6 and existing homes, the Clayton Gardens Urban Design District regulations list multiple height mitigation techniques including increasing the side yard setback one foot for every five feet of height the structure exceeds the height of the adjacent structure at the side yard. The applicant proposes to increase the side yard setbacks between the proposed and existing homes from 5 feet to 13 feet in accordance with this requirement. Clayton Gardens has traditionally been dominated by the use of standard size brick in a variety of red tones, although the original brick has been painted in some instances. The primary building material for each home is brick painted white. The proposed roofs are clad in asphalt shingles, slate in color. Black wood clad windows are proposed. Two 10-foot wide exposed aggregate driveways are proposed on the eastern and western ends of each property. The driveways will lead to rear-entry, at-grade attached garages with raised panel garage doors painted black. Modular retaining walls ranging between 3 and 4 feet tall are proposed along each driveway and will conform to the City’s design and material requirements. Each rear yard will be enclosed by a 6-foot tall cedar privacy fence. The project as proposed is in conformance with the requirements of the R-2 Single Family Dwelling District and the Clayton Gardens Urban Design District. Susan stated that to ensure that the homes are distinguishable as individual structures while still blending in with existing homes on the street staff recommends that the homes use two distinct color schemes. Otherwise, staff is of the opinion that the homes are compatible in terms of mass, height, and design with existing nearby homes and recommends approval with the following recommendation:

approved by staff prior to the issuance of a building permit.

Samples of the proposed brick (white for 8125 & red/golden for 8121), roof and limestone were presented.

Chairman Lichtenfeld asked where the projected bay is on the second floor.

Mr. Goffstein indicated that there is only a small, 2-foot projection on the side of 8125.

Chairman Lichtenfeld noted that while this is not a 2-family neighborhood, maybe duplexes can be considered in the future for this area.

Jim Liberman stated that 8125 is much superior, but that he thinks the two homes are too much alike and asked that the rooflines differ. He referred to homes in University City on Forsyth Boulevard that all differ.

Mr. Goffstein commented that this is a side-by-side issue here and that they worked hard to make them different. He added that only so much can be done on a 50 X 120 lot and that the square footage needs to be marketable. He stated that they could possibly louver the front of the roof.

The basic massing of the proposed additions is articulated with windows, accent materials, and variations in roof forms. The height of the additions is 27.5 feet from grade to the mid-point of the

8 roof. The existing residence is red brick with stone trim. The proposed addition will be brick to match the house. The roofing material of the addition will be slate, grey green in color to match the material of the existing house. The windows will be double-hung, white in color. The garage doors will be carriage-style black in color. The proposed materials of the additions will match the materials on the existing home. The existing detached garage will be converted into a pool house and the existing garage doors will be replaced with windows. According to the applicant, the pool house will not be used as a second living unit. A new pool is also proposed. The existing asphalt driveway will be expanded in the front of the property to create a circular drive, and on the side of the property to allow access to the garage from Forest Ridge Place and to connect the driveway to the service alley located on the west side of the property. The plans show a new trash enclosure located on the north side of the home, accessible from the driveway and screened with a painted wood fence. The HVAC units are located next to the trash enclosure and are not shown as being screened; however, due to the size of this property staff does not believe that the units will be visible from adjoining properties or Wydown Boulevard. With the exception of the new asphalt driveway, the project as proposed is in conformance with the requirements of the R-1 Large Lot Single Family Dwelling District and the Architectural Review Guidelines. Staff is of the opinion that the proposed design of the additions is consistent with existing materials on the home and on other homes in the neighborhood. While asphalt is not an approved driveway material, it was previously approved for this project in 2012 and staff recommends approval as submitted.

Mr. Fendler indicated that this project is smaller than the project proposed in 2012. He stated that the materials will match existing, there will be no addition to the carriage house and that all 5 homes in Forest Ridge Subdivision have asphalt driveways and the existing driveway is asphalt.

Chairman Lichtenfeld asked if there is an addition to the dining room.

Mr. Fendler indicated that there is a small bump-out addition to the dining room.

Jim Liberman told Mr. Fendler that he likes his work, but it seems he keeps coming back to this Board.

Mr. Fendler indicated that the first bid came in a little high and the owners had triplets so they postponed the project.

Sally Cohn asked if they will be reusing the balustrade.

Mr. Fendler stated that he didn’t know if it will be reused, but it will be salvaged for sure.

Sally Cohn stated that she has a problem with the use of asphalt and that it’s not the City’s fault the work wasn’t done before. She stated this is an opportunity to get rid of asphalt and use an upgraded material.

Sally Cohn stated that she has a problem with the use of asphalt and that it’s not the City’s fault the work wasn’t done before. She stated this is an opportunity to get rid of asphalt and use an upgraded material.

9 Jim Liberman asked how much of the driveway will be new.

Mr. Fendler indicated that a little less than 50% will be new. He stated that he and his clients discussed a cobblestone apron and using a cobblestone border. He reminded everyone that all the homes have asphalt.

Sally Cohn commented that there are only 6 houses in the neighborhood.

Chairman Lichtenfeld asked if they would border the existing asphalt as well.

Mr. Fendler replied “yes”.

Chairman Lichtenfeld stated that in theory, he agrees with Sally but there is nothing but asphalt in this neighborhood.

Louis Clayton referred to the ARB Guidelines.

Sally Cohn questioned why staff wanted an asphalt driveway on Carswold replaced with a different material, but in this case asphalt is allowed, even as an additional 50% is being added.

Susan Istenes indicated that staff considers these requests on a case-by-case basis.

Chairman Lichtenfeld called for a motion, barring any further questions or comments.

Jim Liberman made a motion to approve as submitted. The motion was seconded by Josh Corson and received the following vote: Ayes: Chairman Lichtenfeld, Craig Owens, Jim Liberman & Josh Corson. Nays: Sally Cohn.

SIGNAGE – COMMERCIAL – 112 SOUTH HANLEY ROAD

Mike Christian, contractor, was in attendance at the meeting.

Susan Istenes explained that the subject building is located at the southeast corner of Hanley Road and Carondelet Plaza and contains a 17,940-square-foot, two-story building located on top of a one-level parking structure. The multi-tenant office building was constructed in 1964 and also contains a 19-space parking lot on the north side of the building. The applicant, on behalf of Scottrade, proposes to remove the existing wall sign facing Carondelet Plaza and replace it with a 9.25-square-foot channel letter and “swoosh” logo sign. The sign will be constructed of white acrylic letters and internally lit by LEDs. An identical sign is proposed on the Hanley Road elevation. Section 425.040.5 of the Sign Regulations sets the permitted sign size and location based on usage and building type. For multi-tenant office buildings, the Sign Regulations permit ground floor office tenants with windows and street frontage to have a 12-square foot wall sign, but no