November 6, 2017 — Meeting Minutes

MINUTES

CITY PLAN COMMISSION/ARCHITECTURAL REVIEW BOARD

NOVEMBER 6, 2017

CITY HALL COUNCIL CHAMBERS

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

Present: Steve Lichtenfeld, Chairman Craig Owens, City Manager Joanne Boulton, Aldermanic Representative Ron Reim William Liebermann Brian Maguire Scott Wilson

Absent:

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

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

MINUTES

The minutes of the October 16th meeting were presented for approval. The minutes were approved after having been previously sent to each member.

ARCHITECTURAL REVIEW –ADDITION TO SINGLE-FAMILY RESIDENCE – 7100 WYDOWN BOULEVARD

Bruce Michelson, owner, and Pavel Ivenchuk, project architect, were in attendance at the meeting.

2 Susan Istenes explained that this is a request for the construction of a 1,450-square-foot rear 2- story addition to be located off of the existing attached garage and will cover a portion of the garage. The existing attached garage extends beyond the side yard setback and therefore, is considered a legal non-conforming structure. In order to maintain legal non-conforming status, the garage cannot be significantly altered and the non-conformity cannot be increased. The proposed addition is located within the buildable area and meets the side yard setback. The roof of the garage will be altered for construction of the addition; however, the new roof line is sloped and will replace the existing parapet wall, reducing the height of the structure where it encroaches into the setback. Because the proposed work will not increase the non-conformity, staff believes the proposed project does not result in a loss of legal non-conforming status for the existing garage. The existing home has a primary building material of white stucco with an accent material of red brick. The home features white casement windows and red clay roof tiles. The proposed rear addition will also be constructed of white stucco with red clay roof tiles to match the existing house. The addition roof line will mimic the roof line of the existing house. Casement windows are featured on all four elevations of the addition to match the style of the existing house. The addition also includes a basement level. Two extended window wells are proposed along the south and east elevations of the addition. The window wells will be surrounded with a metal railing. The applicant is proposing a new concrete patio off of the southeast corner of the addition as well as a concrete walkway connecting the existing patio to the mudroom located in the proposed addition. Staff is of the opinion that the design and materials of the addition are compatible with the character of the existing house. Impervious coverage on the lot will be increased with the proposed project. Existing total lot impervious coverage is 21.5 percent. In the R-2 zoning district, total lot coverage is limited to 55 percent. The proposed total lot coverage is 24.1 percent, which is below the maximum allowed. The proposed addition does not require Site Plan Review; however, it does have a potential impact to existing trees in the area. There are multiple large existing trees adjacent to the proposed addition located on the subject property and on the neighboring property to the west. The City’s contracted landscape architect visited the site to assess the potential impacts and has made multiple recommendations for tree protection. The following is the City’s contracted landscape architect’s analysis: “The subject of the report is a large Oak in the backyard of 7112 Wydown Boulevard. With on-site observation and measurements from aerial photography, the canopy of the tree and its critical root zone is estimated to be 15’ into the yard of 7100 Wydown Boulevard. The proposed addition is planned to be constructed at the required 15’ setback. However, access and construction activities will be within the critical root zone between the addition and the property line/fence. A grading plan has not been provided, but the existing grade in the critical root zone should not be lowered or raised in this area. It is recommended that a Certified Forester/Arborist be obtained by the homeowners of 7100 Wydown Boulevard to create a tree protection plan and to implement tree protection measures. This plan will include pre-construction protection measures (such as root pruning, plywood, mulching, etc.) and post construction measures/maintenance (aeration, fertilizer treatments, etc.). It appears that the height of the addition will not be in conflict with the overhanging canopy; however, there are dead branches that should be removed before construction begins as they will be difficult to access after the addition is constructed.” Director Istenes noted that the project as proposed is in conformance with the requirements of the R-2 Single Family Dwelling District and

3 the Architectural Review Guidelines. Staff is of the opinion that the design and materials of the alteration are compatible with the neighborhood and recommends approval with the condition that the applicant provide a tree protection plan, written by a Certified Forester/Arborist, for treatment of the tree located at 7112 Wydown Boulevard prior to the issuing of building permits.

Chairman Lichtenfeld asked the owner if he had anything to add.

Mr. Michelson replied “no”.

Chairman Lichtenfeld asked if the owner was willing to comply with staff’s recommendation.

Mr. Michelson indicated that he had already informed his neighbor that he would provide tree protection. He added that he and his neighbor use the same tree service company.

Chairman Lichtenfeld stated that the project looks good to him and the addition maintains the appearance of the existing structure.

Hearing no further questions or comments, Scott Wilson made a motion to approve per staff recommendation. The motion was seconded by William Liebermann and unanimously approved by the Board.

ARCHITECTURAL REVIEW – INSTALLATION OF FREE-STANDING ATM – 8100 FORSYTH BOULEVARD (BANK OF AMERICA)

Diane Burant, project architect and Robert Lee, contractor, were in attendance at the meeting.

Susan Istenes explained that the property contains a two-story bank building with a drive-through. The existing drive-through ATM and teller machines are legal non-conforming uses and therefore additional machines or lanes cannot be added. The proposed walk-up ATM is considered an accessory to the bank use, which is permitted in the C-1 zoning district and therefore, does not impact the legal non-conforming status of the drive-through. The applicant proposes to locate the walk-up ATM in an existing courtyard north of the building between Forsyth Boulevard and the surface parking lot. The existing pavement will be demolished and a new concrete walkway will be installed from the public sidewalk to the machine. The applicant also proposes new landscaping around the machine and walkway. The ATM machine will appear similarly to the existing drive- through ATM machine located northwest of the building. The aluminum machine will have red sides, a white front and back and a grey overhang. Two recessed lights are located in the machine overhang. An approximately 2.7 square foot sign is located on the front of the machine, facing Forsyth Boulevard, and on the rear of the machine, facing the interior of the site. The sign depicts the name of the bank and the logo and will be internally illuminated. The proposed walk-up ATM will be highly visible due to its color and location. The machine does not match the style or color palette of the bank building; however, it does resemble the existing drive-through machine. Walk- up ATM machines are commonly found attached to the façade of bank buildings and less

4 commonly seen as separate structures on the site. Staff recognizes that the unique form of the bank building presents a challenge to adding a machine into the façade; however, the isolated proposed location will detract from the existing site environment. The existing drive-through ATM is setback from the street and still appears out of scale and out of place. The proposed machine is significantly closer to the public realm and therefore the impacts will be greater. The existing site serves as an appropriate transition between the residential neighborhood to the west and commercial district to the east. The site integrates medium sized tree and landscaping that creates a connection to Shaw Park, located south of the site. Staff is of the opinion that the proposed ATM is not compatible in terms of materials, scale, design or location with the existing site or surrounding area. Staff does not support the request to locate the proposed walk-up ATM on the site and recommends denial.

Ms. Burant indicated that the bank attempted to add an ATM to the drive-thru about a year ago but was turned down. She noted that the building does not lend itself to an interior ATM; however, the bank representatives are open to a kiosk redesign and wants to work with the City to come up with an agreeable solution.

Chairman Lichtenfeld asked if there was a walk-up ATM on the northwest side of the building (he referred to Sheet L1).

Ms. Burant stated that she’s not sure how that would work with the landscaping and access and that the bank assumed that people would park in the lot and walk to the machine.

Chairman Lichtenfeld noted that there’s no walkway from the lot to the proposed machine.

Ms. Burant stated that they are still working on that.

Joanne Boulton asked why the ATM that Chairman Lichtenfeld referred to is no longer there.

Ms. Burant indicated that she did not know.

Chairman Lichtenfeld stated that attaching it to the building would be a better solution.

Joanne Boulton indicated that her personal preference is for a lower profile machine; attached to the building in the same location as the former one.

Ron Reim stated that he agreed and the lighting would be better for a machine attached to the building.

Joanne Boulton asked the applicant if she wanted to table this.

Ms. Burant replied “yes”.

5 Hearing no further questions or comments, Craig Owens made a motion to table this to give the applicant time to consider other options. The motion was seconded by Joanne Boulton and unanimously approved by the members.

SITE PLAN/ARCHITECTURAL REVIEW/LOT CONSOLIDATION PLAT – 7501 MARYLAND AVENUE & 7500-7520 WESTMORELAND AVENUE (CENTENE UNIVERSITY & CHILD CARE EDUCATION CENTER)

Due to a conflict of interest, Ron Reim recused himself and did not participate in any discussion and/or vote with regard to this project.

Bob Clark, Clayco, and Eli Hoisington, project architect with HOK were in attendance at the meeting.

Susan Istenes read the majority of the staff report for the site plan portion of the project as follows:

The subject properties are bounded on the north side by Westmoreland Avenue, on the east by Jackson Avenue and on the south by Maryland Avenue. The properties are zoned R-2 Single Family Dwelling District and total 126,018 square feet. The site is currently developed with a 38,399 square foot school building. The property is surrounded by residential land uses to the north, east (across Jackson Avenue) and west, and office uses to the south (across Maryland Avenue). On September 12, 2017, the Board of Aldermen approved a Conditional Use Permit requested by Centene, owner under contract, allowing use of the property as a daycare and corporate education facility. The applicant is now proposing site alterations to prepare the property for those uses. The applicant proposes to renovate the interior of the existing building and to construct multiple additions totaling 21,921 square feet, resulting in a total building area of 60,320 square feet. The applicant also proposes to demolish 2,814 square feet of the existing building. The existing parking lot will be expanded to include 85 spaces and a drop-off circle will be added along Maryland Avenue to include 5 parking spaces. The parking lot and drop-off area will be accessible from Maryland Avenue. The property is shown on the Clayton Master Plan as Single Family Residential; however, the property has been developed and used for a school since prior to the construction of the existing Maryland School in 1931. It is not unusual to find institutions located within or on the periphery of residential neighborhoods. Staff is of the opinion that the project generally complies with the Clayton Master Plan. The proposed development is generally compatible with adjacent land uses and buildings. The applicant proposes to bring life back into a vacant building, which has begun to come into disrepair. The general function of the existing site is being maintained with the upgrades. Maryland Avenue will serve as the main access route for both uses of the building. South of the subject property, across Maryland Avenue, is a surface parking lot and office uses. The subject property is surrounded by single family residences on all other sides. By focusing vehicle traffic onto Maryland Avenue, the potential impact of increased vehicle trips is kept away from the residential areas. The proposed site design also focuses the density on the southern portion of the site and reserves larger landscaped and open areas on the northern portion of the site. Staff is of the opinion that the proposed site plan is compatible with the

6 proposed land uses and surrounding area. The R-2 Zoning District limits the building footprint of higher education building to one-third of the site area. The proposed building footprint is 37,863 square feet and the combined lots total 126,018 square feet, so the building covers 30 percent of the total site. The subject lots shall be consolidated into one lot in order to comply with the regulation. The City’s contracted landscape architect has reviewed the landscape plan and finds the proposed plan generally acceptable. The site is to be densely landscaped and attention was paid to the public frontages with the design. Some comments still need to be addressed, including a few species substitutions and tree protection requests. Some of the re-grading proposed along Westmoreland Avenue is within the critical root zones of the existing street trees. The proposed grade should be revised to limit disruption in the critical root zone. Staff recommends lowering the proposed grade of the parking lot at the northern end to the extent possible and exposing the proposed retaining wall above grade to shield car headlights. The existing street trees along Westmoreland Avenue are vital to the residential character of the street and the City’s contracted landscape architect has concerns about negative impacts of the proposed grading for the berm. The dense landscaping proposed between the parking lot and sidewalk is sufficient to provide screening of any exposed retaining wall. The landscaping will act as the berm required by the approved Conditional Use Permit. A non-residential use is proposed for the subject property that is located in a residential zoning district, so the project falls under the City’s Tree Protection Ordinance for caliper inch replacement. The proposed project eliminates all but one existing tree within the property and 11 inconsistent street trees along Jackson Avenue and Maryland Avenue are being removed. The landscape plan includes 23 new street trees along Jackson Avenue and Maryland Avenue. All trees along Westmoreland Avenue are being preserved. The proposed project removes 577 caliper inches of trees and provides 282 caliper inches. Only 331 caliper inches of replacement are required for the site, so the proposed plan is deficient 50 caliper inches. The applicant may plant additional caliper inches on site or pay into the City’s Forestry Fund. The landscape plan meets the requirement for use of Missouri native trees at 82.6 percent. The on–site parking lot will be accessible from Maryland Avenue with a service vehicle exit-only provided onto Jackson Avenue. The proposed expanded surface lot includes two, two-way drive aisles and adequate stacking for the daycare center drop-off. The trash dumpsters and service dock are accessible from the surface parking lot. The curb cut on Maryland Avenue is wide enough accommodate the turning radius of trucks and an exit-only curb cut is provided on Jackson Avenue. The applicant has stated that deliveries will not be made to the site at the same time as pick-up or drop-off for the daycare center. Staff is of the opinion that the circulation system will provide for the convenient and safe movement of vehicles and pedestrians. A drop-off area is also provided further west on Maryland Avenue. The drop-off area will be used for shuttle traffic providing transportation to and from Centene University. The one-way drop off lane is only accessed from the one-way street of Maryland Avenue. Staff is of the opinion that the circulation system will provide for the convenient and safe movement of vehicles and pedestrians. Proposed site circulation is compliant with site design conditions included in the approved Conditional Use Permit. All driveways, curbs and gutters will be installed in accordance with City standards. The site has frontages on three sides and an existing building, which makes the location of parking interior to the site and away from sidewalks difficult. The applicant proposes an 85-space on-site parking lot, which will be accessible from Maryland Avenue. The proposed parking lot is an expansion of the existing surface

7 lot located on the east side of the property along Jackson Avenue. The Conditional Use Permit for the property specifies that the surface parking lot cannot be expanded any closer to Maryland Avenue or Jackson Avenue than the existing lot and could only be expanded north as far as the front yard setback along Westmoreland Avenue. The Conditional Use Permit also stipulated that a berm and landscaping to shield car headlights must be installed around the expanded parking lot area. Landscaping and a 6 foot tall wrought iron fence are proposed between the parking lot and the public sidewalk. Review of the landscape berm is included in the landscaping section of this report. With minor revision, the proposed site plan complies with requirements of the Conditional Use Permit. The drop-off area along Maryland Avenue also provides 5 parking spaces. The drive land will be separated from the sidewalk by a limestone knee-wall and landscaping. The trash dumpster will be located at the northeast corner of the building in the service area and screened with a 6 foot tall brick wall and decorative metal gate. No new structures are proposed as part of this project. The proposed additions will either replace previous additions or fill in portions of the building, maintaining the generally rectangular form of the existing building. The main entrance to the building is oriented toward Maryland Avenue. The existing storm water runoff, according to the MSD 15 year, 20 minute calculation, is 8.03 cubic feet per second (CFS). The proposed runoff is 8.63 CFS, which represents an increase of 0.60 CFS. Green roofs and bio-retention areas are proposed for water quality treatment and runoff reduction. The property is over one acre and therefore MSD requires water quality mitigation, not water quantity mitigation. The storm water plan has been reviewed and deemed acceptable. Impervious coverage in the R-2 Zoning District is limited to 55 percent of the total lot area and 45 percent of the front yard area. The proposed project will increase the amount of impervious coverage on site from 52.4 percent to 53.8 percent. The proposed front yard coverage is 43.34 percent. The applicant has proposed four areas of green roof over different portions of proposed additions for a total green roof area of 12,866 square feet. The definition of impervious material listed in the Zoning Regulations is: “A surface that has been compacted or covered with a layer of material so that it is highly resistant to infiltration by water.” The applicant is proposing a 6 inch deep green roof system designed to act similarly to a grass lawn. Runoff curve numbers (RCN) are used to quantify the runoff volumes produced by different surfaces. The MSD approved RCN for the 6 inch deep green roof proposed is 85, while a typical grass area with type D soil has a rating of 80 RCN and a traditional roof has a rating of 98 RCN. Based on an analysis of the proposed green roof design, staff believes that the proposed green roof provides enough storage to handle a typical rain event and delays additional runoff to mitigate potential negative impacts to the storm system and adjacent properties. Runoff will occur from any surface once the saturation point is reached. The green roof will operate with a similar saturation point of a typical lawn. This means that runoff will be created by the green roof around the same point of a storm event that a lawn would produce runoff. It is the opinion of staff that the proposed green roofs are a pervious surface based on the definition of impervious material found in the City’s code. Any reduction in the green roof area made in the future would need to be replaced as pervious surface elsewhere on the site. More specific details of the green roof design and drainage will be required for the building permit to ensure continued compliance. Significant regrading of the site is proposed. Grade will be lowered along Maryland Avenue and Jackson Avenue. The slope of the existing berm along Maryland Avenue is steep and subject to frequent erosion. The proposed grading plan will use retaining walls to maintain some areas of the existing berm, while

8 lowering others to provide the at-grade building entrance and lower the slope of the entry drive to the surface parking lot. The lower grade along Maryland Avenue and Jackson Avenue will also decrease the speed of water runoff from the site and lower erosion. Re-grading is also proposed along Westmoreland Avenue to create the berm shielding the surface parking lot. The City’s landscape architect has requested revision to the proposed grade in order to protect existing trees. Staff recommendations for re-grading along Westmoreland Avenue are outlined in the landscape section of this report. With minor revisions, staff is of the opinion that the proposed site grading will not be detrimental to surrounding properties and will result in a better functioning site. There are multiple outstanding SWPPP review comments regarding construction practices that will need to be addressed prior to the issuing of building permits. Multiple forms of lighting are proposed for walkways, stairs, parking areas and entries. All exterior lighting will be less than 75 watts and shielded or cut-off to prevent spillover onto adjacent properties. The Fire Department has reviewed the plans and finds them acceptable. The project is consistent with good planning practices and principles. At this time, staff does not anticipate adverse impacts regarding public services or municipal facilities. Director Istenes concluded by stating that the proposed project is in conformance with the requirements of the R-2 Zoning District and the approved Conditional Use Permit for the property. Storm water will be adequately managed on site. The landscape plan features a variety of native species, shrubs and trees. Staff is of the opinion that the project meets the criteria for site plan approval subject to the following conditions recommended by staff:

1. The applicant shall address outstanding comments outlined in the City’s contracted landscape architect’s review letter dated November 1, 2017 (attached). 2. The applicant shall address outstanding comments outlined in the City’s contracted SWPPP reviewer’s letter dated October 27, 2017. 3. Any future reduction in green roof area or the function of the green roof will need to be made up for in pervious area elsewhere on the site. 4. The front yard setback along Westmoreland Avenue shall be revised on all sheets to be 26.4 feet and the front yard setback along Maryland Avenue shall be revised on all sheets to be 47.9 feet. 5. The applicant shall revise the proposed grade at the north end of the parking lot. Joanne Boulton stated that she does not believe that the proposed site plan complies with condition number 18 of the Conditional Use Permit regarding coverage {condition number 17 is the condition she is referring to, which reads “The overall site shall contain no more than 55% of impervious coverage.}. She referred to an email message she distributed yesterday which read: “I have reviewed the Maryland School application materials for the Plan Commission/ Architectural Review Board meeting scheduled for Monday, November 6, 2017. And I have two serious issues I wish to address. First and foremost, the Site Plan presented by Centene for the Maryland School property does not meet the CUP requirement #18 “The overall site shall contain no more than 55% impervious coverage”. This Condition, crafted by the BOA,

9 with help from the City’s legal and planning staff, came after a long discussion about the need for more of the lot to be designated greenspace to mitigate the detrimental impact of this Conditional Use on the nearby and abutting residential areas and must be understood in the context of the whole record (see minutes attached). The plan presented to the BOA during the CUP discussion showed more than 55% of the total lot covered by impervious materials. Condition #18 was added because members of BOA determined it was necessary to hold this development to the standards defined in our zoning code for R-2 areas, which requires at least 45% of the lot to be of pervious materials (greenspace). Rather than try to tell the applicant where their pervious/impervious coverage should be, the BOA choose to give them a guideline – no more than 55% of the total site (ground) may be covered by impervious materials. In this context, "site" was intended as the total ground on the lot. Additionally the BOA action was a message to the Plan Commission, that upon review, they could not invoke Section 405.1890 (B) and “have the authority to approve a modification of up to an additional 5% over the impervious coverage requirements,..”. At no point in time did the BOA discuss Condition #18 in terms of storm water runoff, which seems to be the only basis upon which the planning staff reviewed this Condition. While I applaud and support the use of green roofs, it was not the intent of the Board when making this Condition that green roofs would count towards the pervious/impervious material coverage on the lot. Adherence to the intent of this particular Condition in this CUP is of great importance because at least two of the “yes” votes for the CUP would have been “nay” votes had Condition #18 not been added with its intent as described above. In fact this CUP would not have even been granted. My second concern revolves around the appeal that the BOA is scheduled to hear about this CUP next Tuesday. We ask a lot of our Plan Commissioners and it seems that with an appeal pending and the major defect of their site plan as described above, consideration should be given to tabling this item until the appeal has been heard and the applicant has had an opportunity to properly address Condition #18.” Member Boulton then made a motion to table consideration of this project.

A discussion amongst the members ensued with regard to Ms. Boulton’s concern and request to table.

City Attorney O’Keefe stated that staff has no opinion regarding Ms. Boulton’s motion and that it is the prerogative of the voting members whether to table or not.

Mr. Clark informed the members that their contact is up on the property and asked for the opportunity to present the proposal this evening. He added that he disagrees with Ms. Boulton’s opinion that the plan does not meet the coverage limitation as contained in the approved Conditional Use Permit.

Chairman Lichtenfeld stated that although he agrees with Ms. Boulton’s opinion regarding the coverage issue, he feels there is sufficient items in the site plan to continue its consideration this evening.

10

Brian Maguire asked about pervious pavers.

Joanne Boulton informed Brian that they do not count towards pervious material.

Scott Wilson stated that he would prefer to continue this evening.

Joanne Boulton announced that the Conditional Use Permit is under appeal and for that reason as well, she would prefer to table this project this evening. She added that she spoke with every Alderman and discussed this matter (coverage) with each one and that she believes she is representing all of them with respect to this issue.

Mr. Clark stated that they have made tremendous investments towards improving this dilapidated property/building and that you are trying to force us to reduce parking which is the only way to gain greenspace. He added that he believes they are meeting the letter of the law.

There was no second to Ms. Boulton’s former motion to table. Motion died due to lack of a second.

Mr. Clark began a PowerPoint presentation. He stated that the building only covers 30% of the site. He noted that they’ve gone through the public process and have listened to comments and have made adjustments to the plans based on feedback. He stated that he understands there is an appeal to the Conditional Use Permit which, according to their legal counsel, is in good standing. He reiterated that their contract is up on the property and as such, they need a decision. He added that they believe the building is handsome and the use is low impact.

Mr. Hoisington presented slides depicting site photos, the proposed site plan (he noted that the exit onto Jackson Avenue will only be used by large trucks on a limited basis), the landscape plan including berms and buffers and various renderings and building elevations.

Material samples were presented.

Mr. Clark stated that the fence line along Westmoreland will align with the houses.

Joanne Boulton commented that is a requirement.

Chairman Lichtenfeld stated that the materials fit well and are of high quality; however, he is concerned with the circular drive in that it is 21 to 22 feet wide and has little landscaping.

Mr. Clark indicated that it was reduced to make it more residential-like.

Joanne Boulton stated that people will park there rather than using it as a drop-off.

11 Chairman Lichtenfeld stated that this proposal is opposite of the neighborhood character and is more commercial like which is a concern to him. He stated that there is no suitable landscaping going back in and that he also has concerns about the green roof. He noted that his primary concern is on the Maryland Avenue elevation.

Mr. Clark indicated that they had to alter the building front, but they may be able to add more landscaping. He noted that there are trees on both sides of the drop-off.

Chairman Lichtenfeld stated he agrees, but it will take those trees 30 years to grow and that large canopy trees are not going in. He reiterated to the vastly different character of this proposal from that of the neighborhood and that this Commission is charged with eight items to consider when reviewing proposed site plans and he does not feel the Maryland Avenue side is desirable and is actually is a more destructive approach; the proposed design destroys the “U” shape character. He noted that this matter will be discussed more during the architectural review portion of the review.

Joanne Boulton referred to Section 405.1890 of the zoning regulations (impervious coverage), noting that the proposed site plan does not meet the 55% maximum coverage allowable. She added that she agrees with the Chairman’s comments about this project destroying the character of the neighborhood and that she has a problem with the parking they’ve created with the 2-lane drive lane. She stated that there’s too much concrete on the site and that the condition in the Conditional Use Permit was put in there for a reason.

Scott Wilson asked what the coverage calculation is.

Joanne Boulton reiterated that this plan does not meet the requirements of the Conditional Use Permit.

Craig Owens asked about the berm and the ability to shield vehicle headlights.

Mr. Hoisington stated that due to the issue with the tree roots, they decided to use a smaller wall and larger berm.

Chairman Lichtenfeld asked if it will shield truck headlights.

Mr. Hoisington stated that it will be well above what’s needed to shield headlights.

Craig Owens asked if they could install a taller wall.

Mr. Clark and Mr. Hoisington replied “yes”.

Chairman Lichtenfeld asked if the shrubs will be solid green all year.

Mr. Clark replied “yes”.

12

Scott Wilson asked if it is believed that staff misinterpreted the Board’s desire with regard to coverage.

Kevin O’Keefe indicated that staff’s comments result from a technical review (how the code is applied) and does not deal with coverage as an equal to open space.

After a brief discussion regarding the impervious coverage issue and its condition as contained in the approved Conditional Use Permit, Joanne Boulton reminded everyone that this property is located in the R-2 Single-Family residential district and that although the Board felt this was good use of the property, to reduce the impact of the use on the surrounding neighborhood, the Board wanted lot coverage to be equal to that for a single-family home and require 45% greenspace. She noted that the members of the Board of Aldermen are not planners or engineers.

A discussion regarding coverage in relation to storm water drainage ensued.

Mr. Hoisington asked if the number of on-site parking spaces needs to be re-visited.

Joanne Boulton informed Mr. Hoisington that the number of parking spaces is also addressed in the approved Conditional Use Permit and that revisions to it can only be approved by the Board of Aldermen.

William Lieberman announced that he attempted to calculate the percentage of coverage minus the green roof area and came up with 10.72% over the 55% maximum allowed (or 65.72%).

Joanne Boulton reiterated that she would like to table consideration of this project rather than vote to possibly deny it.

Mr. Clark voiced his preference to continue this evening.

Joanne Boulton stated that she concurs with the Chairman’s earlier comments regarding the Maryland Avenue elevation.

Chairman Lichtenfeld announced that he would now hear public comments. He asked that comments be brief and not be repeated.

Catherine Love, 7605 Maryland Avenue, questioned the legality of the proposed perimeter fencing; asking if the fence height being proposed is taller than the code permits. She stated that the property will feel like a fortress in their neighborhood.

Steve Rosenblum, 7501 Westmoreland Avenue, questioned the parking.

Mr. Hoisington indicated that the Conditional Use Permit requires 90 on-site spaces.

13

Mr. Rosenblum stated that he does not believe all those spaces will be needed as shuttle service will be provided by Centene. He asked what will happen if the appeal is granted.

Kevin O’Keefe indicated that the City will cross that bridge if and when we get there; he noted that the filing of an appeal does not preclude plan review.

Jeff Morrisey, 7611 Maryland Avenue, stated he agrees with the comments made earlier by Chairman Lichtenfeld and Joanne Boulton.

Anneliese Schaefer, 7527 Westmoreland Avenue, stated that there was never a parking issue before {when the former school was in operation} and she’s unclear why so much on-site parking is being required for this project.

Rick Bliss, 7515 Westmoreland Avenue, stated that based on a rough calculation, it appears as though pavement will bring vehicles 85-feet closer to the houses on Westmoreland Avenue and that headlights won’t be screened. He stated that as he has said before, the maximum number of parking spaces on-site should be a maximum of 45 and the greenspace should be left as-is.

Kevin Williams, 7394 Westmoreland Avenue, asked about the fencing along Jackson.

Joanne Boulton asked the applicant if there is a gate at the Jackson drive.

Mr. Hoisington reiterated that the drive will be an exit-only onto Jackson and the gate will remain closed except when needed.

Joanne Boulton again motioned that this {site plan review} be tabled. The motion was seconded by William Liebermann and unanimously approved by the Commission.

The architectural aspects of the project were now up for consideration.

Joanne Boulton asked the applicant if they brought the 3D animation with them for presentation this evening.

Mr. Hoisington replied “no”.

Anna Krane stated that it is up to this Board whether or not to continue without it.

Mr. Hoisington commented that he did not take it as a clear requirement.

Joanne Boulton stated that it is a requirement.

14 Chairman Lichtenfeld informed the applicant that they may be coming back for the architectural vote as well. He stated that he wants to see the 3D presentation as well.

Joanne Boulton commented that the project/proposal is difficult to analyze without a 3D animation.

Mr. Hoisington stated that he understands.

Joanne Boulton made a motion to table this item until the 3D animation is made available.

Mr. Clark stated that they will benefit from moving forward with the presentation this evening.

Joanne Boulton told the applicant to bring it next time.

Brian Maguire seconded Ms. Boulton’s motion to table. The motion received the following votes: Ayes: Joanne Boulton and Brian Maguire. Nays: Craig Owens, Chairman Lichtenfeld, William Liebermann and Scott Wilson. Motion fails.

Susan Istenes read a portion of staff’s report as follows: the applicant proposes to renovate the interior of the existing building and to construct multiple additions totaling 21,921 square feet, resulting in a total building area of 60,320 square feet. The applicant also proposes to demolish 2,814 square feet of the existing building. The existing parking lot will be expanded to include 85 spaces and a drop-off circle will be added along Maryland Avenue to include 5 parking spaces. The parking lot and drop-off area will be accessible from Maryland Avenue. The primary building material of the existing building is red brick with an accent material of limestone. The building elevations feature frequent and uniformly spaced windows and a gable roof. The height of the existing building is 46 feet 8.5 inches, as measured from existing average grade to the mean of the roof slope. The applicant is proposing an addition to fill the middle of the existing u-shaped building along the southern elevation and a one-story addition is proposed along the east elevation of the building. The southern addition will create the main entrance for Centene University and the eastern addition will create the main entrance for the daycare center. A second story addition and deck is proposed along the northern elevation of the building as well as removing and replacing a previous addition located at the northwest corner of the building. The building material of the proposed additions is red brick with limestone accents, to match the existing building. The proposed deck along the northern elevation is constructed of painted steel, along with the canopy proposed at the eastern end of the building. The proposed additions all feature flat roofs, with the tallest addition being 38 feet 11 inches tall. The northern and southern additions will feature green roofs. The applicant proposes replacing the windows on the existing structure and the middle, in- fill addition with painted aluminum window units to match the style of the existing windows. Painted aluminum storefront windows are proposed on the northern elevation additions. New grey architectural asphalt shingles are proposed for the existing roof. A play area for the day-care center is proposed along the northern elevation, extending from under the proposed deck north toward Westmoreland Avenue. The play area will be enclosed by a brick screening wall. A brick and stone

15 screening wall is also proposed around the service area located at the northeast corner of the building. The main entrance to the existing building is located along Maryland Avenue. There is a significant grade change between Maryland Avenue and the building entrance. The applicant plans to lower the grade along Maryland Avenue, so that the main entrance of the addition will be at grade. The applicant is proposing a stone retaining wall along both sides of the drop-off area at the southern elevation of the building and a stone screening wall in the drop-off island. A wrought iron fence with brick columns at the corners is proposed along the north, east and south property lines. A solid wood screening fence is proposed along the property lines shared with single family residences (west). The applicant is proposing an expansion and re-configuration of the existing surface parking lot located at the southeast corner of the site. The surface lot will be extend north on the site along Jackson Avenue. Concrete pavement for the parking lot and drop off area located off of Maryland Avenue is proposed. Director Istenes noted that there is criteria for review including compatibility and building materials; but she did not read the criteria specifics into the record. Director Istenes then noted that the applicant previously presented material samples and some architectural features have already been discussed. She stated that staff recommends approval with the condition that the height of the iron fence with brick pillars that is located between the drop-off area and main entrance courtyard be reduced to a maximum of 3 feet.

Mr. Hoisington began a PowerPoint presentation. Slides depicting site photos and renderings of the building after the proposed renovations were shown. He noted that they deliberately lowered the roofline in an attempt to be sympathetic with the neighborhood.

Chairman Lichtenfeld asked about the stone detail around the windows.

Mr. Hoisington informed Chairman Lichtenfeld that the stone detail would remain.

Slides depicting photos of the original building were shown.

Chairman Lichtenfeld commented that the project is void of detail.

Mr. Hoisington stated that it is their intention to match existing.

Chairman Lichtenfeld stated that the design changes the character of the building and makes it now feel like a factory; he feels the proposed project destroys the character of the building. He added that the bay windows are now interior and the opportunity to maintain the historic design has been lost by covering it up.

Mr. Hoisington indicated that they could study the bay windows.

Slides depicting additional elevations and renderings were shown.

Joanne Boulton commented that the gym got taller.

16 Mr. Hoisington concurred.

Joanne Boulton stated that there is more square footage on the north than there is on the south. She asked that the south façade be further studied.

William Liebermann stated that he likes the idea of keeping the original building.

It was noted that this building is not on the National Register of Historic buildings.

Scott Wilson suggested this not be put off as someone else could come in and tear the building down.

Mr. Clark stated that they’ve been thoughtful and attempted to retain as much of the existing building as possible and that it would be sad if the building were to be torn down but that’s the path this is heading if they cannot make this work.

Chairman Lichtenfeld stated that it is the City’s intent to preserve the character of the building.

Mr. Clark reiterated that they are trying to do that and noted the need to meet ADA requirements.

A brief discussion regarding the canopy covering the 8 vehicle spaces in the center ensued. Mr. Hoisington stated that there is no canopy along the Maryland Avenue elevation on purpose.

Scott Wilson commented that the windows on the front of the building are more institutional and that it would be better if the new windows matched the existing ones.

Chairman Lichtenfeld referred to the solid/void ratio.

Mr. Hoisington stated that they want a lot of natural light for the day care facility.

A discussion regarding various interior building elements ensued, especially the interior stairway.

Marguerite Bliss, 7515 Westmoreland Avenue, questioned the need for a terrace/outdoor deck for an educational use. She mentioned that there are no windows in the gym.

Mr. Hoisington stated that the windows will remain and the terrace has two functions.

Joanne Boulton voiced her concern of the use of the terrace late at night.

Mr. Clark stated that the terrace will rarely be used late at night.

Mr. Morrisey stated that the existing building’s “U” shape made it feel better; the two wings helped break down the scale of the building and by pulling out the building makes it a 3-story façade

17 versus a 2-story façade. He added that the removal of those seven to eight trees changes the feel of the property and noted that the building already had two entrances. He stated that the plan relies on matching the existing brick which would be difficult and that entire building would need to be re- mortared.

Chairman Lichtenfeld stated he is anxious to see the next iteration.

Joanne Boulton asked the applicant if enough information/feedback has been provided this evening.

Mr. Clark stated that he believed so.

Hearing no further questions or comments, Joanne Boulton made a motion to table this review to give the applicant an opportunity to respond to comments and to produce a 3D animation. The motion was seconded by Brian Maguire and received unanimous approval of the members.

LOT CONSOLIDATION PLAT – 7501 MARYLAND AVENUE, 7500-7520 WESTMORELAND AVENUE

Susan Istenes explained that the property currently addressed 7501 Maryland Avenue is 90,949 square feet and contains a school building and surface parking lot. The remaining properties are 5,845 square feet each and are currently vacant. The consolidated lot will measure 126,018 square feet. The proposed plat will consolidate seven existing lots that have historically been maintained under common ownership as part of the school property. On September 12, 2017, the Board of Aldermen approved a Conditional Use Permit for the operation of a daycare and corporate university on the subject properties with the condition that the seven existing lots are consolidated into one. The R-2 zoning district allows colleges and universities as conditional uses, but restricts building footprints to no more than one-third of the site area and consolidating the lots will ensure compliance with the zoning regulation. Director Istenes noted that staff is of the opinion that the lot is consistent with lots of similar uses and compatible with the lots located in the immediate area with regard to size, frontage and arrangement and recommends approval to the Board of Aldermen with the following conditions:

1. That the applicant provide a Mylar for the appropriate City of Clayton signatures per the Subdivision Ordinance requirements after Board of Aldermen approval;

2. That the applicant files the plat with the St. Louis County Recorder of Deeds office and submit proof of filing to the City within 30 days of Board of Aldermen approval.

Chairman Lichtenfeld announced that the applicant has the right to consolidate.

18 Hearing no questions or comments, Joanne Boulton made a motion to recommend approval of the plat to the Board of Aldermen per staff recommendations. The motion was seconded by Craig Owens and unanimously approved by the members.

Having no further business before the Commission this evening, the meeting adjourned at 8:05 p.m.

_______________________________ Recording Secretary