July 6, 2015 — Meeting Minutes
MINUTES
CITY PLAN COMMISSION/ARCHITECTURAL REVIEW BOARD
JULY 6, 2015
The City Plan Commission/Architectural Review Board of the City of Clayton, Missouri, met upon the above date at 5:30 p.m. Upon roll call, the following responded:
Present:wyd Acting Chairman Ron Reim Mark Winings, Aldermanic Representative Josh Corson Sherry Eisenberg
Absent: Chairman Steve Lichtenfeld Craig Owens, City Manager Vacant Seat
Also Present: Susan M. Istenes, AICP, Director of Planning & Development Services Louis Clayton, Planner Kevin O’Keefe, City Attorney
Acting Chairman Reim asked that all cell phone ringers be turned off, that conversations take place outside the meeting room and that those who wish to speak approach the podium and to be sure the green light on the microphone is on for property recording of this meeting.
MINUTES
The minutes of the June 1st meeting were approved, after having been previously distributed to each member.
Acting Chairman Reim announced that in an effort to accommodate one of the applicants who has a prior commitment, the agenda items are going to be rearranged so that the 37 Crestwood item is heard first.
EXTERIOR ALTERATION – SINGLE FAMILY RESIDENCE – 37 CRESTWOOD DRIVE
Susan Istenes referenced Item D on the agenda. She explained that this is a request by David Glarner for the construction of a fire escape platform outside the third floor of the southern elevation. She stated that the 14,589-square-foot property is located on the west side of
2 Crestwood Drive and has a zoning designation of R-2 Single Family Dwelling District. The existing improvements on the property include a two-story single-family residence. The third floor attic was recently refinished and the only means of egress is an existing staircase between the second and third floors. Although not required by the Building Code, the applicant wishes to install a fire escape platform on the southern elevation of the third floor with access from an existing window. According to the applicant, the purpose of the platform is to provide a space for someone to exit the attic in case of a fire and safely wait for a fire truck to rescue them. The fire escape platform will measure +/- 34 square feet and be enclosed by metal railing painted to match the slate roof. The Claverach Park Trustees have the reviewed and approved the proposal; however, they have expressed concerns that the appearance is “awkward”. The applicant has submitted letters of support from the adjacent property owners at 35 and 41 Crestwood Drive. The fire escape platform is located on the southern (side) elevation. It is visible from the public right-of-way when looking from the west and south. The platform is partially screened from public view by the existing roof, chimney, and mature trees. The visual impact is further minimized by painting the railing to match the slate roof. Susan noted that the project as proposed is in conformance with the requirements of the R-2 Single Family Dwelling District and staff is of the opinion that the proposed platform will not have a negative visual impact on the neighborhood and staff recommends approval as requested.
Mr. Glarner thanked the Board for allowing him to go first. He stated that staff provided a complete explanation of the proposal and asked if there were any questions.
Acting Chairman Reim asked if this will address his concerns about providing living space on the third floor of the home for his children.
Mr. Glarner replied “yes”; he indicated that currently there is only a narrow set of stairs.
Acting Chairman Ron Reim asked if there were any further questions or comments from the members or the audience.
None were received.
Josh Corson made a motion to approve as submitted. The motion was seconded by Mark Winings and unanimously approved by the Board.
CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT – NEW RESTAURANT – PIGARO – 8025 BONHOMME AVENUE (CLAYTON ON THE PARK)
Mark Rubin, representing the property owner and Ben Poremba, restaurant owner, were in attendance at the meeting.
3 Acting Chairman Ron Reim wanted it on the record that in the past, his company worked on a project for this space, but not currently so he spoke to the City Attorney who informed him that he could participate in the consideration of this proposal.
Susan Istenes explained that this is a request for a conditional use permit to operate a Mark Rubin stated that the 4,643-square-foot restaurant will be on the 2nd floor, west side of the building. The restaurant will serve contemporary Italian cuisine using French techniques. The applicant also plans to submit an application to the Board of Aldermen for a liquor license. The subject property is located at the northeast corner of Brentwood Boulevard and Bonhomme Avenue and has a zoning designation of Planned Unit Development. The restaurant space is located in on the west side of a mixed-use residential building (Clayton on the Park) facing Shaw Park. The restaurant space measures 4,643 square feet and will accommodate 96 seats indoors. Outdoor dining is not proposed. The restaurant will be open seven days a week, 8:00 a.m. to 11:00 p.m. Deliveries to the restaurant will be made through the existing loading area located on the north side of the building off the alley. Delivery service from the restaurant is not proposed. Trash will be stored in existing receptacles located in the loading area and the restaurant plans to participate in a recycling program. Parking will be available in the public parking garage to the east. Valet services will be located on Brentwood Boulevard. The proposed restaurant is located in a mixed-use residential building. The surrounding land uses include an office building to the north, a public parking garage to the east, a mixed-use residential tower with a restaurant to the south, and Shaw Park to the west. Staff is of the opinion that the proposed use is compatible with surrounding uses. No exterior changes to the building are proposed at this time. The landscaping bed along Brentwood Boulevard will be updated with new plantings and the landscape plan has been approved administratively by staff. Restaurants over 3,000 square feet must provide parking based on the following ratio: three parking spaces for every five seats on a pro-rated percentage for all square footage in excess of 3,000 gross square feet. Based on the size and number of seats proposed, 20 parking spaces are required. The Clayton on the Park building comes with rights to 260 parking spaces located in the adjacent 8011 Bonhomme Garage owned by the City. The current lease also provides the Clayton on the Park building 69 additional spaces during the evenings after 5:00 p.m. and on weekends. The garage has a capacity of 570 parking spaces, and by design, has been operating as a shared use parking facility benefiting adjacent properties. Spaces are unassigned and are not reserved for each user. As part of the rezoning of the property to Planned Unit Development in 2011, a shared parking study analyzed the parking demands of the development based on the occupancy of 209 residential units and a 5,000 square foot restaurant. The consultant found that the parking demand for the proposed use of Clayton on the Park (including residential and restaurant) would be met with the current number of spaces available at the 8011 Bonhomme Garage. The consultant also noted that with the inclusion of the 69 additional parking spaces available on evenings and weekends, there was 20 to 40 percent excess parking capacity at different times of the day. Staff is of the opinion that due to the excess capacity noted in the study and the availability of nearby on street parking that adequate parking is available for the proposed use. Based on the City’s Bicycle Parking Regulations the proposed restaurant is required to provide one bicycle rack; however, one has not been shown on the plans. Staff recommends that the applicant submit a site plan showing the
4 location of the required bicycle rack in conformance with the Bicycle Parking Regulations, to be approved by staff prior to the issuance of a building permit. Staff is of the opinion that the proposed restaurant meets the requirements contained in the regulations governing conditional uses. The inclusion of a restaurant at this location will add vitality and provide a unique dining establishment in Downtown Clayton. The restaurant space is comparable in size to other restaurants Downtown, and adequate public parking will be available in the 8011 Bonhomme Garage and on the surrounding streets. 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 restaurant will be compatible with surrounding uses and recommends approval with the condition that the applicant submit a site plan showing the location of the required bicycle rack in conformance with the Bicycle Parking Regulations, to be approved by staff prior to the issuance of a building permit.
Acting Chairman Reim asked for confirmation that they are not asking for outdoor dining.
Mr. Poremba replied “yes”
Josh Corson stated that this will be a neat addition to the site and to the City.
Acting Chairman Reim asked if there were any other questions or comments or any from the audience.
None were received.
Acting Chairman Reim asked about staff’s recommendation.
Louis Clayton stated that they could meet the bicycle parking regulations; he will have to re- review the bicycle parking regulations to determine.
Acting Chairman Reim asked the number of racks required.
Louis Clayton replied “one”.
Mr. Rubin stated that wouldn’t be a problem.
Being no further questions or comments, Mark Winings made a motion to recommend approval of a conditional use permit to the Board of Aldermen per staff recommendation. The motion was seconded by Josh Corson and unanimously approved by the members.
CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT – SECOND UNIT – 10 EAST BRENTMOOR PARK
David Williams, project architect, was in attendance at the meeting.
5 Susan Istenes explained that this is a request for a conditional use permit to allow a 460 square foot second unit on the second floor of the detached garage. The 1.76-acre property is located in the Brentmoor Park Subdivision and has a zoning designation of R-1 Large Lot Single Family Dwelling District. On January 20, 2015, the Architectural Review Board approved plans for a 3- car detached garage at the northeast corner of the lot. At the time of approval, the plans indicated that the second floor of the garage would be unfinished. The applicant now proposes that the second floor be used as a 460-square-foot second living unit.A second unit (carriage house/granny unit) is a type of accessory structure, either attached or detached, which provides complete, independent living facilities for one or more persons including permanent provisions for living, sleeping, eating, cooking and sanitation and is located on the same site as the principal residence. Susan noted that second units are permitted subject to approval of a conditional use permit as per Article VII of this Chapter with certain criteria contained in Section 405.330 of the City’s Zoning Regulations. Staff is of the opinion that the proposed second unit meets the requirements contained in the regulations governing second units. Provided the structure is used in accordance with the requirements for second units, staff believes it will be adequately screened and buffered from neighboring properties and will therefore have minimal impact on the neighborhood. Susan stated that staff recommends approval of the Conditional Use Permit to the Board of Aldermen with the following conditions:
1. All conditions of Chapter 405, Article II, Section 405.330, shall be adhered to.
2. That the applicant record a deed restriction pursuant to item 3 under ‘Criteria for Review” and submit proof of the required deed restriction to the City prior to the issuance of a Building Permit.
Mr. Williams indicated that he has nothing to add.
Acting Chairman Reim asked if there were any questions or comments from the members.
Josh Corson asked if there are going to be any more changes to this property.
Mr. Williams stated that he thinks this could be the end.
Acting Chairman Reim asked if there were any questions or comments from the audience.
None were received.
Being no further questions or comments, Josh Corson made a motion to recommend approval of a conditional use permit to the Board of Aldermen per staff recommendations. The motion was seconded by Mark Winings and unanimously approved by the members.
6 SITE PLAN/ARCHITECTURAL REVIEW – MAJOR ADDITION TO SINGLE FAMILY RESIDENCE – 938 SOUTH CENTRAL AVENUE
Blair and Scott Mehlman, developers, were in attendance at the meeting.
Susan Istenes explained that this is a request for review of the site plan associated with the proposed construction of a 1,128 square foot addition. The 8,971-square-foot site is located on the east side of South Central Drive, just north of Clayton Road, and has a zoning designation of R-2 Single Family Dwelling District. The existing 2-story home measures 1,680 square feet, and the proposed project consists of the construction of a 2-story, 1,128-square-foot rear addition. Because the size of the addition is greater than 50 percent of the existing home, site plan review is required. The applicant has submitted approval from the subdivision trustees. No new HVAC units are proposed. Two existing HVAC units are located on the north side of the home and are screened by a 4-foot tall wood fence. Trash will be stored in a new, 40-square-foot trash enclosure adjacent to the driveway and will be screened by a wooden fence and gate. The existing and proposed impervious coverage on site is 29.9 percent. The proposed impervious coverage is 36 percent which is below the maximum allowable impervious coverage of 55 percent. The existing storm water runoff, according to the MSD 15 year, 20 minute calculation, is 0.48 cubic feet per second (CFS). The proposed runoff is 0.515 CFS, which represents an increase in 0.035 CFS. To mitigate the increase in storm water runoff, the downspouts from the addition will be piped to two pop up bubblers in the rear yard. The Public Works Department has reviewed the site plan and finds the storm water plan acceptable. The landscape plan shows the removal of two trees totaling 62 caliper inches, all of which require onsite replacement. The landscape plan proposes 24-caliper-inches of new deciduous and broadleaf evergreen trees, resulting in a 38-caliper-inch deficiency which requires a payment of $4,560 into the City’s Forestry Fund. The City’s contracted landscape architect is of the opinion that the proposed trees are suitable for the site and the existing trees to remain are shown to be protected and preserved per City guidelines. Exterior lighting is proposed on the rear of the addition and will not exceed 75 watts. Susan stated that the proposed addition is compatible with the design and materials of the existing home and surrounding homes in the neighborhood and that storm water will be adequately managed on site, and the landscape plan provides for a variety of new trees that are suitable for the area. The height, setbacks, and impervious coverage as proposed are in conformance with the requirements of the R-2 Single Family Dwelling District. Staff is of the opinion that the project meets the criteria for site plan approval and recommends approval with the following conditions:
1. That the applicant pay $4,560 into the City’s Forestry Fund prior to the issuance of a building permit.
2. To ensure the future maintenance and operation of the piped downspouts, the applicant shall record the approved site plan with St. Louis County, and submit proof of recording to the City prior to the issuance of a building permit.
7 Mr. B Mehlman thanked the members for the opportunity to present this project. He indicated that this is the third renovation project they’ve done in Clayton in one and a half years. He stated that they are happy to comply with staff recommendations.
Acting Chairman Reim voiced his concern about the amount of water running onto the property to the rear (east) property.
Mr. B Mehlman informed the members that they spoke with those neighbors and they plan to mitigate the run-off.
Acting Chairman Reim asked if there is any way to save the two trees.
Mr. B Mehlman indicated that the addition impacts those trees.
Josh Corson asked if it was time to make a motion.
Acting Chairman Reim responded “yes” if the application is ready to revise the storm water mitigation plan.
Mr. S Mehlman informed the members that they met with all the neighbors and that they are on board to mitigate run-off in whatever way needed to fix the water problem.
Mark Winings asked if that will be a condition of approval.
Louis Clayton informed the members that the Planning staff relies on the City’s civil engineer when it comes to water mitigation but if this Board has concern, the plan can be looked at again.
Acting Chairman Reim asked if there were any questions or comments from the audience.
None were received.
City Attorney O’Keefe suggested approving the site plan subject to staff’s reconsideration of the plan to be sure steps are taken to optimize water run-off mitigation.
Being no further questions or comments, Mark Winings made a motion to approve the site plan per staff recommendations and that staff re-review the storm water mitigation plan to review water flow. The motion was seconded by Josh Corson and unanimously approved by the members.
The architectural aspects of the project were now up for review.
Susan Istenes explained that the proposed addition is located at the rear of the home and will be constructed of red brick. The height of the addition is +/- 22 feet from grade to the mid-point of the
8 roof. The proposed roof of the addition will be clad in black architectural asphalt shingles, and white windows are proposed. All building materials will match those on the existing home. An existing concrete driveway is located on the southern edge of the site and provides access from the rear alley to an existing rear entry garage. The existing driveway will remain and the applicant proposes to enlarge the driveway +/- 210 square feet using the same material. With respect to driveways, the City’s Architectural Guidelines read as follows:
To eliminate the appearance of "a sea of concrete", the driveway should be exposed aggregate, brick pavers or stamped concrete.
Staff is of the opinion that the requirement for driveway materials is meant to apply to driveways accessible from a main street due to their visibility from public streets. The existing driveway is only accessible from the rear alley and is not visible from the street; therefore, staff supports the use of concrete in the driveway expansion. The project as proposed is in conformance with the requirements of the R-2 Single Family Dwelling District and the Architectural Review Guidelines. Staff is of the opinion that the proposed design of the addition is consistent with existing design and materials on the home and on other homes in the neighborhood and staff recommends approval as submitted.
Mr. B Mehlman asked if there were any questions.
Samples of the window, roofing material and brick were shown as well as photos of the existing house.
Acting Chairman Reim asked about the driveway.
Louis Clayton indicated that it is being expanded.
Acting Chairman Reim asked if it is concrete.
Louis Clayton replied “yes”.
Acting Chairman Reim asked if the addition will be visible from the street.
Mr. B Mehlman replied “no”.
Acting Chairman Reim asked if the blue awning will be removed.
Mr. B Mehlman indicated that it may be removed. He indicated that they plan to add landscaping.
Sherry Eisenberg asked if they are losing a window in a back bedroom.
9 Acting Chairman Reim noted that the bedroom Sherry is referring to is noted as room 205; it will only contain one window.
Mr. B Mehlman concurred.
Acting Chairman Reim referred to the brick, asking if they will get a color closer to the existing brick.
Mr. S Mehlman indicated that it is impossible to match exactly.
Acting Chairman Reim stated that he hopes they will get closer to what’s existing than the sample they brought.
Mark Winings asked if the existing house will get a new roof to match the addition.
Mr. B Mehlman replied “no”. He indicated that the roof on the existing structure was replaced about a year ago.
Acting Chairman Reim asked if there were any audience questions or comments.
None were received.
Mark Winings asked about the materials.
Susan Istenes stated that it will be put on the record to match the materials as close as possible to existing and that staff can review.
Acting Chairman Reim solicited a motion.
Josh Corson made a motion to approve. The motion was seconded by Mark Winings and unanimously approved by the Board.
DRIVEWAY REPLACEMENT – SINGLE FAMILY RESIDENCE – 7444 WYDOWN BOULEVARD
John Heller, owner, and Elizabeth Heller, sister and attorney, were in attendance at the meeting.
Susan Istenes explained that this is a request for approval to replace an existing asphalt driveway with asphalt.The subject property is located on the south side of Wydown Boulevard between Glenridge and Audubon Drives, and has a zoning designation of R-2 Single-Family Dwelling District. The site contains a 2-story single-family home. The applicant’s contractor recently began to remove the existing asphalt driveway with the intent of replacing it in the same location with the same materials. The City informed the applicant that new, replaced and expanded driveways must
10 be constructed with approved material (exposed aggregate, brick paver, or stamped concrete). The applicant has chosen to request approval of the asphalt driveway from the Architectural Review Board. With respect to driveways, the City’s Architectural Guidelines read as follows:
Driveways and Aprons To eliminate the appearance of "a sea of concrete", the driveway should be exposed aggregate, brick pavers or stamped concrete. Aprons are to be constructed to the Department of Public Works standards.
Asphalt is not a permissible material for driveways; consequently the previous asphalt driveway and the newly replaced driveway do not conform to the current Architectural Review Guidelines. Since the adoption of the Architectural Review Guidelines in 1996, the city has required new driveways to be constructed of exposed aggregate, brick pavers, or stamped concrete. However, in the not so recent past, the Planning Department has permitted asphalt and other non-conforming driveways to be replaced with the same material as long as the driveway was not being relocated or increased in size. Approximately 3 years ago after reviewing the driveway/retaining wall replacement practice, it was determined that driveways and retaining walls that were non- conforming to the Architectural Review Guidelines, upon reconstruction, widening or extension, could only be replaced in conformance with the current architectural standards in place at the time. This requirement is consistent with the non-conforming provisions of the Zoning Regulations which serve to eliminate non-conforming situations over time, taking advantage of the opportunity to bring them up to adopted standards when they are changed to a significant degree. To allow the continuous replacement of a non-conforming driveway would only serve to perpetuate the existence of an undesirable single family residential driveway surface theoretically forever, or until a property owner voluntarily brings the surface up to current standards. Existing non-conforming driveways may be repaired and maintained without being required to upgrade to an approved material. Susan stated that in order to preserve and enhance the visual appeal of the City’s residential neighborhoods, staff is of the opinion that when replaced, non-conforming asphalt driveways should be constructed with an approved material and therefore, staff recommends to deny the request as submitted.
Acting Chairman Reim asked if they received an estimate to do the driveway in exposed aggregate or stamped concrete.
Ms. Heller replied “no”.
Mr. Heller informed the members that they have lived in this home 19 years and that their driveway has been a pile of destroyed asphalt for 3 ½ weeks now.
Acting Chairman Reim asked when the City allowed like for like replacement.
Susan Istenes stated that the like for like replacement policy was re-examined 3 years ago.
11 Sherry Eisenberg asked if that was due to aesthetics.
Susan Istenes replied “yes”.
Mr. Heller stated that 98% of the driveways on Wydown between Hanley Road and Big Bend Boulevard are asphalt.
Susan Istenes stated that this is a challenging issue as permits are not required for driveways. She stated that she knows people do work without City approval or knowledge. She stated that people should check with the City prior to commencing work.
Ms. Heller stated that in that case it may be better to require a permit. She stated that she would be happy to read her memo into the record.
Sally Eisenberg asked if the contractor should check with City requirements before beginning projects.
Acting Chairman Reim stated that the formal mechanism (permit) does not apply here.
City Attorney O’Keefe asked if her client agrees to upgrade the driveway in conformance with the ARB Guidelines at the time if in the future 50% or more of the driveway is replaced and a deed restriction.
Ms. Heller (and Mr. Heller) replied “yes”.
City Attorney O’Keefe suggested tabling this in light of the circumstances as the project is half completed, but not to undermine the policy.
Susan Istenes asked why table.
Acting Chairman Reim stated that it’s the middle of the project that he is sure everyone would like to see completed.
Kevin O’Keefe questioned if this would be better handled by this Board or administratively.
Ms. Heller stated that she can meet with Mr. O’Keefe.
Sherry Eisenberg questioned future similar issues.
Acting Chairman Reim stated that is something that needs to be discussed.
12 Rick Bliss, Clayton resident and member of the Board of Adjustment, stated that he does not know the applicants and that the City tries to accommodate its residents. He stated that stamped concrete versus regular concrete is still concrete; adding that he has an asphalt driveway as well.
Acting Chairman Reim commented that this seems to occur frequently. He suggested revising the language.
City Attorney O’Keefe stated that if a non-conformity is abandoned it can’t go back or if destroyed it can’t be rebuilt without meeting current requirements.
Being no further questions or comments, Mark Winings made a motion to table. The motion was seconded by Josh Corson and unanimously approved by the Board.
****************************************************************************
Ron Reim welcomed Sherry to the Commission.
Josh Corson asked how they are going to handle the driveway issue.
Susan Istenes stated that there’s also an issue of increasing impervious coverage by doing at- grade work.
Acting Chairman Reim suggested revising the language in the ARB Guidelines.
Susan Istenes indicated that the driveway issue has come before this Board two times now and that the City expects a certain look; she stated that the language needs to be clarified.
Josh Corson stated the more people will repair versus replace.
Susan Istenes stated that staff can do a better job getting the word out. She stated that another issue is retaining walls and the materials used for them. She informed the members that in an effort to assist citizens, the city has softened its requirements for securing fence permits as a survey is no longer needed. She stated that staff could reach out to contractors.
Being no further question or comments, this meeting adjourned at 6:40 p.m.
________________________________ Recording Secretary
The transcription of the May 11, 2015 special meeting was presented for approval. The transcription was approved as prepared, after having been previously distributed to each member.
13
A brief discussion regarding the Ash trees in the City took place.
__________________________ Recording Secretary