August 3, 2026 — Meeting Transcript

Good evening, everyone, and welcome to the Plain Commission ARB for August 3rd. We have a large group tonight, which is good to see. If you have any electronic gadgets, please silence them at this time. Ryan?

Steve Lichtenfeld? Here. Helen DiFate?

Steve Lichtenfeld? Here. Ellen DeFate?

Here.

Jim Marcineau?

Here.

Brennan? Here. Blair Kweskin?

Brennan? Here. Blair Queskin?

Jeff Morrisey

Jeff Morrissey

Susan views

We have minutes from the previous meeting on July 20th are there any changes. Seeing none do we have a motion

I move to approve as submitted second

all in favor. Okay. This is the time for the open forum. If anyone has signed up outside and would raise their hand now, it's when you can ask a question about anything not on tonight's agenda. Any takers? No? Okay, we'll move on. We'll move into the business matters on the agenda. And the first ones are on old business. And it is 48 South Beamiston. And I know the applicants are here. And we will start out with the staff report.

So this request is going to include applications for site plan review, architecture review, a conditional use permit, and a plat. They were originally considered at the meeting on July 6th with a motion to continue those applications. The applicant has requested that these applications only be considered for feedback at this time, and as such, the Planning Commission can consider these applications jointly. A few changes to note from previous submissions include the addition of an outdoor space adjacent to the retail entry, the retail entry now being recessed, the addition of some stone window sills, expanded use of stone across various facades, and then height modification to some elements including stair and elevator areas. Staff recommend that the Planning Commission consider these applications, provide feedback, and motion to continue these applications to a date to be determined. Staff want to note that the PCA ARB is required to render a decision on applications within a 60-day period of the first meeting. If a waiver is not submitted by Friday, August 7th, that's this Friday, the applications will be placed on the August 17th agenda, which is the final meeting within the required review period. At that meeting, the Planning Commission Architecture Review Board will need to take action approving or denying the applications unless that waiver is submitted.

Thank you. Does the applicant have anything they'd like to add to it right now? Come on up.

So again, thank you for your time. Can

you just make sure that that microphone is on, that it's showing green? It is showing green. Awesome.

So can you hear me okay? Okay. Thank you again for your time and your consideration. And we are today looking for additional comments back from the board on the ARB portion, the architectural review portion, as well as the site plan portion. like to start with the arb portion and get some feedback from from you guys on the changes that we've made which are which ryan has outlined most significantly the addition of a plaza on the north side if you go back to the first floor plan yep yep that portion there um a small but highly visible from a pedestrian standpoint plaza on the north, which has potential to spill out from the retail area. A rendering of that has been provided on, I believe it is slide 21, showing potential for what that plaza could be. Do we want to address them one by one or do I want to address them as a whole?

We'd like to hear them all at once. Okay. And then we'll be able to talk. I do have a question about that.

Yeah.

That space was there previously.

Yeah, it was a whole lot less defined previously. So this time it's got a lot more containment with vegetation, a planter wall and the potential for interaction with the retail space.

I have a question. On your plans, you show a balcony above that, above that retail bay. It doesn't show in your rendering.

The balcony is on the fourth floor. Which is slide seven. It's adjacent to what is a fitness area that spills out as a private fitness area to a balcony.

Okay, that's stepped back. That is not – so the retail bay is just

separate.

Right. Okay. Right.

Yep. So while on that elevation, some of the other changes that we've made have been to the articulation of the parapet, screening of the HVAC – really taking inspiration from the southwest corner and trying to bring those elements across to the rest of the facility. I think the feedback that we got last time was it was a little flat, and the parapet condition was really horizontal, so we've raised stair towers. We've raised elevator towers and integrated those into the overall architectural language. We've also integrated... Stone sills and lentils for all of the windows. Set back the retail, the main retail entry, and that is at grade. There's no steps or ramps to it. from a pure architecture standpoint, that was kind of what we came back with. There are questions about glazing and birds. We'd like to defer that conversation until we get through this general portion.

I believe you also changed the vertical strip window.

Did. Yeah, we lengthened it on both sides, on the elevator side as well as the stair on the south side. So from an architectural standpoint, we'd love some feedback on that.

Okay. We're prepared to look at all four sections together. So if you would go through everything for us, we would appreciate

that. Okay. The next major point is... really the use of the different spaces. So, yeah.

Good evening. Before I get started, Bob Hagan with DCM Group. Tonight with me we have Don Musick from Musick Construction who will be the general contractor of this project and also the president of DCM Group. Next to Don is Francis Godfrey. He's the president of Sterling Bank here in St. Louis. And Jim Mello with Armstrong Teasdale. He's our attorney on this project, also a resident of Clayton. And also, I believe, joining us by Zoom call is Calvin Matthews, another attorney who is a corporate attorney for Centene Bank, and he is also a resident of the fourth floor, how are we going to activate that floor? How are we going to bring some energy to this corner? And at that time, I don't think I was prepared well enough to really address that. We talked in very general terms about what are we going to do here? What does it look like? But before I get into that, I want to make sure for the record we set, make sure we clarify. Number one, we're not here to debate the need for Clayton's need to have more retail or less retail. That got brought up in my other conversations with our client, staff, design team, what have you. That's not what we're here about. We're here about how do we activate that corner and make it work? Because we've been through the retail component before with staff and what have you. So to that end, as far as programming here, we asked Sterling Bank with their help to describe what are we going to do there? And what they just came to the table with is, you know, it truly is a public venue. and they gave us some data to back that up. They don't see this as strictly just another branch for Sterling Bank. If you go to their other branches around Northern Arkansas, Southern Missouri, it's really a community asset. And what I mean by that is they truly do turn over their place a business to the public. To give you an idea, in Fayetteville, Arkansas, they did 206 events in Fayetteville Arkansas. I would like to think in Clayton we'd do a lot more than 206, but that gives you an idea of the magnitude about what they're talking about doing here. They do everything from Qantas to Rotary Club to CLE. If you're not familiar with Sterling Bank here in St. Louis, they have a huge LIHTC division along with New Market Tax Credits. They'll be doing a lot more of that CLE for lawyers and really bring in the Clayton community. And when we talk about bring people to Clayton. We're not just talking about people who work in Clayton, we're talking about bringing people from outside of Clayton into Clayton for these events. So when they come in, they go to the event, maybe they go out, have some drinks before or afterwards, have dinner. So I think some of the criticism was unfounded last time when we heard, well, elevator served, how do you get up there? I think a combination of the plaza up front where we could do events nine months of the year and upstairs, I think, I think that'll add to the vibrancy of that corner and start to move some of that traffic down that way. So that's, I'm open to any questions or comments you have about that in terms of activating that corner.

Well, as I said before, we'd like to hear all of your upfront comments and then we'll be able to respond to all of them. So that's basically

all I have. Francis, you got anything to add to that? Did I miss anything? in terms of activating that corner. I really

want to reemphasize our-

Sorry to interrupt, but if you're going to speak, can you come up to the microphone so that way folks online can hear you?

Good evening. I just really want to re-emphasize the importance of the fourth floor in the community space. Serling Bank's been around in St. Louis for about 15 years, and Clayton, and out in Chesterfield. And where we strive is working with, as a community bank or community, affordable housing programs, whether that's in the city or elsewhere, We are very committed to that industry, along with the historic tax credits, new market tax credit programs. You're seeing historic tax credits here in Clayton that we're involved in. So again, we have a large following of not only leaders in the construction industry, attorneys, finance, also CPA firms in that industry, which we intend to hold community events for those type of programs and then also other nonprofits that fill that, like Northside Community Housing and their organization to have events hosted there. And just really the whole ecosystem for affordable housing, but then also other commercial businesses. in the St. Louis metro area that we support. You know, we manage over $1.8 billion in loans for businesses in St. Louis and outside of St. Louis. And this facility, which has been in Clayton for close to 15 years, is going to be rebuilt to repurpose the building and to re-energize that corner. I think it's a It's laid out perfectly to do that, to help accommodate our customers, the community, and help continue to grow the Clayton area. And it's quite a bit of investment for us. It's a huge investment for our bank community. to build this facility. And we've had tremendous track record, as mentioned in our Northwest Arkansas. We have four buildings that have gone up, all of them having community space, all of them active. And St. Louis is again, we're trying to revitalize that corner that's been idle for a very long time, six years or so, four or five years. And again, replacing it with a state-of-the-art building where we could bring in organizations, not only on the fourth floor, but also If you look at the renderings and see where the food trucks come in, and we could have events, civic events to help complement events that you guys have, like the St. Louis, Clayton has, like the St Louis Art Fair. We were very excited to get this project off the ground and make this substantial investment that's needed on that corner. And again, if there's any questions when it comes time for questions, I'll be glad to answer any of them. Thank you.

I think at this time that's what we have.

Okay. Of course, you've covered site plan and architectural. The other two for everyone in the audience is the conditional use permit and the minor subdivision plot. I don't think there's really anything to say about those two. There are not. Well, we're glad to see you back, and I would just like to open it up by saying we appreciate seeing how you've manipulated some of the facade elements. But in reality, in comparing to what we saw one month ago, the overall design has not changed very much. but uh leaving it at that i'd like to start it off with uh the other members and jeff would you start sure

um thanks very much now i agree with what steve just mentioned i appreciate the effort to develop some of the details of the project i do have a question and i know it's a it's a very different element but the existing plaza that sterling had for years in that corner Was it used for event purposes much at all?

It was. It was. And if Ana was here in our conversations with her, she remembers the times. Yeah, they hosted happy hours on a regular basis there. Nine months of the year. Back then, they would have live music, food brought in by restaurants, what have you. And considering... This type of plaza versus one that Gary probably remembers where you used to go down the hole and have events. I think it'll spill a little bit more out on the street and hopefully, once again, activate that corner more.

Okay. And I guess this is a comment as much for staff and the city as it is for you folks, but I don't know if there's any vehicle that we would have to... I don't know, promise isn't the right word, but for Sterling to commit to the city that a certain number of things and type of things would be done in these areas. I don't know if you're prepared to do anything like that or not. That would

have to be a conversation with their team, but I think we'd be happy to supply to you the numbers. of the events that we had at other banks. I mean, it's a pretty extensive list. And when we say events, we're not talking about, let's say the Kwan is doing one monthly event there. Some of these organizations are meeting four times a month there, bringing in your 30, 40 people. I mean, for them, it's their flagship branch here. And Not to diminish the other branches, but basically to show off their branch. They're spending a lot of money. They want it to look nice. I think everyone in the room knows, you know, to create business, you have to have those relationships. How do you create relationships? You get to know people. And this is their marketing strategy. Bring people in, get to know them, entertain them, be part of the community. And I think that's why they've been so successful in the other

markets. I think one other thing that I'd like to reemphasize, which I don't think has been talked about the old facility probably housed comfortably 15 individuals with the tellers. It wasn't exactly the best laid-out building for a bank. This is going to, if not double it, almost triple it, employees in the Clayton area. Again, that includes... Obviously, our affordable housing team, our commercial team, which has grown substantially. And so it is going to be employing a lot more individuals than what we currently have. if you guys know where we are today, right across from Strabs and Clayton, and it's not a great building. It's just not a great office space, I should say. And so we're anxious to move forward to help bring more jobs into Clayton. And with regards to the number of events, You know, we would, you know, it'd be hard to actually type the commit to a certain amount without being, you know, sometimes when you have covenants on things that you have to monitor them and then, you know. But we do have a tremendous success rate with these type of organizations coming into our facility, particularly as nice as this one is going

to be. Because if things ended up looking like the renderings you've got that you're showing of a lot of activity, and you mentioned the food truck pulling up and that sort of thing, I think that's certainly an asset. I still have my doubts about a fourth floor boardroom space being as much of a public asset as you're describing it. But I appreciate the level of... listening that you did to our first comments um i think unfortunately though i think and i'll agree with what steve mentioned earlier it essentially is a similarly programmed project to the one that we saw last time and my my main concern then remains my main concern that we're taking down three buildings to put up one smaller building and a large parking lot plus plazas attached to it. So I wish it was denser. I don't think this is a design issue. I think it's a building program issue. I don't know what could go along with the bank functions and the retail functions, whether residential, et cetera. I wish there was more building there. I wish it was more urban. But that was my concern a month ago and kind of still remains my prime concern.

Do you remember what the occupancy rate was of that other building that was there in the parking garage? Was it being fully utilized? No,

I don't know that.

No. I would say that with regards to the green space that we're providing and spaces outside, I do think that that will draw activities along with, like I said, the food trucks earlier and other people being able to use it freely with no restrictions. Maintained by Sterling Bank, maintained in the prestigious Clayton area that you guys have had for many of the years. and um okay so we we do intend to um to keep up that that quality

i appreciate your thoughts i think that's all i've got steve thanks later

please

I won't add too much more. I agree that it's not substantially different than what you presented before, and it is a density sort of issue as opposed to an architectural design issue in this case. I know that we had mentioned the possibility of relocating the retail space to the other side so that the plastic could be used more effectively for that needs. And I understand that you're not necessarily in the business of creating a retail space. That's not your primary focus. But I find that... kind of sad place to have a sandwich on the side of the building, this small plaza, not necessarily meeting what we were looking for. And this use of the plaza on the other side, I just, I can't recall a time of the Sterling Bank events that took place in that plaza four years ago or five years ago. And I lived in Clayton at that time, so I don't know and would love to know the sort of attendance and where that drew people from in order to go to those things. In regards to the fourth floor space, when you say it's public and available to anyone, I'm curious to know how that all works in the sense of... Is it on a rental basis? Is something where any organization says, we'd like to use this on every Tuesday? The Kiwanis do this and how that's being addressed.

Actually, it's handled through a portal. The bank has a portal for all their other branches where you basically submit and it's free of charge.

OK.

Yeah. And so they have a staff member who handles all that through the portal.

Okay, that's good to know. You have something to add on that one?

No, it's open to, when I say open to the public, no, you cannot just walk in and off the street and decide to bring your six pack of beer and have beer up there. No, we're talking about organizations that go through the portal and set up and say, okay, I would like the Clayton Art Fair Commission, go up there and utilize it. Go in the portal, Kiwanis. I'm trying to remember some of the other examples that they gave us of people that utilize this, you know, We have schools, different schools. You have chambers of commerce. You have, you know, non-for-profit child awareness groups, things like that. And then, of course, and also some corporate clients, you know, that do business with. But yeah, sewer portal.

There's a number of nonprofit organizations for financial literacy that will also participate. And one thing with regards to, I guess we're saying it's public, but it's controlled, right? Because it has to be because we're a bank and everything has to be secured. It has to go through an extra layer. But going through the portal and being able to first come, first serve, reserve your spots, You could bring your own food in. There's a kitchen up there, prep. They have access to that. And then we ask them to clean up the best they can. But again, we'll take care of the rest of it after that. So again, it is a financial commitment to Sterling to be able to provide a public facility and a bank where we have to provide the security to also protect the bank.

And to that end, You know, it's open to the public, and it's not restrictive. A lot of these places that have a similar concept, let's say, you've got to use three different caterers, and they're all high-end. No, you can bring your own caterer in. However you want to do it, you can pretty much bring it in as you see fit. Or if you decide to do a potluck, do a potlucks. A lot of the venues around town, you can't do that. So I think it adds to the element of it being more of a public. Let's open our doors. We're community leaders. How can we help out? And hopefully we can do some business.

I appreciate your explaining that, and that helps. I see kind of two arguments that you're presenting, and one of them is that it's better than what was there existing. And I don't know if that's a valid sort of reason for us to move forward with it. I agree with you that it is certainly better than what was existing here. I think that... As a committee, we're looking at what is the best term for Clayton? What's the best fit for Clayton? And some of the concerns that we had, this excessive parking spot, the space from the higher buildings, the view from the higher buildings when you're looking down and you're looking at the mechanical screening, which you've actually reduced in these new elevations and renderings. It seems like I'm seeing a lot of things that are very good for Sterling Bank. I'm not seeing overall a whole lot of benefit to the overall Clayton community. And this does help to say that this fourth floor space is available. I do see that as a need and that's great. I just wish that there was something more that could be done with the overall footprint of the building that wasn't so jarring. I think that's all I have.

Yeah, and I think if you're going to measure it only by the size of a building or the bricks of a building, you're absolutely right. But if I say to you, okay, what out-of-the-ground project do we have going on in Clayton right now? When's the last one we had in Clayton? I think it's sort of... Development starts organically. And it's been a while since Clayton had some cranes in the sky, right? I think this is an organic project.

Now, there's a lot going on right now in terms of residential. Absolutely.

Absolutely. I don't disagree with you. Residential, yes. But as far as commercial, not a lot. And I think this is organic. You know, I'm sure everyone would love to see a bigger building there. We would love, as a developer, we'd love to see a But as we spoke about last time, it's not in the cards, unfortunately, at this time. You got to start somewhere. And here's what we have. And I think you got a good corporate citizen that's willing to open up his doors to the people in the community, not only Clayton, but surrounding areas. And it's shovel ready. I mean, a lot of these deals, and there's a couple in Percolate now, I know in Clayton, you know, it goes back to what happened previously at this site. Grandiose plans, looks great. But did it get done? The answer is no. This will get done. With your approval, this will get done. They're committed to it. And Francis didn't touch on it, but they're spending a lot of money on this building, which I think everyone can agree. Their people will be working in their offices. As we see, I mentioned last time in Clayton, a lot of people do hybrid. I think these people will be working their offices as they get this project done five days a week.

All right. Thank you.

Jim? Yeah, I think we've had a lot of discussion here about the fourth floor and how it'd be programmed and everything. I think that's really probably a minor piece of a much bigger puzzle. And I think the bigger issue here that I think everyone's kind of commented on is the density. It's the consolidation of three lots into one relatively small building for those three lots. I think the very large plaza also hurts that overall feel of the density. So overall, I know this is something where you're looking for feedback. I think what I took away from the last meeting is there seemed to be support of, instead of necessarily building across all three lots, if building could be focused on the Sterling Bank site as it is versus demolish the other two buildings, a building relatively of this size could be built in that footprint and you overall have a much denser project. I will say overall too, as far as we're discussing this plaza, we're discussing the fourth floor simply because of the fact that we have this consumer emphasis area and this is alternative compliance to meet the consumer emphasis area because the building as it stands does not meet the requirements for that consumer emphasis area. I sense some skepticism on as far as the programming of that plaza, programming of the fourth floor. Regardless, I think a lot of what you just said is programming as far as for the fourth floor and not the plaza as much where the consumer emphasis area is that street level activation. And if we're talking about alternative compliance and at least the narrative that's been presented, at least for me it does not meet the bar of alternative compliance. Also, I know last time I tried to go back and do a little more research because it was kind of presented that this plaza is like a signature flourish of Sterling Bank. I went and tried to look at several locations, and I might not have been looking for the right plaza. I looked at Kansas City. I looked at St. Genevieve. I couldn't find another plaza and another one. So I didn't necessarily know what other locations had plazas, how those were activated, or how that kind of fit into – Because I don't want to sit here and say take out the plaza if that's a signature of Sterling Bank, but I had trouble seeing how that was incorporated in other branches as a signature.

Right. And to that end, I have not been at every location of Sterling Banks, but like Kansas City on the plaza, there's no plaza there. Country Club Plaza. Chesterfield, there's not one. Northern Arkansas, yeah, they have a water element typically in the front or in some of the locations. Yeah, they do have some of the older ones, probably not. It's a newer branding for them of the newer branches. Is that fair to say, Francis? I'm sorry. As far as the plazas, those are in the newer branches. Yeah. So on the older ones are the one up in Chicago. I don't think there's anything in the Chicago one because of, once again, constraints. But yeah, look at Rogers or Fayetteville.

That'd give you an idea. I think plazas like this, I think they have great intentions that most people go into them. But without... some real sturdy planning and programming behind it. I think they largely just sit empty, and in this case, with so much building mass taken down, and then this building kind of pushed back off the corner as it is, I think it just contributes to making it feel that much more open and empty, which doesn't help the overall aspect of everything. Me personally, I would like... I understand your concerns about this... can't necessarily be a 25-story project. And I don't think it necessarily has to be a 25-storey project or some huge building, but I think if we're looking at a more compact building, then maybe if we can take lot consolidation off the table and focus on just the Sterling Bank site and presenting a compact building on that site that doesn't have to take down multiple buildings, I have a feeling that we would arrive, that we would be a lot closer to what a lot of us are envisioning or feel comfortable going forward. I think in a lot of these cases, like I said, this hasn't changed necessarily so much from the last one. It's the taking down of over 150,000 square feet of building that basically turns into a surface level parking lot. Let

me interrupt for a minute. I think that could be a positive and here's why. When you say you're taking down buildings, let's look at the Melman building in particular. Okay, obsolete building. I actually had, with the help of Music Construction, we had one of our project managers go through there and do a little pre-con estimate on what would you do to basically clean this up, clean this building up. And you're dealing with mechanicals, you're dealing with roof. But the bottom line is when you get it all said and done, make it look real pretty, you got small floor plates. And I don't know how many companies, when they come into Clayton, are looking for small floor plates, right? So now you're dealing with a subset of tenancy, which is going to be people are looking for small floor plates, cheap rent, not class A. And that's really we got class A construction costs, but then we got class B or C rents and it just doesn't work. And And you say, you just got a surface lot there. Well, you know, the good news is we're not putting up a garage up there. Because original plan, we had a garage going there, two-level garage. And staff encouraged us, well, what about this? What about that? We got rid of the garage. So what does that mean for the city of Clayton? Well, that's a lot cheaper to redevelop a surface lot down the road if someone came to Sterling Bank. And I'm not speaking for my client right now. I'm just thinking out loud as a developer. If someone came to Sterling Bank and said, hey, we want your parking lot, and we want that parking garage next to it, you've got a nice development site there. And nothing precludes that from happening. If you've got a parking garage there, I'd say it would be very costly for a future developer to try to redevelop that surface lot and the buildings, the parking garage next to to make that work, right? So I know it's not ideal, the parking situation there with the surf slot, but it really is. If you look at Carondelet, it runs to the east. So as you go by, with the exception of the people in the buildings next door, You really don't see it from the street, so it's screened pretty good there. Unfortunately, you're right. I think Chris brought up. From an office building next door, you're looking down on it. There's no doubt about it. There's nothing we can do. We can put some more green space in that parking lot to kind of gussy it up, but really from the street, you won't see it. So that's food for thought, you know? Yeah.

I appreciate that opinion, but I think overall, you guys came here looking for feedback. And my feedback, I do not view taking down those two buildings for a surface lot as a positive. And I feel pretty strongly about that. So I want to just try and communicate that as...

Can I add something further? The existing buildings that are there have massive code issues. They don't meet current code by any stretch. One of them isn't sprinklered. The egress widths aren't appropriate. So to bring them up to code... is cost prohibitive. So that's part of the reason why they're not being, the floor plates themselves are inefficiently designed and then to come back and add in new mechanical, new egress, et cetera, et cetera. They're just not, they're not developable as is. I know you asked that last time of have we thought about redeveloping those? And yes, we did. We went back in and studied whether or not that was possible and it's just not.

certainly I understand a lot of difficulties exist, but at the same time, I wouldn't, I wouldn't agree with demolishing those buildings and just making a surface parking lot to say, okay, it can be shovel ready for a site in the future. You know, Those problems existed back when the buildings were first purchased six years ago. Also, that's not a condition that's changed at all. Those conditions exist when the current tenants of those buildings were asked to leave at that time. So I certainly understand that, but I still wouldn't support just demolishing those buildings for a surface parking lot. No one?

Okay, I won't repeat what everybody has said. I will start with a compliment in your app. Alternative compliance request. You mentioned the plaza will have pedestrian scale lighting and unobstructed sight lines for safety. In all my years, I have never seen anyone address that in written form. It is so important. Thank you. Safety is key. And the streets in Clayton are not, we don't get a lot of pedestrians walking. So you don't have safety with people. It's your sight lines that become even more important. And that brings me to the plaza. I, like Chris, would like you to do something there to get people to the plaza along Carondelet without having an event. Could you take a little bit of space and put a coffee shop You know, go up and buy. You can't sit down. So it wouldn't be year round. But something like that.

So you're talking like a coffee kiosk similar to have a commerce bank inside their lobby there? If you've been to, I can't remember the coffee shop, it's right across the street, but they have a little kiosk in the lobby there.

Something like that, maybe a little bit more visible from the outside, so that if I'm in the hotel across the street and I don't want to go in and sit or stand and wait to be seated at a table, I just want to get coffee, a cappuccino, a latte, and sit in a Park myself on a low wall or something and drink that and maybe a pastry and it needn't be, you know, a fresh, freshly baked. You don't need a bakery. I experienced that in Sydney, Australia. And it was wonderful. Every morning, I skipped the hotel restaurant and their little coffee shop, went across the street, sat down outside, went up, got my latte, sat down outside. It was different. It was unique. And you've got a built-in market.

Right.

So I like what you've done with the tables and chairs at the north end. And that would be for something that is more, you sit down, you go in, you sit down. You take someone takes your order and then you can be seated outside. That's a different type. And that might not turn into a restaurant type of shop. But I think the plaza on the south side, that needs something more than events. You know, not lavish, but something that's visible.

So a... Just so I recap your aspirations. We're really talking about like a coffee kiosk deal where it kind of rolls up, it's there, it's not permanent. Yeah, and the coffee company I was thinking of is Ivy on Merrimack. She has a little kiosk in the Commerce Tower now, or it's been there since day one because I go in there.

Yeah, I think something like that. And then I like what you're planning for the board, the community boardroom. Could you put that in writing? We're all here and we're listening, but we could all disappear. You know, when construction's finished, I think I would feel better about what you're proposing. If it was something, just a general outline, these are kind of the rules, if you will.

Right. Well, I think I'll bring it back to the team, but really that's when the lawyers get involved and we have to talk about, if we're talking about a covenant, that's one thing. We're talking about just something in writing. Sure, we'll be happy to do that. But I think my lawyers here will probably shoot me if I say we've got to put a covenant in there. But I will certainly bring that up with them.

Now, something in writing that we've got and we know and we're clear on, it's not going back to the recording of this meeting and saying, oh, but they said.

Right. I understand.

One

of the interesting things about that is that actually is a corner associated with 200 plus events. in these facilities. That's not small. That's not a, you know, five times a year kind of deal. 200, sometimes multiple times a day. And that's Fayetteville. I can only see that being more active.

At the same time, I hear that number, like 206, and I think, okay, our neighborhood has a yearly meeting. And it's like, okay, if there's 206 events going on here, what are the chances of even being able to get in if there's just that much volume? So I would have to see kind of more of the granular data as far as who's meeting what days, who's programming, that type of thing. It's easy to throw out this number 206, but to... I would need to see more behind that to really feel like, okay, yeah, this is something that's...

Happy to share some of that without the non-confidential.

Yeah, we'll talk to the team and see what we can disclose on that for sure. I think

we have heard what you're saying before and it hasn't materialized. You know, so that's, I think that's where I'm coming from and

because they're already doing it and it is not a it's not a promise to bring it's a continuing to do make sense so i want to add on that

it's the permanence of what they're doing i think a A couple of questions, and I do agree with you. We do have plans to make room for food trucks in there. They could come in, whether it's their coffee or lunch, and again, that's quite a bit of green space and investments with chairs and cleaning up and trash and everything and keeping it, again, a prestige corner. that it is. So we are opening up to that little space right there on Crondelet, opening it up to the public and having those, you could see on a couple of the pictures, I'm not sure who's controlling the monitors, who's controlling the pictures, but you could see that there's a concept to have those food trucks. So again, however the demand is, to activate that corner, that they're able to come there and sit down on our property and enjoy a cup of coffee, a bagel or sandwich. If you keep on turning, it'll pop up. Again, I'm not sure who's controlling it. A couple of things with regards to I heard on the surface lot. Again, it's also not only to support the community room, which you need parking. Again, Clayton is somewhat tough to get parking. St. Louis, I could tell you, you know, if parking is not right there, it's not going to be a very popular place. So, yeah. Again, I think the surface lot is also there to support the employees, the new jobs that will be coming to Clayton. There's a perfect picture that, again, Fridays, fall days, you know, that you could go out there and have a sandwich and coffee and so forth and enjoy the property. Again, at our expense to get back to activate that corner. And there's no secret here. It's also... It's also selling Sterling, right? There's no secret what we're doing here. It's pretty black and white that Sterling is building a brand and, again, giving back to the community. I mean, we're all in business, so there is a business purpose here. There's no secrets there. But that picture right there is what you're going to be seeing in Clayton. And I think that is what I'm excited about. That's why I joined the bank. I've been affiliated with the bank for 22 years, and I am excited about this. And I can't believe we're at this point, but I understand what your purpose is and what you're trying to do. But we're investing a lot of money for the community and a substantial improvement to that corner. bigger than it was in the old corner, that this footprint would not support this piece of property here, this new property, and repurposing it. And again, also the jobs and the parking that's necessary to help facilitate that. And also the commitment to the community room and the people getting in and out and having a secure parking to get in and out is what we're committed to. So I think I addressed some of the questions here and some of the previous questions, so thank you.

Would you consider shifting retail to that side so that that plaza could be used for a restaurant and have that be dedicated outdoor seating space, similar to like a Cafe Napoli or something like

that? No. No, you can't. We just can't have that much traffic in front of a bank. You just can't. It's just not possible. I mean, we have the FDIC. We have the Missouri Division of Finance that we have to answer to for security. This is not an entertainment facility. It's a business, and it's a business that is highly regulated with security. And we're spending a ton of money already providing a retail space with limited exposure to the bank and then a community room where, again, separate access and secure space. We have to lock down the entire bank because these events are going to be on weekends and weeknights too. So we need to do one thing, and that's look out for the best interest of Sterling's safety for its depositors and its customers.

Can you discuss as far as the security regulations and FDIC go if – I understand not wanting to shift retail to that, but can you talk about the differences as if retail was there versus, say, if some large community events there? How does that differ with the FDIC and security and all that? As far as number of people, how the events control, like what's like the

demarkation? We're talking about putting a Cafe Napoli right in front of the bank's building. and really having a building of this size where it's kind of a single-purpose building versus a larger commercial building. The regulators require us to make sure that their security, not only on our property, on our building space, but also they have to have adequate insurance, excuse me, to our facility. We carry cash, we carry valuables, vaults, we carry a safety deposit box. We cannot have that type of flow of traffic in front of our building because it would just be a total distraction and very unsafe proposition.

So presumably, could there be like a community event that's held outside the bank, something like attached to art fairs or something like that that gets too large? Right there. It's

not if it's periodic, not if it's...

You're talking seven days a week at the restaurant.

Yeah, we're talking late nights and alcohol

and...

People go, oh, there's a bank right here. And after drinking for three, four hours, it's just not a safe proposition.

It's a little bit different clientele. I mean, I don't know how many people have been napping at closing time, but sometimes it's not very pretty.

It's not very pretty at 10 o'clock, let alone 1 o'clock.

So would you be able to have a restaurant in the commercial space on Beamiston?

If somebody could come in there and fit it in there, then that's what that space is for. I'm just saying with your security regulations and stuff like that. It's on the end. It's on a less popular area. It's not near the front entrance. The way it's designed right now...

Pull up the design. Banking operations...

I'm just trying to understand the differences so we understand the nuance and the rules. It's not near the main entrance, it's not near the flow. It's restricted. It's not restricted, but it's cornered off. Another way of saying it. Okay.

Thank you for explaining that. I appreciate it.

Okay.

Just to wrap up, You could take a few square feet on the south inside your building perimeter on the south face and put in a kiosk for coffee.

We can't commit to putting in a kiosk. What we can try to do is make some indentation so food trucks could come in and park there.

Is

that

what you're saying?

No, not a food truck.

A

kiosk.

When I

was describing earlier, I was giving an example. No, if we did a coffee kiosk, it would have to be outside in the plaza where we provide electricity, fresh receptacles and all that stuff. We're not talking about doing a kiosk. Our lobby is way too small. The Tower of Commerce was my example. I'm not talking about doing something like that. I'm talking about doing a Okay. Like a little wagon, probably what you described in Australia, I actually was in Chile recently and they had this little like miniature, I don't know what you want to call it, like a cart or a truck, almost like a fancy golf truck. And she had chocolates and she had coffees and it was in the middle of an alley. I know exactly what you're talking about, but that would not be any in the lobby. We don't have the space security issues we're talking about on the plaza.

Okay. Okay. I don't know Clayton's requirements. Right.

That's a whole other

issue. You've got what I'm asking. I know what you want. Okay. That's it. Thank you.

Thank you.

Okay. I haven't been to Chile or Australia recently, but I was in Milwaukee. And we actually... spent time at a very busy place for brunch, and we got our coffee and walked across to a little area similar to the north side of the patio that you're proposing. And that became a whole little community that was very welcoming and fun versus inside the crowded restaurant. So anyway, and Helen, I will pick up too. I loved your comments, but the one thing, we don't yet have active pedestrian traffic in downtown Clayton, which is, I think, why we're all here on this particular project. A couple questions. First on that, the new patio on the north side, it looks like it's almost going to be almost a pocket park. You've got a living wall in the back and things like that. And that's fully open to the public, correct?

Correct.

Okay. Okay. And then on primarily the other plaza and the fourth floor, imagine the fourth floor you're primarily looking at daytime activity, daytime meetings, things like that, in the evenings too? A

combination. Okay.

that's what you've experienced at other locations yes okay and in the plaza you mentioned pop-ups and the art fair and things like that and are you putting electricity for food trucks and things like that in the plaza itself in the same electrical questioning line different location are you yeah let

me interrupt from it yeah we also discussed also at one time along with those electrical needs for the food trucks what have you is if you have just you know a one or two person band that we went to hire come out do some entertaining yeah that and then also electric is if you have maybe like a art little set, you know, art pop-up where you have, you know, five neighborhood artists that want to put a pop-up tents. And once again, they'll need electricity and stuff like that for that. But yeah, the, we're anticipating putting electricity out there.

Yeah, that transforms the ability of what you can offer there. Absolutely. I would hope that would be part of the plan. And I agree it would be really helpful to have you share what you anticipate, the programming, what your goals are for that in those spots. Then on the concerns that it's not a dense building – And I have to tell you, seeing that 44% of that block is parking lot doesn't feel good. But what can you do with that? I know that I think it's been resurfaced just right now. I think Crondelet is our bike path coming into downtown area. I don't know if there's room to put – is that right? As you're coming in from the Ritz area, I think that's the street that bikes are routed on.

I think there might be a, like a share of that's on that street, but I would defer to any, like we'd have to check with public works and see if there's

anything. It's not a separated bike path, but that's where the little pictures are. Um, or were before repaving. I don't know if something with that space, if it's not dense for office buildings, things like that, is there anything else that can help support the central business district? We always have concerns with parking and you're right. People like surface parking. They don't like to go in the lots. Um, But whether it be bikes or something else that that, you know, Divi bikes, I don't know. But something that would support the downtown access, even if we're not going to have a dense building there with office space. I think that could be helpful as well. Or the question I had is the parking lot? Do you anticipate there'll be public parking at any time say in the evenings when there's not an event or the bank is closed? Or do you anticipate it will always be private parking?

I think from a practical standpoint, if they're doing 206 plus or minus, and I think we'd probably do more events there considering it's Clayton and not Fayetteville. I think it'd be used quite a bit for the public, for the events. I mean, you're talking...

Public wouldn't be very difficult to provide the extra security. Right. Customers would

So it would be tied solely to bank usage. Bank or special events. Including special events, which somehow, how do you... I guess I'd leave it to you how you control who's coming in and out at that time. Yeah. Right. I... Looking at the comprehensive planning we're doing, if we can activate the downtown area, obviously a denser building would be phenomenal. And making up for that with providing things that otherwise increase downtown activity I think is pretty critical. The other part in here that staff noted is sustainability goals. Sustainability goals coming from our community. You mentioned, we talked last time about the bird safe glass. Easy at the construction stage, a little bit more difficult later on if you can look at that the city is committed to the dark skies and to migratory bird protections that would be great the uh you know the green the green the living wall in that north part is great anything like that you can do if you can make that even more of a pocket pocket park that's great um and thinking along those lines adds the sustainability buses to it as well i think would help as well And that's all I have right now. Thanks.

Well, you've heard many comments, probably none that you haven't heard before, but I'd like to add one more, and that's the big elephant in the community and the world right now, and that's That's why we cannot assume that we could get a higher density building on this site at this point. The money, the rates, inflation seem to be holding everything back. We're not sure that we could... envision a Class A building at this point. But I definitely agree with you because I did look at the Melman Building. It is, at best, a B building, even if it were to be renovated. I think it's really a C building, to be honest. So I don't see a future for it. But going beyond the economy as being a big deciding factor right now, and you've heard about the density. We would be going from about a 4.2 density down to a 0.63 density on this site. When you do that, it really becomes a suburban plan, not an urban plan. This is currently zoned as a high-density mixed-use property, which we all know what that means. A lot more density than would be on this property at a FAR of 0.63. So... I think we're sort of in a quagmire right now, but let me go a little further. Susan brought up the comprehensive plan, and that's where much of our guidelines are correctly being administered right now. And that was put together over the last three plus or minus years to guide us up to 2040, which we have another 14 years to go on it. And it really says that we are to maximize lot coverage and density and promote shared parking and maintain the high-density mixed area. To get away from that, of course, we have to go with alternative compliance, which you've given us many pages to read on that. So that's sort of the density area related to what our guidelines are right now for downtown Clayton. Now, the plan itself, I think the relatively minor revisions that Keith was talking about, I think they make a lot of sense. I think the building does look much better, but it's really the same building. It has a little more lipstick on it at this point, but we really haven't changed the hairstyle or anything else. So with that in mind... The building just does not fill the street frontage and that's another item, but it's in conflict with the two public ground spaces. The new one at the north end adjacent to the alley and the large linear one on the south side running along Carondelet, which I think is actually very nice. But I believe Susan said we're trying to activate pedestrian use. And right now that area has virtually no consistent pedestrian use at all except for the Caddy Corner County Jail. Correct.

Yeah, last time it's interesting. During our last meeting, we took your criticism and Keith and I walked down there and we had to help a young gentleman flying to Metrolink and there were some other people there. To that end, I know you brought the financial aspect, but I think the other aspect you got to look at it is sure this is not everything you guys want here. It's about compromise, right? And if you look out their building, what they're going to be looking at is a vacant lot across the street Then you've got another parking lot, and then you've got the Ruse building. We all know the Ruse building is going to – something's going to happen to it. It's going to either be boarded up here shortly or they're going to tear it down. Who knows what's going to happen? So you've got from Shaw Park all the way down to our building. That's what we're looking at. And then, as you point out, you've got the jail, and then you got – A hotel that's not exactly thriving is a tough area to energize. But as I said to you before, I think it's important that this is organic. We've got something going. You've got a crane going. You've things going. Sure, everyone would love to see something a little bit bigger and denser. And I know we're asking for a compromise here. I mean, I think this is a tough site to develop. And as I mentioned last time we were here, there's a lot other better sites, be it Montgomery's or the U.S. Bank site, whatever. I think if I'm an outside developer coming in, those would be the sites I'd look at first, assuming we could get the economics going. So I want you to keep that in mind also. You've got the economic portion of it, and then you've got the practical standpoint that it's not a great corner from a standpoint that you've got vacant lots, the Ruse building, the jail,

I'm glad you said it's not a great corner for development. I think many of us would agree with that. But if we can come to some point where we can get it developed, that is a win for Clayton right now. either Jim or Chris said, it looks like the plan is really beneficial to Sterling Bank, but we're not really sure if it's beneficial to downtown Clayton. I think that's something we're going to really have to work around. many of the other things about the plan we've already covered. The consumer emphasis area, the CEA, and this building falls into it. There again, I believe we needed about 50% of the facade to fit into that case. And I believe we're at 30 to 32% right now. So we're not quite there. So there again, we would have to fall back on alternative compliance to make that work. And the alternative compliance I think was not strongly stated at this point. We've read through the letters, and I think the letter from Sterling Bank was very, very pointed, and that's the one that made me think about the economy and what is going on right now. So overall, I still have Quite a few worries. Let's go back to semantics for a minute, and that's the word public. And I do think that the two ground spaces, the north one, which could be a little outdoor dining pocket park, or the linear one along Carondelet, are very nice. And I think those could be publicly used if we can get activation going and get people walking around there. I think they would be very positively received. But on the other hand, the community room on the fourth floor really does not have any public appeal to it. It certainly, from your description, could be used very highly. In fact, if you were to have 206 events in a year, that's essentially one per business day. So that would really keep it hopping. I doubt that with change of services, you could have more than one a day in there. But as Helen indicated, we've come across this problem before and it has never worked out. The public spaces that were not publicly accessible to the public turned out not to be accessible They were by invitation, basically. If you have a portal, that really is not going to be publicly used. So I have great concerns about going forward with a suburban concept in the middle of an urban district even with looking at the economics of the situation. I think it could potentially set a precedent. You mentioned the U.S. Bank side, just to... about two blocks north and one block east, we would like to see that not be demolished and put up with a building that covers less than 50% of the site. And we certainly, in our comprehensive plan, And all of our planning over the years, we have avoided large surface parking lots. So as you requested, tonight is really only for comments. And I hope that what we're saying is we'd really like to see something happen. But I'm not sure that we're there yet. I think there are several items that really have to be rethought and reviewed. figured out at this point.

Jeff? One thing to that. I'm not a developer. I'm not going to pretend I'm a developer, but somehow a number of residential developers close to this building actually have built sizable projects in recent years that they've somehow have made work. I know you attempted to pair residential with the bank at one point, and that didn't come to fruition. I wish you could try again. I think that's the sort of building potentially even in this economy, Steve, that could work. There seems to be an appetite for the apartments and or condos that are being built in the central business district so um I I agree that the the office market post-pandemic especially seems like uh something that's changing dramatically on the other hand I I don't know who lives in all the residential units that are being built but somebody's living in them so um it might be something to consider

yeah I think you drive around Clayton at 9 o'clock at night and look at some of those residential developments I think we talked about last time, be it the one by my old office, Maryland Walk. I think a lot of those people have three or four different... places to live. And they don't certainly activate the community very well, because they come in town, you know, a couple weeks, and then they go down to Florida, then they go down Denver, what have you. So I appreciate you saying, can we get some more residential? But unfortunately, for you guys to really activate, you're not looking for the retired CEO, you're looking for younger people to come in here and, once again, energize this area, how do we get it going? And I'm not sure at those price points of apartments that have been going up, the most recent one being the bulky brown one. And occupancy is not right down the street here. It's not really stellar. And then we go back to, we're not here to argue about the retail, but all they did in that development, I know they got a couple of new tenants coming in, but they just basically took the sushi station out of the corner up here and put them down there. and they're trading tenants around. I'm not sure that helps Clayton too much to activate it. And so, and I've been told there's a couple other people coming in here in the near future, but where are they coming from? I don't know. Are they just in tenants?

I would echo what Susan said, too. I was in Milwaukee not that long ago, and the residential that's been brought into downtown in Milwaukee is just amazing. The third ward there is an incredible place that started piece by piece and has great public spaces. And could Clayton and should Clayton be a residential center even more than an office center is what I'm asking. it's not there yet but you could be another step in that direction right potentially later

I'm not the design person, but I will tell you just our conversations. If you walk the site, you'll see this steep incline and to have that door be moved further down. I understand what you're saying. Understood. That's problematic.

Are there comments? Any comments from the audience? No. Any hands up? No hands up. Okay. Well, we do have a staff recommendation. I'm sure you've seen it. And I'll just read it. The applicant has requested that all applications for this project be presented for feedback only. I think we've done that. We really haven't looked at the conditional use permit or the minor subdivision, but there's nothing to talk about those. Staff recommends that the Commission consider this application, provide feedback, and motion to continue the application to a date to be determined. I see heads going, so I will ask for a motion. Mr. Chairman,

if I may, could we get confirmation from the applicant? As staff has indicated, I believe your next meeting is the deadline for the board commission to act within the 60-day time limit. And we have not received an extension from the applicant at this point. So if we do not expect to receive that, from the applicant, I would suggest that the motion should be to place it on the next agenda for action. Yes. Pardon

me? You will receive an extension. All

right. Thank you.

If

we don't receive it, staff will put it on the next Agenda. I believe you have until the

7th, which is Friday. OK.

Kevin, with what you said, should the motion still include the date of August 17th?

No, I think to be determined and staff will put it on the agenda

if

the extension is not received.

Okay. And Steve, do we need one motion for all four or four motions?

That's fine. One motion.

One motion. Okay. I move to continue. The site plan review, architectural review, conditional use permit for the bank drive-through and the minor subdivision plat consolidation to a date to be determined.

Second. All in favor?

Aye.

Okay. Great. Thank you. I look forward to seeing you again. Thank you. Okay. Before we proceed to new business, we will take a few minutes and we'll go out. Anyone else can join us and we'll reconvene in eight to 10 minutes.

Thank you. That's exactly

what we should

do.

oh right now what's that

See all people for a glass. I got you. I tried to figure it out.

Oh, my.

Thank

you.

That's great.

By.

Bye.

Yeah.

Okay, we're all back and we will continue with our new business. Item one is 7701 Forsyth is the applicant here. Okay, we'll start with the staff report.

The subject property is located at the northwest corner of Hanley and Forsyth and is developed with a mixed-use commercial tower. The request is for approval of sign modification for an additional wall sign on the Forsyth facade, which presently holds the maximum number of permitted wall signs. The sign would measure 20 square feet and comprise of aluminum. The building currently underutilizes sign square footage on this facade, and the proposal would not result in a total signage area greater than normally allowed. Staff are of the opinion that the underutilized sign area and limited size of the new sign would have a minimal visual impact and meet the criteria for alternative compliance. Sorry, for sign modification. To ensure the appropriate signage ratio in the future, staff recommend a condition of approval to limit other sign types. So staff recommend approval with the condition that no additional window signs or blade signs be installed along the four side fringe.

Okay. The applicant. Come up, identify yourself and add anything you'd like.

Good evening. I'm Matt with Zieglin Signs. I was here in July. We proposed adding a bunch more signs. We've scaled that back. We're asking for one.

Well, it looks good. I think that pretty well sums it up. It fits within the guidelines. It will advertise one of the new major tenants in the building. I had no problem with it. I believe it's only 20 square feet. Ellen?

No problem.

Jim? I have no problem with the new sign. My only small quibble is, can you explain the reasoning behind moving the Hoffman sign down and then putting this in its spot? It would be above the main entrance. It's his building. Okay. Because my... I think as far as the Missouri Athletic Club sign, like in a vacuum, I think is great and perfect. And I think this is a great solution for like what we talked about last time, as opposed to not going with the whole science sub-district, but presenting something just for that My only concern is the Hoffman sign is very large. It's literally maxed out as big as it can be. The Bank of Washington sign is very large, I think it's just eight square feet under what it could be. And you take that mass and put the mass of those two big signs right next to each other instead of being a little more spread out where it is now. I think it kind of makes everything look more cluttered by moving the two big signs directly next to each other. This is a request from our client. We're only asking what he wants. Completely understand. I just wish there was a way to flip-flop those two signs to not. I think part of the concern with the sign sub-district was the mass looking overwhelming, and by moving the two biggest signs right next to each other, I do have a bit of a concern about it being overwhelming, but like I said, I think the Missouri athletic club sign on its own is nice, compact and does a great job with, with what it needs to be. So I don't know if those concerns are just my own, but

that's all I

have. Bruce.

I like it. I agree with you, Jim, that I'd like to see the placement of it swapped and even have the Hoffman sign down to the corner. But I understand that Hoffman owns the building. And so they're going to want their sign front and center there. Other than that, I think it looks really nice and addresses the concerns that were brought in July.

Jeff. Just so I'm clear, this is a third added sign to this facade and only two are allowed to begin with. So that's why we're considering this application, correct? I agree again with what everyone's already said that my immediate thought was flip the, the Hoffman and leave Hoffman where it is and put the athletic club sign in the middle. The other thing that I would add to the recommendation is not only not to do any more signs on the foreside side and more hanging signs on the fourth side, but also not to do them on the Hanley side or the North side of the building. I don't want to, die by a thousand cuts here by adding a sign and then a sign and then assign i think they've we've gotten to the maximum number on the other facades and i would prefer that we leave it at that as opposed to continuing to add hang signs thank you

susan no concerns

Well, Jeff, we really haven't considered that in the application for review. I think we may have to wait and see if they come back with anything and deal with it then. But I think we're setting a precedent of not overloading any facade at this point where we were before or potentially. Are you aware of the recommendation we are okay. And just to review that it's that no additional window signs or blade signs so be installed along the South Forsyth facade, we're okay with that okay.

I move to approve as submitted with the staff recommendation.

Thank you. Item number 2 has been stricken from the agenda, so we'll move to item number 3, 7754 Forsyth. And we will start with the staff report.

Subject property is located at the southeast corner of Bemis and Forsyth. The property is on M3 and is location of Cafe Napoli. The application is to retain screening in a pergola installed without permits. The staff analysis yields the following opinions. One, that the pergola is compatible with the property and surrounding area due to its appropriate scale and complementary materials. Two, the concrete planter portion of the screening is compatible. However, the composite screening material and height are inconsistent with the intent of consumer emphasis area and architectural review guidelines. The pergola and screening may be encroaching into right-of-way, and staff have also observed frequent storage of chairs, tables, boxes on the sidewalk outside of the planter and fence barrier. Staff are of the opinion that no outdoor dining furniture or structure should encroach into the right-of- way. Staff recommend approval with the following conditions. One, that the composite boards consisting of the upper 4 feet 3 inches of the screening be removed. And two, no furniture, screening, planters, storage, or other outdoor dining equipment shall encroach into public right-of-

Okay, welcome.

Hello. My name is Derek Lauer, architect. I've been retained by Cafe Napoli to address the committee.

You have anything to add?

As it is that... Cafe Napoli has heard the concerns and has taken the immediate steps of engaging an architecture firm and an engineering firm to do analysis of the screen wall planters that were there. What it is, is that we feel that the planters form a couple of benefits to the City of Clayton. One is that it cleans up the visual aspect of the patio from the street, but also forms a protective barrier as well. Because those concrete, the screen walls are actually in concrete planters. And so they provide also a protective barrier between the patio and the street. Again, today's climate, you know, the way that things happen it prevents a vehicle from being driven into that area it also provides sort of a visual barrier um for from both the neighborhood side and from the restaurant side for one aspect that it cleans up the visual aspect of what you see from the street but also from the dining experience stops headlights from coming in and these type of things And so we would like to request that the planters be allowed to remain in place because they do not encroach into the right-of-way. They provide a screen barrier, a sound barrier, and also a protective barrier. So we'd like that consideration.

But what about the... the composite boards that are above, what are you saying about that?

The composite boards are of a decorative nature and they are pre-finished. They have a decorative element that allows for the passage of some light through it. So we would like to request that those are allowed to remain in place. They are compliant within the height regulations. They're less than seven feet tall.

You should clarify that front yard fencing is allowed to be a maximum of four feet tall within an intersection. If you're within 20 feet of an intersection, the maximum is something like three and a half feet. So commercial structures can have taller fencing if it's at the rear of a property, not at the front of the property. However, the Planning Commission can consider taller fencing in the front of a property.

Anything else, Derek?

So we would like to have that consideration to leave the screen wall. Now, certainly we can reduce the height to them. That's easy enough. But we feel that in its current form, that it actually forms an attractive and safe functional barrier.

Well, I certainly understand that. But having been at NAPLI very recently, I found the existing installation made a tunnel effect. I felt it was very enclosed and overly high from the inside. So then over the weekend, I kept going back looking at it on the outside. And to me, it was a wall. I certainly understand the concrete planter boxes, they make a lot of sense from security and visual and everything else. But I think as Ryan was indicating, the height needs to be lowered. And I think it could be lowered to a point where customers sitting on the Napoli patio would not have it hanging over their head very high, but their faces could be obscured from people walking on the street. So I'm not sure where that is, but it's definitely lower than what we see. From the street side, I think to maintain that street activation, and there is a fair amount of pedestrian activity on that street, I agree that it should be lower from that side also. Otherwise, it feels like a blank wall. So I'm open to considering something lower. But then I have another concern thing to consider. A few years ago when the St. Louis Club was at the Pierre Laclede Center at the corner of Hanley and Forsyth, they wanted to have an outdoor dining space. And we allowed them to use the plaza right in front of what you saw in the previous application, right in front of where the MAC sign will be. But they wanted it to be more private. So what they did was they did put up a planter barricade on the upper level, and then they put columnar greenery in there. that lives all year long, so that you had the idea that air could circulate and vision could be seen in and out. But there was a semblance of privacy for those people that would be sitting inside. I think that's what we would probably want to look at here.

In the case that we would be able to, let's say, reduce the amount of that composite material by half and then have a decorative element above that, something, again, more porous, more visual, or would it suffice to reduce the height of the screen walls and cut back the height of the poles and just lower the whole thing, leaving the planters in place?

Well, there are seven of us here. I'll give you one opinion. I would rather see greenery than any wall material up there. But I'd be open if it were a combination of the two. But let's go on. Helen?

Well, I'm sorry that you don't like your neighbors to the north. City Hall, the fire department, the residents of Old Town. Walking from North Beamiston southward, it's a wall, a black wall that says, I don't want to look at you and you're not welcome.

Yeah, I don't know that that was the intent or the...

It may not have been the intent, but that's what it looks like. And the next thing, because... And I frequently take people there when the American Institute of Architects has speakers in town. And if I'm responsible for that program, I will take maybe six to 10 people to dinner at Cafe Napoli. Well, the ambiance of people in the evening sitting outside with lights on is a draw. It's unique in the St. Louis area. And the corner, I mean, design-wise from an architectural standpoint, planning, the open corner is wonderful. Now, I'll have to say, if I take them there, because I'm trying to impress them. They're from all over the country. Okay, guys, pull up and there'll be like a black wall. It's around the corner. That's not a good description entry to a good restaurant. The property line, judging from the survey that was online, not in our packet, the pergola, the planters and the wall and the storage box are all in the public right of way. Which, you know, we're citizens paying for the sidewalk and you're using it for private profit. So that concerns me. The planters, according to the information, you can't put plants in them. They're concrete and then rocks epoxied on top. So you can't use those planters, take out the filling and put in earth and true plants. At any height, the rule of thumb is three feet to seven feet is the sight line you want to keep open for safety. And the height you've got, that's a dark corner at night. There are a number of people from the hotels, people working there, that use the bus stop. That creates an unsafe situation. And then people walking. You don't know who's around the corner. Let's see. Oh, on one of the planters, there's a drain pipe coming out. What is that draining?

Again, that's just acting as a weep. If there's any moisture.

It looks like it could be a vent for gas, but I don't see gas there. But it's large enough. It's about two and a half inch diameter.

I believe it's an inch and a half, but it's just for moisture to escape out of the planter so it doesn't cause corrosion and such.

Yeah, I walked around there yesterday. I drive by there every day, many times a day. The drain, if that's taking water out, then in wintertime, there'll be black ice across the sidewalk.

It's not that much moisture, but I understand.

Pardon?

I don't believe there will be that much moisture involved, but yeah.

Okay. Well, the snow melting and the pergola, according to the notes was permitted on a separate permit. Um, how does the roof drain work?

It's a pre-manufactured, it has aluminum channels that go, that it channels it out. It's a pre manufactured device.

Where to? Is it going to be on the sidewalk?

No, no, it drains directly out the bottom.

Okay. I have a lot of concerns about it. And I think from what I've heard from friends who have mentioned it and I didn't ask them or state my viewpoint, they enjoy if they're going to eat outside, they want to be outside and not in something that is enclosed deliberately. You do have pocket parks that are wonderful, but they are put in between existing buildings, existing situations. So I think the planters that you had going back on Google Maps, going back a couple of years, that caught the planters when there were flowers and greenery in them, I think that looked wonderful. Dewey's Pizza, which is not your competitor, but their outdoor patio is better looking. And that's Dewey's on Delmar and North and South. I think you've done a disservice. Not you personally, I realize you were hired after the fact. But this does a disservice to a restaurant that was really in a place where if people are in town, this is where you want to take them. The ambiance is gone.

Just as a... My initial suggestion when I first found out about this problem was that they come back with a nice decorative ornamental metal that has a lot more openness to it that you could plant vines and such to it. So again, they were open to several ideas. I think that that's up for discussion. I think if there's a way to take these planters and make them more attractive, bring it down and create that sort of more inviting environment that we can easily do that.

It's interesting that security is an issue where on the Bemiston side, it's not an issue because cars are parked there at times.

That's right. At the time when the restaurant is occupied and full, there's always valet cars there. No one's going to be able to drive their SUV up into the people. Certainly not during times of business. In the case of the Forsyth side, there was a vulnerability there to which the concrete planters does address that. But certainly there is a more aesthetically pleasing way of doing it. I agree.

Yeah, it's a corner. Corners, as an architect you know, corners need a special treatment. And this, it unfortunately looks like a salesperson did a good job and sold them on the idea, completely negating that corner. You've got the park outside of City Hall.

And

then with the safety, at night if I'm taking people from the architect's programs, I'm usually by myself and I'm usually parked on Bema Stint. Yes, I could go to my garage, but I'm parked in front of City Hall With it open, I know that I am visible with that wall. Once I go past, I'm history. So I think there's safety issues too. That's it.

Jim? I think we talked a little earlier in previous discussion about Clayton 2040 and as far as the planning and kind of the outcome of that is we as a board were kind of given a mandate to try and increase vibrancy downtown. So part of the problem I have is with the screening, you have something that, you know, I think by all measures is a success. You know, we have a very successful patio that people are going to regularly and they're dining. But if you come across that Forsyth side now, you can't see any of that. You're just... And when you... We were talking earlier about another restaurant where you drive by, you see all the people there and really note it. We've... talked about as far as window coverings at certain buildings, how limiting all the windows being covered so you can see inside the building. You can see stuff going on there. And part of the success of Cafe Napoli and the restaurants down there is part of what led to the consumer emphasis area that we were talking about earlier, wanting to build upon the success that's already there. So unfortunately, I think the screening, the way it's designed, sets that back. I completely understand the need to maybe have some sort of protection as far as a low planter. As far as the upper composite part, I think that's where we arrive at the problems. I think the other thing, as it was mentioned earlier, how it kind of acts as a wall I think the restaurant kind of treats it as a wall, unfortunately too, and put stuff kind of out on the sidewalk, extra chairs, extra storage and stuff like that. And treats it as like a storage space outside the restaurant where you don't necessarily see the items on the patio, but then they become a bit of a hindrance to anyone walking down the sidewalk or, or driving down the street. Uh, so I think some sort of low planter would be fine. I think these higher wall-like, uh, structures are where we kind of come into problems uh and i'd like there just be something in between

chris

yeah i'll say first and foremost i have the utmost respect for cafe napoli for the pietoso family um i think that cafe napoli opened in the late 80s maybe early 90s 89 around there um and i think that you have got to have been doing something right for being around for 36 years I worked at Cafe Napoli. It was my first job. And I know that Tony Pietoso, in particular, never did anything substandard, it seems. And I was surprised at this because it felt distinctly off-brand. for the Pietoso family, that they would do something like this that does look like a wall. It reminds me very much of a wall that I had built in my backyard many years ago for the purpose of screening out my neighbors. And I had a pool and did not want people to be able to see in. And that's what it feels like in this case. And so I appreciate that... It looks like it's to create some privacy. And I can appreciate that you wouldn't want the people on the sidewalk coming up or panhandling or interrupting with dinner. And for all of those, I think that there could be some solution that works. But I believe that You and the Pietosis could do something much more creative than what is here currently to make it look like more of a Napoleon sort of... Is that right, Napoleon, if it's from Naples? Something from Italy that looks much more like a charming plaza. And I don't know what that entails. I think that this doesn't work necessarily. The parts that do work for me in the sense of this column are these plantings, as Steve had talked about, works extremely well. I think that if there was more of that, if there was something that gave me just this moment of thinking, wow, we have stepped into Italy here, I'd be completely OK with it. As it is right now, I think that Jim highlighted it well, that it seems like it's a wall and then you're stacking things on the other side. Right before the meeting, I walked over there and saw this outside storage box and was tempted to lift it to see what's inside that storage box. Is it a body or is it the pillows for the outside area there? And I don't know. I didn't open it. But I think it should just be taken on as a challenge for you and for the pietos is that something could really be architecturally significant. And this is the corner to do it. I still direct people. If you want to see three brightly colored Ferraris in a Friday, this is the place you go. If you want kind of the movers and shakers on a Saturday. And if you want to be seen, this is where you go. And in that sense, Cafe Napoli has an opportunity to do something that is extremely just respectful. And I think that's the challenge in this case. Take away this kind of half measures that looks like kind of an afterthought for COVID and put in something that's much more impressive.

Blair?

Jeff? Yeah, I agree with what's been said already. It's I'm not in favor of what's been put up. Blair made a great comment. What was rendered is not what was built. And it does look half done, not particularly thought through. To be honest, it looks like It looks like a partition that might have been built at an alley and not at a public street, which is exactly the opposite of what I would want it to be. So I'm not in favor of it. I am confused, though, and Helen brought this up. Are the planters erected within the public right-of-way of the street? I don't know that I saw that. I see that on the documents or not.

okay okay needs to be verified

to clarify nobody at the city clayton is a surveyor however the survey provided shows that property line right about the building line on both frontages and you can kind of gauge it there because we see that sort of curb there that triangular curve at the corner if you go out there you can eyeball it where's the leg of the pergola where are those planter boxes at the reason this presents a challenge It's because Public Works is going to have insurance and agreement requirements that goes along with something like this. It doesn't mean they can't keep those planters where they are. But if they do keep them where they are, they're going to have to carry insurance and renew that with Public Works every year. And Public Works is the expert on that. I don't know all of the details, but that's going to come with extra requirements. Would they require an encroachment permit

of any sort?

The right-of-way permit is what they'd be looking for. Okay, okay.

So all of, again, I'm not a surveyor. I'm just kind of eyeballing what's over there. Whenever I went over there and looked at it, all of those planters there on the Forsyth frontage are forward of that building line.

And I guess what I would like to see is a drawing on top of the survey that shows where things have actually been placed so that everybody's clear whether it's in the right place or not in the right place. But as to its height, I think the height should only be what our allowable height at corners is. I don't think it should be any higher than that. I wish there wasn't a... as people have commented, now being put up on Forsyth Avenue. Thanks. Susan?

I concur with everything that has been said that I would like to see it comply with the current height standards and material standards and not encroach on the public right of way unless it's been addressed otherwise.

Any further comments, Derek?

Just one thought. Again, I think that the solution of having it in an encroachment, having that worked out, even if it means them carrying insurance, may be the way to go. Just to be honest, these things weigh a lot. They weigh a couple thousand pounds each. If there's a way that we can work with you to then make it aesthetically pleasing to play with the height, make it attractive add some plants do those types of things we would love to have just a way to move forward rather than have to remove them or some other step backward.

And just to clarify and the. their dimension of putting some other, not the pergola, but something metal or something going up higher that does raise the heights in my opinion.

Whatever is acceptable is what we would propose for sure.

I would recommend that you work both with Cafe Napoli and with our staff as far as getting the height down, the materials correct, and whatever encroachment or permitting, as Ryan was indicated. is worked out um so that everyone is satisfied and then come back and let us take a look at it

absolutely fantastic i appreciate all of your input thank you

very much one other question is there a setback requirement on something like that or can they go right to the public right away

do you mean setback for the

planters i know it's it's encroaching on it but is there a

There's not a setback requirement for those, whether it be an accessory structure like a pergola in the space or that fencing area. It's in the front yard in the commercial, or in a mixed-use district. So it would have to come before this board for approval. If it encroaches into the right-of-way, they have to get approval from Public Works and provide the proper documentation.

Thank you.

Any other comments?

Yeah. Derek, you mentioned the weight And yeah, those planters are going to be heavy. But according to the information, you can't take out the guts of them and put in planting material. It's rock because they've, according to the literature, they've epoxied that soil.

Those have not been epoxied as of yet. There was a recommendation pending the result of this hearing. Oh, okay. Again, I think there is a way to then, if we were going to go with plants, perhaps it would be year-round faux plants would be one solution. Again, we think we'd be able to work that out. It just needs further study. I'll come back to you with the solution.

Okay.

Take a look at the Pierre Le Cleed Center. Okay. It It may give you some guidelines. Okay, fantastic.

I move to continue to a date to be determined.

Second. All in favor? Aye. Opposed? Okay. Thank you, Derek.

Just to clarify, this application is going to be subject to that 60-day deadline. So tomorrow I'll send you guys a waiver via email if you guys would like to waive that 60-day deadlines. That way you have more flexibility when you come back. You'll just sign that and return that to me. If that's not returned, then we will request that this board make a decision within that 60-day window, and it would automatically be placed on the last meeting within that window.

Um, sorry, just one quick comment on that. This item is pending in municipal court, um, for noncompliance about getting building permits and the judge did express concern, a safety concern because the pergola and other elements have not been reviewed by our building official due to lack of information. Um, so I do have a little bit of concern with providing you up to the 60 days to respond to that. Do you think you can provide a response earlier?

Yes. At this point, there is a separate building permit application that has now been amended and that's been amended with structural calculations and drawings and additional information. So we have addressed the safety concern of those planters. But again, a lot of that will be revised based on our resubmission to comply with the requests here tonight.

I understand. But the pergola, do you plan on changing anything about the pergola? Maybe we'll just put this back on the next agenda.

I'm not sure that what was being requested to be changed about the pergola specifically. Right, but it

hasn't been approved yet, so we can't issue a building permit.

Right. That building permit application has been amended and is currently in review status.

I believe what Ms. Crane is indicating is you can't get the building permit because the construction of that has not been approved as part of the site plan. I see, so we need this approval prior to that being issued. Yes, and if you want to separate the pergola from the rest of it in order to move that issue towards more resolutions.

That's correct. I just want to address the safety concern about these items remaining potentially in the right of way with public access. So if you're amenable, we would like to place the pergola on the next ARB agenda. If you have the rest of your revisions ready, we'll place everything on it. But otherwise, at least we can get the pergola proceeding through building review.

I like the idea. We'll make sure that we comply with that.

Okay. Thank you. If I may suggest, we'll put the entire matter on for the next agenda, and if only the PIRTLA is ready, we can separate it at that time.

Agreed.

Thanks, Kevin.

Thank you, Anna.

Kevin, do we need to re-vote on that, or can we take your word and follow that?

The applicant has agreed, so I think we'll take it as that that would be the plan.

Okay. Thank you, Derek. Okay, we've come to items 4 and 5, 801 Seminary Place, and thank you all for waiting. Well, here again, we'll start with the staff report.

Starting with the site plan review report. The subject property is the site of Concordia Seminary, is owned R2 and is developed with the university seminary residential and recreational uses. In May, the city council approved a conditional use permit governing future phase development of the campus. The applications tonight pertain to phase one of five, which would see the reconstruction of student housing on the west side of campus. This phase one site measures 4.61 acres and would see some of the following changes. Demolition of four existing multifamily structures, construction of four new multifamily structures containing a total of 16 dwelling units with three bedrooms each. roadway and parking improvements, sidewalk improvements, and new drainage and dry detention. The structures are proposed to be constructed in similar locations to the existing structures. New HVC units would be screened with a combination of fencing and landscaping. Trash should be stored within existing dumpsters. Green space would be reduced by 3% from 72.5% to 69.5%. Runoff is proposed to increase by 1.02 cubic feet per second in a 100-year 60-minute storm event. Runoff would be mitigated with the construction of dry detention areas. Staff are of the opinion that additional information should be provided to allow more complete review of the pre- and post-construction drainage conditions. Tree replacement would occur across the phases, with some being planted outside of the phased area. The Phase 1 planting does not meet the replacement requirement, and staff are of the opinion it should either meet the requirement or additional information should be provide for the Planning Commission to consider. Parking would be reduced by five spaces during this phase, but would be resolved in the future. And staff are of the opinion that there is sufficient parking on site to accommodate the parking. Staff are of the opinion that the proposal has not met the criteria for site plan review and recommend the application be continued to allow the following visions. One, provide pre and post construction drainage sub-area calculations. Two, color code the landscape plan to identify what trees are being removed and what trees are being added within phase one. And then three, either revise phase one tree replacement to meet the requirements or to provide additional information informing the need for replacement in later phases.

Okay, thank you. Welcome back. Thank you very much. Good evening and thank you all for your time. Just as a quick overview, we received the staff comments, the most recent round of staff comments Friday afternoon, and we've actually already prepared exhibits to respond to those items and Angie's passing those around. horn right now for everybody um we do have a presentation that i'm going to go through and then i'm going to invite my colleagues up to the table we will have an architect a landscape architect and civil engineers are all present for answering questions and being a part of the discussion as we get into that obm does this mouse work up here it does i think Yeah, it does. Okay, great. So I'm going to flip through a really quick overview presentation just to kind of familiarize everybody with the project and describe a few big picture items that may or may not be super prevalent in our submittal just because there's so much work, so many phases, and we're trying to convey a whole lot of information in this packet. So we're all familiar with the site. We are on Concordia Seminary's campus, and we are calling this new project, so two years later, is being called The Woods. That's what they call the existing infrastructure and housing over there right now, and we are going to keep the name. We have internally been lovingly calling it Woods 2.0. But we are working on the seminary campus. The CUP boundary was established during the conditional permit approval phase. It runs along Seminary Place, and we are focusing on the western portion of the campus. It's slightly highlighted that includes all phases one through five. We are here today. This is just a reminder of what that CUP diagram looks like, where we established multiple zones in this western half of the campus. We are focusing on the multifamily residential zone, specifically on the phase one area that you see highlighted in pink here. These are the, again, this is just some campus metrics. They're all in the packet if you'd like to dig into them. But we, again, are focusing on phase one, which encompasses 4.61 acres of the site. Four structures that will be removed and replaced in nearly the same locations. 16 dwelling units within those four structures. They're all three-bedroom dwelling units. In this phase, all dwelling unit types are gonna be type B per fair housing regulations. I'm gonna say that that is because currently a portion of the campus that will remain, there are existing ADA units available. There's five within five buildings And those will all be maintained until the very last phase of the project, at which point we would have constructed new type A buildings in future phases. They're just not included in phase one. And then Ryan did give a little description. We are losing a couple parking spaces that's large in the phase one area. That's largely because we are striping new accessible parking stalls with the drive aisle, but we're not changing the shape of the existing roadway. If I go into the site, I want to highlight the drainage and the pre and post drainage configurations here. So this is a diagram of the current condition. Our site is divided into two separate watersheds. We have River De Pere to the north and Deer Creek to the south. So we are required to retain and retain water within the existing watersheds that we are straddling with our new construction. The green are what they call bypass areas, which do not currently flow to any detention, retention, any stormwater management system. The whole point of this project is to not only improve upon these and meet MSD regulations and requirements, but to also minimize the amount of green area that we see on that plan. So this is our post drainage plan where you see a lot of the green bypass areas have gone away and will be serviced by the new above ground detention basin at the south or in the Deer Creek watershed, or at the north in the River De Pere watershed. The calculations are provided in the packet. One of the staff recommendations also asked for this to be broken down into the sub-phases. That is this diagram in front of you. It will be broken down into these individual sub-phases and this is how it is being presented to MSD and how it will be permitted through MSD. All that aside, we get to our phase one focus area and it requires that we construct the entire new dry detention basin required for the entirety of the project in phase one, which is why it's so large because we have to accommodate the runoff then the future phases two through five as part of our project. So this new detention basin is reusing the existing location. This is where water currently drains on site, but it's actually creating a situation where all of the water within this watershed can actually be detained on Concordia's campus as opposed to running off to adjacent properties. The landscape plan has been rendered to show how tree canopy coverage will look. This is at the end of the phase one project. This is what tree canopy coverage would look like. On the following slide, I have trees that would need to be removed. um in a graphic format so the brighter trees on this are all the new plantings new tree new new large maples and oaks and under in uh flowering understory canopy trees all consistent with existing vegetation on site But this shows the existing trees are slightly dimmer or duller in this image, and the new ones are the ones that are outlined in black and a little bit brighter. And then you'll get an idea of the amount of trees that have to be removed and then subsequently replaced to accommodate this new above-ground dry detention basin. Phase one ends in a 550-caliper-inch deficit. However, part of the CEP approval allowed us to look outside of just the actual phased boundaries of the construction for site plan and new building development and would be replaced in the future phases when we come back for approval. Here we have just a couple slides showing the overall look and feel of the foliage that we would have on campus. It is largely aligned with existing tree species while also incorporating some color, not only with seasons but with flowering in summer and fall. some evergreen trees so that we don't lose all of the screening from Big Bend, especially when these are in full bloom. We do have a couple instances where it was just not feasible to... to plant large trees or screen elements, screen shrubberies elements around HVACs. So you'll notice when we get to the enlarged site plans that there are a couple instances where we will have a six foot high wood fence to accommodate some screening with flanked evergreen shrubbery, screen shrubbery on the sides. This is just where it encroaches a sidewalk. We do have block retaining walls where proposed on campus and then all of our new sidewalk and building entrances are required to be accessible. They're all on the accessible route so there will be some railings required on site to accommodate any slopes greater than than ANSI and ADA allows. Quick overview of the apartments. We have four of these structures. They are all the exact same. The overall concept of these is the 1920s prairie style concept, which does not match the existing limestone infrastructure or historic buildings on campus, however, Those limestone buildings were also built in the 1920s. So we found a nice marriage between the ability to not only are we so far away from them on the western portion of the campus, but we also just we liked the marriage of a little bit more of the modern prairie style elements with the historic limestone towers and academic buildings that we see on the existing campus. It's a proposed, the building materials are proposed masonry veneer and we do have all of them in the room. Sorry, not Nietzsche, James Hardy fiber cement siding with cast stone band sills around the building and at the sills of all the windows. And we are proposing an asphalt shingled roof on the hip roof with a little outboard pergola for main entries. This is just the back of the building. We wrapped the materials all the way around. When we say brick veneer, we are talking full cavity wall with the brick, not just a two-inch veneer stick-on piece. It's a full cavity wall construction here. Sides of the building and how we make that transition from a slightly higher band sill on the front of the buildings to the slightly lower one on the back. And that's really in response to some of the previous comments that we've had about not creating a back of a building where it's going to look super obvious that it's the back of the building from any of the public visibility right-of-ways, especially along Big Bend. And then really quick, floor plans of the buildings. These are all three-bedroom units. The units and floor plan do not share demising walls. They have a hallway and stairwell in between them. These buildings do all have full basements that would primarily be used for storage. Where we have type A buildings, those basements will be walkout basements and will be on the accessible path. We are blessed with the topography of the existing site to accommodate the location of those walkout basements with that topography. The second floor stacks on the first, and then we have a pretty simple hip roof proposed here with a ridge vent. And I want to thank you all and invite my... Colleagues up to answer some questions with me, and we'll also put on the table all of our materials.

Okay? Before we get to the materials, I'm not sure who could talk to the water detention.

Yeah. Let me get back to that. Okay.

Hi, Alyssa Burkemper. I'm with Colon Associates, the civil engineer on the project.

Lead us through it.

Absolutely. So I'll start with saying the purple area, there is an existing detention base in there today. It's just north of Tuscany Park. You can kind of see it off Big Bend if you look for it. So that's a similar approach that we are going with the south purple area. MSD, as we know, this was... Built in the 90s, MSD has changed their code since then. So we are just improving this detention basin, bringing it up to MSD's code. And then as Ryan stated earlier, we are also slightly increasing the impervious area. So we're also accounting for that. The orange area today, there is no detention for that watershed. Today, all that just runs to the sewer that then goes to Dartford Ave and then goes to River De Pere. So we are now adding a detention basin into that orange area. to kind of reduce additional runoff area to the north, to River De Pere.

I noticed in the staff report, it said this was sent to property owners within 200 feet of the property. And of course we have residential to the south, Tuscany Park and to the north also. Have we had any communication from

anyone? No residents have reached out to me.

I know Tuscany Park has had some flooding issues over time. So the rebuilding of the purple detention, will that improve the situation over the existing? Absolutely. I think I saw a chart somewhere. so the uh the differential see which one

in the bottom right hand corner that is the 100 year 60 minute differential and we are doing for the entire project so phases one through five we are increasing the runoff by 1.02 cfs which that will be accounted for in the detention both the tuscany the south one and the north detention basins

oh

I guess it's fairly minor. Is that correct?

Yeah, typically, MSD requires detention for differentials that are greater than two CFS. So I will say that MSD is also aware of the drainage concerns for both watersheds. So they're also holding us to stricter requirements than what's typically required. So that's we've got like another layer of design for this detention basin. That's helped to reduce the runoff from this total runoff from the site.

Dave Kuntz, You can ask a quick question is this calculation after all five phases are built.

Dave Kuntz , Yes, yes, this includes all phases

and I don't think I saw anywhere in here, maybe I missed it we have any even estimation of one phases two through five are going to be constructed.

As soon as we get approval on phase one, we start working on the documentation for phases two through five and we'll be right back here for the rest of it. We just wanted to get under permit so that we could get under construction. We also don't have the ability to displace all 21 buildings at the exact same time. So that's why we're doing a phased approach. We're doing four or three buildings at a time as opposed to all 21 because people need somewhere to live in the meantime. They're a

rough idea of the year that phase five will be done. And it's not my business, but does Concordia have the funding to do all five phases?

Absolutely. Okay. The year it would be done, we haven't, without knowing when we would get approval on this, I don't know if the full schedule has been updated, but we can certainly provide that information. And like I said, I don't even think we're going to break it up and come back just for phase two next. I think our next approach would be to come back for approval for phases two through five. on the next iteration, but you see how much work had to go into the planning for those phases because we have to construct the detention for phase one and it didn't make sense to do five detention basins.

Let's go around. Helen?

I don't have any questions.

Jim? My main concern, I don't have any big overarching concerns with the project or anything like that. My only concern, I think it got brought up with an earlier project. Typically when things happen in Clayton, then people see it and then people start peppering us with questions. And my worry is the amount of trees that are coming out here. And I'm worried about it. at least even in the short term and looking like a giant bald spot. And I think we've learned through past meetings and stuff, the community is very protective of this site. So I guess I wish I was asking a more technical question, but I want to try and get like a bit of a warm fuzzy on the trees that it's not going to, because it looks, and you'd have to tell me the, it looks like we're losing half of our caliper inches. And I don't know if that's across the entire site or just in that section, but like, if you can, Looks like you're about to. If you can talk me through the landscaping considerations of basically how we're going to get from where we are now to these trees being cut down to keeping it from being too bare.

Yeah, so my name is Alyssa as well. And I'm the landscape architect on this project. So when we were starting this process and we learned about the detention basins and how many trees, as you can see on your screen here, were being removed, at this point we knew we couldn't replace the 550 caliper inches in this area for phase one without it pretty much taking away every usable space for essentially these families, because that's really who are the users on this site. So At that point, we had to look at it at the holistic scale. So while at this point in time, it's going to be a 550-inch deficit, in the future, at this current point, after all five phases are done, we're going to have a surplus of 233 caliper inches. And our approach as far as the planting design has gone, we know... How do I go

back? Just on the scroll.

Oh, on the scroll. Thank you. Just kidding. It's like stuck. I always get this luck. There we go. The approach really is we've left a lot of the existing trees along, I believe that's Big Bend right there, kind of alone. And we're really focusing on putting the replacement trees replacement of the trees right on the edge of that detention basin. My strategy for this was putting in those flowering ornamental trees that act as understory. Those are going to be quicker, those are going to come in faster and they're also kind of give you those wow elements faster while our canopies and our oaks take their time to kind of grow in and grow up but one of the good things about this since this campus has been around for a while it's probably time to thin out that forested vegetation because if you do not do that if you don't let little percolation of light in none of those existing seedlings underground that have probably been there for many years even have the opportunity to come up because they're not even having the upper like option to So I think with us going through this process, we're going to have also a natural resurgence of trees from the ones that I've been producing over the years. I hope that helps or clarifies.

Yeah. My main concern overall, and clearly we're going to lose some more trees kind of inward on campus. And at least from a community standpoint, I'm not quite as worried about that as I am the screening from Big Bend. Um, because once again, not your project, not a project that got built, but, uh, the trees coming out and that screening along Big Bend seemed to be a chief concern of residents. So I just want to feel very confident that even with the number of trees coming out with it not being on that perimeter, uh, Or lining that new basin. That basin doesn't feel like this giant hole that is really obvious from Big Bend. That's, I guess, what I'm trying to

say. And I don't think it will. And I know we have the aerial faded underneath of what an existing looks like. And us being out there, we're literally stomping through trying to even look through ourselves. Yeah. I would love the option to be able to plant evergreens in that area, but it's just not possible as far as like year round vegetation because evergreens don't like shade. They don't want to be trapped. They're going to be unfortunately not strong and sturdy and healthy. So because I tried to do that and through our design iteration, it was just improbable to be able to add a year round kind of screening opportunity specifically along that side.

Does the existing tree line, as it fronts kind of that sidewalk along Big Bend, is there opportunity to do any planting kind of closer to Big Bend? Or does the existing canopy kind of prevent that?

Existing canopy prevents that. And we worked really hard with Cole Associates to leave as many trees alone as possible. And that is really difficult to do on the site considering... the detention basins. So we honestly, I think we I'm shocked by how little we actually have to remove outside of the direct detention basin. So I think that we've gone through very many iterations together, the Alyssa's have worked really hard together to do as much as possible to maintain those. Thank you, of course.

Chris,

Have you considered honeysuckle or bamboo? I've heard those are very popular in this area.

They're fast growers. Fast growing,

screening. Spreaders. No, first and foremost, thank you for waiting for this long, a couple of hours, and to have this level of enthusiasm for the project still. Thank you for that. I think it's commendable that you all obviously know this project very well, and there's an intention behind your design. And that does matter. It seems like you've considered everything. My only concern, and I think it'll be addressed when we see the materials, is that it I see where you're going with the prairie-style design, and I like that. I'm not necessarily getting it from the masonry wall elements. I see it more as a cinder block, and I don't want to see cinder block. I want to see masonry wall because as you're going down Big Bend, if you're thinning this canopy out, it becomes more of those buildings possibly are going to be visible. So I want to be able to see something and think, wow, that looks prairie style and that is intentional, which I think is what you've been doing for this whole project. So that's my only concern is that I want to see that. I like your color choicing in terms of the hardy board. I am not a fan of asphalt shingles, but in this case, I understand. And I think it works with the low roofs as well. So overall, I think it's been an excellent project. kind of different iterations of this. I like the intentionality behind the whole project and I just look forward to seeing how it continues in the materials that you're presenting too.

Later.

Jeff? I'll triple that comment because yeah, I think this is going to make the backs, quote unquote, which I don't think of them as a back, of the phase two buildings much more visible from the street. So I think we'll get to that later, but I think more attention needs to be paid to the back. I understand this is probably where the detention has to be just from a site standpoint. You all know that I know too much about this site, but I do. I wish we didn't have to take out as many trees in what is the most heavily treed portion of this site. And especially now with the tornado tree removal that I believe is going on, the other end is relatively thin. This end is pretty dense. It's too bad that the detention has to be here, but I imagine the civil engineers are going to tell me that's where it has to be. And what the new trees that are being planted, the ones that are shown bolder here, just what's a general range of caliper size for those trees when they're going in?

Yeah, so all of the flowering trees, they're going to be at a two and a half inch caliper. And then all of the canopy trees sit about at three inch. Typically when we spec evergreens, it's more based off on a height, but we spec those also at a three inch caliper. So everything's coming out at a decent size. Otherwise, if you try to do larger, it's a substantial cost to get almost like half, you know.

Well, and they also wait to start growing longer. So I understand, but at least those are two and

a half. Yeah, that's our standard that we do on those

types. Thanks. I think that's most of what I had site plan wise. Susan?

Yeah, I don't have much. Thanks for, again, thanks for waiting and for the quality of this plan. It's the trees. That's what we're going to hear about. and I know there's not much you can do. I'm just curious, the end goal, when there's a little bit of surplus in Caliper, that's compared to what it is now post-tornado, right? That's not going back to what it was three years ago.

Correct, but why we tried to at least give more Caliper inches than are required just to do right by the project and right by the space and right by the City of Clayton.

Calculated. already removed those from our plan so they're not even being technically like accounted for at this point so we've done the job of like once they're removed what does that kind of look like like where is that campus going to be at so we've we've done the to go like cole said above and beyond um

that's very appreciated right Right and also just working with the city is i'm learning a lot with about trees, as we try to replant and have everything you're not not all the exact same age and not too large, so that they actually. have the chance to grow with the deeper roots and and i'm sure you're covering this because you all talk very. Working intentionally and you all informed and qualified and we've done a lot of research to on keystone species and things like that and that's one thing with it with a tornado. it's an opportunity as well to get the right mixes in there to bring back an even stronger habitat. And so several times it was where we're matching what's already there. And I'm assuming as well, you're improving on increased knowledge and the opportunity that the tornado brought us. Is that right?

Yes. And we made sure to follow Clayton's tree approval list as well. So like we're checking those.

Honey suckling bamboo. Okay, great. Yeah,

exactly. Those somehow stuck in. I don't know how, but yeah. Yeah, we've tried to check all of our boxes and make sure that that's

okay.

Okay,

thank you.

I see we have a hand up.

Hello, thank you. This is Jerry Lauder. I'm calling from my wife's phone, so... I have a question about the drainage and runoff. I live at one, or we live at 110 Arundel, so at the corner of Dartford and Arundel. And with the both Phase 1 through 5 as well as the detention basin, how that's going to affect runoff to the north? I know there's issues to the south, but with the prior go-round, of proposals. We discussed it then and had provided footage of the runoff that we see with severe storms coming down onto Dartford, which carries a lot of silt into the sanitary sewer. And I was just curious both with the current detention basin, what's going to be, how it's going to be impacted, and if something can be done in the short term to address this.

Yeah, so the orange area is what is proposed to drain to Dartford today. This is the current conditions existing drainage plan. There's no detention basin on seminary's campus today that handles drainage to the north, which goes to Dartford. so with msd's um i guess requirements since the 90s that's something that we are now adding to kind of help will help limit the runoff from our project to dartford so we will have a detention basin proposed there that is not that is not there today

okay um and so i mean i don't know if it could be passed back to um the seminary if anything can be done in the interim And then during the work because I mean it is the detention basin going to be one of the first things that's constructed

The orange wine the detention basin will be in the future phase phase three So that will come with our um the next Phases two through five application that we submit for site plan review.

Okay, so it's gonna be some time before this is addressed. I

Correct me with a construction of the future phases.

Okay, we'll get both for the planning board. I don't know if anything can be done to have this addressed again. I'm happy to share footage that I've taken from multiple storms, but it'll be great in phase 3 through 10 or whatever where it's addressed. But it's a current problem now and has been a problem. And I think the concern is if construction even in phase 1 is going to make this worse.

Phase one construction will not have any impact on drainage to the north to Dartford. We have a stormwater management pollution prevention plan also proposed to limit any sediment runoff or any post-construction activities on the site. I personally, I mean, MSD has made it known that there are drainage issues for the River De Pere watershed, which is what drains to the north to Dartford. I'd recommend reaching out to MSD to raise for any concerns and they could address that.

Okay. All right. Thank you.

Any other comments on the site plane review?

Thing that I forgot to ask Steve, I'm sorry. In the removed trees in phase one, I'm probably going to butcher the term. Are there how many legacy trees are in that area?

This second, I don't have my full Excel sheet with me. But that is something that I can pull up and email you all with that. That's already calculated. I just I just don't have that up on hand right now.

Thank

you. If I may ask one clarifying question to Cole or Alyssa, you can answer this. The planting of new trees. So you have a substantial number of trees shown that would be planted along Big Bend north of the phase one detention area. So it's outside of any of your phased areas. areas in particular do you anticipate planting those areas that are outside of the scope of work with phase five when it wraps up or how are you how do you plan on handling that

We are planting within the CUP zone. At this time, we haven't discussed necessarily how that's going to be fully broken out where it's kind of outside of those building phases, but we just know by the end of phase five, all trees will be planted.

I think I would caution against calling it the woods. No, and I mean this seriously. I'm not making a joke out of this, only in the sense that I can already see people saying, well, this is the site formerly known as the woods. With those many, we understand the overall impact that you'll have with planting all of these new trees. I just would be prepared to defend, as we are going to have to be prepared to defend why are they calling it the woods, in a sense, if they're removing all of the woods.

Thank you.

If we go ahead.

I was going to ask Anna and the staff if what we received tonight, does that answer the concerns that you have listed?

So first I'd just like to commend the applicants for turning around plans as fast as they did to our comments. I know last week was a very busy week. We haven't had time to thoroughly review these in the way that we had previous plans, so we can't offer a good, well-informed recommendation to you based on these items this evening.

Well, with that, it seems like it would be beneficial to continue it to the next meeting. where you would have time to review it?

That would be the staff recommendation because we can, I mean, the only input we can provide you is based on the plans that we've had more time to review.

I think that's a good point, Blair. I'll say I felt very comfortable with your revised presentation tonight. I don't know. How does everyone else feel?

I assume in that situation, if staff found something that they were concerned about, no matter how small In that case, if it's phrased properly, they could put it on the next beating and we could knock it out in two weeks. Brian?

And feel free to jump in if you have any opinions you'd like to share, Ana. My first thought is that, you know, in terms of administrative approval, it's very easy for us to go back and look at the SWPPP requirements. We can look at the drainage area calculations. Something that's a little less clear might be the tree planting. If you guys are going to recommend, you know, a staff review, I think it would be helpful for you guys to make it clear Are you fine with a deficit at this time, or do you want that Phase 1 planting to be resolved even if those plantings are outside of the Phase 1 area? As staff, we're not concerned if those plantings go outside of the Phase1 area, but a big question is, are you okay with there being a deficit at this type contingent upon a future phase, which we know it's their intention to complete it, but which may or may not happen?

And that was the nature of my question about the timing of phases two through five, because I, I believe them that they want to, they want to proceed right away, but I don't know what could

change

between the

end. And I can say, I mean, certainly, obviously anything can change, but if the intention is to present two through five all at once, I don't think you short of some sort of catastrophe, they're going to want to build four buildings in a detention pond and walk away from it. So it was,

I think maybe even talking about it here, we say like, okay, if we end with this deficit, I think it's kind of known going through, especially if we're looking at two through five all at once, that deficit will have to be reconciled. And like, we would have to have something much more clear to move forward at that point. And I think everyone would probably be in agreement to that.

So something about the deficit to be reconciles within two years of, yeah.

Right. I would recommend that you either put a time, you can either say in future phase or X number of years, whichever comes first. And then I would also put some sort of condition, as Ryan mentioned, that the SWIP and drainage calculations be reviewed prior to issuance of a building permit.

And to clarify, is this just the site plan review that we would be approving based on administrative approval? We're not talking architectural review at this point? Are we talking about both? No. Just site plan? Site plan. Thank you.

I do want to say that in our first submission and our recommission, I believe it's L500, that is the overall tree planting plan. So you can go in there and see what is already going to be proposed, what additional trees, all their quantities, sizing, all of that stuff. So that's already been

out

because we couldn't come here today to you and be like, you know, we have a deficit, but we don't know we're going to be able to accomplish it in the future phases. But if you go on your previous full package, you can look at page L500 to review.

yeah so the contents there it's just we were trying to pare down the presentation to to format, you know what we really needed to focus on today for phase one. There are a few diagrams that are inclusive of the entire project phase. I will say each construction phase on that cp diagram that you can see is. Estimated right now at 6 months length for each construction phase. So that would mean we'd be under construction on phase 2 early next year. Pending, you know, getting the all these approvals and. This this process underway. that, like I said, we would be turning around and you'd see us again in another month to review, to have the same conversation about phases two through five. So the whole project is a go. Like I said, we broke it out this way because frankly, the GC needs to construct it in phases anyway. So we said, let's go ahead and try to get approval on phase one so that we can get shovels in the ground. Some of those buildings that we're vacating are about to be vacated at the end of the semester. So, you know, we're... why we are trying to approach this in a phased approach, but we do understand the complication of not having all the information. But like I said, six months construction duration for each phase.

So if we were to give a timeframe to make up the deficit, what would be a comfortable timeframe?

For when all the trees would be in place? I don't think all of the trees would be until the end of phase five, however. So that would be two and a half years. Until they're all in place, but we're not going to wait until phase five to start putting a tree in the ground. The phase one trees come when phase one is done. And then we just understand that we have this deficit. So there's an overall plan that Alyssa mentioned that does lay out the new location for every single tree, every caliper inch that we are required to replace and what we had presented in the diagrams. We just had only shown the phase one landscape plan.

And I'm assuming that also depends upon time of year that you can do planting. Correct. Correct.

And I will say they have a lot on staff groundskeeper, Gail, at the seminary and she's incredible. And we will be working with her hand in hand to even make sure that she's comfortable with when everything's going in the ground for her own maintenance, for her pruning maintenance schedule, pruning schedules, everything. So every, you know, the timeline for planting will not only be at the right time for the plant and the, you know, with our climate, but also in very direct coordination with the onsite on staff groundskeeper to make sure that everything that goes in the ground is maintained watered. She knows it's there and, you know, we're not just, putting trees somewhere that no one's going to take care of it. We

typically plant in spring and fall.

Yeah,

because just a warning that you may have construction done at one point and you may wait a certain period of time to have the right time to put the trees in the ground.

Yeah, and I think that we will try really hard not to do that. And then if there is an unusual circumstance, like say randomly it falls behind in the summer, we have had very good success actually of keeping all of the trees we planted on a previous project completely alive because we worked so hand in hand with our GCs and watering bags and then hand watering on top of that. So if it comes in a really odd time, obviously winter we're not really going to, but summer we've had very good success of doing it. Not our preferred method either. So we shoot for spring and fall.

Just for the understanding of everyone too, when a building permit is issued for a project like this, the tree replacement and tree protection, that's part of the permit set that's actually approved and issued. And so the building permit will not receive final approval and closed out from the city until they have completed the planting plan. And there is a process under a building permit for them to request an extension for planting if that were to fall in the wrong time of the year. So we do have a process in place already under our building permits to address that concern that you've identified, Jeff.

would you be comfortable with that three years

three year timeline i think so yeah yeah

okay now we have to figure out how to word this

Kevin,

maybe you can assist. Mr.

Chairman, can I ask a question? It sounds to me, Anna, like the closeout of the building permit process, which would be one permit per phase, I presume, has sufficient regulatory control to enforce completion of planting without additional time limits for this approval. Is that what you were suggesting?

It is, but the one caveat to that is that under the plans presented today, we do not know which trees on their replanting plan would be associated with Phase 1. So that's where maybe you can assist with the caveat that if a formal replanting plan for Phase 1 is not provided to the city, within three years, they will have to return to do so. So if they provide that formal planning plan when they come with their next set, phase one through five, but if for some reason did not get a building permit to actually work on phase five and the project ended, then they would have to provide us with which trees are being replanted to cover the deficit created by the phase one construction.

Okay, now how do we say that? Okay, so approval subject to administrative review of the stormwater remediation plan and a requirement that the phase one planting deficit be resolved in the course of completing building permits for subsequent phases, or if construction ceases for six months or more, then that deficit must be satisfied within six months of the stoppage of construction. Is something like that on it? Yes. Good thing we record these things.

The staff confirmation?

Yeah, I think we have to include that. So...

except that she just said yeah we just need to say staff recommended the application application subject to staff confirmation that the three criteria have been met and then what he said

sounds like a so moved sort of situation okay

Okay, so I can so moved. So moved. Thank you, Kevin.

Second. All in favor? Aye. Closed. Okay. I think we got through that part. Thank

you.

Like to introduce Scott fell with Nova group. He's actually the architect of record on this project.

Good evening. So these are the samples of the materials that you're looking at in the renderings. It is a... We'll start with the shingles. We'll go from the top down. The shingles are... architectural grade laminated profile shingles, so they aren't just flat. There's variation in them. They'll throw shadows and everything else, and they have a little bit of varying color. The hardy siding is a plank, just lapboard plank siding. It's fiber cement. It might last longer than the brick. Yeah, stone. This is what all of the that that horizontal band and the sills will be made of believe there are five inches. And That's one sample of the masonry product. It is a concrete brick. It is not clay masonry. It is full bed depth, however. It is not peel and stick. It is four inches high, 16 inches long. One of the reasons we selected it is because it gives us that horizontal reinforcement of what we're trying to accomplish. And I think that's part of the whole prairie style influences is things are horizontal with the lower pitched roofs, the deeper overhangs. I think from a distance, I think this would, will appear very much as brick. Even if you, I mean, and if you're thinking just modular brick, then no, because that's smaller, but there's a lot of facilities that use King size or jumbo size brick, which are more in this range. And for buildings like this, I don't know that that would be inappropriate. So yeah, So those are the basic materials. The other is a metal sample. That's the gutters and downspouts, things like that.

Is it a blend? Yes. A variety of colors? Yes. Yes.

If you're providing a description as you walk with the brick, it is not being caught by audio.

So I was pointing out the variations in the single brick that we have, but the picture on the documents you have is representative of the range of the material.

when I looked at the, uh, submitted drawings, I thought it's very, very dark. Um, but now that I see the brick or block and the rendering on the screen, it looks a lot lighter. Uh, I know there was a comment that it'll be, uh, eventually, uh, pretty well shaded by trees. And, uh, I think these colors would then fit in fine. I think if we had no trees around there, it would be pretty desolate. Yes. The only thing is it seemed like on the campus itself, there was more of a little bit of a reddish color in some of the stone that I don't see being picked up here.

And I would agree with that. but we didn't want to introduce a whole new material like the stone. And I think part of the whole prairie school is, is the darker color underneath the overhangs. And so I think that's kind of what prompted the, the siding choice. And then for the masonry, it's just, I mean, that's what, you know, um, It just, there wasn't an option to pick any of those roses or pinks up that's in the stone on a lot of the rest of the campus. But I think also this is fairly far removed from any of those buildings.

And of course they're going to relate to each other. So they're a new campus of its own. Yes. There was also comment about the percentage. Oh, yeah. The front left and right facades measure 65% Masonry. The rear comprises 35% Masonry. Comments on that? Jeff? I was...

A little disappointed by that. As I mentioned earlier, I think during the site plan review and paired up with the removal of trees, these buildings, and I'm not thinking so much of phase one as I am of phase two through five, these buildings don't have backs. That rear facade will be exposed to Big Bend pretty substantially. And at the moment, I don't know if anybody wants to flip to the other elevation, the Dave Kuntz, It that looks like a back facade only problem is in this site plan that's the side that the public sees, and so I wish it was more masonry than it is. Dave Kuntz , I also this isn't a material comment Steve it's a pretty. spartan building i don't know if that's the right adjective or not it's a pretty simple pretty plain building um as opposed to i guess i'm used to seeing and thinking of the existing buildings that were in there that were all masonry that had quite a bit of in and out i mean the footprint of these buildings is tremendously different than the footprint of the previous buildings i know you wanted to go simpler and you're saying prairie but i'm not getting prairie i'm getting um camp you know vernacular sort of um and so I wish they were a little more developed than this I don't know if budget is driving the decisions that we're seeing here architecturally it could be

That is certainly a factor. I mean, we do have a budget and I can tell you that the original design, which had a lot more of that, was substantially over what the seminary had planned for this. And so... The fact of the matter is the buildings that are there now cannot function. Those

buildings are too much, I agree. I just worry that the pendulum swung a little too far in the other direction here. And like I said, not at all thinking about phase one because the back faces the seminary. although maybe they're concerned about that but the rest of the phases much of the back faces the street it becomes the street elevation so um i wish there was more masonry on it i wish there was a little more articulation to the buildings themselves to be honest so i went a little further than just materials steve but um yeah i wish we had that 75 percent on each facade

Did you consider maybe the buildings do not have to be identical from one to the next?

No. And I guess these are three-bedroom units. The next phases will have four-bedroom units and two-bedroom units, So they won't be identical because they'll be bigger and smaller, but they will. I mean, the presentation will be virtually the same. I think to try and start Coming up with multiple designs back there, I don't think lends itself to good design for this kind of... I mean, even if you walk around the campus, the buildings are all fairly... And they really are fairly similar. Yes, they do have differences, but they're fairly

similar. I think the only thing I was looking at is if the... amount and location of the brick could be changed, not to change the footprint or anything else about the building.

We could certainly look at adding some additional masonry to the back of that building.

I think that could help. And where I was going was, I see we we see building 14 on the front elevation. Yes. They're all going to look like and you only know which one is yours by the number.

True.

It's like new subdivisions. where you have two and three car garages all lined up on the street. Then the house is sort of tucked behind it, and you really don't tell one house from another anymore. So I think I was looking for a little character identity in it. And it goes along with, Jeff, what you were saying. I think I expected closer to our, 75% masonry. Yeah, and

I can just tell when we spoke with staff, they weren't overly concerned about meeting that number. But certainly if that's your concern, we will address it as you speak to it. We've

got many other comments to go. Who wants to jump in next?

Okay, I'll jump in. Along with Steve's idea of maybe more brick or varying where you have brought the siding down and the brick up, kind of changing that, maybe keeping the same percentages because I'm sure that's based on cost. giving it some difference, I think would help. Putting the number there over the canopy over the door. How visible will that be when you're walking? Or will there be ground signs? or something else to say, you know, number 14, number 13.

As far as local signage, I don't know that we've discussed that I believe the public sidewalks are far enough away that that small canopy above the door is not going to block vision to that sign because that's sloping, you know, away from you. I think the numbers will be readily visible.

Okay. What is the bond pattern for the brick?

It would most likely be, well, it will be a one-third running bond.

Okay. Okay, I don't have anything else.

I actually welcome the fact I don't have as strong of an opinion as I usually do. Um, I, I definitely see some of the comments. Uh, I would, I would just throw if we're, if we're focusing on most of my thoughts on this, once again, I think the way most people experience this is from Big Ben. So how it will look from Big Ben, like at a distance. So, um, I, I don't necessarily have a problem overall with the Hardy to Masonry, uh, But if we're looking at throwing something in where, you know, even if we're going higher on some, if we could focus on say like building 27, 25, 23, 21, the ones that are, you know, the backs are going to be most visible from Big Bend and maybe at least be able to focus on a smaller amount of buildings to where, like I said, those are the ones that most people will experience because most people aren't going to be driving through campus. experiencing that so it just to maybe present a little bit better from the street is just my only thought overall

I just want to add one comment, and that is among the 21 buildings, we are looking at this one, which is on a relatively flat surface. But this section of the campus has a lot of topography. So the masonry veneer will go all the way down to the ground level everywhere. And like we said, some of those buildings that have the backs to Big Bend are going to be walkouts because of the topography and because we need to make them accessible. So the basements of them accessible, on the accessible route. So I will say that while the dimension taken from the bottom of the roof to the cast stone band might be the same, the finished floors of these buildings are not the same from building to building, and the topography along the side of the building might is not going to be the same from building to building. So I do think you'll get expressed different elevations and visibility of that masonry veneer that we're talking about. So if we take the dimension down from the roof line, I don't think you'll just have like a, it's not a flat surface. So you're not just going to have like a, single horizontal datum across the entirety of the site, which I do think will help. And I just wanted to make sure it was pointed out.

So if we have a three-floor facade, we would have much more masonry percentage on that.

Correct, which is why along the back of the building we did that dip so that when we do have a whole third story underneath that we can still bring that brick all the way down to the ground level and not try to come up with a different stem wall solution or we obviously don't want to expose the concrete stem walls so we just... That's where that came

from. And I actually appreciate you highlighting the fact that I'm getting ahead of myself, too, because I have to remind myself we're talking about phase one, four buildings here. And at least in these four buildings, the front of the building is technically what would face Big Bend as the backs would face campus. So that should be brought into consideration for this phase. Yeah. As far as coloring goes and everything like that, too, I do. I like the darker coloring. I think mixed with the foliage, I think a lot of it will kind of blend in from the street, like I said, and that's how I think most people experience it. So I don't have any big overarching concerns.

Chris?

I know there's a Finnish architect, Johani Palasma. I probably bastardized his name, but he said that the door handle is the handshake to a building. And I think that applies in this case. And someone else said that, you know, the details in the architecture here or the beauties and the details. I would like to see some more variability since this, in essence, the backside of the building is the front of the building and it looks very institutional oriented. I like what you've done with the front of the building. It reads more prairie to me in the sense of these ribbon-style windows. I don't see that in the back. I appreciate mentioning the topography that is obviously going to impact the view of it. I would love to see a rendering. uh from the big bend side that shows what this actually would look with the site placement um because it's hard to envision that just looking at these identical buildings um that do look very institutional and that goes down to the uh if you flip back ryan or whoever is that yeah that one here just even the doors um I just don't see that same ribbon style window. I don't see the overhanging eaves necessarily. The things that I normally associate with prairie style, I don't see really prevalent other than the low eaved roofs. The benefit of a clay fired product as well is that you get all of this wonderful variability in the colors. With this masonry product, it sounds like that's not the case, that you might get four or five different colors. And if that's the case, What are you going to do to maintain that those batches are really mixed, that it's all sorted together so that you don't have this one part of the building looking all of this color, the next part looking all of this colour? And is there going to be enough variability? Because looking at the drawings here, it purposely looks like there's no variability in the colour, both in the masonry and then, of course, with the hardy plank siding. And that's a concern because it reads very flat. And in low-light areas, it could look all like one colour. So... Have you given some consideration to how you're going to mix up the colors with that masonry to get some sort of a variability?

The manufacturer produces the product, and it has a natural range in it. And then at that point, we can certainly... clarifying the masonry specifications that mix your pallets so that, you know, we don't get all of the same, you know, but the samples, the live samples we looked at out, out at best blocks yard in Bridgeton, the range is prevalent. It is not a uniform color. It does have some variation. Now you back up 200 yards and, Maybe not so much, but I think that's also part of architecture is you don't look at things like this for one. I mean, this is the only way you'll ever see this building. In real life, you'll never look at this building this way. So there are shadows. You know, there's variation. The mortar color will change it, which it will just be a natural mortar to help lighten it up even more. So, you know, certainly we will make an effort to make sure that they mix their palates so we do get that variation.

is there any projects around that you're aware of that have this masonry in this color that we'd be able to see what that actually looks like? And then in terms of the natural masonry or the mortar that you're going to use, the natural mortar, I would want to see what that looks like so that, again, it doesn't kind of reinforce this idea that it's a very light or a very dark, that it is... offsetting the masonry, but also not appearing just to have all of these white lines then on the back there. I mean, I guess I'd love to see some sort of a striving towards something that looks more natural than this masonry block that we have here. I would have liked to see the five, and I appreciate for the sake of your back and for that you didn't bring those five pieces in there. But I would love to see something in situ to see how it actually looks.

jeff i think we we talked about most of it just a detail the porch construction what do you envision that to be what materials are those what are The deck?

Yeah. They will be masonry columns. Oh, these are masonry? Those will be masonary columns, and then it will be all tracks, synthetic, and then aluminum railings. Okay. And the deck itself? Will be composite. Yeah. It'll be a... Okay. I mean, the structure will be wood, you know, regular lumber, but the decking material and the band board around the outside will all be...

Because your front elevation shows masonry columns, but this one doesn't. Yeah, they didn't come

out

correctly,

but they will be the masonry.

Okay, that's different.

It is

better. Okay, yeah, I wish there was a... I'll echo the thoughts, and I already said a bit of it. I wish there was... a little more um a little more to the buildings than this they're they're simple and maybe in my mind a little too simple

susan

uh yeah just just adding to what was said i do think especially facing big bend we should be aware of what's what's being seen um and As far as the color, it does look dark, but my bigger concern really is something that, again, since the tornado, it's a heat island effect, especially of the roof in such a dark color. I don't know if they can go at least a shade lighter. I don't want to throw off the whole color scheme, but it is something that we should all be aware of, that the lighter our roofs, the more sustainable and energy efficient for you your building is going to be until that tree canopy eventually comes back as the calipers grow. That'd be my comment.

Any other comments from the design team? Anna, any further comment? Nope. Thank you. Okay. Well, we have, I think, several recommendations. Of course, we do have a staff recommendation to approve as submitted. Do we want to modify that at this point?

Well, it sounds like there's been several of us have brought up the idea of potential exterior alterations so that the buildings are not identical. Is that accurate? And in that case, is that something that we want to proceed with?

i think as a group we need to decide uh what to recommend to the design team and it may require them returning to us

i think the consideration would also be the four buildings that we're considering here so if we you know Do we have a problem with the composition of these four buildings? We've clearly voiced that, you know, and some of it is just going to be natural because of topography. But, you know, are we okay with these four buildings going up this way? of highlighting through this conversation that we clearly we have a responsive design team here is listen to suggestions uh that you know we may want to see more variation in the future especially for the buildings fronting big ben so i think that's specific you know we need to consider if these are the four buildings that we want to modify

i'd like to see phase one be approved one way or another so that the project can keep going and we could see phases two through five very soon and deal with that. Following what you just said, Jim, I think maybe we should go with what we see right now, realizing that we may look at some different locations maybe what is seen from Big Bend Boulevard in the future.

Steve, is that including the amount of masonry shown on these four buildings being below the 75% level that the

ordinance? Yes, but... I don't remember the lay of the land. Do any of these four buildings have the basement exposed? No, no,

they're all very similar to this. This is a fairly flat portion of the site.

I hesitate to change that.

Yeah, and the backs of these, once again, the backs of these face inward to campus, not outward to the public.

Yeah. hesitate to change from what's proposed right for these

yeah

as long as everyone understands that we may be taught we will be talking differently when we look at other buildings that are exposed in other areas very likely

Right. To Cole's point of, you know, entire elevations of how the buildings work are going to be sitting next to each other and in the landscape. Yeah.

Any other comments on that? Any comments from the design team? You're comfortable? Oh. Oh, there was a thumbs up. Okay. Yeah, it's late. Okay, then I think we're ready.

I move to approve as submitted.

Second. All in favor?

Aye.

Opposed? Well, we thank you for hanging in. This will ultimately be a great improvement for Concordia.

Well, I appreciate it. Thank you all for your time tonight. This was a easy two hours to wait after the last two years.

Well, we've come to the end of the meeting. Jeff, any comments? No, nothing else. Thanks. Blair?

Chris? Nothing. Thank you.

Jim? No comments. Ellen?

No comments.

Susan? Nothing. Obie? Nothing for me. Ryan?

Nothing further.

Counselor? Nothing for me, sir. We appreciate all of your assistance tonight. Oh, it's fun to be here. Thank you. You're always welcome. Thank you. Okay. Well, we will see everyone. Will everyone be at the August 17th meeting?

Okay, Blair, you'll be gone? I will be here. Okay. Okay. We'll have a quorum. We'll see you two weeks from now. Okay. Thank you. We're adjourned.