November 16, 2020 — Meeting Minutes
CITY PLAN COMMISSION/ARCHITECTURAL REVIEW BOARD VIRTUAL ZOOM MEETING MONDAY, NOVEMBER 16, 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, George Hettich, and Helen DiFate answered roll call.
ALSO IN ATTENDANCE
Stephanie Karr, City Attorney Susan M. Istenes, AICP, Planning Director
APPROVAL OF MINUTES
CAROLYN GAIDIS – MOTION TO APPROVE THE MINUTES OF 11/02/2020, AS SUBMITTED.
2 OLD BUSINESS
16 BRENTMOOR PARK – ARCHITECTURAL REVIEW – REAR YARD ADDITION
Director Susan M. Istenes summarizes the following staff report: “The approximately 81,903 square foot site is located on the south side of Brentmoor Park Drive. The property has a zoning designation of R-2 Single Family Dwelling District. The property contains a 5,686 square foot house and the applicant is proposing a 1,000 square foot single story addition to serve as an extension of the living room. Other minor changes include new retaining walls, landscaped and paved walkways and new doors, a planter, two pergola structures, new outdoor kitchen, new concrete patio and proposed pool folly.
The proposed rear addition is similar in massing to the existing house. The style is different in that it has a flat roof and a large 16 foot by 10 foot non operable door unit facing the rear yard. The height of the proposed addition is 14 feet, 10 inches and the height of the existing structure is 28 feet 11 inches and is 2 stories in height. There is an existing pool fountain that will be removed and a “pool folly” will be constructed in its place The A/C units will be relocated to the side of the new addition and screened by existing landscaping.
All of the proposed changes are on the rear elevation and in the rear yard of the house. The proposed design and materials are intended to be consistent and compatible with the existing home, including the color and finishes. Staff is of the opinion that the addition is compatible with the existing house and neighborhood character.
The project as proposed impact a minimal portion of the overall property with the new addition footprint proposed to be constructed in an already developed raised lawn area. Minimal tree disturbance and removal is proposed (the applicant is removing one tree and adding one tree) and the overall tree canopy exceeds the requirement by 44,678 square feet.
The primary building material of the proposed addition is stucco and is the same color and material to match the existing house. The retaining walls will be finished in stucco – English style to match the existing primary structure. The proposed pergola at the new outdoor kitchen will be stained (color not specified) and new iron railings will be installed on top of the retaining walls to match the existing balustrade style. The proposed pergola shade structure at the back of the pool is approximately 9 feet 6 inches tall and will sit atop cast stone columns, Tuscan style, limestone buff color. The wood pergola roof will be stained with a semi-transparent stain, color Hill Country. The pool folly will be 14 feet high and will be constructed with terra cotta tile and stucco. Staff is of the opinion that the proposed building materials are compatible with the existing neighborhood character.
STAFF RECOMMENDATION IS TO APPROVE WITH THE FOLLOWING CONDITION:
1. TREE PROTECTION AS REQUIRED BY CODE SHALL BE INSTALLED PRIOR TO ANY GRADING FOR THE TREES
ALONG THE WEST PROPERTY LINE.
DAVID SCHAUB (DS) - ARCHITECT
DS – Explains the project in more depth than staff report.
CHAIRMAN LICHTENFELD AND RICHARD LINTZ – Asks questions regarding the roof line.
DS – Explains that trying to match the old roof would prove to be nearly impossible and that the roof will be barely visible from the front.
3
NO OTHER COMMENTS FROM THE BOARD MEMBERS.
CAROLYN GAIDIS – MOTION TO APPROVE WITH STAFF RECOMMENDATION.
RICHARD LINTZ - SECOND
BOARD VOTES TO APPROVE WITH STAFF CONDITION, 7-0.
NEW BUSINESS
122 SOUTH HANLEY ROAD – ARCHITECTURAL REVIEW – EXTERIOR ALTERATIONS AND SIGNAGE
Director Susan M. Istenes summarizes the following staff report: “The 8,420 square foot site is located on the east side of South Hanley Road between Colorado Avenue and Carondelet Plaza. The property has a zoning designation of HDC High Density Commercial District and is in the Clayton Plaza Downtown Overlay District. The subject property is currently operating as Clayton Car Wash but is under contract to Waterway Gas & Wash Company. The new owner intends to renovate the interior and exterior of the subject property to reestablish the Car Wash under the Waterway brand as a Waterway Express. The customer will stay in their cars the entire time, the wash is operating. There are two pay stations at the entrance to the wash, where customers will pay for the wash services. The intent is to offer a quick, automatic wash service. Waterway staff will be on site and some appointment only extra services, such as detailing, will be offered.
The building will be painted, a new metal exit canopy will be installed, and a cohesive sign plan is proposed. While it is not the purview of the ARB, the applicant also intends to rehab and brighten the entire car wash tunnel and the building’s interior.
The masonry building will be painted white, the drive through lanes will be restriped and new paving and curbs will be installed to create two distinct drive through lanes. A new pre-finished clear adonized metal canopy 10 feet 6 inches in height, will be installed at the wash exit, to replace the existing. New aluminum overhead doors with polycarbonate lights will replace the existing car wash doors at the entrance to and exit from the car wash tunnel. New gutters and downspouts will be installed as well as 3 new light sconces at the front of the building and at the back bay doors. The existing entrance to and exit from the car wash will remain in the same locations. The 6 parking spaces available for the car wash are located behind the building and will be restriped. Six signs are proposed:
1. LED double sided halo lit painted metal blade sign, 26 square feet in area – not allowed by code. 2. LED halo lit painted metal building sign, 28 square feet in area – allowed by code. 3. LED halo lit painted metal building sign, 28 square feet in area- allowed by code. 4. Enter sign over the back bay doors.2.3 square feet – allowed by code 5. A non-lit double sided painted metal directional arrow sign at the entrance 3 feet 6 inches in height, 8.4 square feet in area – exceeds code by 2.4 square feet. 6. Two externally illuminated painted metal directional and menu tower signs, over the drive through lanes, 6 feet 9 inches in height – not addressed by code.
The applicant is proposing two wall signs; both facing Hanley Road, one on the west façade and one on the south façade; both the size and location are permissible by the sign code. A blade sign will be placed on top of the
4 canopy perpendicular to Hanley Road just south of the proposed wall sign. The applicant is seeking a deviation of the sign code to allow this sign. Two menu/tower signs will be interior to the site and serve to provide direction to the drive through lanes and a place to pay for car wash services. The code does not address menu board signs, but their size is reasonable to serve their purpose and they are setback approximately 50 feet from the Hanley Road right of way and not directly visible from the street. An arrow shaped directional sign will be placed in a landscaped area adjacent to the drive through and exceeds the code by 2.4 square feet. The sign code limits directional signs to 6 square feet.
Staff is of the opinion that the sign code provides ample signage especially for properties located on corner lot and does not support the additional blade sign and additional square footage for the directional sign.
The proposed renovations will restore the character of the existing building. The addition of off-street parking will bring the subject property into conformance and create a more functional site. With minor modification, the proposed signage will conform to the Sign Regulations.
STAFF RECOMMENDATION IS APPROVE WITH THE FOLLOWING CONDITION:
1. THE SOUTH WALL SIGN SHALL BE SETBACK A MINIMUM OF 4 FEET FROM THE BUILDING EDGE.
2. THE DIRECTIONAL SIGN SHALL BE LIMITED TO SIZE 6 SQUARE FEET.
3. THE BLADE SIGN SHALL NOT BE PERMITTED.
MICHAEL GOLDMAN (MG) – APPLICANT/OWNER
MG– Explains the project to the Board and offers to answer questions.
CHAIRMAN LICHTENFELD AND ROBERT DENLOW – Ask questions regarding number of cars serviced and how it will affect traffic on Hanley Road.
MG – 20 cars on a good day, exiting onto Hanley should not be an issue.
CAROLYN GAIDIS – MOTION TO APPROVE WITH STAFF RECOMMENDATIONS AND THE MODIFICATION
RICHARD LINTZ – SECOND
BOARD VOTES TO APPROVE WITH STAFF RECOMMENDATIONS, 7-0.
8012 BONHOMME AVENUE – ARCHITECTURAL REVIEW – EXTERIOR ALTERATION/RENOVATION
Director Susan M. Istenes summarizes the following staff report: “The approximately 10,000 square foot site is located on the south side of Bonhomme Avenue between S. Meramec Avenue and S. Brentwood Boulevard. The property has a zoning designation of HDC High Density Commercial District and is in the Central Station TOD. The property contains a multi-tenant, 93,000 square foot, 3 story commercial office building. The proposed exterior revisions include the following:
1. Repainting the existing brick. 2. Removing existing curbing around landscape areas and landscape rock.
5 3. Removing existing concrete stair, sidewall and sidewalk, landing and concrete sidewalk. 4. Remove existing awning. 5. Remove existing railing. 6. Existing storefront to be removed and/or prep mullions for new surface treatment. 7. Repainting existing window mullions.
The applicant plans to repaint all the brick on the building and the front facing concrete wall that supports the stairway on the north elevation, with Sherwin Williams, Peppercorn color. A new canopy will be installed on the lower level of the north elevation and an updated canopy will replace the existing on the south side entry of the north elevation. A new railing will also be installed, and the existing signage will be removed. The existing window mullions will be painted Sherwin Williams Tricorn Black. Exterior Trespa siding/panels in a classic oak color will be installed on the outside edges of the north elevation (fascia) and under the upper level overhang (soffit). Recessed lighting will be installed on the front facing soffit.
New landscaping will be provided at street level, including a new concrete bench wall at the Garden (lower level) of the north elevation of the building.
On the west side of the building, the existing sidewalk/stair will be removed and replaced with a new ADA compliant ramp and cast in place concrete retaining wall.
On the south elevation, existing awnings will be removed and new black fabric awnings, approximately three feet deep and five feet wide will be installed over the two rear entries at the second and third stories. The existing guardrail will be painted a Sherwin Williams Tricorn black and tuckpointing will occur. Gutters will also be painted Tricorn black.
The proposed exterior renovations to this midcentury modern design building will clean up and refresh the building in updated and warm colors. Staff is of the opinion that the proposed changes are compatible with surrounding properties.
STAFF RECOMMENDATION IS TO APPROVE AS SUBMITTED.
CARA MCKEDY (CM) – APPLICANT KRISTEN MALLOY (KM) – APPLICANT
CM – Addresses the Board to answer questions and present the project.
Board Members comment on how nice it will look and that it is long overdue
CAROLYN GAIDIS – MOTION TO APPROVE AS SUBMITTED.
RICHARD LINTZ - SECOND.
BOARD UNANIMOUSLY VOTES TO APPROVE AS SUBMITTED. 7-0
300 HUNTER AVENUE – ARCHITECTURAL REVIEW – EXTERIOR ALTERATION/RENOVATION
6 Director Susan M. Istenes summarizes the following staff report: “This application is for consideration of a request by Shade Guard on behalf of Hunter Realty, LLC, owner, for review of the design and materials associated with the proposed installation of two shade sails (311 square feet each) to be installed over two outdoor north and south patios located on the second floor of an existing office building. The patios are 407 square feet each, in area.
The subject property is located on the west side of Hunter Avenue, adjacent to I-170 to the west and Shaw Park to the east. The existing patios are located on the second floor and are accessible to users within the office building. The proposed shade sails will provide shaded areas for seating on each patio. They will be constructed of polyethylene fire retardant and mold resistant fabric, slate gray in color. The sails will be installed with four brackets attached to the building wall and one, fourteen foot aluminum pole. The shade sails will be dismantled in the winter. At their highest point, the shade sails will be sixteen feet in height.
Staff believes that the shade sails will have minimal visual impact on the surrounding properties, which are non- residential. The shade sails are mainly visible from I-170 and Shaw Park. The proposed color is neutral, and they are of a nominal size and will blend into the background of the building.
STAFF RECOMMENDATION IS TO APPROVE AS SUBMITTED.
JOHAN PARSONS (JP) – APPLICANT
JP – Addresses the board and notes that the post is galvanized steel and there are three brackets not four.
Board Members have no comments other than it will look nice.
CAROLYN GAIDIS – MOTION TO APPROVE AS SUBMITTED.
RICHARD LINTZ - SECOND.
BOARD UNANIMOUSLY VOTES TO APPROVE AS SUBMITTED. 7-0
12 HILLVALE AVENUE – RESIDENTIAL CONDITIONAL USE – CARRIAGE HOUSE
Director Susan M. Istenes summarizes the following staff report: “The 26,242 square foot site is in the Claverach Park Subdivision and has a zoning designation of R-2 Single Family Dwelling District. The site is a corner lot, located at the northeast corner of Hillvale Drive and Harcourt Drive. The property is developed with a 2-story, single family residence, 4,768 square feet in area, with a tuck under garage. A new carriage house/second unit is proposed to be constructed on top of a new proposed 3-car detached garage, at the rear of the existing house (where a current driveway is located). The garage/carriage house will be placed on the property to allow room for a pool and patio space and may be connected to the main house via a covered walkway. The proposed location will require a variance to the front yard setback requirements, for which the applicant has applied.
A second unit (carriage house/granny unit) is a type of accessory structure, either attached or detached, which provides complete, independent living facilities for one or more persons including permanent provisions for living, sleeping, eating, cooking and sanitation and is located on the same site as the principal residence.
7 Second units are permitted subject to approval of a conditional use permit as per Article VII of this Chapter and the following criteria contained in Section 405.330 of the City’s Zoning Regulations:
1) Second (2nd) units are only permitted in the "R-1" and "R-2" Large Lot and Single-Family Residential Dwelling Districts, respectively.
>> The subject property has a zoning designation of R-2.
2) If a second (2nd) unit is to be occupied permanently, then the occupants must be related to the residents of the principal residence. The second (2nd) unit occupants must be related by blood, marriage or adoption or be employed by the principal residence and do work on the grounds.
>> According to the applicant, the second unit will not be occupied permanently but will be available for visiting relatives and guests. It could potentially be occupied permanently by an elderly relative if the need arises.
3) A second (2nd) unit may not be rented, sold, transferred or assigned separately from the principal residence. The owner shall record a deed restriction to this effect as part of the conditional use permit process required for such second (2nd) unit.
>> Refer to condition of approval number 2.
4) Maximum living area for a second (2nd) unit in the "R-1" Large Lot Single-Family Dwelling District is two thousand (2,000) square feet, and in the "R-2" Single-Family Dwelling District is one thousand (1,000) square feet.
>> The proposed living area is 712 square feet.
5) An accessory structure containing a second (2nd) unit may not exceed twenty (20) feet in height or occupy more than thirty-five percent (35%) of the area of a required rear yard, but no accessory structure shall be closer than ten (10) feet to the principal building nor closer than five (5) feet from any side or rear property line.
>> Criteria is met.
6) An accessory building that is not part of the principal structure shall be located not less than sixty (60) feet from the front property line.
>> The applicant has filed for a variance from the front yard setback requirement for an accessory structure, scheduled to be heard by the Board of Adjustment on December 3, 2020.
7) Required parking facilities (i.e., garage) may not be demolished or converted in order to construct a second (2nd) unit, unless the required parking space(s) are replaced concomitantly on the site.
>> The required parking facilities will not be demolished or converted.
8) Each second (2nd) unit shall be provided with one (1) additional parking space in addition to the parking required for the principal residence.
8 >> Two parking spaces are required (one for the principal structure and one for the proposed second unit). Three parking spaces are proposed in the detached garage which will house the second unit on the second floor.
9) The second (2nd) unit shall conform to the color, material, architectural style and detailing of the principal residence and shall meet all other applicable Building Code requirements, zoning regulations, developments standards and guidelines.
>> The appearance of the new detached garage/second unit will be considered under a separate application for Architectural Review Board approval. As presented, it appears to be compatible with the materials and design of the principal structure and will have to comply with all applicable building codes, zoning regulations, development standards and guidelines.
10) A landscape plan which provides for adequate screening of the second (2nd) unit from neighboring properties as determined by the landscape architect on contract with the City of Clayton.
>> No landscaping was proposed on the plan for the Conditional Use Permit. The property is a corner lot, therefore impacts on the one street side will be minimal. It is unlikely, because the unit is located on the second story of a proposed 3 car garage, that the impacts from a second unit will be significant. Landscaping can be reviewed in detail at the time the applicant submits the required plans for Plan Commission/ARB approval.
11) Any waiver from the above-stated criteria will require approval of a variance from the Board of Adjustment. (Ord. No. 5814 §1(2.21), 4-27-04; Ord. No. 5935 §1(2.21), 7-11-06)
>> As noted above, the applicant has filed an application for a variance for the front yard setback requirements of the R-2 zoning district.
Staff is of the opinion that the proposed second unit meets the requirements contained in the regulations governing second units. Provided the structure is used in accordance with the requirements for second units, staff believes it will be adequately screened and buffered from neighboring properties and will therefore have minimal impact on the neighborhood.
STAFF RECOMMENDATION IS TO RECOMMEND APPROVAL TO THE BOARD OF ALDERMEN WITH THE FOLLOWING CONDITIONS:
1. ALL CONDITIONS OF CHAPTER 405, ARTICLE II, SECTION 405.3300, SHALL BE ADHERED TO.
2. THE APPLICANT SHALL RECORD A DEED RESTRICTION PURSUANT TO ITEM 3 UNDER “CRITERIA FOR
REVIEW” AND SUBMIT PROOF OF THE REQUIRED DEED RESTRICTION TO THE CITY PRIOR TO THE ISSUANCE OF A
BUILDING PERMIT.
3. THE APPLICANT SHALL SUBMIT A DETAILED LANDSCAPE PLAN AT THE TIME OF THE SITE PLAN/ARB
SUBMITTAL THAT SHOWS ADEQUATE SCREENING AND BUFFERING OF THE NEW GARAGE/SECOND UNIT FROM
NEIGHBORING PROPERTIES.”
TAYLOR HUTSON (TH) – APPLICANT THEODORE POVINELLI (TP) – OWNER
CHAIRMAN LICHTENFELD – Is the basement being extended underneath the patio?
9
TH – The existing garage is completely under the home and would potentially become a recreation room.
GEORGE HETTICH – Have you spoke with the trustees?
TP – We are speaking with them.
SUSAN ISTENES – We do not enforce indentures or force applicants to speak to trustees, we only suggest it as a courtesy. We will not hold up a project for trustee approvals.
Board Members had no other comments.
CAROLYN GAIDIS – MOTION TO RECOMMEND APPROVAL TO THE BOARD OF ALDERMEN WITH THE STAFF RECOMMENDATIONS.
RICHARD LINTZ – SECOND
BOARD UNANIMOUSLY VOTES TO RECOMMEND APPROVAL TO THE BOARD OF ALDERMEN WITH STAFF RECOMMENDATIONS. 7-0
7801 FORSYTH BOULEVARD – ARCHITECTURAL REVIEW – EXTERIOR ALTERATION/RENOVATION
Director Susan M. Istenes summarizes the following staff report: “The 14,810-square-foot property is located at the northwest corner of Forsyth Boulevard and North Bemiston Avenue. The property has a zoning designation of HDC High Density Commercial District and is in the Central Business District Core Overlay Zoning District. M1 Bank currently owns the site and has an existing one-lane drive-through, 24 -hour drive-up ATM. Vehicles enter the drive-through via a one-way driveway on North Bemiston Avenue. Currently, one bypass lane is located between the drive-through lane and an existing row of angled parking. The applicant proposes to add an additional drive-through lane and move both lanes towards the west, along with other exterior renovations to the building and site. Both drive through lanes will have virtual kiosks. All vehicles will exit onto Forsyth Boulevard.
Drive-through facilities for financial institutions require a Conditional Use Permit (CUP). In 2014, the PNC Bank obtained CUP approval for a modification to the existing single drive through lane when they planned to add an ATM. Any enlargement, alteration or extension of the use requires a CUP to be approved by the Board of Aldermen. Because this is a modification of an existing drive-through lane and the applicant is requesting an additional drive through lane, a CUP is required.
Conditional uses are those types of uses that are considered to be desirable, necessary or convenient to the community but which by their nature can create additional traffic volume, parking demand beyond the development's capacity, and/or a detrimental impact on adjacent or neighboring properties due to noise, pollutants or other characteristics associated with that particular use. Conditional use permit approval is subject to the follow criteria as per Chapter 405, Article VII: 1) The proposed use is compatible with surrounding uses and with the surrounding neighborhood;
10 >> The surrounding land uses include retail, office, and institutional buildings. Drive-throughs may be appropriate uses on properties that front a high traffic arterial street such as Forsyth Boulevard. 2) The comparative size, floor area and mass of the proposed use and/or proposed structure are appropriate and reasonable in relation to adjacent structures and buildings on surrounding properties and in the surrounding neighborhood; >> The proposed additional drive-through lane will include the construction of a canopy. Two virtual tellers will replace the existing single drive-up ATM. 3) The proposed use will not adversely affect the general appearance of the neighborhood due to the location of the proposed use on the parcel of ground or due to the materials used in the construction of any proposed buildings being greatly dissimilar to surrounding appearances of buildings or due to the architecture of any proposed building being of such nature as to create visual disharmony within the neighborhood; >> The visual changes are minimal and include the installation of two virtual tellers and an overhead canopy and some additional landscaping, all of which will be reviewed in detail through the Architectural Review process. 4) The proposed use will not adversely affect the neighborhood in terms of water runoff, noise transfer or heat generation due to significant amount of hard surfaced areas for buildings, sidewalk, drives, parking and service areas; >> There will not be an increase in hard surfaces on site. At this time staff does not anticipate adverse effects with regards to water runoff, noise transfer or heat generation. 5) The frequency and duration of various indoor and outdoor activities and special events associated with the proposed use will not have a deleterious impact on the surrounding area; >> The outdoor activities are limited to cars using the drive-through, and therefore staff does not anticipate significant impacts on adjacent properties. 6) The proposed use is likely to remain in existence for a reasonable length of time and not become vacant or unused and whether such use involves the presence of unusual, single-purpose structures or components of a temporary nature; >> Staff anticipates the uses will remain for a reasonable length of time. 7) The proposed use complies with the standards of the Zoning Code and good planning practices; >> The proposed use will require the removal of 7 parking spaces. Because the building is non- conforming to the current parking standards adopted by the City, no net loss of parking can occur as a result of the conversion of the parking area to a drive through lane. The applicant has presented a plan which indicates that the lost spaces will be replaced in the existing underground garage via renovations that are also planned for this property.
11 8) The landscape plan for premises to be occupied by the proposed use is adequate in regard to the creation and maintenance of landscaped areas and the use of buffers for screening of the use; >> The applicant is proposing new landscape beds and raised planters along the north, and west sides of the site. The proposed drive through use and paved areas will be softened through the installation of the proposed plantings. The detailed landscape plan will be reviewed as part of the Architectural Plans for the project, submitted concurrently with this CUP application. 9) The impact of projected vehicular traffic volumes and site access is not detrimental with regard to the surrounding traffic flow, pedestrian safety and accessibility of emergency vehicles and equipment; >> Because the drive through lanes will be available 24 hours a day, it is likely that trips to the site will increase after normal business hours when traffic congestion in the downtown area is at its least. Therefore, staff does not anticipate that additional trips generated by the proposed additional lane will adversely affect traffic flow or public safety. 10) The proposed use complies with the parking requirements as set forth in the Zoning Code and does not add parking demand that cannot adequately be handled by on-site off-street parking; >> The Off Street Parking and Loading Regulations require establishments with a drive-through lane to provide a minimum of 10 stacked parking spaces. Due to site constraints, the existing drive through lane was approved with 3 stacked parking spaces. The relocation of the existing lane and the addition of another lane will provide 6 stacked spaces behind the existing lane and 3 behind the new lane for a total of 9. Section 405.3620.17 of the Off-Street Parking and Loading Regulations permits the Board of Alderman to modify the number of required parking spaces through the conditional use process. 11) The number of transit movements on abutting streets and on minor streets in the neighborhood to be generated by or associated with the proposed use will not cause significant increases in hourly or daily traffic levels; >> The proposed use is not likely to affect transit movements. 12) The proposed use will not significantly increase demands on fire and Police protection services in excess of the individual demands of adjacent land uses and whether the proposed use will not present any real or potential fire or public safety hazard; >> The proposed use is not likely to significantly increase demand for fire and police protection services. 13) Added noise levels generated by activities associated with the proposed use will not adversely impact the ambient noise level of the surrounding area and neighborhood; >> Because the site is surrounded by retail, office and institutional uses, not residential, staff does not anticipate any adverse impacts regarding noise. 14) The activities associated with the proposed use will not generate obnoxious odors to the detriment of the surrounding area; >> Staff does not anticipate that the use will generate obnoxious odors.
12 15) The intensity, duration or frequency of lighting associated with the proposed use will not adversely impact adjacent properties or significantly increase the ambient level of night light in the neighborhood; >> New lighting is proposed as part of the Architectural Review for exterior renovations and will be reviewed as part of that application process. 16) Where a proposed use has the potential for adverse impacts, sufficient measures have been or will be taken by the applicant that would negate, to an acceptable level, such potentially adverse impacts. >> This location has historically been used as a drive through for the bank. The additional lane will not create more traffic and it may help alleviate any concerns over the minimal stacking spaces that are available on site due to its small size and current development configuration. At this time, staff does not anticipate any adverse impacts with respect to the proposed use.
Staff is of the opinion that the additional drive-through meets the requirements contained in the regulations governing conditional uses. Due to the location of the drive-though, and the historic use the drive-through on the site, staff does not anticipate adverse impacts on adjacent properties. Based on the information regarding the operation of the drive-through as provided by the applicant, staff is of the opinion that the proposed use will be compatible with surrounding uses.
STAFF RECOMMENDATION IS TO RECOMMEND APPROVAL TO THE BOARD OF ALDERMEN AS SUBMITTED.
TYLER STEPHENS (TS) – APPLICANT AMANDA NORRIS (AN) – APPLICANT
THE BOARD MEMBERS HAD NO COMMENTS.
CAROLYN GAIDIS – MOTION TO RECOMMEND APPROVAL TO THE BOARD OF ALDERMEN AS SUBMITTED.
RICHARD LINTZ - SECOND.
BOARD UNANIMOUSLY VOTES TO RECOMMEND APPROVAL TO THE BOARD OF ALDERMEN AS SUBMITTED. 7-0
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.
13
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. 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).
14 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.
15
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,
16 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
17 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
18 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.
19 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
20 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 APPROVE AS SUBMITTED.
STEVEN BROWN (SB) BRIAN GOBELL (BG) FRANK ANDRE (FA) TIM ROWBOTTOM (TR) ERIC FISCHER (EF) ALYSON TAYLOR (AT) MATTHEW CHIAMPI (MC) GEORGE STOCK (GS)
TR – Addresses the board, explains the project, and opens it to board questions.
CAROLYN GAIDIS – MOTION TO CONTINUE TO THE NEXT MEETING.
RICHARD LINTZ - SECOND.
BOARD UNANIMOUSLY VOTES TO CONTINUE TO THE NEXT MEETING. 7-0
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: “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, 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
21 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.
3) Façade relief should be incorporated into all building elevations. Long uninterrupted elevations should be avoided. >> 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. 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. 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
22 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.
4) Window openings should be incorporated into all building elevations. Blank walls, long horizontal openings, odd shapes and glass walls should be avoided. >> 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.
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. 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. 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)
23 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. >> 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.
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.
3. More prominence should be given to the exterior entrances to the five ground level apartments along Maryland Avenue.
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.
5. Vinyl framed windows are an inappropriate assembly in the North Central District. Windows should be aluminum framed.
6. The proposed development does not provide roof top use or articulation.
The intent and purpose of the existing CBD Core Overlay Zoning District states:
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:
24 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.
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 RECOMMENDATION IS TO CONTINUE FOR FURTHER DISCUSSION.
STEVEN BROWN (SB) BRIAN GOBELL (BG) FRANK ANDRE (FA) TIM ROWBOTTOM (TR) ERIC FISCHER (EF) ALYSON TAYLOR (AT) MATTHEW CHIAMPI (MC) GEORGE STOCK (GS)
TR – Addresses the board, explains the project, and opens it to board questions.
RICHARD LINTZ – MOTION TO CONTINUE TO THE NEXT MEETING.
GEORGE HETTICH - SECOND.
BOARD UNANIMOUSLY VOTES TO CONTINUE TO THE NEXT MEETING. 6-0
25
HAVING NO FURTHER BUSINESS BEFORE THE COMMISSION, THE MEETING WAS ADJOURNED AT 21:30.
_______________________________ Recording Secretary