this neighborhood.” He informed the members that the project will have to go before the City’s Architectural Review Board.
Rick Bliss asked if the Subdivision Trustees have approved the plans.
Mr. Voellinger indicated that one has and the neighbor to the south has.
Chairman Soule asked if the City received any written objections to the proposal.
Louis Clayton replied “no”.
Mel Disney asked about the MSD easement.
Wayne Enderling, architect, stated that a corner of the garage would be at the easement.
Mel Disney stated that if that’s the case, the garage footing would encroach over the easement and that MSD’s approval should be attached to the file.,
Mr. Enderling stated that he met with MSD and the foundation goes straight down.
Mel Disney asked that consideration be given to obtaining written MSD approval.
Kevin Williams, former Clayton resident & Clayton attorney, noted that this property is “super” unique; having 3 front yards and that the rules were not drafted for 3 front yards. He asked that MSD approval not be required as it could possibly significantly delay the project.
Mel Disney stated that he still wants approval from MSD as the footing may be an issue.
Louis Clayton informed the members that before projects are issued permits, setbacks are verified and that it is city policy not to allow permanent structures in easements without approval of the easement holder; in this case, MSD.
Chairman Soule stated that this is an issue that is not addressed here but at the permit phase.
Louis Clayton concurred.
Hearing no further questions or comments, Rick Bliss made a motion to approve the requested variances (an 8-foot variance from the required front yard setback of 18 feet along Hanley Road and a 26.3-foot variance from the required rear yard setback of 43.3 feet). The motion was seconded by Liza Streett and unanimously approved by the Board.
AN APPEAL SUBMITTED BY JACK DEGAGNE, CONSULTANT REPRESENTING CAPITAL GRILL, FUTURE TENANT, FOR THE PROPERTY AT 101 SOUTH HANLEY ROAD
Chairman Soule asked the applicant if he had any objections to these exhibits being made part of the record.
Mr. Voellinger replied “no”.
Chairman Soule indicated that these exhibits would be made part of the record.
Mr. Voellinger asked that the survey he brought with him that highlights the setback lines be marked as an exhibit and entered into the record.
Chairman Soule asked if it was included in the submittal.
Mr. Voellinger indicated that the survey was included, but it was not highlighted. He stated that they bought the house 4 years ago and studied the zoning laws for R-2. He noted that this unique
He stated that they bought the house 4 years ago and studied the zoning laws for R-2. He noted that this unique
5
lot has three “front” yards by Code and one rear yard and that if setbacks were met, the lot would be unbuildable.
Chairman Soule asked about the unique lot (noting the three front yards).
Mr. Voellinger stated that the code does not address three front yards and that it is a unique challenge. He noted that the driveway is right off Hanley Road and leads to a tuck-under, 2-car garage. He stated that they attempted to keep the tuck-under garage and that the remainder of the planned work meets setbacks.
Chairman Soule asked if the lot has an irregular shape as well.
Louis Clayton replied “yes” and reiterated the uniqueness of having three front yards.
Chairman Soule asked if that reduces the buildable area.
Louis Clayton replied “yes”.
Chairman Soule asked if the placement of the house on the lot is challenging as well.
Louis Clayton replied “yes”. He explained that the yard opposite the yard with the lesser street frontage is, by definition, the rear yard; in this case, the front yard functions more as a side yard.
Chairman Soule noted that 17-foot distance from the south property line. He asked if this is a typical side yard for a lot of this size.
Louis Clayton replied “yes”.
Chairman Soule asked if the structure will be partially screened by a wall (along Hanley Road).
Louis Clayton replied “yes”.
Chairman Soule asked if staff believes that air and light will not be negatively impacted by this addition.
Louis Clayton indicated that he was correct.
Liza Streett, referencing Page 5 of the plans {west elevation}, noted the garages face Polo Drive. She asked if any consideration was given to make the doors face south, noting there may be Code issues with a street facing garage.
Mr. Voellinger indicated that Polo Drive is unique due to the lot shapes and that there are 8 or 9 front facing garages.
Chairman Soule asked staff if there is a regulation prohibiting front (street) facing garages.
The motion was seconded by Liza Streett and unanimously approved by the Board. AN APPEAL SUBMITTED BY JACK DEGAGNE, CONSULTANT REPRESENTING CAPITAL GRILL, FUTURE TENANT, FOR THE PROPERTY AT 101 SOUTH HANLEY ROAD
7
Jack DeGagne, consultant representing Capital Grill, future tenant, was in attendance at the meeting. Also in attendance were Paul Fuse, building manager (CBRE) and Ted Martin with Capital Grill.
Acting City Attorney Heinz presented the following exhibits:
Chairman Soule asked the applicant if he had any objections to these exhibits being made part of the record. Mr. DeGagne replied “no”. Chairman Soule indicated that these exhibits would be made part of the record. Mr. DeGagne stated that Capital Grill is very excited to come to Clayton, noting that J. Buck’s recently closed. He stated that the structure is circular which, in terms of design, flow and seat count, doesn’t work for Capital Grill; the major issue being seat count. He noted this will be a fine dining establishment and they want to accommodate as many patrons as possible, adding that customers stay up to two hours to enjoy the fine dining experience; they are not in and out. He stated that he has been with Darden for 16 years and knows them very well and they want everything perfect. A site plan was presented. Mr. DeGagne stated that the existing structure contains stone columns and all they are proposing to do is square-off the building which requires approval of an 8.4-foot variance (from the 10-foot front yard setback requirement). He stated that they are asking for a Floor Area Ratio (FAR) of 4.76, noting that the current FAR is 4.74; a difference of only 200ths. He concluded by respectfully asking for the approvals. Mr. Fuse stated that the overall change is to appeal to the Plaza in Clayton and Pierre LaClede buildings. He stated that they are excited about this new tenant. Mel Disney asked if any alternatives were considered. Mr.