October 21, 2024 — Meeting Transcript

Welcome, everybody. If you have cell phones or electronic devices, if you could turn them off, that would be great. And if you wish to speak on an item, I guess, actually, quite frankly, I don't think there's is there anybody in the audience. So if you wish to speak on an item, please wait until I ask for public comments. When there's an item and you wish to speak, click to raise your hand if you're on Zoom and you'll be given permission to speak. If you're in person, please come to the podium and make sure the green line is on at the bottom of the microphone. Please start by giving your name and address for the record. If someone has already made the comments you have in mind, please just state that you agree with comments already made and do not repeat them. Ryan, if you could go through the roll call.

Bridget McAndrew.

Here.

Helen DeFayt.

Here.

Kami Waldman.

Amy Waldman.

Here.

Jim Marsena. Here.

Great. The next item on our agenda is the minutes from our meeting on October 7th, 2024. Are there any changes to the minutes? If not, I will entertain a motion.

I move to accept the minutes as submitted.

Second. All those in favor? Aye. Opposed? Great. So our new business and really the only thing on the agenda tonight is 55 Crestwood Drive. So we will start with the site plan review. And I see that there are representatives for the project. Ryan, if you could go through the staff report.

The property is located on the west side of Crestwood, just north of the intersection with Hillvale. The property is zoned R2 and is developed with a single family home. The applicant is proposing the demolition of the existing structure and the construction of a new single family house. Trash and HVAC units are proposed in the rear yard. Gas and water would be connected from the front of the home and electric and sewer would connect via the rear. Coverage would increase from 31.7% to 46.1%. Existing stormwater runoff per MSD 15-year 20-minute storm calculations is 0.67 cubic feet per second. The total proposed runoff is 0.75, which represents a 0.08 cubic feet per second increase. Downspouts would collect runoff from the roof and connect to a dry well in the rear yard with a pop-up emitter. Existing canopy coverage is 4,521 square feet with 1,694 to be removed. The plan proposes adding 4,000 square feet which is 1,676 more than the requirement. 78.6% of the trees are proposed to be native. The landscape reviewer noted that the retaining wall adjacent to the pool in the rear yard would cut half of the structural roots of the neighbor's landmark size tree. Following the recommendation and guidance of the city's contracted landscape reviewer, staff are of the opinion that the rear yard should be revised so as not to impact the critical root zone of the neighboring landmark tree. The property meets the requirements of the archie district and staff recommend approval with the following conditions. One that the applicant file a deed restriction with the St Louis county recorder of deeds, noting the location maintenance requirements of the drywall and shall submit proof of filing prior to an approval of the building permit. And that the rear yard Shelby revised so as not to impact the critical route zone of the neighboring landmark tree.

Great. I see that we've got some representatives. If you could just make sure the green light is on.

Good evening, city staff, architectural review board members. I am Scott Melman of Melman Brothers Development. And I am privileged to be here tonight on behalf of my brother and I. We want to thank each and every one of you for allowing us this opportunity to make this presentation. Blair and I are honored to have the future buyer of this house, Brady McInich, in attendance this evening. His wife, Abby, daughter, blanking on her name at the moment, are honorable to be here this evening, but they're also expecting one other. This family will be a great addition to the city. They're very much looking forward to living here with all the great surroundings and everything that it has to offer. For those of you that are not aware, Blair and I are the third owners slash builders of this property to take ownership within the last couple of years. In fact, the previous builder had construction drugs but changed his mind on the direction he chose to go. With that being said, I am certain that the neighborhood will be ecstatic to see this distressed site come back to life. Before I turn things over to the other parts of our development team, the civil engineer and architect, I wanna let everyone know that Blair and I look forward to further communication and coordination with our neighbors, trustees, and we will do whatever's necessary to make sure we get those signatures. Thank you for this opportunity. And now I'd like to turn things over to Eric Vietmeyer with Vols Incorporated.

Good evening, I'm Eric Vietmeier with Vols Incorparated. We are at 10849 Indian Head Industrial Boulevard. We are the civil engineer of record for this project. Ryan gave a very robust and direct description of the property. So I don't really have anything to add other than I'm here to answer any questions you may have.

Are you prepared to talk about the trees? Yes. So can you talk a little bit about what's going to happen in the backyard? Are you guys building a pool?

Right now, the pool shown on our plans, looks like Ryan's getting to those, it's to be designed by others. Vols, we're not pool contractors. It's not something that we get into. So the pool that's shown on the plan right now is a placeholder. Really can't do anything bigger than that. So everything is designed around that size, drywall included. So there's been talk about potentially moving the pool once final design comes into play. Right now I did update the plans to call out for root pruning, which is a lot easier on the trees than just having an excavator bucket, you know, ripping those roots. So for now we're relying on that note so that the landscape architect or an arborist can help ensure that that tree survives. However, it is more than likely that that pool will shift to the left and further ensuring survival of that tree.

So you don't, I mean, so there's not, but you would think, would you think construction of the pool would happen while the home was being built? Is that, or are you trying to do that? Or is it?

It could, but more than likely it may be, construction on the pool may start significantly after construction on the house is underway. Okay.

And then, Ana, just in terms of making sure there's – will the tree protection happen – you know if this if this goes through and the permit like will tree protection happen um like immediately or like just in terms of making sure that the that tree is protected and the root zone is protected like how

well so if the civil plan that they apply with their building permit for includes the pool and the patio then that's permitted as part of that building permit so if they're not going to construct the pool then it shouldn't be shown on their civil plans it is common that the actual physical movement to construct the pool happens much later in the construction process of the overall house, but it would be on the civil plans and be part of the building permit. So any requirements for tree protection and other elements would be based on the civil plans that they provided. Now our contracted landscape architect responded to just adding the root pruning and felt that that wasn't enough to save the tree because of how close it would be to the structural root zone of the tree. So just pruning the roots for this amount of construction within that proximity, they feel would still have impacts. And so that's where if it's going to shift or otherwise, then our recommendation is to include a condition and approval that requires further pruning refinement of the site plan to protect the tree, which we could review under the building permit. So if you're comfortable with the condition, then you can leave that as placed. And then at that point, when they actually apply with their civil plans for the construction permits, we'll review to make sure that what they've added for mitigation of that tree is sufficient.

And just to add to Ana's statement there, with me putting by others on the pool, that is basically saying we're not designing this pool. We're not planning on the pool being permitted yet. by our civil plans. That would be up to the pool contractor, which a lot of times pool contractors have to do their own permitting.

So we do require like a swimming pool permit is a separate element. However, all of their stormwater runoff mitigation, everything else is involved in this plan that they are providing the civil plan under the building permit. So it is kind of an overlap of the two plans. However, if they've provided a civil plan that shows impacts to the root zone, we wouldn't want to approve a building permit that showed that just under the assumption that it would change under a future permit issued to somebody else. So we would either under the building permit put a condition of approval that this permit is not allowing the work associated with the pool and they would then have to apply with future civil plans that show stormwater mitigation at the time of the pool being applied for. So that's a little bit up to them, but it is a two-step process, but we would make sure that we wouldn't issue a civil sheet that showed work within a structural root zone of a tree that would impact the tree unless they've mitigated it.

So perhaps the best way forward at this point would be leave the mitigation alone as it's accounting for the pool that is there. And if the pool is shifting over, it's going to be getting smaller. But if we take it off the plans right now, then the current civil plans have minimal impact to that tree. Would that be acceptable?

I guess it will depend on when you plan on redesigning the pool, because ideally the site plan would be approved with the condition that you're going to amend the civil plans to protect the tree per the recommendations of landscape architect. And then at the time of applying for your construction permits, we would review that that has been approved. Now, if you choose to not address the pool issue until later, then your construction permit civil drawings should reflect that you are no longer asking for approval of the pool at the same time.

Yeah, that's exactly what I was asking. So, yeah.

So then the current civil plans wouldn't necessarily reflect... What we would be approving tonight.

So what I would recommend is how Ryan included in the staff reports that you would approve with a condition that they make, and we can verify that with our landscape architect in the future so that would allow them to either shift the pool over to provide to be out of the structural root zone and we could look for that under the building permit, or some other form of amending um the pool location so

just per the recommendation we can make whatever change when we're submitting for correct okay that's acceptable

um okay with i guess with respect to the site plan i i didn't really have any other questions um but we'll go around um helen

Okay. The retaining wall that is adjacent to the pool, is that part of the pool or?

It's there because of the pool. So if we are modifying the pool, the wall would be modified.

okay um now the previous conversation cleared up what was concerning to me is that we're approving something that we don't quite know if it's shifting or what's happening to the pool so um I have no other questions. Just wanted to say that I like that you're reducing the drainage area by creating a new drainage area. I think that's one of the maybe the only time I've seen that in these notes. So thank you very much.

Does the pool on the patio, and I know that's separate, but is that part of the impervious coverage calculation right now? Currently, yes. How does a pool fit into impervious coverage? Not like the patio around it, but the pool itself?

Our definition right now allows the water area of the pool to count at 50%. Okay. Okay.

I guess I want to commend you guys for actually going below maxing out the impervious coverage. Again, we don't see that a lot. So thank you for that. Um, I also am happy that you guys are, um, going above and beyond like the tree replacement requirement. Um, again, we don't that a lot, so that's, that's great. Um, and just out of curiosity for like that, you know, critical, uh, root zone, how far over are we thinking that whole area needs to shift in order for that? And forgive me if I

totally missed it. So he's going to scroll to the landscape plan off, and there's a... Okay, so typically on the landscape plan, and I think this probably is part of the note that was missing, all of the existing trees that are to remain, they should mark the area of the critical root zone. And so then we would know, but so that's not on this plan. So our landscape architect would have to review that when they provide their response, but it's probably a few feet.

Yes, our landscape architect had provided us with that information so that is something that is known, you know, within the like

10 feet like any

somewhere around there. I think the idea was to shift almost the whole pool over to the driveway with just two or three feet of grass strip in between as separation.

Yeah, I mean, I guess when I was looking at this, I was assuming it was a spec home. So I know the owners are here now. So I think that's something that you want to make sure that they probably understand how that's going to change for us. But yeah, no other questions though. Thanks.

Jim? Well, I think in this case, this house is going to come down regardless. But I do want to at least acknowledge that this is a bit of a shame. This neighborhood is... on the National Register, and this is contributing property and merits and young property. One of the first houses in 1923 built in Claverac. So I think that's all worth saying. And objective five of our plan commission is preservation of buildings which are architecturally or historically significant or contribute to the character of the city. Just something I want to note. I don't think... The reason that I think we're here is not because of the people who... The reason this house is up for removal, I don't think, is because of these developers. But I just wanted to say that I think this is a process that started well before this application. And I don't know if one of you others want to speak to it, because none of my questions are of a civil nature, at least. It appears, at least, that the house is shifted. So it's basically right on... seven and a half foot setback, is that correct? Yes. Okay. Traditionally, when Claverac Park was laid out in 1922, it was laid out with 10-foot side setbacks. Now, R2 zoning allows for a seven and a half-foot setback in this case, or 10% of the front of the lot. Is there a design decision that necessitates going to the extreme far end of that side or any other reason that you chose to build to that seven and a half foot line versus the 10 foot line that's kind of widely established in the neighborhood.

There is the driveway on the left hand side, you know, being a comfortable with still needs a little bit of green space to be able to make grade before we hit to the property line without putting in retaining walls. We were to move the house to the left, we would need retaining walls along the left property line.

But most of the houses, at least in the neighborhood as it is now do have a driveway to the side and fit with a 10 foot setback on the other side. Correct.

I can't speak for the rest of the houses

of Clavarock. Okay. Um, the other thing that I guess I wanted to discuss is our ARB submittal requirements call for trustee approval when applicable. Um, I think we can quibble on whether the Clavarock park trustees are able to, you know, thumbs up or thumbs down this project, but I think it's at least worthwhile to look at the process of the neighborhood. Um, And the process in Collaborac Park is basically the trustees provide a signature sheet. And that signature sheet, you have the sign-off on the neighbors indicating that they have seen the plans and give them a space to comment. To my knowledge, that was not completed for this project. Am I correct in that or is that a misunderstanding?

That would be more of a...

my understanding that process is not necessarily done until we apply for a building permit and night is strictly to get architectural review board approval before we apply for the building permit we will have to get the signatures from the rest of the neighbors and then the trustees and then when we apply we'll submit that sheet along with our building permit and application

yes and traditionally that's actually not the order that it's in um Traditionally, when any type of project, whether that be a remodel, whether that be new house like this, basically the neighbors are at least provided a set of the plans so they can weigh in. And I think part of that is to help with this entire process just because there's certain things obviously where us looking at the pages not living next to this, there's information that comes forward with that. I think as a board, we talk about how much we value feedback, especially in these last couple meetings. So the fact that I think that that feedback wasn't sought out ahead of time, I really think that that's a valuable part of this process that is important when talking about a house like this, obviously it's going to be knocked down and a very permanent choice. I think especially in this case, as they have pointed out, this property has changed hands three times in 23 months. It's been involved in a lawsuit. So I think to not involve the neighbors kind of up to this point or involve the trustees of Collaborac, is a mistake.

If I can chime in, Jim, thank you for your comments. I mean, one thing that I think other people, the staff and the board could trust is, you know, Melvin Brothers Development, Blair and I have a long lasting relationship and reputation. By no means would we ever try to, you know, do something out of order. out of place without communicating. We strive on our reputation, and we do what we say we're going to do, and we'll continue to do that. We've had great success. Neighborhoods such as Claverack Park or Diamond, there are very, very few of them. But we strive to satisfy any and every requirement necessarily, and more often than not, go above and beyond with that communication. I do just want to acknowledge one thing. I have reached out to every resident within 200 feet of the property. I have spoken to the trustees prior to this meeting this evening. So to that point, I don't know that I'm not going to argue with you or anything, but I have reached out my neighbors, to everybody else within 200 feet and to the other trustees of the subdivision without any feedback to date.

Was that feedback or was that communication? Was it via mail? Did you knock on doors? I'm

just... It was knocking on doors last week with a notice attached in everybody's mailbox. And then there was some communication with Anna, another trustee in the neighborhood. So we did get some feedback from that email, which we've tried incorporating.

um anna or maybe kevin you know i think our neighborhoods are different you know so can you speak to a little bit about you know i know there's it just you know we just have significant differences throughout the city related to trustees

yeah i'd be happy to address that in any forum which the commission would like whether public or in a uh attorney-client communication. So if you would like to do that, perhaps we could take a brief recess and explore that issue.

I mean, it's up to you, Kevin. I was more just curious, like in Claverac, is there a requirement to get trustee?

There may be. Okay. But there is not a requirement on the part of the city for approval by any other entity.

So, how do those two intersect with our...

I'll explain how we work and then if we need legal... Because I think we just

don't have, I mean, Claverack, as you said, is a special neighborhood and there's not very many teardowns there where there are in other neighborhoods.

So we do provide people with a reminder that they might be located within a subdivision or a neighborhood that has an active trustee review process. However, the city can only enforce the ordinances that we have adopted. And so that's a courtesy that we remind them, but we will not withhold our permitting process. waiting for another entity that we don't enforce to approve it. So that's where we kind of remind people then the city's process to try and make sure residents are aware of development is that we mail the notices to the property owners within 200 feet of the upcoming meetings and provide the plans online for review.

I would also add that the fact that we may issue a permit or give approval to plans does not mean that the property owner need not comply with existing private indentures. That the issuance of a city permit does not authorize the property owner to do what the indentures of the subdivision prohibit.

So if for some reason there wasn't compliance by the property owner related to the indentures, would there be a private cause of action by the private subdivision against the new property owner?

Indentures are private contracts between the subdivision, actually the original owner of the property, and those who choose to purchase property within the area. And those are enforced by the trustees in a civil cause of action.

And I think that's overall, I'm trying to look at the larger picture here in the sense

of,

I don't want to necessarily have this be a debate on whether the trustees of the neighborhood get a thumbs up or a thumbs down. what I wanted to look at as far as that process of the neighborhood and have us examine that process. And what does that process exist for? And what is yielded from that process? Um, and in this case, I don't think the process is very onerous at all. And I think it's to the point where something like this, it provides us a board with, uh, a richer level of information and everything. And I really think that that's a process that should be completed before this, especially in this case, we're talking about the pool not being in the place that it is, that pool root systems being affected by that. I really think that if we are approving a site plan We need to be looking at the site plan that we're going to be approving that say okay well the pool is probably going to move over here, and this is probably going to be this, and this is. Probably going to be that. At least since I have been here you we haven't had a situation like that, where you know we're saying Okay, well, a lot of this will change but we're okay with it changing I think we need to see those changes, and I think in this case, the neighbors need to see those. Changes.

yeah I mean I think the ultimate goal is certainly making sure that people like our residents especially obviously the residents around you know 55 right yeah 55 Crestwood Drive were made aware of what happened I don't think there's any suggestion maybe that they haven't gotten notice from the city which is what the city is required to do but I do agree with you Jim like making sure that the owners, because it is somewhat concerning that a pool that might affect a neighbor's you know very significant tree you know. later on i understand that the perm you know they would have to submit separate plans but i think it is you know understanding that you know we have a public hearing where people are you know can comment on where the pool is and if it affects a tree i think is significant so i i mean i i understand what you mean so um it looks like there's somebody

if we want to get into um we can put that as topic to discuss some of these procedures at a different time. Because right now somebody could come to apply for a pool permit and it doesn't require this board's approval or any notification of neighbors. So if that's a concern, I think that's a separate item. If there's concern with our existing procedures that we can discuss at a separate time.

I mean, it is worth noting that the site is a quarter of an acre in size. It is Very small parcel overall. So any change does have a large impact on the lot as far as moving a pool, whether a pool is going to be built or not. Those are large changes. These aren't necessarily minor things as far as like moving a bush five feet in one direction or the other.

Um, and, and I understand what you're saying. I think it is just, but to Jim's point, usually we get a site plan that's complete, you know, whether or not they, you know what I mean? So people in the neighborhood understand whether or not, is there going to pool? Is there not going to be a pool? If there's a separate application later for the pool, if they decide to do the, does do the adjoining neighbors get any sort of notification of that?

No, that's what I'm saying. It's very common that I would say probably really honestly close to half of our spec build houses end up adding a pool by the time it's done. A lot of times we talk to the developers at the beginning and if it's a spec build or not, if there's contemplation of adding a pool, we request that they... note the or they at least run the calculations of the pool within the stormwater mitigation and the runoff component of it and then that pool is permitted through a site a swimming pool permit which does not require plan commission approval or have any sort of notice because only the notices go out through the city when we're noticing of an upcoming meeting so that's where i think if the discussion of notice requirements related to pools or other rear yard improvements is something that we want to look into that matter itself, not this specific pool, but the idea of when we're involving or noticing neighbors is a separate matter that we can look at from this request that you have in front of you.

Well, just for clarification, so right now for the site plan, we're just approving it and acting like the pool is not there, but everything else is...

No, so what we're recommending is because the pool is included in the stormwater runoff calculations and other elements. So what we're recommending or staff's recommendation is approving a site plan with the condition that the location of the rear yard improvements are revised to remove the impact to the root zone of the adjacent landmark tree. So what the applicant has stated is likely to occur to mitigate this potential issue is that the pool would be shifted towards the middle of the yard. We still

know there will be a pool. The actual location of that pool within the backyard is just what's up for debate. Not debate, but what's up for decisions.

Right, that's what would be changed because the mitigation, so from staff's perspective, the reason for the recommendation of us reviewing it under a building permit is because the grading plan for the rear yard, shifting the pool out of the root zone of the adjacent tree would not substantially impact the grading plan in the rear yard, the way that they would shift it. So there would still likely be some use of a retaining wall as proposed today. But the actual location of that retaining wall and the grading is not likely to be significantly changed with moving the pool. And the pool is already accounted for in the mitigation plan with the stormwater. So neither of those two elements are really likely to change. The only change that would be is lessening the impact to the neighbor because now the landmark tree would be further protected. So given that review, that's why staff's recommendation was just to move or mitigate the impacts of the tree and that could be reviewed by staff under the building permit. Other instances, if we feel like a way of mitigating the impact to adjacent tree would result in large changes to the site plan for other impacts to the neighbors then we would not likely recommend that as a condition of our approval that staff would review so that's kind of what led to ryan's recommendation here okay

and there's also jim to the claverex trustees um agreement or um do you guys do site plan review or is it just architectural review of the proposed changes or housing

It all comes under review. And I do want to make something very clear here. R2 zoning supersedes any bylaws of the Claverac Park neighborhood. So R2 zoning is the overall what is considered. But I do think in some of these cases, such as what I was talking about with the setback, traditionally, there has been like a 10 foot setback, even though R2 allows for seven and a half foot setback. So you have a neighborhood that is basically laid out with 10 foot setbacks. In this case, they're putting in a seven and a half and a half foot so I guess my argument in a situation like that is not necessarily saying the bylaws of Clavarack Park say you cannot have a seven and a if we're talking about what's common in the neighborhood and how things present in the neighborhood, that would be an uncommon characteristic for a home in Claverac

Park. Are there any comment? I don't think anybody else in the audience is for or not part of the project, but it looks like there might be some people online that have comments. Mr. Andy Odden, you mentioned

Yes, thank you. Hi, Andy Odden. I'm the homeowner at 53 Crestwood, so just to the north of the property under discussion. Thank you for the opportunity to speak with you all today. Had four things I wanted to just make the board aware of. So first, I share the concerns about the location of the pool. Particularly as it relates to that tree in my backyard. I haven't had much time to actually go through and review the plans for this and haven't spoken with anyone about it yet. But I'm worried, given the age of that tree, that if the pool is placed directly over to the root system, it could cause irreparable damage to it. My second concern I think has been discussed at length, which is the seven and a half foot setback. That's gonna be awfully close to my property and my house. Would have welcomed the opportunity to comment on that in advance. Unfortunately did not have that opportunity. My third concern is around the drainage and runoff. So I hear that there's been a study of rainwater drainage and runoff, and trust that that's been done correctly and that that's sufficient. But I haven't had a chance to see that or take a look at that and have concerns about flooding both for myself, but then also for the other neighbors in their backyards. And then my fourth concern is probably the most important to me. So I heard Scott talk about how he had I shared a letter and gone around to all the houses. This was just this last week. And, you know, I know technically you fulfilled the letter of the requirement with that. I just want to say, though, that I would have welcomed the opportunity to speak with you with sufficient lead time to be able to discuss this. some of these questions that I have. And a couple of days before the meeting is, is frankly just too close given, you know, the busy lives that, you know, all of us have. And so I would really encourage you as you continue this process to engage both myself and the other neighbors as early and as frequently as you can.

Thank you, Mr. Odden. um mr angelitas

yes thank you thank you uh to the board for the opportunity to speak i am like andy i am the neighbor on the opposite side of of this property and i don't know that i have any specific concerns yet because like andy we just got this letter a couple days ago so i don't even know if i have any concerns or any problems also welcome to talk to scott in the coming days and future about the plans or any questions or concerns. But I can't really comment on the plans because we hadn't seen them yet. So whatever the process is, the process is. I'm not here to make it more difficult. I just wanted to let the board know that we just got this notice a few days ago. And so haven't really had a chance to look at anything. Thank you.

Thank you.

Uh, this is a response to neighbor at 53 and 57 Andy. And I didn't catch the one to the South's name, but I appreciate your guys' comments very, very, very much. Um, if you guys are okay with giving me a phone number or an email address, or if I come up can come by in the coming days, I would be privileged to come and speak with you guys at any convenient time so that we can figure out what is best for all parties here to make this possible. Thank you.

Thank you. I just have a quick question, is it possible to do that North setback at or i'm sorry on the right side of the House to make it 10 feet. To keep it compatible with the neighborhood.

there's just not enough room like I said earlier. we already have a retaining wall along the driveway on the other side, but to shift everything over, that retaining wall gets bigger and longer and just more intrusive. So to shift everything over just, it's not really practical.

Not practical for a 4,400 square foot house or not practical for the lot period?

Not practical for the information I was given to put on a site plan. The floor plan is what Scott and Blair and Florence Strubman had developed. And, you know, it's a beautiful floor plan. Lauren always comes up with wonderful ideas. Just the size of the house is what is, you know, that's what's currently going for market. So

the retaining, what would be the issue with the retaining wall if it got shifted? It gets taller and longer. Any idea how much taller, roughly? I'd have to study that. What is it right now? Right now,

let's see. We're about two feet tall in the middle. So it's not outrageously tall, but any further closer to the property line, it has to grow taller and then longer as well.

And that's kind of the only issue?

Not the only issue. Lauren, do you have anything to add?

I would say it would at least be worth considering. The developers have already said, we have two neighbors here who said that they haven't really had sufficient time to look at the plans and haven't been given the plans ahead of the time of this meeting. We have a developer who says that he's willing to meet with those neighbors and willing to meet with the neighborhood and address their concerns.

I say there is a concern the neighbor to the left, there are some retaining walls encroaching through the property line. That was one of the other major reasons for having it to the left to the right we go too far to the left, we have to remove some of the neighbors improvements to the left.

I would. I think we should consider continuing this to a future meeting to kind of give everyone an opportunity to meet um. and get that feedback and maybe have a more fully formed plan come before the board

can i chime in and i i'm not here to make any objections but that's a ridiculous comment in my mind again i want to do everything i have to um to appease the neighborhoods the trustees and my neighbors but it's not a city's requirement to get your guys is okay it's my will doing to specify and speak with you guys. As Ana said, we don't have to have signatures in order to get a building permit. It's a suggestion to get signatures to submit with our building application. So I don't see any reason to have to put this on the agenda for another meeting.

um does anybody else have any other thoughts i'm i'm jim i i appreciate your comments but it seems like under the city requirements notice was given i mean that's why there are neighbors online um it sounds like mr melman is committed it sounds like Mr. Melman was, is committed to talking to both of these neighbors personally to address concerns, but under our code, um, they comply with all, as you said, zoning requirements. So I think we're somewhat, I think our hands are somewhat tied, um, you know, because, I mean, I think as Ana mentioned, um, when the pool comes later, you know, and I think we will make, we will certainly as part of, if there is an approval tonight by this board, by a majority that that will certainly any sort of future civil plan related to pool will take into account the tree. So it goes, you know, I mean, it's also very important to me that we would be very, very careful and protect the tree. So I appreciate your comments, but I'm willing to go forward

If it pleases the planning commission, may I make one recommendation for them to consider? So it looks like I just pulled up the site plan. It looks like the house to the north is midway through the house, roughly eight feet, eight inches setback on that side. I believe there's about a foot and a half of green space between the house and the driveway on the south side. So if you shifted the house south just a foot and a on the North side of the proposed home, which would almost mirror the set, the side yard setback of the house to its North and wouldn't likely result in then also removing the improvements of the neighbor to the South that are encroached onto the subject property. I'll offer that as a compromise for them to consider.

Yeah, I think that would be an excellent compromise. My only question and I cannot speak, uh, completely on this is I don't know if there's any landscaping that's in that green space as part of our requirement or not, or if it's just grass or small plantings.

I believe it's just smaller plantings, not large. And so you'll be gaining a foot and a half of green space on the north side. But at least that way it would somewhat mirror. It looks like the home to the north is kind of angled. So I think the setback at the front face of it's probably 10. And then it kind of trims back. But I just wanted to offer that as a compromise to consider. Yeah,

I think I can speak on behalf of my brother and the future homeowners. I think we'd be fine with that.

And their comments or

yeah I would just personally like to see all that on the plan versus you know at this point we've talked about multiple different things that would not be as submitted. And I think I think we should have an opportunity to review the plan, as it is to be built, not. Multiple changes.

Well, I don't think there would be any other changes other than shifting the house. Right. And I mean, I, you know, I mean, you guys are the, you know, like, I mean, other than shifting the House to the what are we suggesting shifting the house to the right by a foot and a half. Right. Or to the left. I don't know what other changes would occur.

Who just be placement of the pool like when where you know where the pool would be in relation to everything else because

right but it sounds like the pool but i think the requirements to build the pool and the pool permit can still come in separately i mean it sounds like that is very commonplace so i i mean and i i again as i've stated i think it's really important to take into account where the pool goes to protect the tree and the root system which will eventually be um will that be looked at again by our contracted landscape architect

that yes that's correct so they'll they'll provide under the building permit they'll provide their civil plans which would include any adjustments at that point at the very least our contracted landscape reviewer will look at it but staff also reserves the discretion to if we review this and we were to see impacts to other elements of grading or stormwater runoff or anything like that to refer the amendment back to this board for review again um but the the landscape reviewer would at the very least look at everything to make sure that the impacts of the trees are sufficiently mitigated.

Are there any other comments online, audience? Any other comments by the board? If there's no other comments, do we have a motion?

I move to approve the site plan with the staff recommendations. The applicant shall file a deed restriction with the St. Louis County Recorder of Deeds, noting the location and maintenance requirements of the dry well, and she'll submit proof of filing prior to approval of building permit. Number two, the rear yard shall be revised so as not to impact the critical root zone of the neighboring landmark tree. And number three, move the house to the south one foot six inches to increase the north side setback by one foot six inches. Second.

All those in favor? Aye. Anybody opposed? So that we are through the site plan review. So then our second matter will be the architectural review. Lauren, will you be venting? I guess first, I think Ryan will probably go through the staff report.

The surrounding area comprises two-story single-family homes with a variety of architecture. The home is proposed to be two stories and would have a walkout basement and will reach roughly 29.8 feet in height, similar to homes in the surrounding area. The Clavarack Park neighborhood features many historic homes with variations in the rooflines, windows and door openings, and depths along the front facade. The proposed house will also feature variations, including a recessed front entry, arched doors and windows, Juliet balconies, architectural accents, and a varying roofline. Common building materials nearby include brick and stucco with stone or wood as accents. New home is proposed to be two stories comprising of off-white brick, dark bronze windows, hip roof, and charcoal shingles. The driveway, front walkway, and rear patios are proposed to be exposed aggregate. The metal four-foot fence is proposed to be around the rear yard and pool. New Highland stone retaining walls are proposed adjacent to the driveway and pool. Wooden closures are proposed for the pool equipment, trash and HVAC units. Proposal meets the ARB guidelines and staffer of the opinion of the proposal is compatible with the surrounding area. The site plan review report requests modifications to the rear yard. However, these can be reviewed as part of the building permit so long as materials remain consistent. Staff recommended approval is submitted.

Good evening, I'm

Thank you, Ryan.

Thank you. I'm Lauren Strutman. I'm the architect of Lauren Strutman Architects. And this is an all-brick traditional home. We tried to design something that fit into the neighborhood. And Clavarack Park actually has a lot of wonderful variety in their homes. There's a lot of different styles. And we have a bronze...

Lauren, you might need to talk into the mic because otherwise, yeah, you could carry it with you. If you want to carry the microphone with you. We

have lots of windows all around the house. We do have a client that this has been very specifically designed for. He's here this evening. We've worked hard on the design to suit their family and I'm here to answer any questions that you have.

Great. It looks like based on the elevations, it looks like it's pretty much the height of the neighboring homes. Would that be? The

floor heights and the roof heights are very similar to the neighboring homes.

I don't have any specific questions related to the architecture, but we'll go around. Helen?

No questions, really. Just like the brick detail.

Amy?

I really enjoy the front facade a lot. I like all the detail. I think it pays homage, I think, to the neighboring house a little bit with that roof detail. I'm just curious about the elevations, the side elevations. They're just kind of very simple. You know, when I look at them, um, you know, cut very flat. I just didn't know if they're, you know, with the architecture of the neighborhood, um, you have a lot more detail in, you know, across the front, but also along the sides as well. I'm just wondering if there was a thought of trying to kind of incorporate that better.

Actually, um, The neighborhood has homes that have a lot of offsets in the house on the sides. And there's also very classic squared up homes in Claverack Park. And that's what our client asked for was just a very classic house without a lot of ins and outs on the side. We have two different roof lines on the side of the house. You can see, and the idea to break it into two roof lines was to not make the roof taller than the neighbors, but also keep it with a steep appearance, which is prevalent in the area. And we do have a lot of windows on the sides and the rear. It's all brick. That brick detail that's on the front of the house goes around the sides. And I think we're making a good presentation here of a house that'll go well in the neighborhoods.

Okay,

thanks. I share the concerns with the kind of flat sides. But really beyond that, I don't have any comments architecturally.

Are there any comments from the audience? Any other comments online from the neighbors related to architecture? I don't, it looks like no hands up. So if, and I do think it's a very attractive home. Scott, if I could just ask, can I ask you a question? You know, a lot of what, and I could have mentioned this under site plan, but you know, you're a, you know, a frequent developer in town. And part of what came out of our master planning was kind of, you know, And I absolutely appreciate property rights, but was there ever any thought to trying to just renovate this home? And I don't know what the condition inside is like.

Yeah, I mean, that's an excellent question. I mean, when we purchased this house, our intentions immediately after walking through it and seeing what the exterior looked like was, unfortunately, this house needs to be demoed. Like I said before, you know, we're the third owner within, I think Jim had said the last 23 months or somebody said that when the last 20 months, this house is distressed. The outside is falling apart. The inside is falling apart. In fact, I was kind of prepared for this question. I have pictures, exterior and interior pictures of ceilings caving in, walls caving in. It's just unfortunately been mishandled over the last two years.

Yeah, I mean, it's just, you know, I think as a city, we want to incentivize people to take care of these beautiful historic homes rather than tearing them down. So I just kind of wanted to hear your thoughts and your perspective on how we can encourage people to do that rather than tear.

Yeah, we certainly take everything into consideration when we're buying real estate within the city of Clayton. You know, the one other thing that's not important, but this was approved by this architectural review board back in June of 2023. for a new construction home yeah um so nothing that we're presenting tonight other than a better looking house a smaller house is being is anything different

and i can say something too because believe me i've had more criticism than uh anyone throughout this meeting like uh the house is falling apart and that is by no means their responsibility at this point

thank you

um I believe the first, the original owners 23 months ago sold directly to a developer with this house never hitting the open market. I believe if we would have had a chance to hit the open market that there's a good chance we would have seen a renovation because this is the type of house that's very attractive in our neighborhood for people to go after. But that wasn't the decision that the homeowners made. And these developers are unfortunately coming into it after basically 22 months of neglect at this point.

I mean, the electric's off, gas and electric are off, water and sewer are just about destroyed. So there's unfortunately no saving.

Thank you. All right, if there are no other comments, do we have a motion? Oh, yes, go ahead. And if you could just say your name for the record, sir.

Brady Mackinac. So pleasure. Thank you guys so much for hearing us tonight. And thanks for everyone that's here. They've been a pleasure to work with. I just want to say I'm a lifelong St. Louis area resident. I grew up in Godfrey, Illinois, and have lived in the city of St. Louis since I graduated law school in 2011. My wife's from Detroit, Michigan. And she went to WashU and she has stayed here, which I know is sometimes a rarity, but a beautiful thing to have happen. And it has been her dream to live in the Y down area and particularly in Clavarac since she went to Wash U. And so I just want to say we are very, very excited to have this project move forward. So thank again you all for your time and certainly everyone else that has worked on this. I just wanted to thank you guys all for your time. I know it's not easy. As a lawyer, I just came from picking a jury in St. Clair County, Illinois. So I know that this stuff can be very time consuming for everybody. So I just want to thank you all for your time.

Thank you for your comments. I mean, we, of course, welcome you to Clayton and we're excited. Looks like you guys have some young children. I can speak very highly for the school district. One

more on the way back.

Oh, great. Wonderful. Well, we do welcome you to Clayton. All right, so if there are no more comments in the audience or online, is there a motion?

I move to approve as submitted.

Is there a second? Thanks. All those in favor? Aye. Anyone opposed? All right, you guys are on your way. When are you hoping to begin construction?

We'll start with speaking with the neighbors.

That would be great. So yes. Once

we do that and get the signatures, we'll apply for a demo permit.

So Mr. Hodden and Mr. Angelita Scott, Mr. Melman had just said that he'll likely apply for a demo permanent in the next couple of weeks. And he looks forward to speaking with both of you. Um, does our staff, Brian or Anna, anything to add? No. Um, anybody else on the plan commission, anything to add this evening? Jim, you look like you have something on your mind.

Or me? No, nothing at this point.

Okay. All right. Um, all right. Thanks everybody. Good night.