November 4, 2024 — Meeting Transcript

Good evening, everybody. Thank you for coming. If you have cell phones or electronic devices, if you could turn them off. If you wish to speak on really the only item tonight 231 North Forsyth, if you'll just wait until I ask for public comment. I'm not sure it looks like there's nobody on zoom. But if somebody does come on zoom, we obviously will. Oh, somebody may have just come on zoom. If you're on zoom, Um, and once there's time for public comment, you can raise your hand. Um, and you will be given permission to speak. Um, if you do come to the microphone, whether or not you're presenting on the house or whether you want to speak, just make sure the green light on the microphone is on so that, um, the people, so the, it can be recorded. And so the rest of the room can hear you. Um, Ryan, if you could go ahead and complete the roll call.

Richard McHenry.

Here.

Bob Denlow.

Bob Dunlop.

Here.

Elvin Gates.

Here.

Kami Waldman.

Amy Waldman.

Here.

Jim Arsenault. Here. David Gipson. Here.

Jim Marcino. Here. David Gibson. Here.

All right, the first item on our agenda are the minutes. If I could have somebody make a motion? I move. Second. All those in favor?

Aye. Aye.

All right. We will move on to new business at 231 North Forsyth Boulevard. The first item on the agenda is related to the site plan review. And if I'm not sure who's going to present, if you guys want to begin. Actually, first, I'm sorry, Ryan will go.

The property is located on the west side of Forsyth between Toptown and Brighton. Property is zoned R2 and is located in the Clayton Gardens Urban Design District. Property is developed with a one-story single-family home. The applicant is seeking to demolish the existing structure and construct a two-story single- family home. Property meets the high and setback requirements of the R2 district. HVAC units would be on the north side of the home screened with a wood enclosure. Trash would be stored in a wood enclosure at the end of the driveway. Coverage would decrease from 63.5% to 54.9%. There are presently two water drainage areas, with some water draining to the north and some to the south. The proposal adds a new drainage area to the east. North drainage area would see a decrease in runoff, and the east drainage area would drain into the street. In a 15-year, 20-minute storm event, the stormwater calculations estimate an existing runoff of 0.26 cubic feet per second of water on the south drainage area. proposal would see an increase to 0.28. To mitigate this runoff, the applicant is proposing a rain garden at the rear of the driveway. Staff are of the opinion that the applicant should revise the plan so that the sump pump discharges at least 10 feet from the property line, that the detention capacity of the mini rain garden should be greater than the additional runoff in the drainage area for a 100-year 20-minute storm event, as so not to increase runoff to adjacent properties. There's no existing canopy coverage on site. The plan proposes adding 3,750 square feet of canopy coverage, which is 11 more than required. 100% of plantings are proposed to be native. Staff recommend approval with the following conditions to be reviewed by staff prior to issuance of a construction permit. That the plan shall be revised such that stormwater runoff to the adjacent property does not increase, and that they propose sump pump daylights at least 10 feet from a property line. That 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 shall submit proof of filing prior to approval of a building permit.

Thank you, Ryan. Um...

Good evening, city staff and architectural review board members. I am Scott Melman of Melman. And on behalf of Melman Brothers Development, my brother Blair and I want to thank you for allowing us this opportunity to make another presentation to this wonderful board and the residents that are here this evening. For those of you that are not aware, this home being proposed tonight at 231 North Forsyth will be Melman Brothers Development's fourth new home on this street within the last five years. Clearly Blair and I have a special connection to this street, but more importantly, our relationship to the residents and the city of Clayton that we truly appreciate and respect. Before I turn things over to the other parts of our development team, our civil engineer and architect, I want to let everyone know that Blair and I look forward to furthering our communication and coordination with our neighbors and always encourage anyone at any time to please ask questions. Thank you again for this opportunity, and now I'd like to turn things over to our civil engineer with Bowles Incorporated, Eric Bietmeyer.

Thank you. Good evening. I'm Eric Vietmeyer, Vols Engineering. We are the engineer of record for this project. I want to first point out staff's reports stating about mitigating the south trans area that mini rain garden and drywall had been there on the very first submittal and was designed to accommodate the increase in that direction. The overall site did have a reduction runoff, but the original calculations on the very first mill did show an increase to the south. Hence, the mini rain garden slash drywall was designed in response to the request or requirement for the sump pump discharge being 10 feet from a property line. The only way we're going to be able to do that is if the sump pump discharges at grade. Otherwise, it's discharging into the mini rain garden as current design. Beyond that, I will answer any questions.

So the suggestion that because the sump pump, as you said, is currently discharging within 10 feet from the property line. So you're saying where, can you just kind of repeat and explain a little bit more what you just said? If we can't

discharge the sump pump there, it needs to discharge at grade up on the driveway. Because to pipe it, we're getting it right out underneath the driveway, and that's closer than 10 feet to the property line. Ryan, are you able to zoom in in the back corner there? So the pipe is coming into the mini rain garden pine as you can see a four inch PVC goes right into the mini rain Garden. If we did not have that pipe, it would have to come out on grade up further up the driveway. All the So there's a four inch pipe that's coming out of the sump pump and it comes up right on the edge of the mini rain garden to be captured within that area. Otherwise, it would have to be on discharging out onto the driveway further up where it comes out of the house up into up in this area. So the back corner of the trash enclosure is five feet off the property line, just to give you a sense of scale. 10 feet is going to be near at the front of the trash enclosure. We have more driveway behind, so we're not able to daylight the pipe before 10 feet unless we are discharging directly into the rain garden. Yeah, we're at five feet. We're actually less than five feet. We are right on the edge of the rain garden.

Right. So how far is it discharging from?

It's approximately about three feet from the property line. Yeah. Like I said, the options are discharging into the rain garden or discharging at grade. In your opinion, which works better? I think discharging into the rain garden works better, creates less of a nuisance for the future homeowner.

What about the future homeowner's neighbors?

As long as the rain garden is functioning, it's going to capture everything. One of the hardest things to do, one of the hardest volumes to calculate is water coming out of a sump pump. There are way too many variables. Even soils engineers are reluctant to give those kind of numbers. It could be just, could be a trickle, could be a garden hose. You know, we've had phone calls of people saying their sump pumps run all the time. We give them a solution on how to fix that. You unplug your sump pump, watch it, make sure where the water stops, adjust your on-float to that point. And some people require, reach about back to us after they put in the solution, and then their sump pump never runs.

I mean, I just speak for myself, but I'm very uncomfortable with a sump pump discharging three feet from the property line. Given the grade two here, I mean, we're not talking about a property two that's like downhill. We're talking about a property that's high up on a hill. I

can easily take that pipe out and just let the sump pump discharge at grade on the side of the house. There's no other place to go with it. Can you describe what a rain garden is? It's a depression in the ground, and this particular detail on one of the detail sheets, it shows the depression, MSD composted minute soil on top, and then clean rock for any other traditional dry well is underneath that.

Can you expand the mini garden, put in another dry well or something to make sure, like an insurance policy?

We could add more rock underneath it, yes. That's actually, that's an easy one. Is that more effective then? Gives you more capacity, yes. Definitely adds

capacity. And I only say that because Clayton Garden has had a history of water runoff issues. Right, right.

We've got, we've got, I mean, there are homes that on Topton that have literally a stream coming down constantly. So I just, I don't, we can't, I mean, I just don't want to approve a house with a situation where we've got potentially a significant amount of discharge three feet from a neighbor's property line.

Well, we understand. Like I said, we can discharge it at grade as well as make the rock section of the drywall deeper and Paul said discharge point away from the property line, yet still adds more capacity, depending on what the discharge at a sump pump could be. You know, the two very easy fixes.

But I'm just, so if it discharges at the property line, I mean, so that if it runs down the driveway, where does it go then?

Running down the driveway goes into that rain garden slash drywall. Will the future

homeowners, I mean, deal with a constantly icy driveway? I mean, I don't.

Oh, it's going to be no different than any other driveway. We've had this similar situation on a few other houses along North Forsyth where the turnaround is close enough to the property line that this board has asked for this solution just off the edge of the driveway to help mitigate that flow going on to the neighbors, even when there was a reduction going to the neighbor. this helps arrest some of that velocity because we're now have the pavement so much closer to the property line.

Yeah. I mean, I just don't, I mean, if I was living in that house, I don't, again, just because I'm constantly talking to residents on Topton who are dealing with a very icy street. So I don't, I just not sure if you want water in the winter discharging constantly to make an icy driveway. So it, I mean, I'm surprised there's not another solution, I guess, available to

you. Another solution could be to have some pump discharge out in the front yard and have it go out to Topton Way. That really is the only other solution. Well, not

Topton, Forsyth. Yeah, Forsyth, sorry. That's okay. Yes. Scott, will you come? I mean... Just because I think there's somebody online.

I don't want to speak for you, but if we were to discharge it at the front property line, being 10 feet off the property line, potentially with the grade sloping slightly towards Forsyth, who knows what the actual grade is, it could potentially then go onto the public sidewalk and make that a nuisance in the wintertime. I'm not

an engineer. I'm also not an architect. I'm not a developer. My concern is the people that live on either side of this home and, quite frankly, the people that will potentially live in this house someday. So finding the best solution, that's what I'm looking for.

And given that it is extremely difficult to calculate the volume of water coming out of a sump pump, maybe instead of going –

Given a day like today, I can't even imagine so much that's coming out of people's

subways. Maybe have the sump pump discharge over in this area will be 10 feet or more away from the property line. So we have that distance where water can soak in. Obviously days like today, nothing's soaking in at this point anymore, but it gives us that 10 foot buffer. We're no longer having that some pump discharge going into the rain garden, the rain garden will just be taking care of what it was intended to take care of. And then the 10 foot of distance or greater will give some pump discharge time to soak in if and when the sump pump is running.

Does anybody else have any comments?

I just had a quick question. I know when we're dealing with larger properties, they have things that is like a catch basin under the ground that slowly releases water back out. Is that something that- It's the dry

well. It's not what you typically see from me, a big standpipe dry well. This is more of an old school dry well because it has a mini rain garden on top of

it. The basin style, then you would be able to enlarge that underground accordingly or-

The basin style that I typically use, you add capacity by adding rock. So if we're adding rock to this one, it's getting you the same thing that I think you're angling towards.

Yeah.

I think what you're describing is more of like a detention basin.

Thank you.

Okay.

Where I think...

You're talking more of like an institutional solution for a larger property where this is more of a smaller scale residential solution that both kind of achieve the same thing, but there's two different capacities. And I think what you're saying is there are different ways to engineer this to up that capacity

Right, to be on like the safe side of something. Over

engineer this to really you know give everyone a warm fuzzy that that's not going to leak onto that property

as I reply with Mr denlo we can easily add gravel to the deep in this drywall tag pass.

yeah so I guess at that point it's you know if we're adding rock how much rock and what does that do to the calculations and what does that change to the flow to the neighboring properties.

doesn't change the flow actually at all. What it does is it gives you more capacity for the next rain event.

I'm wondering if we move the pipe to the other side of the property so it's still 10 feet back and then you move your rain garden over. Is that going to be better for all?

You're not moving the rain garden over, are you? My suggestion was to relocate the discharge for the downspout for the sump pump over into that northern part of the yard.

Then could you shift the rain garden over to catch that as well? All this stuff?

I can lengthen it. I don't want to move it because we still... Oh, that's all the driveway stuff? Yes, that's catching what's coming off the driveway.

Right, so maybe lengthen it to also catch that runoff now that it's 10 feet back further on the other side of the property. Yeah, that's very doable.

It sounds to me if you extend the mini garden deep in it with rock and shift over the sump pump, would you be willing to live next door? No, I know. Yeah. Would you feel more secure? I would, yes.

But we do have, I mean, we have a tuck under a garage here, right? Sort of tuck under garage, sort of. Yeah. I'm just afraid there's a house and I, you know, I am on this board because I'm the aldermanic representative. So I hear from residents on Kingsbury where they have new homes that are above them. And in main, in big rain events where civil engineers like yourself have stood in front of us and said that, you know, we're not increasing flow. I am seeing rivers come behind people's houses onto people's adjoining property behind them on Pershing. So I don't want a situation here where we are going to have that. So I just, I mean, you know, I know the suggestion was that we would revise the plans. I mean, staff suggestion is that We would revise the plans in order to accommodate, you know, the kind of, you know, so we can accommodate the 10 feet from the property line. I don't know if that's something on us. That's something that, you know, can be done later. Is that something that we would perhaps continue the site plan review for? Again, I'm just really concerned here just because, again, we've got a big home that's up on top of the street and everything else is sloping down. So I want to make sure that I think we have to make sure that any discharge has to be at least 10 feet from the property line.

Yeah, I've not been arguing that one. Right, right. I

just, you know...

Yeah, I have no problem moving the sump pump discharge over and stretching out the rain garden to intercept that as well.

Hi, Blair Mellman with Mellman Brothers. And I just want to kind of add two points that, yeah, we're certainly welcome to doing whatever the board's recommendations are. Our intentions are we do not want to increase any water to any of the neighbor properties. We are absolutely on board in that. And I think actually with, correct me if I'm wrong, but our proposed runoff amounts are decreased from what they currently are right now. So I just want to be clear. So it is a bigger house than what's there square footage wise, but we actually have less concrete coverage, less runoff, thus less runoff than what's currently there. But again, overarching, we are going to do whatever you guys suggest, request, going deeper, whatever. We have no problems at all.

Yeah. And Blair, I appreciate that. Again, I have been in a situation where other homes on Kingsbury, there was a decrease, supposed to be a decreased amount of runoff and Neighbors aren't seeing that. So I just, you know, I think we need to take every precaution next year. I mean, needed to protect the neighbors. So

yeah. Question. Can we, if we were to move to approve it, can we delegate this engineering question back to Anna saying with the parameters, the intent is to reduce potential water runoff and that what we think that means extending the mini garden facility deepening the mini garden with rock and relocating the sump pump.

Sounds like that would be one of your conditions.

Right, that would be the condition. That's the way we wrote it is so that when they respond, they would provide that calculation. So he would be able to show how the capacity of the dry well mini rain garden increased with the new design. And

they would have to pass mustard with the staff. Right.

Yeah, I think one of the pieces that makes this different from what we're used to seeing, we are used to seeing dry wells that are located more interior to the site with overflow pop-up emitters. And those dry wells are usually directly connected to stormwater that's being captured from a certain area of the site and put there. This system is really just saying it's going to pick up the sheet flow that comes off of the surface, as opposed to intentionally collecting stormwater from a certain area. So this is really just to slow water. It's not... going to collect and hold it that you might see in like a cistern that might be connected to an MSD sewer for overflow or something like that. This is really as the water flows off of the driveway, it would hit this little culvert of the rain garden. And some of that water, instead of continuing to flow off the site, would instead fall into what they're referring to as the drywall, that the area of rock underneath it.

I guess, Ana, and then like from a professional, your professional opinion. So. why wouldn't there be a drywall here or why choose one? Or is it just a different?

Well, this came up, I think on a different, you referenced a different forest property where this came up. This has come up as a technique to really stop the sheet flow that we see off of driveways. Because as you mentioned, the slope goes down this driveway. So there's going to be water that comes down the driveway and at a higher speed would then continue to flush over the property line onto the neighbor's property. And so the dry well that's being proposed here, the rain garden is really to slow that water down as opposed to other dry wells that say we're going to take all of the roof area and we're going to put this here. So they function slightly differently because if it's not raining. You know, there's no sheet flow except if the sump pump was connected to it. And that's the other area that we've come up with. That's as you, as was already described, some pumps are really hard. They're challenging. And what we're seeing in a lot of areas and Clayton gardens is where there's a driveway that's below grade, meaning we need retaining walls on multiple sides of the driveway. There's usually a sump pump attached to a drain in the driveway. So that is the water flows down the driveway, doesn't flood the garage. And those sump pumps are then connected to pop-up emitters or to dry wells elsewhere in the yard. But because it's really hard to calculate what expected output there is from a sump pump, that's when we start to see pop-up emiters that are running more frequently because those calculations probably weren't necessarily included the same way you're used to when you originally approved the site plan. So in this instance, separating the sump pump from this dry well was recommended because then it kind of again separates the two issues of water being created. Because the hard part for us to gather from this plan was You're capturing sheet runoff from the driveway with the rain garden. So you can kind of estimate what the capacity you need on the dry well, but we can't estimate the sump pump. So the fear was that if we're attaching the sump pump that we know we have issues estimating with an intentional estimated capture from the, from the driveway, that's when we sometimes end up with not enough capacity. And then you get the overflow where there's nowhere else for it to go because it's only three feet from the property line except directly onto the neighbor. So separating the sump pump and extending the drive, the rain garden would do a better job of capturing those two items separately from each other.

Ana, so in your professional opinion, if we shift that discharge over to the green area here where we said where it can be more than 10 feet, that mini rain garden is extended then back across that property line. And then that rain garden is also deepened with additional rock. Do you feel those steps get far enough to address the concerns of the staff?

Right, so I'm not a civil engineer, but those are the recommendations from when we've talked to our contracted engineers to separate those out. That's something that we've discussed with them previously. So then when we would get... the response of that redesign, we would make sure that our engineers looked at it to agree with that. But that's the concept is that when you separate those, then you would be able to handle both better.

If I may, you're thinking this sump pump discharge but not extending the rain garden

No, I think you could, there's nothing wrong with extending the rain guard. And I think is basically what we've gotten to at this point. Yeah. The concern was really because we struggle to know what some pump output's going to be when we. I just wanted to

ask what my direction was going to be depending on the conditions from the board. Yes.

um with respect to the site plan review does um anybody else on the board have any comments or

I just had a quick, because since you're maxed out on your impervious coverage now, do you guys have a buyer already interested? No. I just think it's important because we've had developers come through where they've maxed it out and then that leaves no room for the homeowner to extend the deck, to extend the patio. I'm just making sure that these are all good sizes. For the deck, I mean, I think it was 12 foot. I don't remember. Is that sufficient? I know because you've maxed it at anything anywhere we

do not have a ladder today but we are aware of what our coverage is currently and you know we'll build within our parameters for certain

yeah I'm just thinking as the future homeowners for them to know like there's just no way I mean it's the deck design is that a sufficient amount of space to put chairs and you know the patio at the you know coming out of the basement like that can't get extended at all

Coming from the experience that we have with our architect and my brother and I, the experience that we are working in the City of Clayton, the buyer pool that is out there, this is plenty of sufficient space. We're comfortable with that.

Yes, I do have a question. What is the difference in the grade as you go down the driveway, the new driveway, to the adjacent Side and backyards.

To the left or to the south, the property line is about six inches plus or minus above the driveway. So it was enough that we didn't need a retaining wall. It's the green strip right down through there. Same as between the driveway and the house. And then once we're into the backyard, it's say level-ish backyard.

Okay. What about on the other side? Because you have a retaining wall there.

You have a retaining wall on the other side to help for the stairs coming down from the deck. So what's the height difference? That is only, it's less than two feet tall.

Okay.

Just so staff sort of knows what to expect. If you were to deepen that dry well, it looks like you've got 2.58 feet. in your detail there do you have any idea what kind of depth we might be looking at are you talking about doubling it or can you talk about adding gravel to make it deeper to build capacity

we can we can add another foot we can add another two feet yeah it's i mean if you have a percentage of added capacity you know i can work towards that otherwise i was saying just adding you know another i

don't know that any of us would know that's why yeah

Yeah, I mean, adding two feet of rock gives a significant additional capacity.

And I think maybe just to add, I think it's designed right now to capture per the calculations the proper amount. So anything we're adding additional is going to be over the amount. So we're not like trying to hit a threshold because we already have. So whether we add a foot or two feet, whatever it is, of course, we're fine with. We're only going extending beyond what that current threshold requirement would be.

Yeah, I think and I appreciate that. I just think as we're seeing outside today, I think we're just seeing increasing rain events that are 100-year rain events that come every year now. So I think being airing on the side of more rock rather than less would be, I think, a good idea.

Sure.

Right.

Yeah. That's okay. I just wanted to be somewhat specific and make sure it was effective. That way, you know, not that you come back with an additional five inches of rock and then we're in this situation where it's deeper, but it's probably not.

And also lengthening it to get into that green section is also going to almost double the capacity without going any deeper either. So going deeper and longer, we're going to get to three or four times the capacity of what it currently is designed for.

4.58 feet with

an additional two feet. Is there any other comments? Would anybody on Zoom or in the public like to make a comment? And this is just respect to the site plan. So architecture will be next. But if you'd like to come up, you can come up to the microphone and state your name and address and just make sure the green light's on.

Yes, my name is Bruce Bryan. I live at 228 Topton Way. And I just had a question. You mentioned that you're at the limit for impervious coverage. And when they calculated impervious coverage on our home, I was surprised because I think it was the first 15 feet of what I thought was my lot wasn't included because it belonged to the city of Clayton. Is there a similar situation here? And has that been taken care of in the calculation for impervious coverage?

And, you know, so the difference on this street is that the right of way is improved with a tree line and a sidewalk. So that's where on, on Topton Brighton, that 15 feet gets harder to know, but yes, this calculation. So you can see the dark black line on the screen that outlines the property line. So the only calculation is include is private property.

Okay. And there's no exceptions. This is the 55% of impervious coverage. Is that, I believe that's correct. Is that right? Yes. There hasn't been any change in that or what's it called when you give an exception? I know there's a word for that, but I don't know what it is. A what? A

variance. A variance. Thank you. Yeah, there has not been a variance. That's the only

question I got. Okay. Thank you. One other thing. Two things. If this gets built the way it's planned and the homeowner decides they went for a sidewalk in, what's the recourse there? And secondly, if my backyard gets flooded, what's the recourse there for me if these calculations don't turn out right? Do I come back to you? Do I go to the homeowner? Do I go through the builder?

What was your first question, sir?

The first question is if the homeowner decides you're going to pour a patio in the back,

That would be where you would call the city. So if they're increasing their impervious coverage back there, you are welcome to call the city and we would send out a code enforcement person and tell them they cannot do that. My

second question was by flooding in my backyard. What do I do with that?

Yes, so that would be something. Yes, it would. It wouldn't be something as the city because it would be a private cause of action between you and the bills builder. So yes, you would. That would be something that you would go to the builder or at that point, the homeowner.

Yes, thank you.

You're welcome.

I'm Alex Silversmith. I'm a 221 Forsyth, which is the building to the south. So I'd like to think of Clayton as a little bit of a one stop light town in the middle of a bigger city. So I think I know a number of you came in, my wife is very good friends with Lynn Waldman. Jim, I think we went to WashU around the same time together. I really appreciate hearing a lot of the concerns. I know I've seen gentlemen driving around the neighborhood building very beautiful homes. So I think the question is just how do we build this in a slightly different way to avoid some of the flooding concerns? Really appreciate what you brought up tonight. I think I'll sum it up and then maybe illustrate a little bit with the pointer and forgive me for bringing my phone for some notes. But I think the request is to have make sure our water is discharged to the street and then also make sure that a stormwater, you know, the city contractor engineer I can review any update and make sure that the discharge to the south is not higher because currently it is higher. And I'll just point for folks who don't know. So this is my porch right here. And even though you can see the deck, this is where the rain garden folks are talking about. This is my deck. My driveway is about five feet under that grade. So even though the grade at line is the same, it'll all just come down. And that, you know, as folks know, on a night like tonight, I mean, we would get a lot of water. I'd say we get just enough not to have issues at the house, but I think any more water would be too much. And so any sort of additional water flow, we would just want to make sure there's both not additional discharge that'll go effectively right into the house, and then also that When all that water is coming out it's getting dumped out another way, so those are my two kind of big ticket requests on this plan and. that's that's all I got are we going to talk about the House after

yes that'll come Thank you so much yeah Eric can you talk yeah can you do if you wouldn't mind addressing some of

those. Your question about water flowing over towards your property we're actually lowering. Right on our side of the property line. So we're taking water away from you be directed into the rain garden slash dry well which, as we've been discussing is going to be have increased capacity so we're taking water that was going towards you now away from so you should be having an improved condition.

I.

It's just the way everything laid out and because there is that more discharge was your initial reason why we designed that mini rain garden slash drywall was because there was an additional But it's not going to you. It's going back to the two to one bright and that's why we designed that rain garden slash dry well to offset that increase So,

Alex, do you mind just coming up? Sorry. So the

question is, how do we, when I just see that, I just boil it down to a single number because I'm a simple guy. So when I'm looking at higher discharge to the south,

Well, it's not to the south. It's going to the rear.

Okay. The original report noted.

The south portion. Okay. South portion going to the.

And then again, forgive my simple nature. Rain garden sounds like a bit like a gravel bunch of kind of impervious gravel that the rain goes in, which on a nice like sprinkle night would be fine on a night like tonight. I was assuming when I came in. Get some water. You tell me, you're the expert. Right.

Well, this, it's not, you're not going to see gravel. There's going to be MSD compost in Minnesota. So it's going to be lawn. It's going to be landscaped. It's going underneath there is going to be a clean gravel. So you had a 40% void spaces. That's what we calculate for the storage of water. And now that we're doubling the depth of it and increasing the length of it, we are almost quadrupling the volume, the capacity of this so that not only the Brighton Way neighbor, but also the Tottenway neighbor will be seeing reductions in runoff. And you can see by these contours, we're pulling all the water towards the north away from your property.

Can I just repeat like backwards? Maybe like what you've said, hopefully maybe take some confusion out, at least how I understand it. And you can tell me if I'm correct or not. And this might help your question. In the initial report, it showed an additional runoff towards in the direction of 221 Brighton Way, his property. So in response to that, this drywall was designed then to reduce that runoff and to keep it so there is no additional runoff. Then on top of that, what we've talked about at this meeting is deepening that well, that drywall by an additional two feet and then lengthening that drywall to the north. So just by what we see on the screen, we have already at least, and we're talking theoretical numbers, obviously, we know that this is all difficult, but we've taken care of that additional runoff that you have seen in the site report, the staff report. And then on top of that, the measures that we've talked about tonight would then further mitigate that. We obviously don't know to what degree, but it would go further.

Right. Provides more capacity for more detention to further reduce the runoff onto adjacent properties. Like tonight.

Why not come up again? I'm sorry.

So I guess the question is, on a night like tonight, would that water come into the house? Because I think a lot of this was based on the test of a 20-minute rain. And so I think back to the original request, I think the original request is someone who, again, not me, someone who knows this sort of stuff, shows that the plan reflects... that through whatever the 100-year rain is or a rain like tonight, in simple terms, would not cause overflow discharge.

It can always be a rain event that is greater than the design capacity. We're only required by the city and by MSD to design to a 15-year, 20-minute rain event Most times on a house, on custom homes, I design to the 100-year storm. And

that's, I think, the worst.

Right. And adding... I would have to run all the numbers to know what kind of rain event this increased dry well slash rain garden would provide. But what we had right now was already to a 15-year, 20-minute rain event. Increasing these capacities, we're going to be getting closer to the 100- year. 100-year is only 35% more water than the 15-year. So... It's not a big leap from 15 to 100 year design.

But really how you've had that design is it's all going to this drywall. It's not going to his property. Correct.

So the water will flow towards the drywall versus onto an adjoining property. With

the driveway being lowered compared to your property, nothing, you know, water's not going uphill. So it's all being pulled away from your property line. My

garage line is lower than that. My garage one will be still about four feet lower. If you go five feet down, I mean, again, you're the engineer. The water flows down.

It's

just going through the gravel. I think that's where having and like I think Eureka, City of St. Louis, I mean most of them do require the 100-year. That's where just being consistent. And then if somebody just runs it and says, hey, based on this, then I'd feel better knowing

The grading on the new driveway, it being lower, it will prevent anything from running to your side.

So I think if you look at the plans in the next discussion, the front elevation is being Right. Effectively run off to my property.

Well, with the grades that we have, water cannot go towards your property.

I mean, Alex, I'm not an engineer either, but it sounds like the way the grading is, everything should shift more to the... Yeah.

No, that's what I was seeing from the plan, that the grading is really taking the water to... the backyard of the new home. It's sloping. It's a large swale, if you will, taking the water in that direction. So with or without the rain garden, you being adjacent next door, you're not going to get the water. Without the rain garden dry well, then the neighbor behind will get the water.

We're essentially creating a berm. Yeah.

Do we have, are there any more comments? It looks like the gentleman online, if you would like to make a comment or woman online, you can raise your hand. No, yeah, do you want, got it. Yeah. Do you want to come up? Sorry.

I think the plan, the last part, this is a small one, is just, I think it involves sawing through some concrete right here. And I was just hoping maybe, you know, right, our old neighbors, that basically abuts my house. So one half, this little block here, I think the plan is it would just get sawed through. I was hoping maybe there was another way we could do it that just looked a little bit Because you know so it's not just leaving the exposed concrete I don't know if there's a way to do that that doesn't increase cost too much, but just so you know again not an expert, but that that was my.

I'm having a hard time visualizing that. Do you know, visualizing, Ana, would that be something that would, do you know?

So it's on, if you want to go to the demo sheet. If

you have Google Maps, I can see it. And I think contestants, we can certainly speak outside of this, but yeah, we would certainly welcome coordinating and working with how we can make that cut because the His pad kind of abuts directly to the existing driveway, which is where the new driveway will go. So there's obviously going to have to be cut once we get rid of that old driveway. But yes, we will cert and he kind of shows it right there. It's got that concrete pad. Oh, got it. But yes, We would certainly have all intention and welcome those conversations because we're going to want it to look good for obviously the new home. Yeah.

For them to expire. Exactly. Sure. Okay.

Absolutely. Okay. Thanks. um all right if are there any other comments up here from the board um if there are no more comments do we have a motion i

move that we adopt the staff recommendation regarding the site plan review including uh the two conditions are you guys familiar with them uh regarding the The plan shall be revised such that stormwater runoff to an adjacent property does not increase, and the proposed sump pump shall be at least 10 feet from the property lines, and that will be reviewed by the staff. And the second one is 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 shall submit proof of filing prior to approval of a building permit.

David or Anna, do you want us to specify that? Okay, so Bob, if you could.

With regard to the condition number one, in revising the stormwater runoff to adjacent properties, we foresee that the rain garden shall be extended and deepened, and perhaps even widened, and that the sump pump in all likelihood would be relocated from the existing plans that are presented here

tonight. Make

sure the increase in depth is at least two feet.

We'll increase the rock depth.

And going back to the rock garden to... Going to depth, we anticipate it would be deepened by about two feet.

We have to specify how much we widen or lengthen, I guess, the rain garden in the back.

If you want it to lengthen to at least pass the point of the new sump pump discharge.

Yes. So moved.

Second.

All those in favor? Aye. Opposed? All right, so that motion passes. So the next item on the agenda is the architectural review process for 231 North Forsyth. We'll have Ryan summarize the staff report first.

New construction is common in Clayton Gardens, with single-story homes often being replaced with larger ones. The home features a hipped roof, the front-facing wall dormers, and a covered entry, arched windows, and accents from the second floor. The large side facades are perforated with windows and one box bay on the north side. Plantings are proposed around the base facade. The combination of windows and plantings will assist in breaking up the larger massing of the facade. The new home is proposed to be 29 feet and 6 1⁄2 inches. The proposal incorporates the use of increased setbacks, which is identified as a mitigation method in Section 410.385 . This section recommends increasing the side yard setback by an additional foot per five feet of height difference. Both side yard setbacks exceed this requirement for height mitigation. The structure would comprise of tan brick with black windows, stone accents, and charcoal blend architectural shingles. A wood deck with an iron railing is proposed at the rear of the home. The front entry path and driveway are proposed to be exposed aggregate. Cedar enclosures are proposed for trash storage and HVAC units. The proposal complies with requirements of the R2 District, Clayton Gardens, and the Architectural Review Guidelines. Staff recommends approval is submitted.

Thank you, Ryan. All right, we will open the discussion. Lauren, will you be presenting?

My name is Lauren Strutman. I'm the architect for the project. Thank you all for coming out on this rainy night. This is an all-brick traditional home. We have, you can see on the board up here, black architectural windows, a tan brick ceiling. a kind of cream colored limestone and a charcoal blend roof. The house is brick on all four sides, and I think it's a very traditional house that would blend in well to other new homes built on Forsyth. And I'm here to answer any questions that you may have on it.

I'll open the discussion up here. Bob, do you wanna start with any thoughts on the architecture?

I would like first talk about the height. I've gotten letters being concerned about the height. I drove around your area. I talked to the city. The height is consistent with heights in the Garden District, first of all. But one immediate home, a few homes are significantly different, of course. At the same time, I realize that the trend in the Clayton Garden is to go up to two floors. And that's been going on for for quite a while. And to solve that you move the setbacks

right

and you just tell me what's going on there from your point of view.

So for every five feet of additional height, according to your Clayton Gardens guidelines, you have to have one foot of additional setback. And we have substantially more than what's required to mitigate the height on both the north and the south. On the south, we have required a 10-foot setback, and we actually have on the south side 13 to 15 feet. I'm rounding off the numbers. We're required to have 10 foot. We have 13 to 15 feet, and then along the north, we have 11 to 13 feet with seven and a half foot setback required, and I'm talking about the setback plus the additional mitigation that's required to mitigate against the neighbor's home, so we're not even close in terms of we're very much exceeding the setback increase for the height increase over the neighbors on the left and right. And we kind of purposely designed the house to be more narrow, not hitting our side yard setbacks out of respect for the neighbor's homes. I

want to hear you explain it.

Lauren, can I jump in? And I, you know, as you said, there are a bunch of like techniques that, you know, you can use to kind of mitigate that height. Um, Did you ever think about, you know, making this a shorter house and adding more dormers or something? You know, it doesn't look at all very similar to surrounding, you know, just again, to kind of soften the height. On

that front elevation.

And we did that to mitigate the height. I think the market is for a two-story home in Clayton Gardens, not a story and a half of dormers. But we did try to mitigate the height by sloping that front roof down. It's not at a full nine-foot bearing in the front of the house.

I also have a quick question. It looks like your house is set up higher, like, you know, like the basement level below. You can see a lot of that. Is there a way to, like, set the house down more to help for that

height? We can't set the house down anymore and have the proper drainage on the driveway, and we only have a nine-foot basement on this house. It's certainly not a 10-foot or an exaggerated basement height. Actually, when we work with Eric Vietmeyer, we ask him to set it as low as we can, and he has put it as low as

I mean, as I drove around the neighborhood, I saw similar circumstances. You got the two-story home next to a couple of ranch-style homes, and there is a significant height difference. The only thing I would say to that is the trend is already established, and I think our job is just making sure we mitigate the adverse effects to the existing ranch-style homes as much as we can. And I think maybe the question here is, is the setback sufficient? I'm not sure I have that much trouble with it. I don't think it's going to block the sun or something. These are north, south, not east, west circumstances. Any more people want to talk about

it?

Helen,

do you have

anything?

Have you, when I look at it, it is very, I get a very vertical feeling with the windows. You have the flat head and then the two windows above are arched so your eye kind of goes that way. Have you looked at getting rid of the arched head on the second floor and just keeping that strong horizontal. And then maybe putting the arch below, on the windows below, so that your eye looks more at the first floor as opposed to being pulled up

The dormers that we're showing are going to create a little vault in each of those bedrooms on the left and right side. And I know our clients, the Melman brothers wanted something in that vault rather than a blank drywall triangle. And we very specifically with these dormers tried to bring down the height of the house. And I don't know that they'd want to change it to put the arches on the main level instead of the the upper level i appreciate that i

don't know how it would look i did not draw it up and go which two i like which is better how should we change it no that's up to you um but it just the dormer effect and the arched window brought my eye up there it's attractive but trying to fit in with the neighbors, and it's not just one neighbor that is one story. There's a number of them. Could you do something like that? Kind of reinforce the horizontal of the roof line And then put the interest, you know, at the first

floor. Yeah, I've made the porch a horizontal flat roof and we've put a horizontal band all the way around the house. And I just, I don't know. And we've also just seriously exceeded the rules on increased setback for neighbors being, we're not like on the edge of it, we're many feet away. in excess of what would be required. And I know there's another rule that you can plant some columnar trees along a property line, but it would only be like two trees. And that actually is an approved method by Clayton. We thought by putting a substantially bigger side yard setback in would be the nicest thing to do to the neighbors and not have a new house on top of their homes.

I think the way you've detailed it with the brick and the stone on all four sides, that is excellent for the neighbors. That doesn't always happen. We start seeing the secondary material percentages creeping up, up, up. So no, that was my only thought to try to pull it down visually.

Kimmy?

Yeah. And just, you know, since this is going to be such a dominant force on this section of the street, I'm just curious, like what, you know, and I know you say you have like some details in the brickwork, but like when you're coming up, you know, Forsyth and you see it's going to be a statement coming up that street. And like, I don't feel like the side elevations are really doing very much. I know you kind of added that On the right elevation, that little bump out, it just seems just kind of like a giant brick. I mean, granted, I see that little details, but I wish there was just a little bit more interest. I'm just kind of curious why. I mean, it's just kind of a giant brick box, really.

I think we have a remarkably large amount of windows on the side. If you look at the side of the roof line, it's actually two roof lines, not one. There's a roof on the front of the house and a roof on the back of the house. It's two different roofs to break it up. And there's

just no change in the

elevation. Is that right? It's just flat, though. It's not a flat roof there up there on the side. And it's the same on the left and the right side to break it up and we're also trying to not obviously have a roof that's too tall to exceed the height.

No, I'm just saying like the brickwork, like on your left elevation, that's all one plane. Is that accurate? As a lot of homes typically are done. Right. I just think, you know, with the exposure that these elevations are going to get just from the size and like the neighboring, you know, homes, how much of a, it just seems like something that's missing from this that could be added. But yeah, that's my thoughts.

Yeah, I think overall, like looking at all this, I mean, it's very clear you guys have followed the letter of the law. I think kind of, I guess what the discussion is going to be is does it follow the spirit of the Clayton Gardens overlay district? And if you read through that overlay, I mean, one of the very first things it says in that overlay is avoid tall blocky building forms. And I think it's really hard argue looking at this, that this isn't a tall blocky building for them. But I mean, as far as the Clayton gardens overlay has a maximum height of 30 feet, I believe you're at 29 foot nine and nine 16th. So, I mean, we're, we're good by like two inches there. Um, it also says in the Clayton gardens, overlay, I mean, this is something I'm curious. This is brick color shall be compatible with that found in other homes in the block. Um, uh, I don't know if that's something you can speak to. That's something I have found interesting. I think since I've been a member of this board, I haven't seen anyone propose a red brick house. It's always tan brick. So I don't know. If there's a development reason that tan brick sells better or a reason that you'd expressly want to avoid red brick or something. I look at as far as with this overlay district, the spirit of that is when new homes are being built, those new homes won't visually dominate the homes that are already there. So I look at this, I see what is a very tall, fairly blocky form. Then I feel that's accentuated further by a brick that's lighter than the homes around it. So there it stands out more. And this overlay gives basically five separate ways in which a home can fit in better with the context of the homes around it. This design definitely takes one of those into account as far as reducing the setbacks. But I almost wonder if... house went out more but more stepping down was taken in or something like that that variation would remove maybe some of that blockiness and help it fit in the context of the neighborhood a little bit better i don't know that's i just threw a lot at you so that's a lot to speak to but uh i don't know what thoughts you have on them

i mean i feel like this There have been an awful lot of new homes built on Forsyth, a ton of them. And I've in fact designed quite a few of them. And the one prevailing thing you see in Forsyth, which is I think kind of wonderful, is all the homes are very different styles. There's not like one look that everything has. Everything has a variety. And I've done a lot of homes in Clayton and I feel like this will really blend well. And we tried very hard to be sensitive to the neighbors on the left and right by not Jumping our building over to be at the minimum, we have substantially greater setbacks and landscaping on both sides. There's obviously a much bigger area to put landscaping in if we had been at the setbacks. And I've lowered the second floor to be the roof kind of as low as you could do it and have a second floor. And I feel like we have a good design here. Most of the homes you see do have straight sides. They don't go in and out. And we put a lot of windows in and two different roof lines to break that up. So I think Blair and Scott and I worked hard to come up with something that fits in the neighborhood. And I will say that this is a dark tan brick, not a light tan brick. It's not one of those white houses that really stands out. And I feel like it would look fine on the street.

specifically with like stepping down on the sides is that something that was considered at all or is that something you looked at or something you could possibly consider in the design that you know might not take it kind of from this one straight plane but maybe bring it down a little bit on the sides in any way um

we have just a typical uh second floor with four bedrooms uh there aren't any other extra spaces and if we were to uh somehow reduce the second floor it would be difficult structurally to build and also probably make it less than a four-bedroom home and uh or we could add one-story pieces to the side but if we added one-story pieces we're we're creating more impervious coverage on the lot by going straight up and down we're kind of minimizing the coverage on the lot so uh uh no we haven't given consideration to make a three-bedroom second floor or something like that and reduce it

you know in the picture that you're showing us the roof line is a lot higher than in the picture here and and and the picture on the screen yeah it's much more attractive

and actually i will say uh The people that do, we used to have a different person do our renderings and he just retired about two weeks ago. And the people that did this tend to try, these rendering companies tend to try and make a house look impressive like you're looking up at it. And the correct view is the drawing that's on my screen. I would say the 3D kind of exaggerates the tallness of the dormers. And this is how the house will be built is what you're seeing right here on the screen.

So is it fair to say that the roof here is going to be

above the dormers.

Above the dormers.

Well, above the dormers, right.

And my statement is that looks much more attractive.

Yes, I agree.

With regard to the overall comments, you know, there are some really significantly attractive homes. But this one is like a standard model when I drive through in a way. The entryways are all recessed, as in here. It does have different depths on a facade. It's broken up a bit, which is good. You know, I think the trend has been so established that they're going to look kind of like that. And I would see no reason...

I appreciate your comments. And Lauren, I've sat on this board for almost two years now, and I think you do wonderful work. You designed the Rosenblum home on Westmoreland that I think is beautiful. I find this house to be very boxy. I just wish there had been a little bit more... Careful consideration to just thinking about, as Jim mentioned stepping down thinking about and I understand I appreciate again your explanation for why you did what you did i'm not suggesting that we're going to redesign I just. I just wish there had been a little bit more here given to. I think the surrounding areas thinking about, you know, and I think this is a broader discussion about thinking about when it have been nice to maybe build a new home but a new home that's one and a half stories to think about how we can look at the surrounding neighborhood. I understand from a financial perspective that's difficult, but I just I think it's something to think about so. Um, are there any other comments up here? Otherwise we can take some comments from the audience as well.

Yeah, I would like to say just one more thing. I think we need to consider is like putting an overlay district in place is no easy feat. This is not something that's accomplished over a weekend. I mean, this is probably a one, two year process. It involves lots of input from the neighbors, uh, from the neighborhood, from the city and everything. Uh, uh, So when these guidelines, I think, are put in place, you know, I don't think we should necessarily slough them off too easily because by, you know, every time we, you know, say, okay, well, you know, this looks like some houses in there, but we'll go ahead and do it anyway. Then, you know, we're, I think, kind of hastening some of those others being torn down. And the whole point of an overlay district when it's put in place is to keep the character of a neighborhood. So when these guidelines are put in place, I think it's really important to kind of consider that and consider does this specific design kind of comply with the spirit of those guidelines?

Are there any comments from the audience?

No. Funded our house. Oh, okay. I got in on this late. My name is Bruce Bryan. I'm a 228 Topton. And when the sign went up that house was going to be built, I came right to City Hall and said, I'd like to see the zoning rules because I was subjected to those when we did our house. And a very nice man told me that he would send them to me and I got them online. And he said I would be notified before the meeting if I lived within 200 feet. Well, I got notified on Thursday by mail. And so I've kind of scrambled to get my thoughts together. I have not had a chance to see the plants. I emailed some things to Ryan, which you may have already. I've listened to the drainage and that sort of thing. I have some handouts here. I don't know if it's proper to pass those out. Is that all right?

You're welcome. I don't

Is that what you already gave the city? Excuse me? You already gave these to the city. This

is new because I had a scramble. I put some stuff. Because the city

emailed us. Yeah, I emailed

some. Well, first of all, I want to comment on The drawings I see here that really, it's far worse than I even thought for me. I'm a 228 and the slope goes straight down. And right now, what is the first floor looks right over my fence. If you look at the photographs in the back, you can see that it's under exhibit two, that's the existing house. And now I've learned that this whole thing is going to be built up on a berm. So the roof line that I drew in there is going to be even higher. And the other thing that I didn't know about is there's a deck out the back toward my house. And when we built our house, we have a deck on the back with the garage underneath. And I thought I would qualify that I could just use that, get into the setback. But they said no. You can't put the deck with a garage underneath it. That has to be 30 feet from the back. So I had to redesign the house to push the deck, I mean, the garage under the house. So now it looks like we really don't have a 30-feet set deck. We got less than that because there's a deck sitting there. So those are two things I didn't know about. The other... One of the questions I had, you were emailed this, is how the maximum height was calculated. And I was wondering, I guess you've read that, if someone looked at the average grade or if this is the street grade when we're calculating the height. Because if you look at the grade of this lot, I sent you a photograph, it goes straight down. And so the actual average grade of this site is much less than street grade. And now we got it raised up even higher. So does anyone know the answer to that question? Has Vols told you what the average grade of the... of the property as the site.

Do you want, sir?

Yeah, it's on one of the civil sheets, but the definition of height does use the existing average grade before construction to measure off of.

Yes. I was wondering if that was observed in this case.

Yes.

It was.

I mean, I'm...

Oh, that's my question. Because I, as I said, I didn't have any look at the plans and it seems that this has been raised even higher because of the burn that's created so you can have a nine foot basement. So... I'll go on, but that's a question I have that needs to be answered, I think, to see if it's even compatible.

So as you see on the screen right there, the average existing grade is actually below. So he's pointing to it. So the line of the average existing grade that the height's calculated off of is below the finished floor of the new house.

Okay. So then the height in the front has to start from there, correct? Because it has to be 30 feet from the average grade. I'm looking at these drawings. I don't think that's true, is it?

Yes, that's what the drawing show. It's the average existing grade to the mean slope of the roof.

No, but Ana, just because I find this confusing as well, sir. So it doesn't go to the top of the house. It goes to the mean, like the middle of the roof. Okay. So it doesn'T go to the top Of the roof. I know that's confusing. So it goes to them kind of the middle of the Roof.

That lays my concern. Okay. I want to make sure that was taken care of. I used to be an engineer in my old days. Yeah, no, I

find that confusing as well.

Okay, I'm going to then move forward on what I have written here, so if you want to follow along. I believe that the plan submitted for this new home clearly violates zoning restrictions for this portion of Clayton Gardens and should be rejected. Section 41.0385 clearly states that homes west of Forsyth have traditionally been one-story ranch designs with a strong horizontal orientation. Homes built with increased heights and densities in this area tend to be highly visible in contrast to the established neighborhood, often dramatically reducing lawn areas and the traditionally open character of the lots. We were talking about the spirit of these zoning regulations. Design should be responsive to the surrounding development, ensuring that they are compatible in terms of mass, scale, and height with existing homes along the block. This requirement clearly prohibits the construction of large, incompatible homes, even if setback, height, and impervious coverage requirements are met, which might not be the case here. And I've been reassured that it is. So I think those have been met. The building code is in place to protect residents, not developers that come in from the outside, hoping to maximize profit without regard for current residents. We moved into this area because of the expansive lawn areas, wide open character and ambience of the neighborhood. All residents have made considerable investments in their homes to live here. The area is known as Clayton Gardens, not Clayton McMansions packed with endless behemoths or Clayton Castles because of a palace squeeze on a small lot surrounded by humble homes. Consider the impact on the adjacent one-story ranch at 221 North Forsyth. My neighbor's right behind me. We have a picture back here, Exhibit 1, that gives you some idea what this might look like, and there's also drawings here. If Clayton allows a 30-foot high two-story box to be erected next door, all sense of space and openness present when this house was purchased is lost. The house will be overwhelmed in shadow and in the splendor of the new mansion next door. The only use for the now undesirable shabby house will be as a tear down. My neighbor's home value is reduced to the price of the building lot. The process would then move down the street. Our own home at 228 Topton Way would lose value if a huge incompatible structure overwhelm my backyard and ruin the spaciousness and privacy we've enjoyed since we moved into Clayton Gardens. You see the picture in the back. As noted above, Section 410.385 requires that the design of a new home be compatible in terms of mass, scale, and height with existing homes along the block. The existing home at 231 North Forsyth is a one-story ranch, 1749 square feet, with a two-car garage. Proposed two-story replacement is 5800 square feet with a four-car garage. that is 3.3 times the square footage, most definitely not compatible in terms of mass scale or height with existing home or the surrounding homes along the block. As noted in section 410.385, which is attached for your viewing, the scale for compatibility is the existing homes along the block, if you look, I have a map, I've got it labeled as exhibit three, And these are the homes surrounding 231 Forsyth. The ones marked with an X are one story houses, some have dormers and some don't. And if you stand at the top of our block and look down Brighton way, all you see are one story houses. They're all marked with Xs. There are two stories houses farther down but they're out of view because the road turns. Likewise on Topton, mine is the second one down, I have dormers on my house. Again, one-story house, some with dormers. As far as you can see, the houses with the Xs are one-story houses. So you can see all the houses surrounding 231 Forsyth on my block are one-story homes. So this is a map of existing homes on the block that we're supposed to compare with and make this compatible with. One-story houses, some with dormers as far as you can see. As the roads go downhill and curves off the left on Brighton and the left on Topton, there are no two-story houses in view on our block. When renovations and additions have been done by residents who live here, the building code has been strictly enforced without exception. I was not allowed to alter my roof line and had to comply with the requirement of compatibility with surrounding development, which is a long story, but I had to do that. A real estate developer must be held to the same standard. It is time for the City Plan Commission Architectural Review Board to stand up for the residents they serve and reject the proposal plans for 231 North Forsyth. The developer has a clean sheet of paper. There's no reason they cannot design and build a smaller house compatible with the lot size, neighborhood, and Clayton zoning for this area. They, of course, also had the option of choosing another building site for their two-story, 5,800 square foot house with a four-car garage. If you reject the current plans, the builder will find another way to repugn profits, but not at the expense of Clayton residents. If you accept these plans, we will be robbed of the neighborhood we have invested in, enjoyed and planned for our residents as we age. That is not something we can walk away from with profits, but we'll have to live with. Thank you.

much less articulate speaker than my neighbor. So I would just, if we pull up that original diagram, the one that shows the front with the neighboring houses. There you go, yes. So I think this really just illustrates in kind of the plane. I mean, again, I think it looks like the finishes look beautiful the homes you guys built are really beautiful homes. My neighbor's home, very pretty. So clearly designed nice homes. I think the question is, I mean, it just looks so much higher than the house to the left, which is my house. And I think Robert has made a point around this kind of what's happening in the neighborhood. I would argue there's a way to do it, but just maybe slightly differently that doesn't accentuate the height as much. And I would also argue it is different when if you've got five two-story homes, like, you know, you have a lot of streets where you do have two-story homes on Kingsbury, on Topton. So building another new two-story home is not as big of an adjustment. Similarly, I would say even on Kingsbury or on Brighton or on Forsyth, you do have some older ranches in between larger new homes, but majority of those homes are new. So the impact is, I think, huge. less felt this is you've got five single story or story and a half homes with one in the middle so it just stands out a little bit more so again to me it's a how do we do it slightly modified but not not do it just uh you know when you look at that and i'm thinking of looking out the window how do you how do you get a little sunlight so that that was my those are my two cents i appreciate your time

thank you Does anybody, anybody online? Oh, yep. Mr. Mrs. Anjul. Yes. You can speak.

Okay. Thank you. So I'm Anjul Sharma, one of the owners at 233 North Forsyth and our house neighbors are the proposed new construction. And I just want to let you know that I heard what Bruce and Alex said, and as a homeowner, I have to agree with what they say. I think Bruce highlighted the most important points to you. But if you look at other constructions where the two-story high homes have been built, they match the houses next to them. But this house is going to stick out among the houses next to it. I just want to let you know that the height difference is too much and it will really impact the privacy and the value of the houses we are living in. In fact, like as Bruce mentioned, that I'm afraid that in future, a house will be left as a lot price only. It's going to be a tear-down house. So we moved in for two reasons. Of course, two important reasons. One is privacy of the house, which, of course, with the big house looming next to doors and many windows facing us and the deck facing us, would be seriously hampered. is a value offer of a construction um which i think is going to be really uh decreased with this new house coming next to us so i i mean i i do understand that moving on this is a new thing these are old houses and the new construction has to come in but uh I was hoping that if this house can be redesigned to look at least to a somewhat similar house next to Alex's house and my house, and not stick out, because this is a big high difference. And this is going to loom over both our houses. And of course, Bruce House, which is going to be, because if you have the view where we stand, Bruce is going to lose all privacy. Because if the deck is right next to them, he has no privacy left from his backyard. So I do understand what he was saying. Thank you.

Thank you, Angela. Do you

want to respond at all, Lauren? I do want to make a comment that this is not a 5,800-square-foot house. Bruce is including the finished lower level, which is optional. They don't even know if they're going to finish the lower level or not. Normally, the square footage of a house is said to our codes here in Clayton for the main level and the upper level, and it's 4,457, not 5,800 square feet. of house and i feel like this is very similar to a lot of homes that in terms of massing that have been built on forsyth forsyth's a street that has got a lot of new larger homes on it all down the street particularly on the west side that this house is on and i feel like we've far exceeded the requirements for mitigating the height compared to the neighbors and uh We can't lower the house without putting some sort of pump station on the driveway and more retaining walls. So I feel like we've made a very reasonable submittal here that meets all of your codes and ordinances. We're not here asking for any variances. Thank you.

Do you want to make one more comment?

I would just like to respond to that. I'm not a real estate person, and clearly, yes, 1,000 feet is in the basement, but I also heard here that the house had to be raised up because we were going to accommodate a nine-foot basement, and a nine-foot seems to me to be part of the house. That's why I included it. I wasn't trying to be deceitful at all. There was also a mention of trees, and I don't know what's going to happen with this. Hopefully, this house won't be built. It won't be an issue, but if The board decides to go ahead with this, and I have looming over in my backyard. I wish at least there would be a requirement that they put some big hedge in or something to preserve some of what I paid for when I bought my backyard and when I moved in this neighborhood. I thought I was going to be living in a place that was Clayton Gardens and not Clayton McMansions, which this is turning into. The other point I wanted to make that Lauren brought up, yes, there are two-story houses on Forsyth. But if you look at the zoning, what's important is the houses nearby and the houses on the block. And that's why I was so careful to provide you all with a map showing the houses nearby are all one story. So yeah, if there's two-story houses down the block, fine, they can live there. You can build it down there if you want. I just don't want it built in my backyard. And, and my neighbor's backyard. And that's what the planning commission has decided that it shouldn't be built there because it's not compatible. And that's the only point I wanted to make. Thank you.

Are there any other further comments up here by any of the plan commission members?

I guess I just, you know, one of like point out that, you know, there, there, it was a blank space, you know, like the design of this house. And so I do think there's, there could have been a lot more care just with like the not making a box. I just think, you know, the flat sides of the house with the sensitivity of, you know, being able to see everything. I just think I wish that that would have been something to consider a little bit more.

I do want to say one other thing too, just I guess that's also kind of more in your guys' favor in the sense that these overlay districts are put in place. I think this is a situation where you have two houses that are dramatically lower, but I I don't think we should be putting ourselves as a board in a position where we're always letting the houses directly next to it dictate what is being built there. And that's why these overlay districts have height maximums, and that's why they have all of these other attributes. So I don't think it should be held against them that there's two relatively... Low houses next row. But at the same time, you know, we do have all of these considerations for Clayton Gardens overall. And I think it's just important to look how many of those are being taken into consideration with this design. Do you

have any comments at all?

No, I mean, I think it echoes what Jim just got at, which is the overlay districts are really put in place to protect neighborhoods. And when the plan commission made a recommendation at some point in time to put this in place and the Board of Aldermen ultimately did it, the standards that you see in the code, the hard numbers, those things, those were set up specifically to protect the neighborhood. And so if an application comes in and it meets those standards, I realize there's verbiage in there about character and other things, but those were the numbers that the community at the time and the elected officials at the time thought were appropriate to protect and safeguard the neighborhood We've got an application here that meets all of that. So personally, I'm comfortable approving it based on that right there, because it would have gone through a public process and had public hearings and people would have had an opportunity to put an input to protect their neighborhood or protect that character when those standards were put together. And so that's why I struggle a little bit with saying that something that meets all of those requirements for some reason shouldn't move forward. Now, are there things the architect might be able to do to make it more compatible, change brick color, change some features of the home? That certainly could be the case. But the bottom line for me as I look at this and I kind of go along with the staff recommendation a lot of times is, does it meet the requirements that are in the code? And that code, again, was specifically put together in this case to protect the neighborhoods. This was custom built for this neighborhood in reaction to the city seeing the single-family ranches being torn down for two-story development. And it meets the requirements, and therefore I'm inclined to approve the application as it is.

Anybody else?

No. I wasn't there when we made the Clayton Garden District, but a while back as we saw the homes being demolished. And I think it was a feeling that instead of doing this on an ad hoc basis, let's get the big picture of how we're going to develop this garden district. I don't think it was the intent. that the single family ranch style homes were going to be the future of the garden district. That doesn't mean you don't try to protect them or mitigate the harm that comes. But, um, in, in my career, I have seen, uh, this happen so many times where, uh, homes start come ranch style, start coming down the big ones, uh, the bigger McMansions, whatever you want to call it, um, are going to be more of the rule for better or for worse. That is a policy that has been basically adopted. And I think our role is to mitigate where we can, because a lot of people have ranch style because they want to grow old in them. I get that. I got gray hair. I get that, but as you drive around, this is a pretty common sight you see. And if you go back 15 years, there'd be a lot less McMansions, I'll call it, more ranch, but the progression has been going on every year. So that's what...

Yeah, at least my response to that would be, I don't think anyone is expecting... if this house gets torn down for another ranch to be put there, it's very clear, you know, that it would be more in a story and a half or two story. I just keep going back to that avoid tall blocky building forms. And I just have, I don't see there's any way around it. You know, I understand. I definitely understand what David's saying is that, you know, There's an art and a science, and he's definitely going by the science of it. And certainly by the science, it beats all those. But I just have a very hard time getting around saying that this isn't a tall blocky building form.

Well, Jim and I agree with you. I also keep going back to that section. My problem is that it says to avoid tall blocky building forms, new structures and additions, which is what this is, a new structure. She'll incorporate a transition and height and scale through one of the following techniques, I mean I wish it was three of the following techniques and, unfortunately, they have increased the side and start the side yard setback. significantly on both sides to offer that so. You know, Alex and Bruce, I mean, quite honestly, Bruce, I wish the house here was a one-and-a-half-story house that looked a lot like yours. You have a lovely home, you know. I understand financially it would be difficult probably for the Melmans to build another ranch. But I think our hands are somewhat tied up here in terms of they have met, you know, the requirements here in terms of height in terms of setback. I am very concerned about water. I think we probe them pretty deeply about, you know, water runoff. You know, I think there's certainly some added protections there. So again, I understand your concerns. If I could, I would love to preserve every older home in Clayton Gardens and not have it be torn down. But unfortunately, I can't buy every house in Clayton Gardens. So I just want to express to you that I understand your concern. I wish this house looked different than it did, but we also can't redesign homes. So I just wanna say that I do appreciate both of your comments this evening.

I absolutely don't agree that... this is preserving the name, protecting the neighborhood. I think it's not protecting the neighborhood, uh, but, but I understand that I would, I would ask though that I don't have a deck layering over my fence, that the 30 foot setback be observed. And I would ask that we have proper screening with, uh, uh, we have some black and Brown magnolias across the other part of our house at that be, uh, added us to mitigate some of this problem that, that we have with this. Um, this is, uh, um, A big problem I have to deal with.

It looks like just in terms of the landscape plan, it looks like there's a red bud in the corner and a few American hollies, it looks like.

Representative from Melbourne, we are probably committed to adding more trees in the back. If our neighbor would like us to do so. We'll certainly work with our landscape architect. I mean, your owners are going to

want to be shielded from me as well. So we need to get some separation there.

Absolutely. So we would be committed to adding some additional trees on that.

All right. Okay. Is that, I mean, because Ana, that would have been part of site plan though, right? Or could that be something we could add?

I think they're comfortable doing it, so we can add that.

Is that something we need to add this evening? How big is the deck and

where is that sudden back there? It says upper level deck, lower level deck.

What did you say? I'm sorry.

I'm sorry, I just

believe it's 12 feet deep. Like towards your house. Oh,

I'm sorry. I'm sorry. It says upper level deck. So. Yeah. The main level of this house, though, is going to be eight feet above the ground. Is that right at that point? Or nine feet because you have a nine-foot basement. So it's really not – it's a very high deck right there. It's not low.

Just a question.

Yeah, so you've raised the whole house up so that you can accommodate the nine-foot basement. So that's even worse than I was thinking. Yeah.

Valera, can you, I'm sorry, can you just

address your question? It's not higher. And if that previous slide showed where the average height is starting from or the lower level, it's I know you keep referring to it. It's raised up or pulled up and it looked like that 30 feet. Correct. Right. And just understand yet that. The 30 foot is still taken from that lower street level or average grade. Okay. So when it's saying it's 30 feet, it's from that lower starting point, not from the starting point on the first floor. I understand that

elevation that has the deck. Can we just stay on this point? You have a problem with amending the landscape plan to plant trees in the back of the property.

All right. Thank you.

If there are no more comments from the audience or online, do we have a motion? I

move that we approve the staff recommendation regarding the architectural review as submitted with the addition of revising the landscape plan to plant trees for screening purposes on the rear of the property.

Seconded. All those in favor?

Aye. Aye.

Aye. Anybody opposed? No. Motion passes. Is there anything else anybody else would like to add this evening?

No, I'm here next time, but then I'm back. All right. Motion to

adjourn.

I

guess we're going to

adjourn. Second? Second. Aye.

Aye.

You did a great job.

Thanks, everybody.