March 27, 2017 — Meeting Minutes

MINUTES

CITY PLAN COMMISSION/ARCHITECTURAL REVIEW BOARD

MARCH 27, 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 Joanne M. Boulton, Aldermanic Representative Craig Owens, City Manager Ron Reim Josh Corson William Liebermann Scott Wilson

Absent: None

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

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

MINUTES

The minutes of the March 6, 2017 meeting were presented for approval. The minutes were approved after having been previously forwarded to each member.

Chairman Lichtenfeld announced that the order of agenda items will be changed this evening; the “Old Business” (Clayton/Hanley Road project) will go last.

SITE PLAN/ARCHITECTURAL REVIEW – NEW CONSTRUCTION – SINGLE FAMILY RESIDENCE – 635 WEST POLO DRIVE

2 Lauren Strutman, project architect, was in attendance at the meeting. Also in attendance were David Volz, civil engineer and Glenn Henke, owner/developer.

Susan Istenes explained that on May 2, 2016 the Plan Commission-Architectural Review Board voted to approve a new single family residence at this location. On February 7, 2017 the owner/applicant provided revised plans for the proposed residence. After review of the changes, staff concluded that the revisions were significant enough to be considered a new submission that would require review and approval by the Plan Commission-Architectural Review Board. The 26,274-square-foot property is located on the west side of West Polo Drive and has a zoning designation of R-2 Single Family Dwelling District. The proposed project consists of the demolition of an existing two-story home and the construction of a two-story, 4,664-square-foot (excluding the basement) single-family residence. The height of the proposed residence is 29-feet 9 5/8 inches as measured from the average existing grade to the mean height of the roof. The proposed HVAC units are located at the rear of the home and screened by a wood fence. Trash will be stored in a 40-square-foot wood-framed trash enclosure located adjacent to the garage. The existing impervious coverage on site is 23.1 percent. The new plans decrease the impervious coverage to 20.7 percent, which is below the maximum allowable impervious coverage of 55 percent. The existing stormwater runoff, according to the MSD 15 year, 20 minute calculation, is 1.28 cubic feet per second (CFS). The proposed runoff is 1.25 CFS, which represents a decrease in 0.03 CFS, and therefore on site stormwater mitigation is not required. Downspouts from the home will be piped to two pop-up emitters in the rear yard. The Public Works Department has reviewed and approved the stormwater management plan. The proposed landscape design provides appropriate landscaping and screening for the proposed home and the character of the neighborhood. The landscape plan shows the removal of 12,795 square feet of canopy coverage. The proposed landscape plan provides a surplus of 49,385 square feet of canopy coverage and meets the requirement for native trees with 33.3 percent. The City’s contracted landscape architect is of the opinion that the proposed trees are suitable for the site. The structural root zones of existing trees are not shown on the Tree Preservation Plan. This can be addressed prior to the issuance of building permits. Exterior lighting is proposed at all doors and the garage. All exterior lights will be 75 watts or less. Director Istenes noted that the proposed home is compatible with surrounding homes in the neighborhood, that stormwater will be adequately managed on site, and the landscape plan provides for a variety of new trees that are suitable for the area. The project meets the setback, height and impervious coverage requirements of the R-2 Zoning District and the applicant has recently submitted approval from the subdivision trustees. Staff is of the opinion that the project meets the criteria for site plan approval and recommends approval with the condition that the Tree Preservation Plan be revised to depict the structural root zones of existing trees to remain.

Ms. Strutman presented a site plan to the members.

Joanne Boulton asked if the house is already gone.

Ms. Strutman replied “yes”.

Joanne Boulton asked about the existing swimming pool.

Mr. Henke indicated that it has not yet been removed.

Ms. Strutman informed the members that this revised proposal is for a simpler, smaller house; about 600 square feet smaller. She mentioned that Trustee approval has been submitted to staff.

Ms. Volz presented drainage diagrams depicting existing and proposed conditions. He added that less water will go onto the public right of way and that there are two pop-up emitters in the rear yard.

Chairman Lichtenfeld commented that it appears that less water will flow to adjacent properties as well.

Mr. Volz concurred.

Chairman Lichtenfeld noted that there is a lot of greenspace toward the west.

Mr. Volz agreed.

Chairman Lichtenfeld commented that the maps are very helpful. He asked the applicants if they were okay with staff’s recommendation.

Ms. Strutman replied “yes”.

Hearing no further questions or comments, Josh Corson made a motion to approve the site plan per staff recommendations. The motion was seconded by Scott Wilson and unanimously approved by the members.

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

Ms. Strtuman presented a color rendering of the proposed house to the members.

Susan Istenes explained that the height of the proposed residence is 29 feet 9 5/8 inches as measured from the average existing grade to the mean height of the roof. The two-story home to the south (637 West Polo Drive) was constructed in 1930 and is +/- 5-feet 4-inches shorter than the proposed home (as measured from the mid-point of each roof). The proposed residence is one-story along the southern elevation, which will lessen the impact of the height difference between these two homes. The two-story home to the north (619 West Polo Drive) was constructed in 1927 and is +/- 10-feet 8 1/8 inches shorter than the proposed home (as measured from the mid-point of each roof). The Clayton Gardens Urban Design District requires the use of an approved mitigation strategy to lessen the impacts of height differences between existing and proposed houses.

4 Although this property is not located within the Clayton Gardens Urban Design District, use of an approved strategy such as an increased side yard setback could be applicable. The distance between the proposed home and existing home is approximately 115-feet, which will mitigate the difference in height between the two structures. The primary building material for the proposed home is mixed red brick with fiber cement stucco panels and cast stone window trim. As proposed, the secondary materials will not exceed 17 percent of any façade. The roof is clad in slate grey architectural shingles and tan casement windows are proposed. The existing asphalt driveway will be replaced with an exposed aggregate driveway leading to an attached side entry garage with two tan carriage style doors. A +/- 2.5-foot tall stacked-stone retaining wall is proposed along the north side of the driveway. No permanent fences are proposed. Director Istenes noted that the project as proposed is in conformance with the requirements of the R-2 Single Family Dwelling District and the Architectural Review Guidelines, that staff is of the opinion that the design and materials are compatible in terms of mass, height and design with existing nearby homes and recommends approval as submitted.

Samples of the brick (mix red), stucco (tan), stone (tan), window (tan clad) and architectural shingles were presented.

Chairman Lichtenfeld commented that the house looks good. He asked if there is one garage door or two.

Ms. Strutman replied “one”.

Joanne Boulton asked for more windows on the left elevation.

Ms. Strutman stated that’s the garage area.

Joanne Boulton asked if the house next door is 637.

Mr. Henke replied “yes”.

Hearing no further questions or comments, Ron Reim made a motion to approve as submitted. The motion was seconded by Scott Wilson and unanimously approved by the Board.

Chairman Lichtnefeld asked when they plan to begin construction.

Mr. Henke indicated that he wants to start as soon as possible.

CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT – ICE CREAM PARLOR – 730 DEMUN AVENUE (CLEMENTINE’S CREAMERY)

Tamara Keefe, business owner, was in attendance at the meeting.

5 Susan Istenes explained that the subject property, located on the east side of DeMun Avenue, north of South Rosebury Avenue and south of North Rosebury Avenue, has a zoning designation of C-1 Neighborhood Commercial District and was formerly used as a hair salon. The restaurant space measures 1,200-square-feet and will have 4 seats. A 160-square-foot outdoor dining area is proposed in front of the building with 10 seats. Signage depicted on the elevation drawing will be considered at a later date.The applicant describes Clementine’s Creamery as a standard ice cream parlor, which will operate similarly to the applicant’s current location in the City of St. Louis. The restaurant will be open Sunday through Thursday, 11:00 a.m. to 10:00 p.m., and Friday through Saturday, 11:00 a.m. to 11:00 p.m. Delivery service from the ice cream parlor is not proposed. Deliveries to the restaurant will be made once a week during winter months and twice a week during summer months. Deliveries will be made in the morning between 9:30 a.m. and 11:00 a.m. to the rear of the building. Trash will be stored in existing dumpsters located in the alley rear of the building. The applicant intends to participate in a recycling program. The property does not provide off-street parking. The applicant is requesting a parking waiver due to public parking provided on the street. 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. Restaurants are permitted in this zoning district subject to approval of a conditional use permit. Because the restaurant is located outside of the Central Business District, off-street parking must be provided for employees. The property does not have off-street parking and the lease agreement provided by the applicant does not include off-street parking, so the applicant is requesting a parking waiver be approved. The applicant has stated that at most two employees will be working at the same time. Because the restaurant is less than 3,000-square-feet, off-street parking for patrons is not required. Public street parking is provided along DeMun Avenue. Three exterior lights are proposed above the outdoor seating area. There are adjacent residential uses; however, the lights will be directed toward the ground and staff does not think the proposed lighting will adversely impact adjacent properties. Director Istenes continued by stating that staff is of the opinion that the proposed restaurant meets the requirements contained in the regulations governing conditional uses. The inclusion of an ice cream parlor will add vitality to a vacant space on DeMun Avenue. The restaurant space is slightly smaller in size to other restaurants and adequate public parking will be available along the street. The proposed hours of operation and method of deliveries are consistent with other restaurants in this area. Based on the information regarding the operation of the restaurant as provided by the applicant, staff is of the opinion that the proposed ice cream parlor will be compatible with surrounding uses and recommends approval as requested.

Ms. Keefe stated that she’s excited to be here and that this will be her second location. She added that she believes this will be a great fit in this great neighborhood.

Chairman Lichtenfeld agreed. He asked about the “naughty or nice”.

Ms. Keefe stated that she has some adult ice creams with alcohol in them.

Joanne Boulton welcomed her to Clayton.

William Liebermann stated that he’s excited about this; he believes it will activate the area and complement existing tenants.

Hearing no further questions or comments, Josh Corson made a motion to recommend approval of the Conditional Use Permit to the Board of Alderman as requested. The motion was seconded by Ron Reim and unanimously approved by the members.

OLD BUSINESS – ARCHITECTURAL REVIEW – MIXED-USE PROJECT – 7601-7651 CLAYTON ROAD

Due to a conflict of interest, Scott Wilson recused himself. He left the member table and did not participate in any discussion or vote with regard to this issue.

Jim Fredericks, attorney representing the applicant and Sal LeCesse, co-developer, were in attendance at the meeting.

Susan Istenes explained that at the meeting of March 6, 2017, the Architectural Review Board voted to continue consideration of the architectural elements of the project to the meeting of March 27, 2017. Staff met with the applicant and the city’s contracted landscape architect on March 14, 2017 to discuss outstanding landscape and buffering related issues. The applicant has submitted revisions to the architectural plans presented on March 6 which are described by the applicant as follows:

1. Adjustments have been made to the Clayton and Hanley tower element. Additional glazing and clerestory windows have been added and the tower brick color has been modified to sand brick veneer so that it matches the cast limestone base to emphasize height and verticality at the corner.

2. Nine parking spaces have been eliminated at the surface lot on the corner of Clayton Road and Hanley Road to increase landscaping and improve the pedestrian experience.

3. Sidewalks adjacent to the building along Hanley Road have been increased to 10 feet in width and the outdoor dining area has been increased in size.

4. Landscaping within the courtyard areas will be achieved through placement of raised planters or pots situated in these areas.

5. The native tree requirements have been met.

7 6. Additional landscape related comments have been addressed and are outlined in a letter dated March 20, 2017 from Landscape Technologies (attached).

The applicant has also attached a document from the team’s sustainability consultant outlining equivalencies between green building rating systems that would be suitable to their project. The project will be seeking National Green Building Standard (NGBS) bronze level certification. This is merely provided for your information and is not under consideration for this application. The sustainability certification will be referenced in the Rezoning/PUD staff report that will go to the Board of Aldermen for final approval. Director Istenes stated that staff’s recommendation is to approve with the following conditions:

1. Pursuant to correspondence dated March 23, 2017 from Christner, Inc. those outstanding issues identified in the Landscape Design comment Nos. 1,5,11 and 12 shall be corrected to the satisfaction of staff no later than two weeks before the Board of Alderman meeting wherein the rezoning/PUD applications for this project will be considered.

2. The proposed north buffer wall on the east side of the site shall be a minimum height of 10 feet as measured from the centerline of the access drive.

Susan Istenes informed the Board that Laurel Herrington, the City’s contracted landscape architect, is in attendance this evening.

Mr. Fredericks stated that they are happy to see this project moving along. He informed the members that the two Laurels, Laurel Stone (project architect) and Laurel Herrington (the City’s landscape architect) had spoken as recently as this morning and he has no doubts the landscaping issues will be resolved. He added that they have been talking to their Westwood neighbors as well regarding the buffer and that they accept staff’s recommendations. He noted that the truck drive is needed and that they will stake the property and they are open to different buffer types. Photos depicting screen/buffer wall options were shown.

A lengthy discussion regarding what type of buffer wall and the height needed to properly screen trucks from the residential neighbors to the north ensued. It was decided that 13-feet would be ample height.

Joanne Boulton suggested the wall be sound attenuating. She made mention of a wall Scott Wilson recently installed to buffer his AC units.

Chairman Lichtenfeld asked that landscaping for the entire project be discussed.

Ms. Herrington presented a landscape plan, in black and white (color rendering not available). She stated that all the landscaping is on private property.

Anna Krane informed the Board that all the public sidewalks are county owned.

Ms. Herrington stated that she would like to see a manicured hedge along Clayton Road near Hanley Road.

Ron Reim asked about paving.

Chairman Lichtenfeld stated that it is asphalt.

Ms. Herrington commented that it’s shown on the plan as pavers.

Joanne Boulton questioned the location of the pedestrian experience. She stated that there are benches along Clayton Road, but on a slope so that’s not good.

A lengthy discussion regarding traffic circulation ensued.

Mr. Fredericks stated that they have not yet heard back from the County.

Ron Reim asked what the applicant will do if the County does not approve their plan (ingress/egress).

Mr. Fredericks stated that if the County does not approve their proposal, it may not be possible to incorporate retail so the property could be destined for residential or parking only.

Chairman Lichtenfeld asked if they could incorporate a wall so as to contain truck noise at night.

Mr. Fredericks stated that although he is not an engineer, he said they can try and erect a sound barrier.

Chairman Lichtenfeld asked if people will walk up the truck drive to get to the retail space.

Mr. Fredericks stated that he hopes they don’t.

Chairman Lichtenfeld stated it would be a direct route.

Mr. Fredericks stated that he hopes that people will walk along the front.

Ron Reim stated that consideration needs to be given to the possibility of cars and pedestrians colliding.

Mr. Fredericks agreed; he mentioned that valet service will be offered in the evenings.

Ron Reim stated he was referring more to general delivery trucks.

9 Mr. Fredericks stated that he doesn’t know when the grocery store will receive deliveries, but believes they will take place early evening and done by 9 p.m.

Chairman Lichtenfeld stated that Clayton Road is not pedestrian friendly.

Mr. Fredericks agreed.

Chairman Lichtenfeld commented that he believes the landscaping has gone as far as it can given the space; however, it will be so crowded it will have a negative effect on the pedestrian experience.

Mr. Fredericks stated that they can work on that.

Chairman Lichtenfeld asked if they would consider eliminating the east bound driveway.

Mr. Fredericks replied “no”.

Chairman Lichtenfeld asked who will use that drive.

Mr. Fredericks stated that it will be used for valet service; a high-end 7,000 square foot restaurant will want valet service.

Another discussion regarding traffic circulation took place.

Susan Istenes reminded the members that only the architectural aspects are on the agenda.

Chairman Lichtenfeld commented that there was a split vote on the site plan aspects and that the landscaping ties into other aspects of the project. He stated that he has a lot of concerns regarding landscaping and the lack of a back side buffer (truck drive lane).

William Liebermann asked if that drive could be enclosed.

Mr. LeCesse indicated that it is something they can look into; however, at some point they will run out of money.

Chairman Lichtenfeld stated that he is confident they can incorporate a sound attenuating wall; maybe with a bend at the top to direct noise back towards the drive.

Ron Reim asked if they could move the valet lane down a level.

Mr. LeCessee replied “no”.

At this time, Chairman Lichtenfeld solicited audience comments.

Patrick Berry, Westwood Condo Association, voiced concern about water run-off and the sound/noise factor also.

Ken Aston, 747 Middle Polo, stated that he can hear Highway 40 from his property and that this building may block a lot of that noise as well as noise from Clayton Road. He voiced support for the project; noting that he, and others, want a grocery store and that this is as pedestrian friendly as it can possibly be.

Mr. LeCesse stated that they will work with the City; that they are willing to cooperate, but he’s not sure what more they can do.

Josh Corson mentioned that he likes the architectural changes they made.

Mr. LeCesse noted that the change to the corner element is that the material is now brick (tan/sand color) and that there are a lot of windows.

Samples of both brick patterns were shown as well as several color renderings.

Chairman Lichtenfeld commented that he is still not inspired by the project and that the tweaks that were made more relate to the neighborhood; he still finds the architecture a problem.

Ron Reim agreed that although there have been improvements, it is still not there yet; the corner element needs better treatment, including landscaping. He noted that the area for outdoor dining is tight. He asked what material is being proposed for the base of the building along Westwood.

Mr. LeCesse indicated that it is it is cast stone; a sample was presented at the previous meeting.

Ron Reim asked if this is the same material as proposed for the retail space.

Mr. LeCesse replied “yes”.

Ron Reim commented that the addition of more brick is a big improvement.

Josh Corson stated that the project has come a long way and that it looks nice; although he would like to see a taller corner element. He added he is less concerned about the traffic at Westwood.

William Lieberman stated he agrees the project has come a long way and that he likes the cast stone on the Westwood side of the building.

Chairman Lichtenfeld commented that the colors of the cast stone and new brick are very similar.

Craig Owens asked for confirmation that signage is not being considered this evening.

Susan Istenes confirmed.

Joanne Boulton asked where we are with the County decision.

Mr. Fredericks stated that County’s decision won’t affect the design.

Preston Dowd, co-developer, GBT Realty, stated that their traffic patterns are necessary for the retail use.

Ron Reim stated that he is struggling with the site development itself and questioned the result if this ended up being a residential-only project.

Mr. Dowd stated that parking would be affected and the need for the retail sales tax. He stated that this zip code is under-grocered in the Country. He stated that they looked at Richmond Heights and that they are under contract in St. Peters; he loves Clayton and this is the perfect blend of what this City needs.

Mr. Dowd questioned what came first; the Westwood Condos or the Schnuck’s grocery store.

The answer was the Westwood Condos.

Joanne Boulton stated that trucks servicing Schnuck’s never used Westwood Drive. She added that she agrees that the architecture gets a bit better each time around, but this is not what she hoped for and the difficulty getting bicycles, pedestrians and vehicles to coexist.

Marsha King, 900 South Hanley Road resident, asked what fronts Hanley Road.

Mr. LeCesse stated that there will be a restaurant on the corner and the rest will be retail use; the grocery store will occupy the middle of the site fronting Clayton Road.

Ms. King asked the hours of operation for the restaurant.

Mr. LeCessee indicated that he does not know that yet; but it won’t be open 24 hours.

Ms. King asked about the truck lane.

Ron Reim asked if he could use the truck lane.

Mr. LeCessee replied “yes”.

12 Ms. King asked about the number of vehicles using Hanley Road as their building is only about 20 feet from this site. She asked about the apartments.

Mr. LeCesse stated that up to 50% of the apartment units will be 1 bedroom units; the rest will be a mix of 2 and 3 bedroom units.

Todd Newstead, Westwood Condo resident, asked if the truck lane will allow for through traffic.

Mr. LeCesse stated that’s not what is intended for this lane; however, it is a through road.

Hearing no further questions or comments at this time, Joanne Boulton made a motion to amend staff recommendation number 2 to read: “The proposed north buffer wall on the east side of the site shall be a sound attenuating barrier and be a minimum height of 13 feet from grade.” The motion was seconded by Josh Corson and unanimously approved by the Board.

Ron Reim made a motion to approve the project with the staff recommendations, as amended. The motion was seconded by William Lieberman and received the following roll call vote: Ayes: Craig Owens, Ron Reim, Josh Corson, and William Lieberman. Nays: Chairman Lichtenfeld and Joanne Boulton. Motion carries.

****************************************************************************

Scott Wilson returned to the member table.

William Lieberman stated that he may have gone beyond on his opinions.

Chairman Lichtenfeld stated that he did not have to worry about expressing his opinion.

Scott Wilson assured the members that they won’t be embarrassed by the end result.

Joanne Boulton stated she is concerned about the pedestrian experience.

Josh Corson stated that the corner wouldn’t be pedestrian friendly anyway.

Joanne Boulton stated that she wants to be able to walk to the store/restaurant.

Ron Reim commented that he believes they still have a challenge with the County; he’s not confident this is a done-deal. He added he is not enthusiastic about the design, but he does want the site developed.

Joanne Boulton stated that it would be nice to know what the County wanted and that they (the applicant) may be back here anyway. She stated that she thinks the County is reluctant to have left turns onto Clayton Road.

Chairman Lichtenfeld agreed; the County is a major hurdle they must get over.

Chairman Lichtenfeld asked if having this discussion while on the record is a problem.

Craig Owens replied “no”, noting that transparency is important; however, some of these discussions may have been better to have had during the earlier deliberations.

Having no further business before the Commission this evening, the meeting adjourned at 7:35 p.m.

_______________________________ Recording Secretary

Document

March 27, 2017 — Meeting Minutes