June 5, 2017 — Meeting Minutes

MINUTES

CITY PLAN COMMISSION/ARCHITECTURAL REVIEW BOARD

JUNE 5, 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: Chairman Steve Lichtenfeld Craig Owens, City Manager Joanne Boulton, Aldermanic Representative Ron Reim William Liebermann Scott Wilson

Absent: Josh Corson

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

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 May 15, 2017 meeting were presented for approval. Joanne Boulton noted that Susan Istenes’ name needed to be added to the individuals in attendance as noted on Page 1. The minutes were then approved, as amended, after having been previously forwarded to each member.

ARCHITECTURAL REVIEW – ADDITION TO SINGLE-FAMILY RESIDENCE – 7635 CARSWOLD DRIVE

James Dolan, homeowner, and Samantha Saunders, project architect, were in attendance at the meeting.

2

Susan Istenes explained that the proposed project consists of the construction of a 216-square-foot two story addition and a 330-square-foot deck/carport. The existing home has a primary building material of beige brick with an accent material of white siding. The home features white casement windows and grey asphalt shingles. The proposed rear addition will be constructed of grey-beige stone veneer and white wood lap siding. White lap siding will not make up more than 25 percent of any elevation and will not be featured on the front elevation. According to the Architectural Review Guidelines, brick and stone are approved primary building materials and should make up at least 75 percent of all elevations. Together, brick and stone will account for 75 percent of the rear elevation and white lap siding will account for 25 percent. The rear elevation currently contains an existing bump-out constructed of white lap siding. The siding proposed on the rear addition will match the existing siding. The proposed siding will have minimal visibility from the right of way along Carswold Drive, but will be highly visible from adjacent properties. The subject property abuts Forest Park Parkway to the north and therefore only has residential properties to the east and west. A wood deck is proposed along the north side of the addition. The deck will be at the height of the first floor and the existing driveway footprint will remain below. Small amounts of wood siding used as an accent material on additions are common in the Wydown Forest neighborhood. The addition is located in the rear yard and will not been seen directly from the street. The addition is located in an area that is currently impervious with the exception of a small section of greenspace located under the proposed deck stairs. The proposed addition and deck will slightly increase total lot impervious coverage from approximately 39 percent to approximately 42 percent. The project does not include any work in the front yard and therefore does not impact front yard impervious coverage. Lots in the R-2 zoning district are allowed a maximum of 55 percent impervious coverage for the total lot. The proposed project is below the maximum coverage allowed. The applicant is proposing to re-grade a portion of the existing concrete driveway in the rear yard, but is not proposing to alter the existing driveway footprint. The driveway will be re-graded to allow for clearance of cars below the proposed deck. The mechanical equipment is currently located along the northern elevation and will remain in the same location. Currently, there is not any screening around the equipment. The addition of wood fence screening is proposed. The applicant proposes storing trash containers under the deck stairs with screening provided by wood lattice fencing. Director Istenes continued by stating that the project as proposed is in conformance with the requirements of the R-2 Single Family Dwelling District and the Architectural Review Guidelines and staff is of the opinion that the design and materials of the addition are compatible with the neighborhood and therefore, recommends approval as submitted.

A color rendering and sample of the stone proposed for the addition was presented.

Chairman Lichtenfeld asked how the addition is being supported.

Ms. Saunders indicated that the columns are steel.

Joanne Boulton asked staff if the Code allows stone to be used with brick.

3

Susan Istenes replied “yes”.

Scott Wilson asked if the garage is going to remain.

Ms. Saunders replied “yes”. She added that the driveway will be re-graded (by 4-6 inches) to meet clearance.

Scott Wilson commented that the south neighbor sheds water toward this property.

Ms. Saunders stated that they are not going any lower than the existing lowest point.

Scott Wilson complimented the architect on the drawings.

A brief discussion regarding the decking ensued. Mr. Dolan indicated that the deck is waterproof. Ms. Saunders stated that it can be slightly sloped towards the north to allow for run-off away from the house.

Ron Reim suggested that they re-think the clearance.

William Liebermann commented that he likes that they are re-using the existing residence.

Chairman Lichtenfeld stated that the project fits in with the neighborhood.

Hearing no further questions or comments and hearing none from the audience, Ron Reim made a motion to approve as submitted. The motion was seconded by Scott Wilson and unanimously approved by the Board.

Chairman Lichtenfeld asked when they plan to begin construction.

Mr. Dolan replied “as soon as possible”.

SITE PLAN REVIEW/ARCHITECTURAL REVIEW – NEW CONSTRUCTION – SINGLE- FAMILY RESIDENCE-629 LANGTON DRIVE

Venkatasreedhar Rathikindi, owner, was in attendance at the meeting. Also in attendance was Gabe Dubois, project architect.

Susan Istenes explained that the 12,000-square-foot site is located on the west side of Langton Drive, north of Edinburgh Drive and has a zoning designation of R-2 Single Family Dwelling District and is located in the Clayshire Urban Design District. The existing home will be demolished and a new house will be constructed on the lot. The proposed project consists of the construction of a 3,420-square-foot single-family residence with an 864-square-foot attached

4 garage. The height of the proposed residence is 26 feet, 3.25 inches as measured from the average existing grade to the mean height of the roof. The plans show the HVAC units located along the south elevation of the house with a 4-foot tall wood fence providing screening to the south, east and west and the house providing screening to the north. Trash will be stored in a 40-square-foot trash enclosure located in the southwest corner of the driveway. The trash enclosure will be screened by a wood fence and the house. The Clayshire Urban Design District limits impervious coverage to 40 percent of the total lot area and allows an increase in impervious coverage based on the garage placement. For this project, the allowable impervious coverage may be increased to 50 percent for the inclusion of an at-grade, side-entry garage. The existing impervious coverage on site is 37.3 percent. The new plans increase the impervious coverage to 39 percent. Front yard impervious coverage is limited to 30 percent in the Clayshire Urban Design District. The proposed front yard coverage is 26.7 percent. The existing storm water runoff, according to the MSD 15 year, 20 minute storm calculation is 0.651 cubic feet per second (CFS). The proposed runoff is 0.643 CFS, which represents a 0.008 CFS decrease. All downspouts and the sump-pump discharge will be piped to one of three pop-up emitters (two in the rear yard and one in the front yard). The Public Works Department finds the storm water plan acceptable. There are 10,019-square-feet of existing canopy coverage on site with 10,019-square-feet being removed. The proposed landscape plan has a deficiency of 270-square-feet of canopy coverage. The design meets the native tree requirement with 46.7 percent. The canopy coverage deficit can be addressed with payment to the City of Clayton Forestry Fund prior to the issuing of building permits. The City’s contracted landscape architect is of the opinion that the proposed trees are suitable for the site. Exterior lighting is proposed at all exterior doors and at the garage. All exterior lights will be 75 watts or less. Susan stated that the height, setbacks and impervious coverage as proposed are in conformance with the requirements of the R-2 Single Family Dwelling District and the Clayshire Urban Design District. Storm water will be adequately managed on site and the landscape plan features plantings that are appropriate for the size of the site and character of the neighborhood. Staff is of the opinion that the project meets the criteria for site plan approval and recommends approval with the following conditions, to be reviewed and approved by staff prior to the issuance of a building permit:

1. The Design and Code Criteria table on Sheet D00 incorrectly lists the Fire Projection authority as Creve Coeur FD. Revise the table to list the Clayton Fire Department.

2. The applicant shall pay $162.00 to the City’s Forestry Fund as compensation for the canopy coverage deficiency.

The applicants had nothing to add.

Chairman Lichtenfeld asked about drainage.

Mr. Dubois stated that there is a slight decrease in run-off.

Joanne Boulton asked where the sump pump will be located.

5

Mr. Dubois indicated it will be in the basement; likely on the south side.

Joanne Boulton asked the reason for a sump pump.

Mr. Dubois stated that it’s common to install one now as it’s harder to install one later.

Joanne Boulton asked if the basement is going to be finished.

Mr. Dubois replied “eventually”.

William Liebermann commented about the decrease in coverage.

Anna Krane reminded the members that the property is in an Urban Design District.

Hearing no further questions or comments and hearing none from the audience, Ron Reim made a motion to approve per staff recommendations. The motion was seconded by Will Liebermann and unanimously approved by the members.

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

Susan Istenes explained that the homes located along Langton Drive in the Clayshire neighborhood are predominately one story, making the impact of new two-story development on neighborhood character greater. The basic massing of the proposed two-story home includes one-story sections and is articulated on all sides with windows, doors and landscaping. The proposed house features a hip roof, which is common in the neighborhood and matches the roof style of the existing homes to either side. The existing home to the north (625 Langton Drive) was constructed in 1951 and is +/- 11.92 feet shorter than the proposed home (as measured from the mid-point of each roof). The existing home to the south (633 Langton Drive) was constructed in 1949 and is +/- 14.92 feet shorter than the proposed home. As required by Section 410.385 of the Clayshire Urban Design District, to avoid tall, blocky building forms, new structures shall incorporate a transition in height and scale through one of six possible techniques. The applicant has implemented two of the permitted strategies to mitigate the height difference to the north and south. According to the applicant, the following permitted technique is being used to mitigate the height difference to the north: “Increasing the side yard setback one foot for every five feet the height of the structure exceeds the height of the adjacent structure at the side yard.” The required side yard setbacks are 8 feet and a minimum 10 foot setback on the north side would be needed to meet the mitigation technique. The proposed setback is 22 feet on the north side. The following permitted technique is used to mitigate the height difference to the south: “Stepping down to meet the approximate height of the adjacent structure.” The existing home to the south is one story. The southern section of the proposed home is one story. The two story section of the proposed home is approximately 22 feet from the southern property line. Clayshire has traditionally been dominated by the use of standard size brick in a variety of red

6 tones. The primary building material for the proposed home is red brick and light tan stucco will be used as an accent material. Stucco will not make up more than 25 percent of any elevation. The house will also feature a limestone band and window trim. The roof will be clad in asphalt shingles, grey in color and black casement windows are proposed. A 10-foot wide exposed aggregate driveway is proposed along the north property line leading to a 3-car garage on the north elevation. A privacy fence is proposed to enclose the rear yard. The project as proposed is in conformance with the requirements of the R-2 Single Family Dwelling District, the Clayshire Urban Design District and the Architectural Review Guidelines. The use of height changes and façade relief adds variation to the building massing and makes the proposed house blend more with existing nearby homes. Staff is of the opinion that the design is compatible in terms of mass, height, and design with the existing neighborhood character and recommends approval as submitted.

Samples of the brick, limestone and architectural shingles were presented. Mr. Dubois stated that the windows will be Anderson and will have black trim.

Will Lieberman asked if the windows are vinyl or aluminum.

Mr. Dubois indicated that they are plastic.

Chairman Lichtenfeld asked about windows in the neighborhood.

Mr. Rathikindi indicated many neighboring homes have wood windows.

Joanne Boulton asked about the 2nd floor loft.

Mr. Dubois stated it is an all-purpose gathering space.

Chairman Lichtenfeld stated that the house looks good and will fit in the neighborhood well.

Joanne Boulton commented that she likes the step down features.

Hearing no further questions or comments and hearing none from the audience, William Liebermann made a motion to approve as submitted. The motion was seconded by Scott Wilson and unanimously approved by the Board.

Chairman Lichtenfeld asked when they plan to start construction.

Mr. Dubois indicated that they hope to begin in a couple of months.

ARCHITECTURAL REVIEW – EXTERIOR ALTERATIONS – 8025 BONHOMME AVENUE (CLAYTON ON THE PARK)

7 Jeff Davis, project architect, and Mark Rubin, Koman Group, were in attendance at the meeting.

Susan Istenes explained that the subject property is located at the northeast corner of Brentwood Boulevard and Bonhomme Avenue. The proposed project consists of alterations to the existing hardscape and landscape along the southern portion of the property, fronting Bonhomme Avenue. The proposed plan includes saw-cutting the existing drop-off area pavement in front of the building and then sandblasting and staining the existing concrete. The stain color has not been determined. The proposal also includes installing new up-lighting and bollard lighting for the drop-off area. A new pedestrian walkway and seating area, also in colored concrete, will be installed under the front arcade and adjacent to the drop-off area. The new sidewalk will extend west of the new drop- off area to new steps and paving south of the existing fountain. A new pedestrian walkway will also be added from the southwest corner of the property leading to the front entrance. The walkway is proposed as decomposed granite chat, lined with a concrete and wood seat wall and landscape beds. The applicant is proposing to remove and replace the existing landscaping within the drop-off area and the landscape bed west of the drop-off area. City standard streetscape is proposed along Bonhomme Avenue. The applicant is also proposing a large letter “C” to be located in the new walkway. The letter would measure 6-feet tall by approximately 6-feet wide. As proposed, the letter is being treated as a ground sign and would need to meet the requirements of the City’s Sign Ordinance. The existing ball-ground sign located in the southwest corner of the property is to be removed and the “C” will replace the existing ground sign. The existing ball located in the landscape bed within the drop-off area is marked to remain. The applicant is requesting three parking spaces on Bonhomme Avenue be designated as 30 minute tenant parking; however, this Board does not have the authority to consider such a request, therefore the applicant will have to contact the City’s Public Works Department. Director Istenes noted that the proposed new granite chat walkway will open the building façade at the intersection, creating a more inviting environment for pedestrians. Additional seating areas will increase the function of the space and encourage more activity and use. The plans divide the proposed project into “Phase A” and “Phase B.” The project type and scope does not qualify for phased approval by the City and is considered as one project, with all elements to be completed at one time. “Phase A” and “Phase B” as noted on the plans does not designate a timeline or an order of completion and should be removed from the plans. The City’s contracted landscape architect has reviewed the landscape plan and finds that an attractive planting design of trees, shrubs, perennials and groundcovers is proposed. The existing caliper inches on site are 135 with 44 caliper inches being removed. For commercial property, replacement of all caliper inches removed is required. The proposed plan has a deficiency of 15 caliper inches and two street trees. The landscape plan meets the requirement for native trees at 58.3 percent native. Some minor revisions to the plan and tree chart are required prior to the issuing of building permits. The Public Works Department has reviewed the plans and is generally accepting of the proposal with some changes requested. The number of street trees and lights proposed is acceptable; however, the trees should be shifted to provide adequate spacing between trees and lights. The standard is for street trees to be spaced 22 feet from tree to tree and street lights to be spaced 44 feet from light to light (11 feet spacing between trees and lights). Additional revisions are required to ensure that proposed alterations in the right of way meet the City’s streetscape standards for location of irrigation lines and conduits, wayfinding signs and ADA

8 ramps. The proposed ground sign is approximately 36-square-feet. The sign will be aluminum painted two shades of grey. The proposed sign is larger than the maximum size allowed and is not located within a landscape bed. The sign is proposed in the middle of the pedestrian walkway, which inhibits the function of the path. The City’s Sign Ordinance allows for a ground sign, a maximum of 25-square-feet, to be located within a landscape bed. The proposed sign is also shown as constructed with the ability to rotate. The Sign Ordinance prohibits rotating or moving signs. Currently, the ball located in the drop-off area landscape bed is painted as a baseball and marked to remain. Because the plans do not indicate otherwise, the Architectural Review Board should consider the current appearance of the ball to be the appearance after the project is completed. Staff is of the opinion that any future changes to the appearance of the ball should be administratively reviewed for approval or reviewed by the ARB, depending upon the extent of the proposed design. Director Istenes continued by stating that the proposed exterior alterations will upgrade the appearance of the Bonhomme Avenue and Brentwood Boulevard intersection; the addition of City standard streetscape along Bonhomme Avenue will create a more cohesive transition into the downtown core. Any major changes to the proposed plan would require review and approval from the Architectural Review Board. Director Istenes stated that it is staff’s recommendation to approve with the following conditions:

1. Remove all “Phase A” and “Phase B” designations from the plans.

2. The applicant shall revise the landscape plan and tree chart per comments outlined in the City’s contracted landscape architect’s review letter dated May 31, 2017.

3. Trees in the streetscape island shall be shifted towards one another so that there is approximately 10 feet between the tree and nearest light and 20 feet between trees.

4. A note shall be added to the plans that the street light electric lines/conduits shall be relocated to the back of the tree wells in the utility trench per City Detail C-1.

5. Irrigation conduits/lines for street trees shall be installed per City Detail C-1: a. Connect service line into existing line at hand hold just north of the construction limits on Brentwood Boulevard. b. Install new irrigation hand hole and flush valve at the eastern end of the project along Bonhomme Avenue.

6. Wayfinding signage shall be installed per the City’s 2017 Wayfinding Signage Project: a. One sign has been installed and shall be relocated. b. One sign could not be installed because of conflict with existing infrastructure and shall be installed as part of this project.

9 7. Clayton Public Works is currently in the design phase of the Brentwood Resurfacing Project. This project will include updating all ADA ramps adjacent to Brentwood Boulevard to current ADA standards. a. The Brentwood Boulevard ramps may be shifted north to become compliant. b. Ramps shall be designed/constructed to current ADA standards. c. Coordinate with Public Works regarding the final design. d. The Public Works Department requires “as builts” of these ramps be provided for review prior to issuance of permits.

8. The proposed ground sign shall be revised to adhere to the City’s Sign Ordinance as follows: a. The size of the ground sign shall be a maximum of 25-square-feet in area. b. The ground sign shall be located in a landscape bed. c. The ground sign shall not have the ability to rotate or move by human or natural force.

9. Any changes to the appearance of the decorative ball located in the landscape bed within the drop off area must be administratively reviewed for approval or considered by the Architectural Review Board, per code requirements.

10. All improvements included in the scope of the project (on private property and public property) are to be completed at the same time. The applicant shall guarantee the completion of all improvements on the approved site plan by posting a Cash Escrow or Performance Bond listing the City of Clayton as the insured for 100 percent of the cost of the project prior to the issuing of permits. The applicant shall provide the cost of the project to the City to be verified by the Public Works Department and the Planning and Development Services Department. The Director of the Planning and Development Services Department has the authority to release the escrow or bond upon completion of the project as determined by a passed final inspection performed by City staff.

Mr. Davis stated that they understood that tree caliper replacement was not required for a commercial project.

Anna Krane stated that changes are needed as trees were marked differently with regard to their condition.

Mr. Davis indicated that his clients want to keep the 5 existing street trees.

Mr. Rubin stated that there’s good canopy coverage now and that he’d like to keep it. He referred to the proposal that was presented to this Board back in December; calling it an “introductory proposal” and noted that this project has evolved and now they are presenting the entire package.

10 A discussion regarding streetscape ensued. It was noted that the City’s Public Works Department determines when and where streetscape is required. Director Istenes informed the members that Public Works has already indicated the need to install City standard streetscape. Mr. Day stated that they would like to treat the corner as a public space.

Mr. Day began a PowerPoint presentation. The first slide showed a rendering of the intersection and the second slide showed the proposed site plan.

Mr. Rubin indicated that they would like the opportunity to make the corner more of a connection point; more of an amenity. He stated that they put a lot of time and thought into this proposal.

Mr. Day stated that they want this to be an area of congregation. He noted the intention to keep the baseball and install street scape to the stairs; adding that north of that is already done.

Ron Reim asked if the rendering shows street scape.

Mr. Day replied “yes”.

Joanne Boulton replied “with caveats to that in the staff report”.

Susan Istenes agreed; noting the spacing issues.

Mr. Day, referring to the proposed “C”, stated that they want it to be interactive.

Mr. Rubin stated that they want to limit its speed/momentum; they want it properly engineered.

Jason Braidwood, also with Koman Group, addressed the members by stating that the same artist who designed the balls is designing the “C”. He stated that if new street trees are installed, they will lose the 5 existing street trees that are already mature.

Joanne Boulton reminded the applicant that streetscape does not fall within the authority of this Board.

A video presentation of an art piece with similar movement to the proposed “C” was shown to the members to give them an idea of how the “C” would move. Mr. Day informed the members that their “C” is 6-foot tall and 2-feet deep and that the mechanism is hidden.

Joanne Boulton stated that she likes it.

Slides depicting various views of the exterior were shown. Mr. Day reiterated that their proposal will make the area more public.

11 Mr. Rubin noted that they’ve introduced some wood into the project.

Chairman Lichtenfeld commented that it looks very inviting. He asked if they could lose the chat.

Mr. Day replied “yes”; but it has stabilizer/binder; he then referred to the product used at Kiener Plaza.

Chairman Lichtenfeld questioned how it will hold up in the winter.

Mr. Day stated it will retain snow/it will hold up.

Chairman Lichtenfeld commented that because staff is identifying the “C” as a sign, it is larger than allowed by the sign code (36 square feet proposed; 25 square feet allowed) and the motion factor needs to be discussed.

Scott Wilson stated that there is a wind driven art piece on Bonhomme.

Ron Reim noted that because the proposed “C” has been classified as a sign by the Planning Director, it’s limited in size (art is not limited in size).

Susan Istenes [Planning Director] informed the members that when she met with the applicants regarding this project, she made the determination that the “C” is a sign and informed the applicant that they may appeal her decision with the Board of Adjustment. She added that if this is considered public art, it needs to be reviewed by the Public Art Advisory Committee (PAAC) who will make a recommendation to this Board (ARB) for a final decision. She added that per the sign code, signs cannot move.

Scott Wilson asked if the “C” could be approved by this Board if it was smaller and not movable.

Susan Istenes replied “yes”.

Kevin O’Keefe announced that the plans call the “C” a “sign”.

Craig Owens asked if this Board can approve the “C” as proposed.

Susan Istenes replied “no”.

Kevin O’Keefe reiterated that the applicant could appeal the Director’s (Susan’s) decision (determination that it is a sign; not art) to the Board of Adjustment. He added that everything suggests that this is a sign.

12 Craig Owens asked if an amendment to the Sign Code is possible.

Kevin O’Keefe replied “yes”.

Scott Wilson stated that it would help Clayton.

Mr. Braidwood informed the members that the “C” is for the City.

Susan Istenes stated that an amendment to the sign code (text amendment) could be proposed to allow for rotational signs (an amendment would come before this Board for consideration before going to the Board of Aldermen) or, as an alternative, the applicant could request a modification to the sign code to allow a size modification; however, it could not be movable. She added that if this is the route the applicant chooses to take, they would have to submit an application for a modification to the sign code for which this Board would consider.

Joanne Boulton asked how much of a modification they would need.

Anna Krane stated that the sign code allows up to 25 square feet; the proposed sign is 36 square feet. She added that ground signs are to be located in a landscape bed as well.

Mr. Rubin referenced the 101 Hanley Road sign and that the Pierre Laclede sign is not in a landscape bed.

Mr. Braidwood commented that this sign, at 25 square feet, is too small for its intent.

Ron Reim stated that if it was art, it could be larger.

Chairman Lichtenfeld stated that he took it as art and agrees that it should be large. He stated that granite chat is more of a garden material.

Mr. Braidwood asked if the “C” could come back as art.

Joanne Boulton commented that City administration has already defined it as signage; to change that would require an appeal to the Board of Adjustment.

Susan Istenes indicated that if her decision is appealed to the Board of Adjustment and the appeal is granted, then the applicant would have to apply and go before both the PAAC and the ARB. If the applicant decreases the size to 25 square-feet and eliminates the mechanism that allows it to move, the ARB can approve. Alternatively, the sign regulations could be amended to allow for rotational/movable signs.

Joanne Boulton asked if the Board of Aldermen ultimately has the decision to change the code.

13 Susan Istenes replied “yes”.

William Liebermann asked how long it takes to go through the PAAC process.

Susan Istenes indicated that the applicant would first have to go through the appeal process (Board of Adjustment); be granted the appeal and then appear before the PAAC and ARB. She stated that the PAAC meet on an as-needed/on-demand basis.

Scott Wilson asked if this Board could approve the balance of the project.

Chairman Lichtenfeld noted that the sign (“C”) is only referenced in one of the ten conditions of approval as recommended by staff.

Craig Owens commented that it appears the consensus is that this Board likes the “C” and would like to find a path to get it to an approval process.

Garrick Hamilton, also with Koman Group, commented that the “C” could be approved if it was reduced in size and made stationary if the Board of Adjustment denies an appeal.

Joanne Boulton referred to the nine other staff recommendations.

Mr. Rubin stated that he would like financial accommodations for staff recommendation numbers 6 & 7 as money has already been budgeted for these projects.

It was determined that these issues can be decided at a later time with City staff.

Joanne Boulton stated that the worst case scenario would be that Clayton on the Park/Koman Group would have to cover the expenses. She noted that this Board only has so much discretion.

Scott Wilson commented that the resurfacing is a City project.

Kevin O’Keefe commented that there is a timing issue here.

Mr. Braidwood stated that their design is not the same as the Brentwood resurfacing project; he added that they are not looking for a kick-back from the City.

Craig Owens indicated that the project has to be compliant with City standards and match up with the project in its entirety.

Mr. Day stated that they need to know the alignment of the ramp.

14 Joanne Boulton mentioned that the Wayfinding signs have already been installed and that because these signs are not yet on the subject property, there will be an additional expense to install them.

Susan Istenes referenced the earlier discussion regarding the landscape bed and the comment that chat is similar; she stated that this Board may be inclined to eliminate 8(b) from a motion to approve.

Another discussion ensued regarding the various avenues of how to move forward with the proposed “C”.

Hearing no further questions or comments, Scott Wilson made a motion to approve per staff recommendations excluding 8(b). The motion was seconded by Joanne Boulton and unanimously approved by the Board.

PUBLIC HEARING – TEXT AMENDMENT - AMENDMENT TO ARTICLE XXIX “OUTDOOR DINING”

Susan Istenes explained that this amendment will allow heaters to be placed in outdoor dining areas that are located on City/public property with approval from the City’s Fire Department. Currently, heaters are allowed in outdoor dining areas that are located on private property with approval from the Fire Department. She noted that outdoor dining permits are required for all outdoor dining and that a separate permit from the Fire Department is required for heaters.

Alan Richman, owner of Sasha’s and DeMun Oyster Bar, thanked the City for considering this change. He noted that he’s had outdoor heaters for a long time and that they are important for his business.

Hearing no further questions or comments, Ron Reim made a motion to recommend approval of the text amendment to the Board of Aldermen as requested. The motion was seconded by Scott Wilson and unanimously approved by the members.

CITY BUSINESS – DISCUSSION – 3D PRESENTATIONS

Susan Istenes stated that 3D presentations of large projects would be beneficial to both the City and the public, as plan sets can be difficult to interpret.

Scott Wilson asked how large-scale is defined.

Susan Istenes stated that a 3D presentation would be desirable for any PUD or SDD project or any high-rise project. She indicated that the Library project would not need to provide a 3D presentation. She informed the members that this would simply be a policy change; no code

15 change is necessary. She added that the applicant would be asked to provide the presentation 2 weeks prior to the meeting date.

William Lieberman asked about cost.

Ron Reim commented that they prepare a 3D presentation for all their projects and that the presentations are user-controlled.

Joanne Boulton asked if software has to be purchased.

Ron Reim stated that there are apps available.’’

Chairman Lichtenfeld stated that they use them all the time as well.

Everyone agreed that 3D presentations would be a beneficial tool.

Susan Istenes informed the members that Centene was told to provide a 3D presentation.

Joanne Boulton stated that a 3D presentation would be wanted for the Novelly project.

Susan Istenes agreed.

Ron Reim stated that he can suggest tools.

Susan Istenes stated that staff would simply need to revise the submittal requirements on the applications.

Chairman Lichtenfeld recommended that this move forward.

Craig Owens stated that the City appreciates Mr. Winkelman’s suggestion for this useful tool.

Ron Reim stated that he won’t be at the June 19th meeting.

Having no further business before the Commission this evening, the meeting adjourned at 7:22 p.m.

_______________________________ Recording Secretary