February 7, 2022 — Meeting Transcript

Okay. Chair Steve Lichtenfeld?

David Gipson?

David Gibson?

Helen DiFate.

Helen DeFate.

Bob Denlow. George Hedick.

Bob Dunlow. George Hedick.

Here.

Carolyn Gatiss. Here. Ira Berkowitz.

Lisa Smith, This is for the site plan review. The subject property is 15,183 square feet and is located on South Central Avenue between Bonham and Shaw Park Drive. The applicant proposes to demolish the existing building and construct an 11-story, 118,275 square foot hotel building containing guest rooms, meeting rooms, and a restaurant. This project was previously before the plan Commission on February 19 2019 and received approval from the Commission with several conditions which are outlined in the staff report. The developer did not obtain an approved building permit for the project within one year per code site plan approval shall be void unless a building permit has been issued within one year of the date of approval, therefore this required an extension prior to February 19 2020 which was not obtained. Subsequently, on January 11, 2022, the Board of Aldermen approved a request to waive the time limit within which an extension request is to be filed and approved an extension of the planned unit development permit deadline to commence construction through June 30th of this year. However, the site plan similarly requires a time extension to be granted by the plan commission and the re-approval of the plan submitted for site plan review. The developer based its request for the extension on the COVID pandemic and funding for the capital markets and construction financing associated with hotel development. The developer has resubmitted the plans that were previously approved by the plan commission. Staff is not aware of any change of circumstance in the area, which would call into question the design and materials of the building that were previously approved. Staff's recommendation is to waive the one-year time limit and extend the site plan approval with the following conditions. First, the entire north-south alley shall be replaced in full with end-to-end a completion of construction. Second, identify the existing concrete median extending north and south Central Avenue on the civil sheets and agree to escrow the funds to install the median extension. Third, the decorative pavers shown in the right-of-way shall be concrete in accordance with city streetscape standards. Four, proposed street trees shown on the landscape plan shall be of the variety of columnar oak species. 5. The applicant shall install 7 bicycle racks along the block or on-site. 6. The applicant shall provide information to address outstanding comments from the CDB Traffic Impact Study and the parking memo, both dated February 18, 2019. 7. The owner shall execute a use and maintenance agreement with the City for canopy and improvements located in right-of-way. Eight, the approved development plan and planned unit development ordinance shall be recorded with St. Louis County and proof of reporting submitted to the city prior to the issuance of a building permit. And nine, work with the city to secure three additional public parking spaces on the street to the south for professional valet. The original site plan staff review Excuse me, the original site plan staff report from February of 19 is included in the report for this year. The advice of that report written combined the reports for the rezoning site plan and planned unit development. As the planned unit development has been extended by the Board of Aldermen, only the site plan review is under consideration at this time. And that concludes my presentation.

Hi. This is Steven Anderson here. I think we're in agreement with the previous approval that was given to us a couple of years ago. back in, what was it, February of 2019. And if the conditions remain the same, we would be very happy to accept them.

Yeah, I mean, I think the only one out of the seven staff level recommendations was the requirement to secure the 20 additional parking spaces that we have, we disagree with based on our evaluation of the site and that Use of the underground portion of our controlled parking area allows us to valet on the spot, getting us really up to the quantity of parking spaces we're comfortable to operate this size of a property with. Urban environments like this close to public transit as well as the use of Uber, Lyft and other rideshare services have reduced the quantity of parking space is needed. and we think that we should be adequate with what we had today.

I think we're in agreement with them. Sorry, I was reading the notes from the end of the staff level report. I apologize. Let me double check. Yeah, all nine of those are acceptable. Yes.

No.

And Nate, would you like to address that?

I could share the drawings if that helps. So the civil plans, we're talking about the median along in Central Avenue? Yes.

I think the intention was that that was not going to be in our scope, correct me if I'm wrong, Sam. Yeah, that's

correct. So we were just supposed to escrow agreed upon funds and then how that was to be designed and constructed was up to the city.

Mr. Chair, I believe that came from the traffic impact study that was put together for this project. So the specific design wasn't included in the plan documents, but the existence of the median was something that the traffic plan had called for. Okay.

That is correct.

PB, Jorge Boone & If if I remember correctly, this the property line bisects that space, and this is the edge of the parking garage there in the corner and we're set back from that property line. PB, Jorge boone & So there is a space between the parking garage in our building

The space between, yes.

Yeah. I think today there's a fence already at the end of that that I would assume is

between the two buildings to control access. the paid hard surface that it is today because today it's a hard surface concrete and that would just be restored and then the fence would be enclosed because i'm in agreement with you i don't want this weird yeah opening

yes there right there would be the fence backup that was originally there or one that looks better than that probably but Don D' Because that's right at our front door, but we would restore that. Karen Hollweg,

Don D' Like a metal picket fencing, but we can whatever spaces between there, we would we would close off.

Okay, George. No, I was a participant when this first came up and I have no additional questions at this time.

Okay, Helen. No additional questions.

David. Uh, nothing additional. Um, everything's the same from the previous approval. So thank you.

And Ira. Well, I just, so I understand what we're doing here today or tonight. This plan was originally approved, but it was also approved with staff recommendations, correct? From before. And I'm wondering, and I think there was some mention by the developer about maybe not agreeing with one or two of these staff recommendations, or I might have heard that wrong. But are we also focused on the prior staff recommendations that have not yet been fulfilled?

So just to jump in here, there were original staff recommendations in 2019 that were not adopted by the plan commission at that time. So the staff recommendations before you today are the same that were in the final motion from the plan commission in 2019.

Okay, so they've been accumulated now that the final actual set of recommendations is what you have on page two of our of our agenda. Yes. Okay. All right. Well, I guess one of my questions has to do with the bicycles and I know that was in the Prior staff recommendation, are we gonna accommodate the seven bicycle racks that were requested? Yes. Okay. I remember sort of wondering about how you're dealing with parking in a situation on a street where that, I know the median is gonna get extended and now you'll have basically one lane of traffic And then will there be parking in front of the hotel? Is that what you're planning or just you're going to carve out, are you going to cut in some space for drop off?

Yeah, this drawing here shows the drop off. Those are three parking spaces, which if you'll read in the notes were intended to be picked up as valet spaces from the city. That was mentioned in the notes. And then they will leave that drop-off zone because this will be valet for the most part. And they will exit, just go straight south, plant south and enter that parking deck entrance that's right there to go to the existing underground parking that is used for or previously used for the police vehicles but is now controlled by this property.

So will people who are coming for drop-off Will they have to take the valet or what if they don't want to?

Well, as anybody else in the city, they're free to park within the deck, the public deck that's there. But it is, they cannot park in the drop-off area. If they want to self-park, they can. But our intent is to push those people to valet.

So you think three spaces out front is sufficient for a hotel with how many units, how many rooms?

Dave Kuntz, 100 or 207207.

Dave

Kuntz , it's it's tight but that's what our property. Dave KuntZ, A lots right there on the front of it, so we don't really have a whole lot else to work with. Dave Kuntzt, That being said, I mean the way to overcome that really is with staffing. Dave Kuntzz, You have to staff your valley per your flow and if your flow is heavy and you only have a few queuing spots, then, then you have to staff, a little bit heavier. And as things ramp up, we will have to do that, I'm sure.

Is there some way that we can enforce that, Steve, or make sure that they staff it adequately? This is going to be double parking over there. There's no way around it. No.

Yeah, I mean, if someone stops in the middle of the street, then and stops the flow of traffic, then I would expect blue lights behind them because they can't just park their car in the middle of the street. Beyond that, I don't know of a way to enforce it. I mean, there's properties that have three drop offs or three spots for drop off all over the place, not just Clayton, Missouri.

I sympathize. Obviously, it's a tight space and tough to deal with, but I certainly hate to see a traffic jam at rush hour with people coming to the hotel and then people trying to get out of Clayton.

The benefit we have, too, with the location is that the underground area in the garage is literally right next door. So the valets won't be sprinting several blocks or anything. So they're right next door. Yeah,

it's a quick drop-off.

a drawing showing that lower level parking just right adjacent to our drop-off.

Yeah, hopefully people will arrive by Metro. Yeah, that would help out a lot.

Well, and not just the police, but guest satisfaction will go down very quickly and we live and die by guest satisfaction. And if they have issues getting in and out of the property, we will be forced by our own pocketbook to fix that problem or we won't have high paying guests coming to our property. So I mean, above and beyond the police issues, it's a dollars and cents issue to us if we don't control that flow.

Right. I'm just suggesting, I don't know what your solution would be if it happens. You know, I'm just not sure what you have available to me.

anything

I have one additional comment, Mr. Chair. The only thing that's changed from 2019 to now from a regulatory standpoint, this kind of dawned on me just a few minutes ago, is the outdoor lighting standards. If we could just add a condition that the project would be compliant with those standards, and I think it is just briefly looking at the exterior lighting plan, but I just want to make sure that that's part of the staff review when the building permits are submitted. Specifically, that section 405.360 of the Code of Ordinances. We just want to make sure they comply with that particular section.

Before we move to that, I'm sorry, Mr. Chairman, what is the time limit of the extension?

We put that in the recommendation, please. I believe it says June 30th, 2022. There it is, yes. Thank you.

Second.

Okay. This is for the architectural review approval. Similar to the site plan approval, there are code requirements for obtaining a building permit within one year of architectural review board approval. The developer based its requests on the COVID pandemic and the capital markets and construction financing for hotel development. Similar to this site plan review, the developer has resubmitted the plans that were previously approved by the architectural review board. City staff is not aware of any change or circumstance in the area which would call into question the design and materials of the building that were previously approved. Staff's recommendation is to waive the one year time limit and extend the architectural review board approval with the following condition as noted in the original 2019 approval, that the applicant shall remove the canopy sign from the proposed plans. And that concludes my presentation.

Unless you tell me I interpreted this one wrong again, which may be true, but the Mark Warren – sign that they asked us to remove in the notes was not the canopy sign it was sign a and sign a is to the left of the canopy on the would look wall or would look well, but the vertical. Mark Warren – The vertical strip wall and they can you pull up the drawings yeah that's sign. Mark Warren – That was mentioned in the meeting notes from the previous approval and I would still prefer to remove sign a. I feel that this AC Hotel Clayton is iconic to the brand and will bring a very urban upscale look to the front of this property. But that's really my only note on that is hopefully a little clarity.

George? No other comments except for the same condition here. I think we need to have the June 30th deadline inside here instead of just an open extension. Okay.

I agree with Steve, Carolyn, and George.

Nothing further. Ira? Yeah, I agree that the sign is attractive. I like that. I think that it should be kept. And I agree with George that we need to reinforce the start date. Other than that, no comments.

No

This is for the review of the design and materials associated with driveway modifications, a rear deck and minor facade changes. The 6,000 square foot site is located on the south side of Kingsbury Boulevard between North Forsyth and North Brentwood. The property has a zoning designation of R2 single family dwelling district and is located in the Clayton Gardens Urban Design District. In August of 2021, the ARB approved the demolition of the existing home in the construction of a 3,157 square foot single family residence. And on October 4th, 2021, the ARB approved a new detached garage. The applicant has proposed the following changes to the approved principal structure. One, the addition of a basement window with window wall on the left elevation and two windows on the right elevation along the driveway. Two, the addition of rear composite deck in an interior elevation Three, the removal of two windows on the rear elevation and the addition of a new door. Excuse me. And four, the addition of a two foot grass strip in the driveway. The proposed deck will replace an approved wood landing and steps. While staff has no objection to the design and materials of the proposed deck, the deck increases the amount of impervious coverage on the site. At the time of approval of the new detached garage in October of 2021, The proposed impervious coverage was maxed out at 55%. To address the increase in impervious coverage associated with the deck, the applicant has proposed a two-foot strip of grass in the 10-foot wide driveway, which will lead from the back of the sidewalk to the back edge of the home. The proposed grass strip results in a ribbon driveway, which is prohibited per architectural design standards for residential driveways. Staff is of the opinion that the proposed deck and driveway changes should not be approved. Impervious coverage in the Clayton Gardens Urban Design District is more restrictive than typical residential zoning districts to ensure that infill and redevelopment is compatible with the established character. The resulting ribbon driveway necessary to achieve the 55% maximum with the proposed deck is not complementary with other driveways in the area. Staff's recommendation is to approve the changes to the elevation of the home only and to deny the proposed driveway and decking changes. That concludes my presentation.

If the applicant could raise their hand, I will pull them over to the panelist side. Here we go.

Mike Thompson, Oh yes i'm Mike Thompson Thompson design group or the architect on the project um. Mike Thompson, As far as you have you've seen the the minor changes to the elevations essentially we've we've added more glass. to the project, so more windows. And even where we took out the windows in the back, the door is larger, considerably larger. So as far as I think just the concerns on the deck, from the deck that was originally approved, yes, we've added another 76. We're asking to add another 76 square feet of deck. to the project, which works out to an impervious coverage of 0.65%. I guess we didn't realize that the ribbon driveway was not allowed. We've seen one on 8129 Pershing. There's a ribbon driveway on a fairly new house. So assuming from that that we could do that is why we propose that. John Gerstle, um we don't need nearly that large of a of area to offset this small amount of deck so that could be moved further to the rear. John Gerstle , If you're not if you don't want to see it from the street or or something else could be done, I mean it's it's equivalent to like taking six inches of driveway away making the driveway six inches narrower. So a fairly small change. We're still considerably smaller, or the original residence that was there was up about 56% impervious surface, so we'd still be below that. So in either case, we've made the site better.

Mike? Yes, I think so, unless you have other questions.

So I mean just another thought it was I was throwing out thoughts to the to the owner today was is basically is another way of doing it would be like a previous pavers type thing back by the garage turnaround. something that you wouldn't see from the street. I'm assuming the ribbon driveway is a visual thing that you think is incompatible with the neighborhood there. So I said, if we could do something with that turnaround pad, There are several pavers that give you 20, 30% pervious water can go through them, that kind of thing or something like that. I

Right, right.

Steve, I think you have summed it up very well. I am not in favor of using a ribbon driveway here. And as both you and Carolyn have stated, bring something. Maybe there's somewhere else that you can do it, pick up that small amount of square footage. But I'm not in favor of the ribbon driveway at all.

Ellen? I would agree. I am not in favor of the ribbon strip in the driveway. And even if it weren't in the guidelines, the design parameters, it's still, when you think of the snow that we've got now, how do you clear the snow off that narrow strip of grass? Does the bottom of the car clear it? It may if you hit it at the right time, but if it starts to freeze, then no, the bottom of the cart probably won't clear it. And then you'll be out there or someone will be out there with a shovel or a snowblower and the grass that looks beautiful in the spring will no longer look beautiful. You will have mud when it comes to the spring. So I don't see a grass strip as ever being practical, except in climates where you don't get snow or snow is a rare occasion. How wide is the driveway?

It's 10 feet right now.

You realize that highways The lane that you drive in at 60 plus miles an hour on a highway is 11 feet wide. Right. You know, can you pick up six inches the length of that driveway?

And that would do basically if we picked it up while the driveway is 78 feet long, we need to pick up 39 square feet. So that's why I said, yeah, six inches of driveway would do it. We had a nine and a half foot driveway, which I don't think is impractical in that you're probably going five miles an hour or less. So it's not really difficult to keep control. A normal parking space that we all pull into is nine feet wide. So it's even less than that. And we don't seem to run into each other all that much.

No, I would... say reduce the size of the driveway and then I would be comfortable with the deck because you would be meeting the requirements. And I think as Steve mentioned, it's important to observe the requirements and not start saying, well, it's only so many square feet. There's a number and I think we need to abide by it. So my thoughts.

PB David Ensign, I guess my only question would be for staff as to whether or not we have a driveway with minimum. PB David Ensigne, The nine and a half so great solution if we don't. PB

Sarah Silver, I would need to look into that, but I don't believe that we do. PB David

Ensigner, And Susan I know I think you're on. PB David Ensiger, If you can hear us I don't know if you're aware of any driveway with regulation.

I'm sorry. I'm sitting here training Lori. Were you talking to me?

Yes. So we're talking about the driveway and they basically need to pick up an additional six inches or so on the driveway if possible. A possible solution would be to narrow the driveway from 10 feet down to nine and a half feet. And I was just curious as to whether or not there's a driveway minimum width in the code.

I don't

have a chance to pull it off just yet.

No, no, there isn't. There's width limits at the apron. Okay. I don't believe there's a width limit for that property at that address, so no.

Okay. Thank

you.

Thanks. Ira? Yeah, no, I think in light of we're talking Clayton gardens. And I think that the homes around there, they, they have quite a bit more green space than probably others. And so I think we can't be, we can't, it's already, it's already not in my, in my opinion, it's already nonconforming with the neighborhood as it is, but if you can get within the rule, I guess you get within the rule. So, but it's gotta be within the rule.

further comment? Well, my only other question would be, I know right now you're requiring or the civil engineer on his plan is figuring the deck as a 50% impervious, whereas I think at least practically on a composite deck, I would guess at least 95% of the water falls through the deck onto the dirt below. So in a real world situation, it's not 50% impervious. Now whether we have to figure it that way, I mean, that would be the other way that would make up the difference without having to do anything else was just to consider what truly how much water a deck truly pushes away.

If it is slotted, 75%.

Impervious.

Okay. Okay. Mr. Chairman, if I may, with respect to the driveway width, section 405.3650 of the Clayton City Code provides that each required parking space shall be provided satisfactory egress to a street or alley by a surface driveway. The width of such driveways and arrangements shall be approved by the Director of Public Works. So there is no A six-inch adjustment would appear to be in conformity if approved by the Director of Public Works.

Not up to us. Okay. Thank you, Kevin. It's not up to us. It's up to the Department of Public Works.

Correct. But the plan being 9 feet 6 inches instead of 10 would not be contrary to any standards that you're applying in this review. Right. Yeah.

Okay.

PB, John Gerstle:" Okay gotcha

right, it is like, as you said, it is we're not even 1% so right but it's an important percent but but yeah it's it's still a small problem well. PB,

Well, just I think in that case, the motion would be to approve with staff recommendations, et cetera, and subject to the applicant making adjustments, plan adjustments approved by city staff so as to bring it into conformity with the permissible impervious service requirements.

Thank you. Did we ask for a participant? Any attendees to speak? Did we ask for that? Yes.

No, not at the moment.

a second? Second. Thank you, Ira. By the way, she was done. I wasn't sure when she was going

to be done. I know. I could keep going, but no.

Okay.

I am.

Steve, Mr. Chairman, board members, I'm really happy to show you what we've been working on for the last several months and get your input on the conceptual design so we can continue on with the project. This will be our second tower building in Clayton, so we're really excited to be back at Clayton and present this particular project. So do we call up the drawings or how does this

Very good, thank you. The 39,921 square foot site is comprised of multiple parcels located at the northeast corner of the intersection of South Emerson Avenue and Carondelet Avenue. The properties have a zoning designation of HDC, High Density Commercial District. The site is currently improved with three buildings of various stories, including the Sterling Bank building on the corner of Bemiston Avenue and Carondelet Avenue. Surrounding land uses include office, hotel, and institutional uses, as well as public parking. The proposed project consists of the demolition of the existing buildings and the construction of a 427,800 square foot 20-story mixed-use building measuring 225 feet in height. The building will contain 5,500 square feet of ground floor retail space 291,000 square feet of residential space comprising 270 apartment units and associated amenities and 12,650 square feet of office space. The building will be constructed primarily of concrete terracotta or glass fiber reinforced concrete walls with accents of metal panels and architectural reveals. The applicant is seeking the PD zoning and unit development as the proposed project differs from the zoning ordinance in terms of the number of square footage required for each residential unit. The proposed footprint does not meet the front setback and the floor area ratio exceeds the maximum allowed. A project of this scale requires a thorough staff review prior to a public hearing. The project will be reviewed and is subject to comments by the Planning, Public Works, and Fire Departments, as well as the City's contracted consultants, and will be before both the Plan Commission and the Board of Aldermen. Staff recommends that the Plan Commission Architectural Review Board consider the proposal and provide input. This is conceptual review only, and therefore any comments made in this report or at the meeting, either by the applicant staff or the Commission members, are not binding. Comments from the planning and public works departments are noted on page two of the staff report. And that concludes my presentation.

Very good. I'll do that. Anissa, sorry I tried to jump ahead of you. I didn't realize that you were reading the report to us. Let's see if we get the drawings up. Mr.

Chairman, would you please have Jack two individuals sitting with him for the record, please.

Sure. With me is Josh Goodman, who is the director of the project on the architectural side, HDA Architects, and Jerry Kryland, who's developer with Green Street.

Thank you. Okay.

Very good. So on your screen, you should see a shot of the existing conditions, the existing corner. Everybody see that?

Good. Okay, then we're well connected. So this is a shot looking southwest at Sterling Bank on the corner that you're familiar with. And then behind it is the eight-story, what they call the Clayton Tower building. It will come down and adjacent to that is a three-level Natalie Gale office building. So those three buildings will come down and that'll take us all the way to Centene's parking garage. And then to the left there, you can see some other shots looking down the street. Probably the one you're most interested in probably is the center one. The view southeast shows the Brown Plaza Hotel, which is directly across the street. So we have an existing site survey here and a couple things to point out. It does show the three building footprint there, but along the alley it's existing 20-foot wide alley that we will widen to 24-foot wide. We'll be removing the electrical poles that are along the alley and we'll eliminate any parking in the alley. So right now there's some surface parking and then there's an entry to the parking garage the cursor is. So we'll eliminate that too. So this is a clean up the alley and that we won't have that traffic to contend with. On Beamiston, it's not shown here, but there's an entry to the Sterling Bank building. So we'll be removing that and replacing that with the streetscape and lighting. And then on Carondelet, there are actually two entries to the parking garage and we're gonna eliminate one of those, and we'll replace that with streetscape and lighting. So that's what we'll be doing to the site This is a little drawing that we put together to just show the heights around site, so our building is 225 foot tall. And you can see the buildings to the east of us get up to 400 feet tall with the Centene project. The Pierre Laclede building is 220 and 300 feet tall. So we're a little lower than most of the buildings to the East of us. And just for reference, the project we designed at 212 South Merrimack is 280 foot tall. So I just wanted to put that in there so you can get a feel for how tall the building is. And then on our site plan here, you can see on Carondelet, we've got the entry. We've removed an entry and we have the entry to the parking garage where we'll have 350 spaces to support the development. Along the Carondelet Avenue, we will have a landscape area all the way through there with the landscape with it. So we'll have a kind of a sculpture garden along there. We'll commission an artist to work with us in that regard. As we get to the corner, we have the entry to the retail bank, Sterling Bank. It's shown in blue there. The next entry is to the lobby for the multifamily. And then we have an entry to first floor retail. And that's shown in blue. There along the alley is loading and trash dumpsters and HAB-Jacques Juilland, generators and Union not you electric they're no longer around amaranth transformers and so forth, on the very right hand side we've got a setback there that we're going to have green area for a dog park where the building tenants. of the project. So that pretty well describes the plan on the site. And you can see we've shown trees at specified distances with the city. We're adding quite a few trees along the street. And then we've got a whole series of drawings that illustrate the project pretty well for conceptual so that you understand it. I don't think we need to go through and labor over all the straight elevations, but let me just take you through this. On the southeast, the right-hand drawing there, we have a pretty nice view of the parking garage with a green wall on the facade of it. So that's something different for Clayton and we're pretty excited about that. On the top deck, we have an amenity area with a pool. The pool is shown in blue there. And then we've continued the deck over the parking. So we've introduced a green area, a green roof area, and some solar panels. So our occupants be looking down, they won't be looking at automobile parking. And then our building, the tan color there on the multifamily units is terracotta. And you can see that we've got it interrupted with balconies and windows. And at the corner, we have a glass corner on the roof. Beemiston side and the Gronlund side, it turns a corner and goes across the frontage on Beemiston. So you can see that there. And we've got some other elevations we'll get into shortly on that. But you can see the balconies that are part of the unit, similar to 212. And then that's a glass facade. On the rooftop, we poke up a little level there with an amenity area. with an outdoor area. Each side of it, look at east and look at west. So we'll look downtown to see the arch, I think. Maybe we can get around all those buildings. And we'll look to the west to see the sunset. So we'll end up with 15 levels of multifamily. So that's that above the amenity deck. We'll go to the next one. Here you can see... The alley side. So we've taken the alley side and up above the parking structure, and we've continued with the terracotta facade to the corner where we have the balconies to interrupt the materials. And then we pick up the glass and turn the glass down. Now at the lower level, we've taken the glass a little farther. And then we've got a screen fabric. We need some open space, but it might be a better fabric metal panels similar to 212. And then on grade level, we've got all the back of house stuff with the loading docks and everything else that's required. On the left, you can see maybe a better view of the solar array and the green roof and the amenity deck. We've got some street views here. If you're looking at the... So on the screen, if you're looking at the right-hand one, you can see the green wall in the entry to the parking structure. Below that, we'll have a kind of gray area there. We'll have an architectural precast, kind of vertical ribbed. We're working on that detail. To the left of there, you can see first level bank and then we have a level of office above it and a level of amenity And then we've got an open amenity area that's adjacent to the pool. And then from that deck above, we have the multifamily. And then on the left, you can see the hookup at the top just for that gathering space and the outdoor viewing areas looking east and looking west. Here you can see on the right-hand side, you can get a better picture of the Bemiston Elevation. And you can see how we've interrupted the blazing with the amenity deck and then stack the multifamily above it. On the lower level, the second level, we have an outdoor area for Sterling Bank, an outdoor gathering area as part of their program. And you can see that cut out in the facade. And then to the left, you really see the fall off of the parking going, I mean, the alley going down to all the services. And then this is a closer look at the green wall, the facade of the garage. And we surrounded that with the terracotta. And then to the left, you can see all the blue is the office. And then above it is the residential. A little closer view of that. You can see on the flush front, we have a vertical wall Uh, Finn, that's a light line there. And then the rest of the glazing be buck blazing. And then the surround at the base is, uh, is a composite metal surround. And that's likewise same up above where the amenity level is and the multifamily starts above it. Uh, at the ground plane, we've got some planters in between the column in between a call native columns there, um, that We're in between the entries, so we've introduced the terracotta wall there with landscape material. And then you can see the entries, corner entry to the bank and then the center entry to the lobby, multifamily, and the one to the far left is to the retail space. And then up above, you get kind of a picture here of the glass window wall for the multifamily area. Then we'll have a horizontal member there that's aluminum at the slab edge, but interrupt the metal panel. I mean, interrupt the glazing and just be a slab cover. And then we're talking about a vertical butt glazed system there for the wall up above. So we have on the left, you can see the top level with the Mike Bruckner – interior amenity space, but the lighter shade of green each side looking East and West and then to the right of that you can see our typical floor layout where we have 18 units per floor for a total of 270 units. Mike Bruckner– And then the third floor amenity to the right of them is the shaded area that we're working on the layouts of that. Mike BruckNER – The fourth floor down to the left there is the is the interior amenity that we cut back and we create that covered area. and then to the outdoor pool deck. And then the third and fourth floor, well, the blue area right in the center there is just office space. That's about 10,800 square foot of office. So this is some precedent images to show you. The one on the left is the terracotta panels. So terracotta is a clay product, like a brick, only it's larger panels, more contemporary looking. And you can see that application there. You can see the center with the green wall where they're working on the green wall, man on the ladder. You can see below there the slab edge where the windows are on the multifamily. And then at the ground plane, you can see some of the composite metal and the treatment we're talking about. And then up above, you can see the blazing so the one on the left is pretty similar to what we're talking about. And then beyond that i've got elevation straight on elevations that i'll just say the same things about all materials, so I think I can turn it back over for questions.

No, sir.

That is correct. The Toronto Left Boulevard is falling about 13 feet from the corner to the entry.

No, it will come in on that level, Steve, and it will be a surface level there all the way around. So it's below the bank level because of the fallen grade. So it will be a service level at the entry and it just be into the embankment going to the lab, but it won't drill down into the site any farther. And those straight will be the ramp going up to the ramp of the of the additional parking for the residential.

Yeah, what I was trying to do was a site plan including the first floor plan. Right.

It will be about a thousand square feet.

I would assume so,

I think that's correct.

green area? We have the green area along Carondelet. in front of the building right there. And that's where we were talking about a landscape and sculpture area.

That I don't know yet, Steve. So we thought it'd be a great idea to have the solar panels and generate some power. Not certain how much we can get out of there, so we still need to do those studies with a consultant.

That's our concern too. So we had that entire area solar and then we did a shading study real quick and we said maybe we should have a green roof and less solar. So that's why we reduced it to what you see there. But we need to go through the analysis, the engineering analysis on that, which we'll do before we make our spittle.

We have the two bedroom units are average thousand 4050 square feet somewhere around there. They kind of vary the one bedroom average is about 750 square feet.

have some smaller units that are kind of like one bedroom with a balcony. We cut the balcony in and those are less than that. So they're at 705 square feet. They might get down to 685. Are they studio or

down to 630

an average. So we do have some units below the 750 square feet.

Sure. I would like to first start out to say that I appreciate seeing the green roof over the parking spots. It's been one of my complaints for a while is that we've got all these flat roofs and it's a lot of wasted space. And I think we could do a better job with that. So the green roofs over the parking, I really do appreciate. As far as the exterior of the building, I think we do need a little bit more articulation throughout, especially on the entrances to the commercial space. Looking at the plans, I just don't see that my eye is drawn to that very well. I kind of agree with Steven on the... transition between the terracotta and the glass. It is striking, but at the same time, in some ways I find it appealing and otherwise I don't find it appealing too. So I'm a little mixed on that one. A question though in the plans though, when you get down to it, it looks like there's only one loading dock for this building. And I thought that might be a little bit insufficient. So I would like, city may need to be looking at that one. And I did not see any bicycle racks in any of the drawings and I may have just missed it, but I'm wondering where those are at. But we haven't really moved to that detail yet. Okay, totally understand that one as well. And I'm sure the next detail I'm gonna get to as well is you're bringing a lot of sustainable attributes here to this building, electronic vehicle charging stations. Do you have plans to bring those in as well? Yes, we do. Great. OK, that's all I had. Thank you.

OK, Carolyn.

Yes, I would agree with Steve's comments on the elevations. I am particularly interested in that north elevation because when I walk, I'm coming from the north. And I think if you thought about the context, the adjacent buildings to the north along Bemisden are low buildings. They may change and they may never change. I have heard many times before, oh, the buildings, those low buildings will disappear. And the low buildings have not disappeared and it's been a considerable amount of time. So I think we do need to see context for the proposed project. And when you look at the context to the north along Bemiston, that north elevation of the project becomes very visible. And when you look at it on the sheet, the bird's eye view from the north, you've turned the corner nicely just so far. Yes, you need to have a loading dock and loading docks are never, great aesthetically, but they're a fact of life. And it is only one, so it won't be too bad. But you continue, you have fins along part of the parking garage, but then they disappear. I don't know that that part of the building, that lower portion where you have the solar array I don't know that that will disappear from view as you're walking south along North, along Binghamston. I think you will see it and you'll realize that the garage is handled, that portion of the building that is garage is handled in two different ways. The Eastern part is it'll be very visible that it's a garage. The western half will look like it's a garage, but there's been some decorative elements added to it, so you don't have this brutal garage facing you. It almost looks like, well, the budget ran out, so we stopped with the fins along that part of the garage. So I think the north elevation, the lower portion is not going to be as hidden as we all might hope. It will be very visible and unless we get some high rises where Cafe Napoli is and going down Bemiston headed south, that north elevation doesn't really enhance the other elevations. What you see first is something that is the least desirable elevation. So with all of that, I would work on the north elevation. I share Carolyn's comments about the green wall that plants, we all know some take off without any help. Others, with all the help in the world, don't want to do anything but curl up and die. So I think we need to plan for that eventuality. So I think you've got a good start. I'm looking forward to what we see next. Thank

you, Helen. Appreciate your comments. David?

I just want to say that I agree with the previous concerns with the building articulation. I think that's something that definitely needs to be considered on the north side, really on the west side as well, where I think it does mimic 212 to some extent, and they're almost facing each other. But also, I guess one of my bigger concerns is if you can go to that view from the south where the garage entrance is at, One thing that seems to hinder us somewhat here in Clayton and the downtown areas is we have these It stretches where you walk across an entire block and you can't really engage with it because you have a garage or you just have solid walls. I think about the county courts building that's on bottom there. It's just a solid wall the entire length. Same with that building along Merrimack. Without any openings along that stretch other than the garage building, entrance itself, I do have some concern with the pedestrian experience along there. And I just want to make sure that we aren't killing blocks. So even if you do have limited access like this, please be mindful of the treatment and the placemaking in that area so that that isn't a harsh block to walk. Because as soon as you do that, you start to fragment the downtown area. We have that in several sections and I'd hate to see it happen again. So if you could think about openings on that stretch, if there's any other way to put another entry there to add some sort of interest to that stretch of wall, I think in the end that would pay dividends. So that's all.

That's correct. He had indicated earlier today he was going to be available until 7.

No, not at this time, Steve. Really great feedback and we'll see what we can make out of it.

Thank

Very good. Thank you, everybody.

Mr. Chair, one other thing I would mention, there was a community conference held for this particular project. So any public input that was gathered during that process, that'll be passed along to the plan commission and the board of aldermen with a formal application at the time that's submitted. So I did want the public to rest assured that any comments they made will be in the record when this comes forward. Okay. Thank you, David.

Thank you, Mr. Chairman. It's been my honor and privilege to work for the city of Clayton and to work for all of you and our elected officials and our citizens. It's just been a pleasure. I've looked forward to these meetings every night or every week we have them or every other week. They've been great and y'all have been great to work with and I will never forget you and I will never the city. It's a very special place and I've been blessed to have spent some of my career here and happy to make a difference. It's been really exciting. I apologize, I've got a mask on because I'm sitting here with Lori. Wilson and she, I've been training her tonight on taking minutes. So I apologize if I get a little disconnected from the meeting, but we've been talking off camera and I've been showing her how to organize the minutes and that sort of thing. So, so I thank you very much. I'll miss you guys and good luck in the future. And please give Anissa a lot of support. She's a great employee and she's She'll be doing great things for the city as well. So thank you.

No

No, just Susan will miss you.

George, we're going to

no, no. I'm here till the end of March. So you've got to put up with him. Three more meetings.

just. I was afraid I was going to get those over the weekend with the weather. Yeah.

David. Just thank you to Susan. We're all going to miss you.

I've already told Susan that I'll miss her, so don't need to rehash that. I think she knows. But I appreciate you, Susan, and I wish you all the best. As far as upcoming meeting, just a reminder that it's on Wednesday. There's a holiday on that Monday and then a Board of Aldermen meeting the following Tuesday. There will be a few things on the agenda. I'm not going to promise what number that will be because it seems to always be in flex, but there will be an agenda.

Okay.