December 7, 2020 — Meeting Minutes
CITY PLAN COMMISSION/ARCHITECTURAL REVIEW BOARD VIRTUAL ZOOM MEETING MONDAY, DECEMBER 7, 2020 17:30 (05:30 PM)
CALL TO ORDER
The meeting was called to order by Chairman Lichtenfeld at 17:30.
ROLL CALL
Chairman Steve Lichtenfeld, City Manager David Gipson, Aldermanic Representative Richard Lintz, Carolyn Gaidis, Robert Denlow, and Helen DiFate answered roll call.
Absent: George Hettich
ALSO IN ATTENDANCE
Stephanie Karr, City Attorney Susan M. Istenes, AICP, Planning Director
APPROVAL OF MINUTES
CAROLYN GAIDIS – MOTION TO APPROVE THE MINUTES OF 11/19/2020, AS AMENDED.
RICHARD LINTZ – SECOND.
MOTION APPROVED 6-0.
2 OLD BUSINESS
7801 FORSYTH BOULEVARD – ARCHITECTURAL REVIEW – EXTERIOR ALTERATIONS
Director Susan M. Istenes summarizes the following staff report: “The 18,745 square foot site is located on the west side of North Bemiston Avenue at the northwest corner of Bemiston Avenue and Forsyth Boulevard. The property has a zoning designation of HDC High Density Commercial District and is located in the CBD Core Downtown Overlay District. The subject property was purchased by M1 Development, LLC, along with 7 N. Bemiston Avenue which underwent extensive renovations for approximately 18 months and is now complete. The owner proposes to construct a below grade garage level expansion, façade upgrades to the building and site improvements, including the addition of a second drive through lane, repaving the driveway and parking area and upgrading the landscaping. The office/bank use will remain the same.
The building will be clad with Butt Glazed curtain wall system with clear glass which will allow visual “see through” to the interior of the building. A recessed, patterned perforated metal screen with a bronze finish, which is see through to the glass behind it, is also proposed to be installed over the front entry. A metal fascia panel, bronze in color will surround the rooftop and an RTU metal screen will screen the rooftop mechanical equipment.
The driveway and parking area will be repaved with 4 inch x 5 inch pavers, set in a herring bone pattern. The applicant did not specify the brick color. Raised planter beds will be installed at the west elevation and will be constructed of brick with a cast stone cap. Three existing trees will be removed at the northeast corner of the site adjacent to the driveway off Bemiston Avenue. Electrical transformers will be placed in that cleared area and screened with an approximately 9 foot 6 inch screen wall. A landscape bed is proposed in front of the wall, however the property is located within the City right-of-way. The proposed screen wall extends on the south side of the entrance off Bemiston Avenue and creates a tall, hard edge against the sidewalk that is not of pedestrian scale and is out of scale with the building to the north.
Existing walls on the Forsyth frontage will be clad with brick; the walls will be of varying heights and the brick will match the brick that was used on the property to the north (7 N. Bemiston Avenue). The walls will be topped with a 3 foot 6 inch high railing composed of a decorative metal screen material that matches the south façade at the entry and which spans between the black metal posts and top and bottom rails/frames to hold the screen material. A landscaped area will be installed parallel to the north side property line. The applicant proposes to replace street trees and upgrade the landscaping on site. Replacement trees will exceed the City tree replacement requirements by 24 caliper inches.
The proposed renovations will upgrade the appearance of the existing building and are compatible with the materials of nearby properties. The proposed brick clad walls will tie in to the property to the north, which is under the same ownership and provides supplemental office space to the subject building, however the proposed height of the walls along the Bemiston Avenue frontage create a tall harsh edge at the sidewalk and are not of pedestrian scale.
STAFF RECOMMENDATION IS TO APPROVE WITH THE FOLLOWING CONDITION: 1. ALL REPLACEMENT STREET TREES SHALL BE COORDINATED WITH THE CITY PER CITY STANDARDS AND PERMIT REQUIREMENTS, PRIOR TO THE ISSUANCE OF A BUILDING PERMIT. 2. ANY PROPOSED LANDSCAPING IN THE RIGHT-OF-WAY SHALL BE COORDINATED WITH THE CITY AND ANY REQUIRED PERMITS AND USE AND MAINTENANCE AGREEMENTS SHALL BE OBTAINED BEFORE THE ISSUANCE OF A BUILDING PERMIT. 3. RIGHT-OF-WAY PERMITS SHALL BE OBTAINED PRIOR TO ANY WORK IN THE RIGHT OF WAY.
3
4. CONSIDERATION SHOULD BE GIVEN TO REDESIGNING THE PROPOSED WALL FACING BEMISTION AVENUE
TO REDUCE THEIR SIZE TO A MORE PEDESTRIAN SCALE.
TYLER STEPHENS (TS) - ARCHITECT
TS – Presents presentation to walk through the plans which show a continuation of M1 Bank on the same block. This will be their headquarters.
CHAIRMAN LICHTENFELD – Are you replacing all glass in the building? And the new glass is clear and will go all the way down? So, you are really increasing the bulk of the building?
TS – Yes on all parts. The volume of the building the glass will go straight down from the edge of the roof.
RICHARD LINTZ – Requests to see Bemiston View* I like that the wall is setback with plantings, the ramp that is there now is currently encroaching on the right of way? Will the bronze age? How will you get from one building to another?
TS – Yes, the ramp is encroaching. No, the bronze is a prefinished material and will not age. You can go across the plaza
CAROLYN GAIDIS – The wall is a little concerning and I don’t think the landscape helps much but I have a concern about going over the right of way. But otherwise I don’t have much. The plantings pleased me.
HELEN DIFATE – Bemistion wall says you don’t want people. I realize looking up I should be able to see through the railing but I’m not going to be able to get far enough away to see anything through it. It’s 9.5 feet from my feet, I’m 5’6”. As a pedestrian with the way the walls exist, you can see into the garage and see if a car is coming. Between the plantings the cars will not know I’m there until they are there. I think there is too much of the bronze color, though I like 7 N. Bemiston.
DAVID GIPSON – This landscaping looks like the current landscaping. How does your wall compare to the current wall?
TS – It’s a couple feet taller than current. The current has a step down and it’s not very appealing, so we aren’t doing it.
ROBERT DENLOW – I think it looks nice. I like it.
NO OTHER COMMENTS FROM THE BOARD MEMBERS.
PUBLIC COMMENTS
RICK BLISS – Concerned about black metal doors. Can you show what the building will look like at night, I don’t want to see a glowing pile of light.
TS – The current plan is to highlight the columns. I would not say it would be excessive glow. There will be no outside light.
HANK WINKLEMAN – This building will expand in bulk but I think this is an very incredible transformation.
4
CAROLYN GAIDIS – MOTION TO APPROVE WITH STAFF RECOMMENDATION WITH A MODIFICATION TO RECONSIDER THE LANDSCAPING ON THE BEMISTON SIDE.
RICHARD LINTZ – SECOND
BOARD VOTES TO APPROVE WITH STAFF CONDITION, 6-0.
NEW BUSINESS
97 ARUNDEL PLACE – ARCHITECTURAL REVIEW – SOLAR
Director Susan M. Istenes summarizes the following staff report: “The subject property is located mid-block on Arundel Place between Dartford Avenue and University Lane. The property has a zoning designation of R-2 Single Family Dwelling District and is developed with a single family structure and a detached garage. The applicant is proposing to install a grid mount, tiered, 312 square foot solar panel array on the roof of the existing detached garage on the east and west facing elevations. The garage is located in the rear yard and the array will be mounted on an Iron Ridge Solar Mount engineered racking system.
Section 405.3880 of the Zoning Regulations outlines requirements for the design and construction of renewable energy systems. For building mounted solar energy systems in residential neighborhoods, the following criteria apply:
1. Building-mounted solar energy collectors installed in residential zoning districts shall be: (a) Installed in the plane of the roof (flush mounted); or (b) Made part of the roof design (capping or framing compatible with the color of the roof or structure); or (c) Building-integrated system. Mounting brackets shall be permitted to be placed parallel on the slope of a rear-facing roof if the applicant can demonstrate that the existing pitch of the roof would render the solar energy equipment ineffective or incapable of reasonable operation. 2. When located on a sloped roof, solar energy collectors shall be located on a rear- or side-facing roof, as viewed from a fronting street. In cases of corner lots or lots with more than one (1) street frontage, the side roof fronting a street shall be considered a front-facing roof. 3. Solar energy systems shall not project vertically above the peak of a sloped roof to which it is attached. 4. When located on a sloped roof, solar energy collectors shall be positioned in a symmetrical fashion and centered on the plane of the roof on which they are located. 5. When located on a sloped roof, solar energy collectors shall be set back at least two (2) feet from any outside edge, ridge, or valley of the roof. 6. Solar energy collectors installed on a flat roof must be screened by the use of a parapet or other architectural feature to screen the view from the street or from ground level on adjoining properties. 7. All exterior electrical or plumbing lines must be painted in a color scheme that matches as closely as possible the color of the structure and the materials adjacent to the lines when visible from the street.
A total of fourteen solar panels are proposed on the east and west slopes of the garage roof. The east and west sides of the roof front the side and rear yard of the property. The plans indicate the dimensions of the array and each panel, but don’t provide the setback measurements to the roof’s edge on the west side or at the peak. The dimension to the north side edge is 10 inches which is less than the required two feet. Staff is of the opinion that the design of
5 the proposed panels are in conformance with the renewable energy design criteria, except for the requirement that they be setback from the outside edge and roof peak by two (2) feet. The setback requirement is necessary to allow the Fire Department access to the roof in the event of a fire. Should the Fire Department decide the proposed design is acceptable, then staff is of the opinion that the proposed array meets the code requirements.
STAFF RECOMMENDATION IS APPROVE WITH THE FOLLOWING CONDITION:
1. All exterior electrical or plumbing lines shall be painted to match the color of the single-family residence.
2. The applicant shall provide the dimensions of the panels pursuant to their location from the roof’s edge
and peak prior to the issuance of a building permit.
3. THE CITY’S FIRE DEPARTMENT SHALL HAVE FINAL APPROVAL AUTHORITY OVER THE LOCATION ON THE
PANELS AS THEY RELATE TO THE SETBACKS FROM THE ROOF’S EDGE AND PEAK.
CONNOR WATERS (CW) – APPLICANT
CW – Explains the project to the Board and offers to answer questions.
NO QUESTIONS OR COMMENTS FROM THE BOARD AS LONG AS THE FIRE MARSHALL IS IN AGREEMENT.
CAROLYN GAIDIS – MOTION TO APPROVE WITH STAFF RECOMMENDATIONS.
RICHARD LINTZ – SECOND
BOARD VOTES TO APPROVE WITH STAFF RECOMMENDATIONS, 6-0.
950 FRANCIS PLACE – ARCHITECTURAL REVIEW – SPECIAL ANTENNA
Director Susan M. Istenes summarizes the following staff report: “Consideration of a request by Megan Flower, agent on behalf of T-Mobile, for the review of the design and materials associated with the construction of telecommunications antennas on a building rooftop and equipment at the ground level. Article XXVI of the Zoning Regulations require Architectural Review Board approval of new telecommunications antenna applications which create a visible change to the property. The purpose of the project is to enhance broadband connectivity and capacity to the existing eligible wireless facility. As part of the proposal, the applicant will be removing and replacing antennas and their associated equipment; specifically, removing 6 antennas and 9 radios and adding 3 antennas and 3 radios, 1 HCS pendant and 1, 1.5-inch hybrid cable.
The 950 Francis Place building currently contains several antennas from multiple carriers. New equipment will be installed in and screened by an existing T-Mobile SSC cabinet. The additional antennas are going to be in the same area and at the same height as the existing that will be removed. An existing wood fence on top of the roof surrounding the existing cabinets will assist with screening the antennas and equipment from public view.
The proposed location and design of the new antennas are not highly visible from Interstate 170 and they will be screened by cabinets and an existing wooden fence. From the ground level at Francis Place, the proposed placement of the antennas would not be visible. The ground mounted equipment will be in an already enclosed equipment storage area located on the north side of the structure in the parking lot; this area is surrounded by a wooden fence and is not visible to the public.
STAFF RECOMMENDATION IS TO APPROVE AS SUBMITTED.
6
EMMA HEALD (EH) – APPLICANT
EH – I have nothing to add to the staff report.
NO QUESTIONS OR COMMENTS FROM THE BOARD.
CAROLYN GAIDIS – MOTION TO APPROVE AS SUBMITTED.
RICHARD LINTZ - SECOND.
BOARD UNANIMOUSLY VOTES TO APPROVE AS SUBMITTED. 6-0
212 SOUTH MERAMEC AVENUE – ARCHITECTURAL REVIEW – EXTERIOR ALTERATION/RENOVATION
Director Susan M. Istenes summarizes the following staff report: “The subject property is located at the southeast corner of South Meramec Avenue and Bonhomme Avenue and has a zoning designation of PUD Planned Unit Development. The property contains a multi-family apartment building with restaurant/retail space on the first floor.
Peel Pizza would like to expand their outdoor seating footprint and install 2.5 inch diameter metal railings approximately 4 feet in height and railing mounted planter boxes to define the outdoor space. They would also like to install six custom shade sails attached to ground mounted columns approximately 8 feet in height, aligned with the mullions on the facade. The shade sails will be attached along the sidewalk to the same custom painted steel columns used to connect the cafe lights as shown in the attached exterior axonometric. Three of the shade sails along South Meramec Avenue range in size from 11 feet 7 inches in depth to 13 feet 3 inches in width. The three sails closest to the front door range in depth from 21 feet 10 inches to 16 feet 3 inches, and in width from 12 feet 4 inches to 14 feet 9 inches. The proposed color is "PEEL" orange and the material is tension fabric and the steel framing color and railing is charcoal black. The shade sails will not extend beyond the proposed railing located below. The applicant did not provide any details about the string lighting that is proposed.
The restaurant is currently approved for 199 total seats and has an outdoor dining permit. The configuration of the tables and chairs on the existing outdoor dining permit shows a total of 52 seats and 13 tables. The placement of the existing furniture is setback 5 feet 3.2 inches to 5 feet 7 inches from the furniture to the back of the tree grates along Meramec Avenue. The proposed railing location would place it 3 feet 11 inches from the back of the tree grate to the railing. On the Bonhomme frontage, the furniture is currently setback 12 feet 4 inches and the proposed location of the railing would place it at 3 feet 8 inches. Additionally, along Bonhomme, the patio area would double in length for a total of 59 feet 7 7/8 inches. In accordance with City code, the applicant is required to maintain a minimum pedestrian access route (PAR) of not less than 4 feet wide and 7 feet tall. The proposed layout violates the minimum PAR requirement of 4 feet; therefore the layout must be adjusted to meet the current adopted minimum requirements. The height of the proposed sail shades was not specified on the plan that was submitted with the application.
The Architectural Review Board was specific about the color scheme of the existing banners attached to this building and the proposed shade sails are consistent with the Fall color theme that was approved for the
7 banners. The applicant did not provide details about the lighting (type, wattage, etc.). The City Code does not address decorative lighting, and this appears to be decorative lighting. The Code does limit outdoor lighting to 75 watts and does not allow the lighting to trespass beyond the property lines. Surrounding properties are non- residential (except for the subject property) and it is unlikely that the proposed lighting will be intrusive to neighboring properties in the evening hours. The proposed black metal railings and planter boxes are like other outdoor patio enclosures found throughout the city and are compatible with the existing building and nearby development.
The proposed patio fixtures and shade sails will create an inviting and festive atmosphere along the street frontage of South Meramec Avenue and Bonhomme Avenue. The proposed color and design of the shade sails is consistent with the colors there were approved for the adopted sign district for this property and will be compatible with the building design. The applicant will need to make some minor modifications to the location of the railings to ensure compliance with the minimum PAR requirements.
STAFF RECOMMENDATION IS TO APPROVE WITH THE FOLLOWING CONDITIONS: 1. NO ADVERTISING SHALL BE PERMITTED ON THE SHADE SAILS. 2. THE LOCATION OF THE PROPOSED RAILINGS, PLANTER BOXES, FURNITURE AND SHADE SAILS SHALL COMPLY WITH THE CITY ADOPTED PROWAG SETBACK AND HEIGHT REQUIREMENTS. 3. NEITHER THE RAILINGS, PLANTER BOXES NOR SHADE SAIL SUPPORTS SHALL BE PERMANENTLY AFFIXED TO THE PUBLIC SIDEWALK WITHOUT THE EXPRESS WRITTEN PERMISSION OF THE CITY OF CLAYTON. 4. THE PROPOSED LIGHTING SHALL NOT VIOLATE CITY CODES. 5. THE APPLICANT SHALL AMEND THEIR EXISTING OUTDOOR DINING PERMIT TO REFLECT THE AMENDED LAYOUT OF THE OUTDOOR DINING AREA AS APPROVED BY THE ARCHITECTURAL REVIEW BOARD AND ALL OTHER APPLICABLE CODE REQUIREMENTS. 6. ANY WORK IN THE PUBLIC RIGHT OF WAY SHALL REQUIRE THE ISSUANCE OF A RIGHT OF WAY PERMIT FROM THE CITY OF CLAYTON BEFORE THE WORK COMMENCES. 7. THE APPLICANT SHALL IDENTIFY THE SPECIFIC HEIGHT OF THE RAILING AND SHADE SAILS AND PROVIDE THE LIGHTING DETAILS ON A REVISED PLAN AND SUBMIT IT TO THE CITY’S PLANNING DEPARTMENT.
JENNY JOHNSON (JJ) – APPLICANT
JJ – Addresses the board and gives a presentation of what they are looking to achieve at Peel.
CHAIRMAN LICHTENFELD – I think it looks good and I agree with staff recommendations. We must maintain the Pedestrian Access Route. I have no other comments.
BOARD MEMBERS HAVE NO QUESTIONS OR COMMENTS OTHER THAN IT WILL LOOK NICE.
CAROLYN GAIDIS – MOTION TO APPROVE WITH STAFF RECOMMENDATIONS.
RICHARD LINTZ – SECOND.
BOARD UNANIMOUSLY VOTES TO APPROVE WITH STAFF RECOMMENDATIONS 6-0.
8 PUBLIC HEARING IS OPENED – Since it was discussed at great length last meeting we will not be doing that again but we will review and open for public comment.
28, 30, 32, 38 NORTH CENTRAL AVENUE, 7800 & 7820 MARYLAND AVENUE, AND 9 & 19 N. BEMISTON AVENUE – REZONING/PLANNED UNIT DEVELOPMENT – NEW MIXED-USE
Director Susan M. Istenes summarizes the following staff report: “This request is for a public hearing to solicit input regarding the rezoning and Planned Unit Development for a proposed mixed-use development. The rezoning and Planned Unit Development are being considered together in this report. This project will also require approval by the Plan Commission (Site Plan), Architectural Review Board (Architectural Plans) and approval of a subdivision plat by the Board of Aldermen. The purpose of the planned unit development process is to foster appropriate use of existing buildings and enable compatible redevelopment which provides public benefits as identified in Section 405.1380 and achieves the objectives outlined in Section 405.1360. A PUD must provide public benefits to the surrounding neighborhoods and to the City above and beyond what can be reasonably achieved by application of the zoning provisions applicable to the underlying zoning district.
EXISTING CONDITIONS AND ZONING
The 1.526 acre site is located west of Bemiston Avenue, south of Maryland Avenue and east of Central Avenue in the north half block, bounded by an east/west alley to the south. The properties have a zoning designation of HDC High Density Commercial District and are within the Central Business District Core Overlay District and the Entertainment Overlay district. The entire site is currently made up of multiple parcels which are currently improved with multiple, single and two-story buildings and a surface parking lot. The property will be rezoned from HDC to PUD.
The new project consists of the demolition of the existing parking lot and structures and the construction of a 5 story apartment building constructed on a concrete podium over 3 floors of parking (partially underground). The project will also be constructed with 10,667 square feet of retail space along Central Avenue, 236 rental apartment units and 346 total parking spaces. The building will total 268,535 square feet (excluding parking) and 403,014 square feet, including parking. The total height of the new structure as measured from average existing grade to the mean elevation of the top of the flat roof is 76 feet 8 inches. Structured parking will be developed on the inside of the development, surrounded and screened by dwelling units facing Maryland Avenue and Bemiston Avenue, and commercial space facing Central Avenue. Access to the parking garage is provided from the east west alley on the south end of the project. Two stories of the garage will be below grade and one story will be above grade, providing 346 total spaces including 6 spaces located off Bemiston Avenue which serves as a motor court/drop off area to the front of the building. An outdoor amenity deck for the residents is proposed internal to the structure surrounded by building walls and will not be visible from any street. City standard streetscape will be installed along the project limits. The proposed project also preserves the 1935 Shanley Building which is located at the southwest corner of Maryland Avenue and Bemiston Venue. It will be used as office space and an amenity for the residents of the project.
This project seeks relief from certain development standards that are set forth in the current zoning district (HDC) and other requirements of the Central Business District Core Overlay (CBD) District. The current required development standards and the proposed modifications to those standards are identified in the table below. The number of requested modifications to the development standards that are required by the design of the project drive the amount of public benefits the developer is required to provide in terms of a point scale that is set forth in Section 405.1380 of the Zoning Regulations.
9 All Planned Unit Developments shall provide at least one (1) public benefit or combination of public benefits that total at least ten (10) points beyond those additional points required for any desired code alternatives, even if no code alternative is requested. After the minimum ten (10) points are achieved, for each code alternative requested thereafter, the developer shall provide a public benefit or combination of public benefits totaling at least five (5) points. For multiple requests for the same alternative (i.e. side yard setback alternatives on two sides) only one (1) public benefit totaling give (5) points is required. The total amount of points required to be achieved as a result of providing public benefits in this case is 20. (See chart below).
10 Requested Code Alternatives requiring a Waiver
Development Standard Requirement Proposed Waiver Required Points
10 Height (HDC) None 76 feet 8 inches No
Height (CBD) 4 stories or 45 feet (maximum) 76 feet 8 inches Yes 5 Building Setback (CBD) 15 feet at 30 feet above grade 3 feet along Central Ave, 6 feet along Maryland sidewalk and main building wall with 1 foot at residential bays above. 50 feet along Bemiston for 129 feet of 212 feet of frontage with 5 feet for remaining 83 feet. Yes 5 Front yard setback (CBD) 0
3 feet along Central Ave, 6 feet along Maryland sidewalk and main building wall with 1 foot at residential bays above. 50 feet along Bemiston for 129 feet of 212 feet of frontage with 5 feet for remaining 83 feet. No
Rear yard setback (CBD) 15 feet 4 feet along alley at ground plane and 6 feet above a minimum height of 16 feet clear Yes 5 Floor Area Ratio (FAR CBD) 1.5 (maximum) 3.94 Yes 5 Ground Floor Uses (CBD) Retail in nature Residential Yes N/A Parking (residential automobile) 2 per unit = 472 minimum
346 Yes N/A Parking (commercial) 1 per 300 square feet = 26 (minimum) 0 Yes N/A TOTAL
20 CBD = CBD Core Downtown Overlay District HDC = High Density Commercial
A PUD must provide public benefits to the surrounding neighborhoods and to the City above and beyond what can be reasonably achieved by application of the zoning provisions applicable to the underlying zoning district. The Board of Aldermen may approve alternatives to the zoning regulations, subdivision regulations or design standards applicable to the property proposed to be rezoned to a planned unit development, in exchange for developer provided public benefits, as authorized in Section 405.1380. Section 405.1380(B)(1-15), characterizes those public benefits that are considered appropriate examples of benefits and Table 405.1390.1 assigns each listed benefit a maximum point value. All planned unit developments shall provide at least one (1) public benefit or combination of public benefits that total at least ten (10) points beyond those additional points required for any desired code alternatives, even if no code alternative is requested. Public benefits are not limited to those outlined in Section 405.1380(B)(1 — 15), and a developer may propose different public benefits in their application for PUD rezoning per 405.1380(B)(16). For this project a minimum of 20 points must be obtained.
11
Point Table proposed by Developer per requested deviations:
Code Section Public Benefit Requested Points Staff Points Code Standard 405.1380(3) Widen Maryland Avenue Sidewalks to 11 feet 2 inches 5 total 3 Projects which provide or enhance public open space, public parks, and public park or trail access 405.1380(3) Provide Plaza along Central Avenue to enhance restaurant experience 5 total 2 Projects which provide or enhance public open space, public parks, and public park or trail access 405.1380(3) Provide an open motor court on Bemiston Avenue 5 total 0 Projects which provide or enhance public open space, public parks, and public park or trail access 405.1380(3) Widen alley; bury overhead lines; Landscape amenity deck and install Clayton standards streetscape 10 total/2 each 2 (amenity deck)
Provision of new or enhanced public infrastructure greater than the code requirement 405.1380(4) Addition of residents to downtown 5 0 Greater housing density with enhanced design standards which results in more affordable housing. 405.1380(6) Underground storage of stormwater and amenity deck stormwater adsorption 5 2
Use of natural means to capture water run off 405.1380(7) Alley Widening 5 0 Dedication of land to city for purposes of widening right-of-way when not already required by code 405.1380(10) Below grade parking 5 4 Inclusion of below grade parking garage
405.1380(14) Shanley Building Preservation 5 7 Preservation of buildings which are architecturally or historically significant or contribute to the character of the City.
TOTAL
40 22 Required: 20 points
Point analysis:
1) 405.1380(3) Provision of new or enhanced public infrastructure: greater than the minimum code requirements or as required as a result of a traffic, parking or similar study, and including, but not limited to, the establishment of onsite common areas (exclusive of yards as defined herein), streets,
12 curbs, sidewalks, sanitary sewers, stormwater sewers, landscape buffers, lighting and public parking.
Applicants response: The development will widen the Maryland Avenue sidewalk to 11 feet 2 inches; provide a plaza area along Central Avenue to enhance the restaurant experience; provide an open motor court on Bemiston Avenue to enhance open space.
Staff Analysis: The proposed Points cannot be awarded for bringing sidewalks and streetscape up to City required standards however the proposal widens the sidewalks along Maryland above City standards and the addition of the plaza area is an enhancement. The motor court is a practical idea but is relatively insignificant in terms of public benefit.
2) 405.1380(B)(6) Protection and addition of green infrastructure. Projects which provide and protect green infrastructure such as planned and managed networks of open spaces (including parks) and features that use natural means such as vegetation to capture, store and infiltrate stormwater runoff (including bioswales, green roofs, and rain gardens).
Applicant’s response: Underground storage of storm water quality and quantity in accordance with MSD recommendations and a proposed amenity deck with a buffer zone to allow for water adsorption and filtration.
Staff Analysis: It’s unclear at this time how the water management system on the amenity deck will function, however, it is consistent with natural means to capture, store and infiltrate stormwater. Capturing stormwater per MSD requirements is not an enhancement over required standards and cannot be awarded points.
3) 405.1380(B)(7) Dedication of land to the City for purposes of widening or improving the adjoining right-of-way.
Applicant’s response: Developer will widen alley at the south side of the project to 24 feet.
Staff Analysis: Points cannot be received for City requirements such as planting city street scape or widening an alley, per 405.1380.B.3. Widening the alley to 24 feet is a city minimum standard that is required of all developments in similar situations, therefore, no points can be awarded.
4) 405.1380(B)(10) Below Grade Parking. Inclusion of a below grade parking facility which meets the parking requirements for the project.
Applicant’s response: The proposed parking structure will be below grade for two stories and will be screened from street view. Over sixty percent of the parking will be located below grade.
Staff Analysis: The parking structure is primarily located below grade except for one level. The above grade portions are screened by the location of the proposed buildings from the three main streets the project fronts and meets the intent of the code.
5) 405.1380(B)(14) Building Preservation. Preservation of buildings which are architecturally or historically significant or contribute to the character of the City.
Applicant’s response: We are proposing the preservation of the 1935 Shanley building as a major contributor to the fabric of downtown Clayton and is considered art by many in the
13 community. The building represents the first example of the International Style of architectural in the Midwest.
Staff response: The applicant identified this under the public art section of the code however, the code has a specific section that references preservation of historic structures. The applicant has met this code standard and was awarded full points (7) for preservation of the building.
The approval criteria are set forth in Section 405.1410 and are designed to achieve the objectives as set forth in Section 405.1360 of the Zoning Code. The Plan Commission may recommend, and the Board of Aldermen may adopt modifications to the requirements contained in Chapter 405.010 et. seq. titled Zoning Regulations as amended and Chapter 415.010 et. seq. titled Subdivision Regulations as amended, as part of its consideration and approval of a planned unit development.to the Board of Aldermen approval, approval with conditions or denial of the development plan. In considering and acting upon development plans, landscape plans and other applicable plans, the Plan Commission shall take the following objectives into consideration through the planned unit development process:
Downtown Master Plan
1) The proposed development is in harmony with general purposes and intent of Chapter 405 of the Municipal Code and is compatible with and implements the planning goals and objectives of the City as set forth in the City’s Master Plans; >> The site is in the North Central District, as identified in the Downtown Master Plan. The vision for the North Central District is to “grow at a human scale at key pedestrian street, with fine-grained development, active streets and walkable commercial areas.” The proposed uses and design will increase pedestrian activity levels and retain the already active streets of Central Avenue and Bemiston Avenue. Staff is of the opinion that the proposed development is consistent with the Downtown Master Plan.
Open Space and Landscaping
2) The quality and quantity of public and common open space and landscaping provided are consistent with higher standards of design and amenities expected of a PUD. Common spaces are adequate in size and design to accommodate public use: >> Criteria met. The building and the garden space coupled with the design of the building providing additional outdoor seating areas at the intersection of Maryland Avenue and Central Avenue provide amenities to both pedestrians, occupants of the building and the general public, to a certain extent.
External Circulation
3) Streets, sidewalks, pedestrian ways, bike paths, off-street parking and loading as appropriate to the planned land uses are provided and meet the City of Clayton standards. They will not unduly interfere with the safety and capacity of adjacent streets, or other means of access to the site. >> Criterial met. The proposed parking, streets, access points and loading zones are appropriate to the type and extent of development proposed.
Internal Circulation
14 4) The internal circulation system of the proposed development encourages safe movement for vehicles and pedestrians and provides public access to green areas and open space preserved on site which are designated for public use. >> Criterial met. The internal circulations systems provide for safe movements of pedestrians and vehicles. Public access to green areas is limited to those residents in the building.
Design
5) The PUD represents a more creative approach to the unified planning of development and incorporates a higher standard of integrated design and amenity than could be achieved under otherwise applicable zoning district and subdivision regulations. >> Criteria met. The proposed project is compatible with surrounding developments in terms of intensity of land use and makes more efficient use of land than the existing low rise, two story office uses. The project represents a redevelopment of half of an existing City block which allows for integrated design as opposed to redevelopment of individual lots with separate buildings.
Utilities
6) Existing or proposed utility services are adequate for the proposed development. >> Criterial met. Adequate utility services are available for the proposed development.
Buffering
7) Appropriate buffering is provided to protect adjacent land uses from light, noise and visual impacts. >> Criteria met. Surrounding land uses are similar in nature and scale. The closest residential properties are across Central Avenue, mixed use residential/commercial, six stories height and across Maryland Avenue to the north.
Natural Features
8) The design of the project is as consistent as practical with the preservation of natural features of the site such as stands of mature trees, steep slopes, natural drainage ways, or other area of sensitive or valuable environmental character. The topography of the property is preserved to the greatest extent possible. >> The topography of the property is preserved to the greatest extent possible. There are no other existing natural features of the site.
Site Layout and Land Use
9) The proposed site layout and uses are compatible with the neighborhood surrounding the proposed development and the City as a whole. >> The proposed layout of the site and the land uses overall, are compatible with the neighborhood and the proposed development and the City as a whole. Adjacent land uses include a Planned Unit Development District mixed use residential and commercial and office uses. A Post Office use is located across Bemiston Avenue.
Compliance with all other applicable codes and ordinances.
15 The proposed development complies with all other codes and ordinances.
Architectural Preservation
10) The proposed development preserves buildings which are architecturally or historically significant or contribute to the character of the City. >> The existing site is developed with a surface parking lot and a few smaller buildings. The developer plans to preserve the Shanley building which is historically significant and contributes to the character of the City.
Points
11) The proposed development provides the required number of points to the extent outlined in Section 405.1380. >> See analysis above. As of the writing of this report, the developer has achieved the minimum amount of points required by Code.
Public Welfare
12) The PUD will not be detrimental to the public health, safety or general welfare. >> Provided the development is built in accordance with the zoning ordinance, this PUD ordinance, the approved site plan and all applicable building and safety codes, the PUD should not be detrimental to the public health, safety or general welfare.
The property has a zoning designation of High Density Commercial (HDC) and CBD Core Downtown Overlay District and Entertainment Overlay District.) The CBD Core Overlay seeks to maintain a pedestrian friendly retail center development pattern and foster a pedestrian friendly environment. Rezoning to a mixed use planned unit development district is allowed only in areas where the existing zoning designation is non-residential, the proposed building(s) totals fifty thousand (50,000) gross square feet or more and are located in overlay districts requiring planned unit development designation.
Mixed use planned unit developments are appropriate when the project incorporates at least two (2) of the following four (4) categories of use and the existing zoning allows for mixed use development.
1) Office use; 2) Commercial land uses such as, retail, restaurant, entertainment venues, etc.; 3) Residential use; 4) Hotel; 5) Hotel and public restaurant (shall qualify as a mixed-use project and the gross square foot limitation per 405.1370 (E) shall not apply).
The proposed development will enhance the pedestrian activity levels in this area of the City and will preserve the existing commercial/retail/restaurant uses on Maryland Avenue. The overlay district requires that ground floor uses be retail in nature. As development along the Maryland Avenue corridor has progressed it has been increasingly evident that the residential nature of the proposed ground floor uses of the facades along Maryland Avenue and Bemiston Avenue are appropriate to the context of the surrounding land uses and within the district itself. The focus of retail ground floor storefronts is Central Avenue, and that will continue with this project. Staff is of the opinion that the development is consistent with the current zoning code requirements for Planned Unit Developments and
16 meets the provisions of the land use policies contained in the Downtown Clayton Master Plan. Staff is of the opinion that the proposed use will be compatible with surrounding uses.
STAFF RECOMMENDATION IS TO RECOMMEND APPROVAL OF THE REZONING AND PLANNED UNIT DEVELOPMENT TO THE BOARD OF ALDERMEN WITH THE FOLLOWING CONDITIONS LISTED IN THE DRAFT ORDINANCE.
STEVEN BROWN (SB) BRIAN GOBELL (BG) FRANK ANDRE (FA) TIM ROWBOTTOM (TR) ERIC FISCHER (EF) ALYSON TAYLOR (AT) MATTHEW CHIAMPI (MC) GEORGE STOCK (GS)
PUBLIC COMMENTS:
PETER BARKOFSKE – Representing Gray Bar Electric speaks in support of the project.
TERRI AND JIM KERLEY – Concerned about traffic with a restaurant on the corner.
JANE MATOESIAN – Concerned about traffic and noise.
KATHY BEILEIN – It’s great.
CHERYL MILLER – I support it.
CHAIRMAN LICHTENFELD – CLOSES THE PUBLIC HEARING.
CAROLYN GAIDIS – MOTION TO RECOMMEND APPROVAL OF THE REZONING AND PLANNED INITE DEVELOPMENT PLAN TO THE BOARD OF ALDERMEN
RICHARD LINTZ – SECOND.
BOARD VOTES TO APPROVE WITH CONDITIONS, 6-0.
28, 30, 32, 38 NORTH CENTRAL AVENUE, 7800 & 7820 MARYLAND AVENUE, AND 9 & 19 N. BEMISTON AVENUE – ARCHITECTURAL REVIEW BOARD – NEW MIXED-USE
Director Susan M. Istenes summarizes the following staff report: “This item was heard at the meeting of November 16th and was continued at that time. Modifications to the design of the project were submitted and have been review by staff. The staff analysis regarding those revisions is located below the staff analysis paragraphs for the November report, and is indicated in bold and italicized text.
17 The 1.526 acre site is located west of Bemiston Avenue, south Maryland Avenue and east of Central Avenue in the north half block, bounded by an east/west alley to the south. The properties have a zoning designation of HDC High Density Commercial District and are within the Central Business District Core Overlay District and the Entertainment Overlay district. The entire site is currently made up of multiple parcels, and is currently improved with multiple, single and two-story buildings and a surface parking lot. The property will be rezoned from HDC to PUD.
The proposed project is a mixed-use residential apartment building with street level commercial space and an internal, three (3) story enclosed parking structure. The new project consists of the demolition of the existing parking lot and structures and the construction of a 5 story apartment building constructed on a concrete podium over 3 floors of parking (partially underground). The project will also be constructed with 10,667 square feet of retail along Central Avenue, 236 rental apartment units and 346 total parking spaces. The building will total 268,535 square feet (excluding parking) and 403,014 square feet, including parking. The total height of the new structure as measured from average existing grade to the mean elevation of the top of the flat roof is 76 feet 8 inches. Structured parking will be developed on the inside of the development, surrounded and screened by dwelling units facing Maryland Avenue and Bemiston Avenue, and commercial space facing Central Avenue. Access to the parking garage is provided from the east west alley on the south end of the project. Two stories of the garage will be below grade and one story will be above grade, providing 346 total spaces including 6 spaces located off Bemiston Avenue which serves as a motor court/drop off area to the front of the building. An outdoor amenity deck for the residents is proposed internal to the structure surrounded by building walls and will not be visible from any street. City standard streetscape will be installed along the project limits. The proposed project also preserves the 1935 Shanley Building which is located at the southwest corner of Maryland Avenue and Bemiston Venue. It will be used as office space and an amenity for the residents of the project.
Per Section 410.190, the following guidelines shall be applied by the Architectural Review Board for development proposals located in the HDC Zoning District and the Downton Core Overlay include additional architectural review guidelines:
1) Party wall development should be encouraged to ensure a continuous building facade. >> The proposed building as shown is a single building that occupies approximately one-half (1/2) of a City block. Thus, the building maintains a virtually continuous building façade on N. Central Avenue, Maryland Avenue, and N. Bemiston Avenue. Furthermore, all building parking and loading areas are accessed from the public alley, with only the “motor court”—adjacent to the residential lobby—having driveway access to a public street (N. Bemiston Avenue). Staff is of the opinion that the proposed project meets this Architectural Review standard.
2) Building skylines should provide interest through introduction of compatible shapes and roof forms. Long uninterrupted rooflines and cornices should be avoided >> The proposed building as shown utilizes one consistent and largely uninterrupted parapet. Variation occurs between the “separate” building masses on the north, east, and west facades, which are treated with different materials and slightly different detailing. Furthermore, the parapet on the west façade is a punctuated vertical pier that extend upward slightly beyond the level of the parapet. Staff is of the opinion that the design could be modified to be more consistent with this requirement. The parapet wall and extending piers at the southwest corner of the building (at the corner of Central Avenue and the Alley) could be raised by three or four feet which would contribute to making the project meet this guideline. Staff comments: Criteria met with revisions proposed.
3) Façade relief should be incorporated into all building elevations. Long uninterrupted elevations should be avoided.
18 >> The proposed building as shown incorporates a variety of façade relief elements on the north (Maryland Avenue), and east (N. Bemiston Avenue) facades. This includes protruding balconies; inset/recessed balconies; inset terraces; stepped-back terraces; protruding vertical piers; vertical reveals between major building massing; horizontal reveals indicating a building pediment; and overhanging canopies. Staff comments: The applicant proposes a new planter concept at each of the five street level apartments to eliminate in ground planters. The windows were recessed between piers to create more relief in the façade and the entrance stairs were pushed back. Staff agrees that these changes breaks up the taller flat wall at the parking garage which is below the apartments and creates more prominence to the entrances. Staff is satisfied with the proposed modifications. More importantly, there is no significant façade relief provided on the west (N. Central Avenue) façade. The west façade is arguably the most important façade of the building, as it fronts the key dining and entertainment street within the district. The treatment of this façade is intended to resemble a historic factory or commercial/industrial building, rehabbed as lofts. The only façade relief provided on this façade are partially-recessed balconies, which are recessed approximately one-and-a-half (1-1/2) feet into the façade in large, rectangular openings, and protrude from the façade approximately two-and-a-half (2-1/2) feet. There are also vertical piers articulated at each structural bay, which protrude approximately six (6) inches. As a result, the west façade reads largely as a flat, unarticulated plane. Furthermore, the question arises as to the function of these balconies—and the balconies on the other building facades—given their small size of approximately four (4) feet by six (6) feet. Staff comments: Building articulations along Central Avenue has been modified. The residential units above the retail base have been setback by 2 feet 9 inches. The northwest and southwest corners have been given prominence through additional articulation, balconies and fenestration. The corner towers are raised 4 feet to create a hierarchy of forms with the corners being primary and adding variety to the building skyline. Between the corner towers a datum line below the top floor and the top floor façade has been provided creating a recessed appearance (approximately 1 foot in depth). There are pier caps which raise above the parapets to articulate the skyline. The balconies have been revised in size and are now proposed at 5 feet deep and 8 feet wide; the change gives them more prominence and functionality. Staff is satisfied with these modifications. Finally, the ground floor elevation exhibits a repetitive series of storefronts with little variation in character. The only differentiation is between the corner restaurant space—which is treated differently— and the other storefront spaces along N. Central Avenue, which are treated the same. This results in a repetitive treatment of the N. Central Avenue ground floor façade that is largely homogenous along the façade’s entire half-block length. The result is a significant change in character from the existing conditions, which consists of four (4) separate buildings with eight (8) individual storefronts. This existing character is positive and representative of “Old Downtown” Clayton, which the Central Business District (CBD) Core Overlay is intended to preserve. Staff comments: The retail space at the ground level of Central Avenue was redesigned to be provide more variation in scale and character. At midblock, the spaces are designed to accommodate 2-4 individual stores. Entrance styles are proposed to be varied with colors and materials and canopies and awnings. Within each frame, the retail façade articulations and setbacks were modified; a minimum glazing height was established (maximum 30 inch windowsill) and a center store entry is proposed. Retail spaces are setback from each other and floor to ceiling glass is utilized instead of one continuous windowsill. A variety of soft awnings and hard canopies are proposed along with a variety of materials, colors and textures for each façade. Staff is satisfied with these proposed modifications.
4) Window openings should be incorporated into all building elevations. Blank walls, long horizontal openings, odd shapes and glass walls should be avoided.
19 >> The proposed building as shown incorporates regular, rectangular window openings and balconies on each façade. Staff is of opinion of that the proposed project meets Architectural Review Board Guidelines Criteria IV. Staff comments: No additional comments.
5) Street level (ground floor) elevation facing the street should be storefront architecture with large show windows interrupted at regular intervals with building piers and generous entrances. Blank walls, long uninterrupted show windows, odd-shaped and small show windows should be avoided. >> The proposed building as shown utilizes storefront architecture on the N. Central Avenue (west) façade, which wraps around the northwest corner at Maryland Avenue. This continuous storefront is divided into two (2) zones: a double-height space on the corner for a restaurant with window walls that may be opened to the sidewalk, which serves as a signature retail/entertainment corner; and a single-height repetitive storefront that comprises the majority (approximately two-thirds) of the N. Central Avenue façade, which is divided into five (5) separate storefronts, divided by piers with individual entrance doors. Both sections are sheltered with overhanging canopies of the same design. The elevation of each canopy segment is dictated by the overall height of interior commercial space, with the corner canopy being higher. The two (2) zones are divided by covered, open-air pedestrian passageway between the sidewalk and the third level of the parking garage. This passageway is intended to provide additional covered, outdoor dining space adjacent to the signature retail/entertainment corner. Along the Maryland Avenue façade, there are individual entrances to the five (5) ground level apartment units. These entrances consist of individual stairways with small porches or stoops that are recessed into the façade of the building. However, the second (2nd) level of parking protrudes approximately four (4) to six (6) feet above the Maryland Avenue sidewalk and is concealed behind a blank brick wall. Staff comments: Modifications were made Along the N. Bemiston Avenue façade, the residential lobby is placed in a protruding, double-height block at the southeast corner of the site. The lobby features one-and-a-half (1-1/2) story glazing. The existing Shanley Building comprises approximately one-third of the Bemiston Avenue façade. Staff is of the opinion that as designed, the proposed project does not meet Architectural Review Board Guidelines Criteria V—due to treatments other than storefront architecture on the Maryland Avenue and N. Bemiston Avenue facades. The residential nature of the proposed ground floor uses along Maryland Avenue and N. Bemiston Avenue is considered by staff to be appropriate to the context of the surrounding district, but the current design of the project does not demonstrate the creation of active and vibrant street frontages along either Maryland Avenue nor N. Bemiston Avenue, which is one of the primary objectives of this criteria are appropriate to the context of the surrounding district. Staff comments: See comments below under additional comments. There are also opportunities to improve the texture and variation of both the N. Central Avenue façade and Maryland Avenue façade. As stated in the review pursuant to Criteria III above, the ground floor elevation along N. Central Avenue exhibits a repetitive series of storefronts with little variation in character. The only differentiation is between the corner restaurant space—which is treated differently—and the other storefront spaces along N. Central Avenue, which are treated the same. This results in a repetitive, treatment of the N. Central Avenue ground floor façade that is largely homogenous along the façade’s entire half-block length. The result is a significant change in character from the existing conditions, which consists of four (4) separate buildings with eight (8) individual storefronts. This existing character is positive and representative of “Old Downtown” Clayton, which the Central Business District (CBD) Core Overlay is intended to preserve.
6) Parking structures visible from the street should be avoided. The upper story should be of design material and color compatible with the urban setting.
20 >> The proposed building as shown fully conceals the internal parking structure where abutting the street. Parking is concealed by the residential lobby on N. Bemiston Avenue; the commercial/retail storefronts on N. Central Avenue; and the third (3rd) level of parking is concealed by residential apartments with individual exterior entrances on Maryland Avenue. However, the second (2nd) level of parking protrudes approximately four (4) to six (6) feet above the Maryland Avenue sidewalk and is concealed behind a blank brick wall. At the northeast corner of the site, the east façade of the parking structure is pulled back to behind the west edge of the Shanley Building and is buffered from the sidewalk by the Shanley Building and the motor court. The parking structure façade is shown to be screened with a vegetative green wall. Staff comments:
Additional comments: 1. Vary the base height up to a typical three-story maximum height and provide plane changes in the façade that create significant vertical and horizontal breaks and shadow lines on the façade. This variance should respond to the street character and typical widths, heights and modulation of existing buildings to create a contextually sensitive building wall along the street.
2. More prominence should be given to the project’s corner at N. Central Avenue and Maryland Avenue. Staff comments: Criteria met; see analysis above.
3. More prominence should be given to the exterior entrances to the five ground level apartments along Maryland Avenue. Staff comments: Criteria met; see analysis above.
4. There is a large quantity of cementitious panels used on the east and south facades of the building. This is generally inappropriate material in the North Central district. Masonry is the preferred material. Staff comments: This was discussed with the applicant after the last ARB meeting, and staff was of the understanding that the Bemiston façade would be revised to be clad in Masonry, however the resubmitted plans indicate that masonry only replaced the cementitious panels on the north end of the Bemiston façade and metal panels replaced the former cementitious panels on the center and south fronts along the Bemiston Avenue facade. Staff understands that it is the applicant’s desire to have this area of the development look like different and separate buildings, but staff is of the opinion that that is already achieved by the proposed design/façade articulation, the green wall, the presence of the Shanley Building, the motor court/entrance, the masonry base, the proposed glazing at the south end and the programmed areas such as the dog park and outdoor terrace at the south end of the Bemiston façade. On this block of Bemiston Avenue masonry is the predominant material on all of the surrounding buildings. The proposed metal panels make that area of the building appear as an afterthought and disconnected. Although metal is generally found appropriate as a secondary or accent material, its proposed location is out of character with surrounding properties and the proposed development.
5. Vinyl framed windows are an inappropriate assembly in the North Central District. Windows should be aluminum framed. Staff comments: The windows have been modified to be aluminum frame; criteria met.
6. The proposed development does not provide roof top use or articulation. Staff comments: Additional articulation was provided along the Central Avenue frontage. The top of the building along the Maryland frontage remains linear, without articulation, however the proposed design for the Maryland facing elevation and the proposed modifications from the previous submittal make the linear rooftop less of a concern. Staff is satisfied with the proposed changes.
The intent and purpose of the existing CBD Core Overlay Zoning District states:
21 A. The Central Business District Core Overlay District (hereinafter known in this Article as the CBD Core Overlay District) applies to selected blocks in the High-Density Commercial District which have been targeted to remain pedestrian friendly retail centers. The area encompassed in the CBD Overlay District is the historic and current heart of commercial and service activities in the City of Clayton. The main reason for the continued vitality and integrity of the area is that the buildings in this area are "pedestrian friendly" structures and human in scale. The CBD Core Overlay District will preserve the ambience of this section of the Central Business District.
B. The purpose of these regulations, and the context within which they should be construed and applied, is to foster appropriate use of existing structures and enable compatible redevelopment where reuse is not feasible, through application of the following goals:
1. Promote structures that have sidewalk frontage suitable for smaller retail and service activities; 2. Stimulate designs that minimize scale and mass as perceived from the sidewalk; 3. Avoid regimentation and visual uniformity along the sidewalk frontage; 4. Encourage harmonious architecture which preserves the essential character of the district via variations in entrance size, setback, height, etc.; creation of varied sidewalk windows and display areas using facade materials and design, which lend both visual and textural distinction. 5. Design buildings to encourage pedestrian activity by use of ground level retail shops and store fronts.
The ground floor of the proposed project does exhibits high standards street front accessibility and flexibility for multiple retail tenants and a single restaurant tenant along N. Central Avenue (as detailed above in Architectural Review Board Criteria VI). However, the ground floor elevation along N. Central Avenue exhibits a repetitive series of storefronts with little variation in character. The only differentiation is between the corner restaurant space—which is treated differently—and the other storefront spaces along N. Central Avenue, which are treated the same. This results in a repetitive, treatment of the N. Central Avenue ground floor façade that is largely homogenous along the façade’s entire half-block length. The result is a significant change in character from the existing conditions, which consists of four (4) separate buildings with eight (8) individual storefronts. This existing character is positive and representative of “Old Downtown” Clayton, which the Central Business District Core Overlay Zoning District is intended to preserve. Additionally, provided commercial space will be replacing existing commercial space on N. Central Avenue, and commercial space removed on N. Bemiston Avenue is not proposed to be replaced. Staff comments: The applicant has proposed several modifications to the details of the store frontage along Central Avenue which make the proposed storefronts look like individual units with more variation in character, while still tying in with the design of the residential units above. Staff is of the opinion that the changes satisfy the concerns noted above.
The ground floor facades of Maryland Avenue and N. Bemiston Avenue do not meet the goals of Central Business District Core Overlay Zoning District. The residential nature of the proposed ground floor uses along Maryland Avenue and N. Bemiston Avenue have been deemed appropriate to the context of the surrounding district, but the current design of the project does not demonstrate the creation of active and vibrant street frontages along either Maryland Avenue nor N. Bemiston Avenue, which is one of the primary objectives of this criteria are appropriate to the context of the surrounding district. Staff comments: After further consideration and in studying the existing development along Maryland Avenue and the compatibility concerns with nearby single family residential development on the north side of Maryland Avenue, staff is satisfied that the proposed street frontages along Maryland Avenue and Bemiston Avenue are appropriately designed. Maryland Avenue, between Central Avenue and Bemiston Avenue, is more suitable and appropriate for residential and office type of development. The small variety of retail and restaurant along Bemiston Avenue will no longer be present upon redevelopment of the subject site and the predominant use will become office. The addition of the residential units and residents to this block will bring additional vibrancy to those streets such as Central Avenue and Forsyth Boulevard, that are the focus of entertainment, retail and restaurant development and which are
22 already predominantly developed as such and will likely remain so as further redevelopment occurs in this area of the City.
STAFF RECOMMENDATION
The applicant has made modifications to the original submittal that involve an exceptional amount of detail as it relates to design and materials, especially along the Central Avenue frontage. Staff has concerns that the details of the design present in the illustrations submitted with the most recent revisions, are not detailed enough at this stage in the review process to ensure the proposed design is constructed as presented to the Architectural Review Board.
Staff suggests that as details of the design are further developed by the applicant’s design team, that further consideration by the Architectural Review Board may be necessary to ensure that the appearance of the project is consistent with the design intent that was presented at this meeting and that any proposed modifications during permitting meet the intent of what is approved and anticipated by the Architectural Review Board and the citizens of Clayton. The need for these additional reviews will be at the discretion of the staff.
Except for the proposed metal panels on the southernmost structure fronting Bemiston Avenue, staff is of the opinion that the proposed modifications are appropriate and consistent with the design intent for this area of the City and the surrounding properties.
STAFF RECOMMENDATION IS TO APPROVE WITH THE FOLLOWING CONDITION: 1. REVISE THE MATERIALS ON THE SOUTHERN BUILDING FAÇADE ON THE BEMISTON FRONTAGE FROM METAL PANELS TO MASONRY TO BE CONSISTENT WITH THE MASONRY PROPOSED FOR THE NORTHERN BUILDING FAÇADE.
STEVEN BROWN (SB) BRIAN GOBELL (BG) FRANK ANDRE (FA) TIM ROWBOTTOM (TR) ERIC FISCHER (EF) ALYSON TAYLOR (AT) MATTHEW CHIAMPI (MC) GEORGE STOCK (GS)
FA – Gives a presentation of the project.
CHAIRMAN LICHTENFELD – Will the interior windows be the same material as the exterior windows?
SB – They will look the same, but no.
CHAIRMAN LICHTENFELD – I thought the presentation that was sent was very complete and addressed the staff’s comments as well as the Board’s comments.
BOARD HAS MINIMAL COMMENTS AND QUESTIONS.
23
PUBLIC COMMENTS:
NANCY GEORGEN – loves the project.
HANK WINKLEMAN – Not a fan of the project.
CAROLYN GAIDIS – MOTION TO APPROVE BASED ON THE FINAL PLANS AND ALL RENDERINGS PRESENTED TONIGHT ON THE 12/07/2020 MEETING.
RICHARD LINTZ – SECOND.
BOARD APPROVE WITH STAFF RECOMMENDATIONS, 6-0.
HAVING NO FURTHER BUSINESS BEFORE THE COMMISSION, THE MEETING WAS ADJOURNED AT 21:30.
_______________________________ Recording Secretary