MINUTES

CITY PLAN COMMISSION/ARCHITECTURAL REVIEW BOARD

AUGUST 7, 2017

CITY HALL COUNCIL CHAMBERS

The City Plan Commission/Architectural Review Board of the City of Clayton, Missouri, met on the above date at 5:30 p.m. Upon roll call, the following responded:

Present: Ron Reim, Acting Chairman Joanne Boulton, Aldermanic Representative Scott Wilson William Liebermann

Absent: Steve Lichtenfeld, Chairman Craig Owens, City Manager Brian Maguire

Also in Attendance: Kevin O’Keefe, City Attorney Susan M. Istenes, AICP, Director of Planning & Development Services Anna Krane, Planner

Acting Chairman Reim welcomed everyone to the meeting and asked that all cell phones be turned off and that conversations take place outside the meeting room.

MINUTES

The minutes of the July 17, 2017 meeting were presented for approval. The minutes were approved, after having been previously forwarded to each member.

REQUEST FOR A MODIFICATION TO THE SIGN REGULATIONS – 200 SOUTH BRENTWOOD BOULEVARD (PARK TOWER) – CONTINUED (plans revised since previous presentation)

Michael Freund, representing Park Tower Condo Association, was in attendance at the meeting. Also in attendance was Jon Krone, Warren Sign Company (sign contractor).

REQUEST FOR A MODIFICATION TO THE SIGN REGULATIONS – 200 SOUTH BRENTWOOD BOULEVARD (PARK TOWER) – CONTINUED (plans revised since previous presentation)

Michael Freund, representing Park Tower Condo Association, was in attendance at the meeting. Also in attendance was Jon Krone, Warren Sign Company (sign contractor).

2 Susan Istenes explained that the applicant submitted revised plans proposing an accessory sign on the drive canopy and an accessory directional sign on the existing screening wall. The proposed directional sign conforms with the requirements of the Sign Ordinance, while the proposed drive canopy sign does not and therefore requires approval of a sign modification. Director Istenes noted that some of the calculations and areas shown on the plans submitted by the applicant do not match staff’s calculations. Based on the Sign Ordinance and policy, staff calculates sign area as a rectangle and does not subtract areas between words, letters or lines. The following staff report references sign areas based on staff calculations, not the applicant’s submittals. There is an existing ground sign located in northwest corner of the property adjacent to the intersection, which displays the building name, Park Tower, and the name of the restaurant, Dominic’s Trattoria. The existing Park Tower sign measures 15.25 square feet with a 4.3 square foot Dominic’s sign on top. Previously, the applicant was proposing the addition of a second ground sign to the screen-wall located in the northeast corner of the property. The applicant is now proposing a directional sign on the screen-wall measuring 6 square feet and displaying the building description “private residences.” The proposed sign is considered an accessory directional sign and conforms to the regulations outlined in the Sign Ordinance: “accessory signs that may specifically benefit the public as hereinafter provided: directional traffic, parking or regulatory ground signs not exceeding 6 square feet.” The proposed directional sign on the screen-wall does not require a sign modification and could be administratively approved; however, because the proposed sign is a revision based on feedback from the Architectural Review Board, staff is requesting a decision from the Architectural Review Board. The proposed accessory sign on the drive canopy was not revised from the previous submission. The proposed accessory sign is 20.4 square feet and displays the building name, Park Tower. The proposed sign is classified as an accessory sign because it is not attached directly to the building wall and signs on drive canopies are not specifically listed in the Sign Ordinance. The proposed sign was determined to have a maximum allowed area of 8 square feet based on the following section of the Sign Ordinance: “an accessory sign authorized by the Director of Planning and Development Services and not listed above shall be proportioned by the Director of Planning and Development Services to the nearest listed above.” It was determined by the Director of Planning and Development Services that the nearest listed accessory sign is the rear building entrance sign, which is limited to 8 square feet. The proposed directional sign on the screen-wall will provide clarity to visitors of the property and the City. It is the opinion of staff that the proposed sign is compatible with the property and surrounding area. The proposed sign on the drive canopy is substantially larger than the Sign Ordinance allows. The modification request amounts to a signage surplus of approximately 12.4 square feet. According to the Sign Ordinance, modifications should only be granted “due to unusual conditions, such as façades that are angled or curved to the front street or streets or land uses which involve substantial accessory uses both inside and outside of buildings and requiring identification or substantial open space or street frontage or a similar unusual condition.” The orientation of the building is unusual with the address being 200 South Brentwood Boulevard and the main building entrance located off of Bonhomme Avenue. The purpose of size restrictions for signs is to maintain the proper proportions of signs in relation to their surrounding context. While the proposed accessory sign is located on a canopy rather than against a building wall, the proposed sign is setback from the street and therefore staff recognizes the need for a larger sign to be legible from the street. Staff is of the opinion that the

Director Istenes continued by stating that with respect to driveways, the City’s Architectural Review Board Guidelines read as follows:

To eliminate the appearance of "a sea of concrete", the driveway should be exposed aggregate, brick pavers or stamped concrete. Aprons are to be constructed to the Department of Public Works standards.

4 Since the adoption of the Architectural Review Board Guidelines in 1996, the City has required new driveways to be constructed of exposed aggregate, brick pavers, or stamped concrete. More recently, flat concrete has been added to the list of permitted materials if the mix and color matches the City’s public sidewalks. The applicant is proposing a colored flat concrete to match the brick color of the house. Colored concrete is not a listed permitted material. The driveway material guidelines are a prescriptive code, meaning materials not listed are deemed not approved until added by the Architectural Review Board. Colored or stained concrete in general could result in a large range of driveway colors and appearances. Staff has concerns about the possible variation in application of colored concrete. Because colored concrete is not a listed permitted material, it is not a common material in the Clayton Gardens neighborhood or the City. The specific request for the subject property would result in a brown colored driveway matching the brick of the house. This application would be compatible with the building on the property and the proposed brown tone is a natural shade that will likely blend with the landscape. The applicant is also proposing the same paving design for the front walkway. While the proposed driveway material is not common in the neighborhood, staff believes this specific application is a complement to the architecture on site. Staff believes this request and application of colored concrete would not have a negative impact on the character of the neighborhood; however, staff does not suggest the addition of colored concrete as a general permitted material, but rather recommends that use of colored concrete be reviewed on a case by case basis and therefore, recommends approval with the condition that the design and material of the driveway apron is to be reviewed and approved by the Public Works Department separately.

Mr. DuBois stated that at the time of approval (April, 2016) this was a spec home and now the home has sold and the purchaser has asked for a colored concrete driveway with a brick border. He noted that a picture depicting the brick was included with their submittal and they want the color of the concrete to match the brick color.

Joanne Boulton asked if he had a photo of the house to show them.

Mr. DuBois replied “no”.

Scott Wilson asked if the color concrete will come in the truck that way.

Mr. DuBois replied “yes”.

Joanne Boulton asked if there is a public sidewalk there.

Anna Krane replied “no”.

Joanne Boulton asked about the apron.

Anna Krane informed the members that aprons are the Meramec gravel/concrete mix; however, the Public Works Department is possibly open to colored concrete for the apron.

Joanne Boulton asked about the apron. Anna Krane informed the members that aprons are the Meramec gravel/concrete mix; however, the Public Works Department is possibly open to colored concrete for the apron.

5

Acting Chairman Reim stated that he’s okay with the colored concrete in this case.

Sally Cohn, 6464 Ellenwood Avenue, voiced her support of this request.

Acting Chairman Reim asked if this is the color they will be using for their walkway.

Mr. DuBois replied “yes”.

Joanne Boulton asked about the brick edge.

Mr. DuBois stated that the brick edge will be the same color and will be 9 to 10” wide on each side.

Hearing no further questions from the Board and hearing nothing from the audience regarding this request, Scott Wilson made a motion to approved as submitted. The motion was seconded by Joanne Boulton and unanimously approved by the Board.

CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT – DRIVE-THRU FOR FINANCIAL INSTITUTION – MIDWEST BANK CENTRE – 8020 FORSYTH BOULEVARD

Lisa Bulczak, representing Midwest Bank Centre, was in attendance at the meeting.

Susan Istenes explained that Midwest Bank Centre is an existing tenant in the building and currently operates a drive through. Financial institutions are allowed uses in this zoning district; however, drive throughs require a Conditional Use Permit. The current drive through is an existing legal non-conforming use. Midwest Bank Centre is proposing some renovations that include the drive though area. The proposed changes will not significantly alter the current function or operation of the drive through; however, any changes would cause the drive through to lose its legal non-conforming status. In order to alter the existing drive through, Midwest Bank Centre must obtain a Conditional Use Permit to bring the drive through into compliance with current regulations. The existing drive through is located under the eastern portion of the building. The drive through entrance is accessed from Forsyth Boulevard and the drive through lanes exit into the east-west alley located along the rear of the building. The existing drive through is composed of four drive lanes. Proposed renovations to the existing drive through include reducing the number of lanes from four to three. The proposed drive through is composed of two 13-foot wide drive through lanes and an 8-foot wide bypass lane. One drive through lane will provide access to an existing ATM and the other drive through lane will connect to a teller station serviced from inside the bank. The drive through will operate during normal bank hours, Monday through Friday, 8:00 a.m. to 5:00 p.m. The ATM will be accessible 24 hours/day. Existing landscape beds and screening walls on the property are to remain as they currently exist. Staff does not believe additional landscape screening is necessary or practical for the property. There are no existing traffic or access issues in relation to the current drive through. The proposed drive through will