November 1, 2021 — Meeting Minutes

1

MINUTES CITY PLAN COMMISSION/ARCHITECTURAL REVIEW BOARD NOVEMBER 1, 2021 ZOOM MEETING

The City Plan Commission/Architectural Review Board of the City of Clayton, Missouri, met on the above date at 1730 hours via a zoom meeting. Upon roll call, the following responded:

Present: Steve Lichtenfeld, Chairman David Gipson, City Manager Ira Berkowitz, Aldermanic Representative Helen DiFate Bob Denlow Carolyn Gaidis

Absent: George Hettich Also in Attendance: Susan M. Istenes, AICP, Planning Director Annisa Kumerow, Principal Planner Stephanie Karr, City Attorney

MINUTES The minutes from October 19, 2021 were approved unanimously. Steve Lichtenfeld, Chairman welcomed everyone to the meeting.

NEW BUSINESS 8135 MARYLAND AVENUE – ARCHITECTURAL REVIEW – EXTERIOR ALTERATION Annisa Kumerow summarized the staff report. Dan Miller, Specialty Awnings was present. Dan Miller – noted his customer is concerned with requested color change by staff. Steve Lichtenfeld – Starlight Blue color proposed goes with branding logo and feels a little differentiation is okay.

2

Carolyn Gaidis - in agreement with Steve Lichtenfeld’ s comments. Bob Denlow – does not have concern over color as proposed by applicant. Hele DiFate – questioned the location of awning in relationship to sidewalk. Dan Miller – noted it is on patio area where fence is and does not exceed fenced in area. Helen DiFate- has concern over rain on awning that may cause splashing for those walking or eating in the area of the edge of the awning. No concern with color. Dan Miller – commented on rain concern. Ira Berkowitz – asked if it was possible to have an awning that could be taken up and down as a seasonal feature. Dan Miller – commented on challenges with a retractable type of awning. Hearing no further questions or comments from the Board and hearing no comments from the audience, Carolyn Gaidis, made a motion to approve without the staff’s recommendation. Bob Denlow seconded the motion; the motion was unanimously approved by the Board. 37 BRENTMOOR PARK – ARCHITECTURAL REVIEW – RESIDENTIAL ADDITION Annisa Kumerow summarized the staff report. James Jamieson, Jamieson Design, was present. James Jamieson made a presentation on the project. Steve Lichtenfeld – asked about the trench drain. James Jamieson– explained it is tied into existing drain at two different points on side and front of structure on the north side of swimming pool and daylights into existing yard. Carolyn Gaidis – no comments. Bob Denlow – no comments. Helen DiFate – asked who did the drainage plan? Seems there are several elements added towards the west in existing to the trench drain and on the east end. James Jamieson- extending existing covered pavilion and to the west, that area is fire pit area and there is no drain planned for fire pit area. Ira Berkowitz – no comments. David Gipson – no comments. Hearing no further questions or comments from the Board and no comments from the audience, Carolyn Gaidis, made a motion to approve as submitted by the applicant. Bob Denlow seconded the motion. The motion was approved unanimously. 24 CARRSWOLD DRIVE – ARCHITECTURAL REVIEW – RESIDENTIAL ADDITION Annisa Kumerow summarized the staff report.

3

Mike Zaccarello, Property owner, was present. Lauren Strutman, Architect, was present. Steve Endsley, with Lauren Strutman Architects, was present. Steve Lichtenfeld - confirmed that there is negligible, if any runoff. Asked if the applicant was agreeable to the two conditions. Lauren Strutman – noted they were agreeable to the two staff conditions. Carolyn Gaidis – questioned landscaping to be removed. Laurent Strutman – commented on replacement landscaping. Bob Denlow – no comments. Helen DiFate – no comments. Ira Berkowitz – no comments. David Gipson – no comments. Hearing no further questions or comments from the Board and hearing no further comments from the audience, Carolyn Gaidis, made a motion to approve with two staff recommendations. Bob Denlow seconded the motion, the motion was unanimously approved by the Board. 22 HILLVALE DRIVE – ARCHITECTURAL REVIEW – RESIDENTIAL ADDITION Annisa Kumerow summarized the staff report. Herbie Markwort, Property owner, was present. Allen Roehrig, Mainline Group Architecture, was present. Allen Roehrig – made a brief presentation. Steve Lichtenfeld – questioned the location of existing garage and noted the amount of impervious will be reduced because of construction from the existing amount. Carolyn Gaidis – questioned removal of trees. Noted drawings did not provide details on replanting of shrubs. Alex Roehrig – noted that the plan will have to be updated after consultation with homeowners and noted trees being removed will be impacted by construction. Susan Istenes – noted revisions to landscape plans will be reviewed by staff. Bob Denlow – no comments. Helen DiFate – questioned light fixtures. Noted 9 fixtures at a height of 8 feet. What is the total wattage? Allen Roehrig – currently 75 watts each, dimmable, warm 300k LED. Helen DiFate – concerned because lights are not shielded, and they are 28-39 feet from property line. May be too much light. Questioned if they could be lowered and number of lights reduced.

4

Allen Roehrig – fixture is more down illuminated than out illuminated and hanging plants would be placed on fixtures. Suggested they would be amendable to submit an exact light type as part of the construction documents at the time of permitting for review and acceptance by staff. Helen DiFate –questioned driveway level, it’s about two stories above, terrace level, then 8 feet above you have light standard. Allen Roehrig – Piers are 4 feet, so 4-foot lamp above that. If we get them lower, fears it is difficult to find a decent proportionate looking post lamp at 3 feet and lower. Felt these lights were proportionate and proposed location: one on either side of grill area and then illumination of seating, steps. Helen DiFate – noted it would be 600 watts if everything is turned on. Height puts it higher visually. It extends light over greater distance. Ira Berkowitz – no comments. David Gipson – noted there are lighting standards that have been adopted by the City. Residential areas are regulated by lumens. We will have questions at staff level to ensure standards are met. Carolyn Gaidis – questioned removal of three trees and questioned content of landscape plans (information is missing). Will there be a plan to review? Concern over removal of sizeable Magnolia Tree and species of Holly noted on plan. Allen Roehrig – there will be a plan when we meet with owners on specifics of perimeter plantings. Trees to be removed are impacted by construction. Carolyn Gaidis – questioned Susan Istenes if this is coming back to the Board for review. Susan Istenes – noted there is no deficiency in terms of canopy coverage and native tree requirements so plan will be reviewed administratively and no need to take plan back to Board. Carolyn Gaidis – native trees of 26-inch caliper is a large tree, and most municipalities will not allow remove. Susan Istenes – noted plan met minimum requirements for canopy coverage.

Hearing no further questions or comments from the Board and hearing no comments from the audience, Carolyn Gaidis, made a motion to approve with the recommendations for staff to review landscape plan and lighting fixtures and total lumens. Bob Denlow seconded the motion; the motion was unanimously approved by the Board. OTHER BUSINESS City Manager David Gipson presented the code section on Planned Unit Development (PUD) regulations.

Meeting adjourned at 1903 hours.