August 31, 2026 — Meeting Transcript

Good evening, everyone, and welcome to the Planning Commission ARB for August 31st. If you have any electronic gadgets, please silence them. Ryan?

Steve Lichtenfeld? Here. Helen DiFate?

Steve Lichtenfeld? Here. Helen DeFate?

Here.

Jim Arsenault? Here. Chris Brennan?

Here.

Mark Weskin?

We have minutes from the previous meeting on August 17th. Are there any changes? Seeing none, do we have a motion?

I move to approve as submitted.

Second. All in favor? Aye. Opposed? Okay. We'll go on. This is the time for the open forum. If anyone has signed up to speak on any item not on tonight's agenda, raise your hand. No hands up either. No. Okay. Oh, okay. We'll move on. The first item is old business 7754 Forsyth Boulevard. The applicant is here. We'll start with the staff report.

This application was originally reviewed at the meeting on August 3rd and 17th and continued at both meetings. No revisions were provided from the previous submittal, and therefore staff don't have any updates to this report. I will note that the applicant has kind of a concept that they want to present. However, this was not presented in time for staff to provide any kind of feedback, so staff recommendations are going to stay as presented in the report. So the pergola and screening discussed in this report are the subject of code violation cases that have been open since March of this year. The meeting associated with this report is the third review by the ARB, and staff are of the opinion that the applicant has had sufficient time to either abate the violation or present sufficient documentation for review by the ARP, and are of the opinion the ARP should take final action per some of the recommendations below. Should the applicant prefer improvements or conditions alternative to those which are the result of the following conditions, then staff's opinion that those should be reviewed as part of a new application. Should the error be elect to continue this application further, staff note that the next meeting, September 14th, is the final meeting in the 60-day review window. Given that this matter is the subject of a code violation case, staff recommend resolving rather than continuing within this time frame. So staff are providing the following recommendations. One, that the composite boards consisting of the upper 4 feet 3 inches of the screening shall be removed. Two, no furniture, screening planters, storage, or other outdoor dining equipment, including the pergola, shall encroach into the public right-of-way.

Okay, thank you. Eric?

Hello, my name is Derek Lauer representing Cafe Napoli. And at this point, what we've concluded is quite simply just to remove the pergola because, you know, we have consulted engineer in order to get the manufactured product to be compliant in terms of uplift, we will be, we would need to, pardon me, unbolt it, move it over, re-bolt it, but that might mean welding in a base plate and cutting in a pier. And the expense of that is beyond what the expense of the pergola was, but engineering and these types of things. So the intent at this point is to remove the pergola. It is over by a few inches. The idea is to move it over by about three and a half feet, align it with the window. But at this point, since there's pending litigation and such, that we would like just to have the recommendation that it be removed and no longer of issue. In terms of the planters themselves, that also based on the site plan that's been submitted. I'm sorry if it didn't get submitted in time, but I do have paper copies of it. We do show the planters being moved and within compliance of the property line. So at that point, we're just looking to, again, comply with the request now. There was issue of the pieces of this screen wall being over the right-of-way, and that's what I just addressed. One of the other was the structural stability of the components. Again, the anchorage of the pergola, as I discussed, we can anchor it with some effort. But as we said also previously that we had engaged Dotec engineering to analyze the overturning movement of the screens as they were built and that we found that they were within loads and would not overturn even with the screens as they are. But our intent then is to remove those composite planks as per requested. Now, we can, again, pick those up. We can move out the planks. And we can move those over. Now, at that point, whether we cut back those existing posts or reuse them to make something else. And really upon this whole process is what we've kind of discovered is that this is a really important corner, you know? And again, just to say a little something about myself, I feel like I'm getting to know you all a little bit, but you know, just about who I am again, You know, Clayton on the park. I was part of that team, Blue Sour and Associates, four people. That was the first instance of building information modeling before Revit even existed. Drew 480,000 square feet as the only drafts person. You know, Clayten on the Maryland Heights, you know, the Maryland walk right there, category from where Herbie's used to be. So I was at the architectural review board back in 97 through 98. and create a full 3D model and showed the sun system so that all the shadows could be calculated because there was an issue about the neighbors not wanting that Maryland walk to be built. So I have a connection to Clayton, and somehow my path has crossed yours. This corner, again, they did something hastily. We want to come back and do something really nice. And looking at the money, the time, and all that, We want to come back with a really cool proposal that makes the pergola a permanent structure, makes the wall built correctly. I think there's an opportunity at this corner to put a sign there that's welcoming as, you know, to Clayton, not just Napoli as a business. But that place happens to be sort of the hearth of the business district. It's a welcoming center. So as you may have seen in some of the renderings I put forth, it started with that idea of the Roman aqueducts. Again, going back to the idea of Tuscany. And I have here the construction documents of how to do that. So I went through and engineered the masonry and how to do the lintels and the drainage and the planter. I have that. Along the time, discussions went on, talked about a more fluid, modern way of doing this. Now, again, I don't know how familiar you are with me, but I was involved with the Creative Exchange Lab in creating a piece of artwork that's right across from the Fox Theater. It's on the KADHX building, right in the parking lot of the Jazz at the Bistro. This is a 30 foot by 42 foot sculpture. made out of electrical conduit. And we did this in 2011, commissioned by the Kranzberg Associates. I've done several public art sculptures. I've got one at the Audubon Center. We've got one up at the college over in Alton. I work with Thomas Lee. So this particular one in Grand Center is something that has been built, has been part of the artistic community of St. Louis, which then I'm looking to use that same language of using these bent metal pieces to form these organic flowing forms that then mimic the shape of the water flowing and the aqueduct. Now, my entire career I've been a pioneer in technology. I got out of WashU, I'm the last of the old generation. I got my master's with a pencil and a typewriter. Never touched a computer until I was 25. By the time I was 30, I was teaching computing at WashU. I taught Carl Safe how to draft. And so at that point, my first job at Bolin was trying to figure out how to create pen setting standards. We were the first guys to figure out how equate line weights by color to drafting. I was then a pioneer in technology and building information model, augmented reality, doing three, you know, augmented design. I'm now at the point where I'm pushing AI as far as it can go, right? So then it's not capable of doing the things that I am. I've found the limits what AI can do. So if you back up to the previous screen, you'll see there is a wireframe diagram. That's a solid object Boolean model of each of the components. And again, it was by this way we partnered with Foreman Fabricators and went through and calculated every single radius of each piece of metal. We sat there in the fabricator and we bent each shape. We got it worked out so every curve lines up with a common connection point. We use simple U-bolts, off-the-shelf U-bolts through Unistrut, a couple of washers. We can then come back. We can finish anything we want. We can luminate it. So that there is what then you see before you. And again, as you see on the corner, I've kind of worked into this idea. I've ended up with... this idea of having that you could have a welcome to Clayton sign. And again, I think that as you know, the way Napoli is and people taking pictures of themselves, this will be the spot where all the pretty girls come and take their selfie in front of it. And now all of a sudden you've got that going around the internet. Welcome to Clayton. Here's where it's the hearth. So I put it to you then, a couple of things. One, let's get past this court case. Give us time to come back with a reasonable solution. And I'll stake my reputation in it. I'm not going to let something bad be done at this corner. This is my chance to do something cool. So then, given that, if we could then approve the pergola to no longer be of issue as it would be removed, that these screen walls as they are currently built being taken off of the right-of-way, And simply enough, remove the planks. That satisfies those couple of conditions. Now then, what forward? Here's a couple of solutions. Both of them are not cheap. We're asking then Napoli to spend 50, 80, $100,000 on this. When at some point we'd like to come back and say, if we're going to spend 150 or 200,000 on that patio, it's going to be integrated to the pergola. They want to do something nice in the center of it. Let's come together on what the sign ought to be. Let's get some good planting on that corner. Let's work on that together. So again, my request is to give us the power to get past this condition with legal condition. With that, then I'd just like to get your input as to what direction you like. Do you like the more traditional look of the masonry? Do you like that more modern look of the wavy metal? I've got some drawings here that show both, that I have the masonry going. At the very end, you have the wavy metal for just the Clayton side, willing to be accommodating, looking for directions. So appreciate any thoughts. Thank you.

Well, first, thank you for the history. I do remember the Maryland walk issues that came up, but those were resolved. So that went quite well.

Through 3D modeling way back when. That's

right. If I understood you correctly, you would say that the pergola would be removed where it is right now.

Yes, that's the intent.

And that the planters would be relocated.

Relocated, yes.

And the wooden planks would come down.

Yes.

In other words, you're saying that everything that is either over the setback line or that we had talked about removing would be gone.

Yes, that's correct.

The legal issue, as far as I know, and Ana or Stephanie, you may have to help, has not been resolved. It's correct. Okay. And we're not dealing with that legal issue here, but it can affect what we are doing otherwise. I'm sure you read this. Ryan's report, and he reiterated the part of it about we need to make a decision and go on. Before we would do that, I want everyone to comment, but I'll do one last comment. I'm intrigued by this much more transparent I think this is virtually the third thing we've been shown. But here again, we have no detail. I can't really read the height or the construction, you know, how those would be kept from if someone hangs on it, what's going to happen. The method of construction, the materials and everything. We're not asking for it now because you really haven't applied. for that. So we will have to go through that in the future. I'm just saying, I think it is becoming more transparent as you go forward. So let me stop there. Helen?

Okay. I'm sorry you didn't bring this sooner or get this so that we can have a chance to look at it because Right now, Steve is right. Short of my trying to look at it quickly in a few minutes, that's not fair to any side. I need to absorb it, think about it, and then really go to the site and kind of try to envision it. You know, this... is much more trend this third edition is much more transparent than what you've shown us and you're showing planting in the rocks and that's fine um which is what we've been asking for or some of us have um I think this is a step in the right direction, but I don't think I can't say yes, this is great. I approve. You know, I wouldn't do that with anything. Thank you.

Jim. Yeah, it sounds like the staff recommendations are kind of what you're asking for and that would help relieve the legal aspect of things. Then after that point, I think I, like everyone else, looks forward to a full submittal of whatever plan you want to put forward at that point where we kind of have the entire process to consider so that we kind of had two steps at this point where without the full information, we've kind of weighed in on our thoughts. So I really don't want to take any more time kind of going over general thoughts when we're not really making an informed decision. So I think we should act on the staff recommendation tonight and then look forward to whatever you choose to present in the future.

Chris. Thank you for all the background on you. That does make a difference hearing all of that. I love that you've been so... easy to work with in this case, coming back with these different iterations of this project. I know we can't comment too deeply on this. I love the direction this is going. I love the kind of public art sort of look of it, and I look forward to seeing that. It seems to me that you have met all of the staff recommendations by what you're proposing here. So along with doing that, you're also giving us kind of a little foreshadowing of what is to come potentially. And without specifics, my heart says, yeah, I love this. Brain might pause a little bit, but I love this direction that you're going there. So thank you for that.

Later.

Hi, thank you for all the work. I also really like the direction. I love that it sort of highlights the corner, the artwork. I think that it's pretty cool. I like it. I want to make sure that this, to me, the planters look really nice and lovely in this. And currently they do not. I know you're talking about moving them and doing that. Just being careful that, you know, right now they're kind of wonky and spaced and taking that into consideration. Okay. Okay, so just making sure that you take that in consideration when you bring this to us again. Thank you.

Any comments from the audience? Come on up. Introduce yourself. Speak into the microphone.

Thanks, everybody, for your attention to all this. I am in-house contractor for Napoli. I take care of all their maintenance, and I tie loose ends up on construction. I did not do this, this wall. But I just wanted to ask you guys, we've spent a lot of time putting these things together, and it's always met with a lot of questions, some approval and some questions. And so is there a direction that you can give us That's maybe more detailed. And the reason that we don't have the details is because we don't know what you're going to say. You know, there's no need to draw the drawings if you're not going to go, I like that, if everybody's not on board with it. So is there something that we can do, get from you guys that will help us to maybe come back one final time with something that's like, yeah, that's it? Because, I mean, we could throw ideas all day and it just falls short. So I don't want to do that. So I just want to ask that.

The first thing is, could you give us your name? Oh, I'm Scott

Sontag.

Secondly, I think you may have heard direction tonight, but if you were here two weeks ago, we had just a rendering. There were photo renderings, but they had no detail. So it was very, very hard for us to really understand buy into

it.

We're at the same point now, but we have a potentially different, for me a more intriguing solution. So there has to be some effort put in front of us to show the materials used, the methods of construction, how everything fits together so that we can see if it meets all of our guidelines and requirements. So even though we, I can only speak for myself, but I think everyone agreed, found this intriguing, the right direction, we still don't know much of the detail. So that's what we're looking for. So basically what Derek was indicating, which paralleled the staff report, was that we need to move beyond where we had been to close that down and to come back with a new application. Okay. With details.

So where it sits right now, if I may, um, you guys are good. Well, mostly good with this. Once we find out the building materials, the sizes and more of the detail, if that all meets, this is looking like we're going to be able to do it or.

Well, No, I wouldn't go that far. But I would say that conceptually, this seems to be closer to what we would be comfortable with for the city of Clayton, for that corner, for the public side of it, and hopefully for Cafe Napoli's side of

it,

where it could be a win-win situation all around.

That's what we want, for sure.

Well, that's what we try to get

also. Okay. Well, thank you.

Yeah. Just for the record too, I think an important part is we have a submission deadline before meetings. That's two weeks prior to the meeting. The last couple of meetings you've presented the concepts new during this meeting. So they weren't provided for staff review or for anybody on the commission to review in the weekend and week leading up to the meeting. So it's really hard looking at this screen for them to try and really quickly figure out. On the spot. I got you. It

was. All right, I'm sorry. I was not aware that we did. Okay.

And as it is, some of this stuff takes a minute, takes a little time. I got this done Friday afternoon, so my apologies for not getting it. If you'd allow me, some of the details that you were talking about with the masonry anchorage and the steel is detailed here. Now, these are reductions. It was set up for 24 by 36 pages, but if you'll allow me, I'd like to distribute these.

That would be fine, but it's not an official...

Right, this isn't the formal submission. You'll have to do that with staff and fill out the new application and submit that to staff.

Make sure your mic's on.

Thank you. The City of Clayton sign, is that like a doable thing? Just before that gets too far in terms of revisions and things like that?

Um, well really with that type of signage, I would have to run that past the city council if they want to actually put that up. Okay.

Thank you. We're not quite finished yet. Actually, Stephanie, I think we're going to need your assistance on wording.

Yes. So, well, here's a question for you. You've already said that you're going to remove the pergola. You're going to remove a lot that's out there. So are you withdrawing the application that is currently before this commission in order for you to file a new application with this new idea?

Can that happen concurrently? Can we get the new application in prior to that one being pulled?

Well, you would have to say tonight that you're going to pull the current application and you have to meet that two-week deadline in order to get it on the agenda. Which

is today.

Is it next Monday? Because I thought the meeting was moved up to September 14th.

And

next Monday is the 7th.

So that would be today to make the application. Can I submit it online tonight? It's kind of drawn.

That's a question for staff, whether you can submit something online.

I would rather not withdraw the application if a continuance allows us to meet the deadlines.

But also... Well, it seems like a continuance also hinders the court case. So it seems like we almost have to decide on this and wipe this out and start fresh. It seems like would be the best thing, whether that is whether an application, then a new application allows us to be on the 14th or not. Doesn't matter. Right.

Right. So the question really is. Are they withdrawing tonight? And if not, then you can't consider all this new stuff that's just been presented. And so really then I think the issue is then you would probably just deny the application that's in front of you. So it's a question of denial or are you just withdrawing it in order to file anew?

If the application is to remove the piece and move the other things off it, we would like to continue with that permission. We would not want a denial of the application. We would want to be able to have the ability to remove the pergola.

I don't think that you need approval from them to remove a pergola. You need approval for installation. Which was

your... I can't speak to how a denial of that would affect the court case. I'm not knowledgeable of such things. I can't answer to that.

The court case is completely separate. I mean, the fact is, is that these improvements went in without governmental approvals. And that's your court case. So... That's totally separate. What you have now is an application for approval for a project that is ever evolving, ever changing. And so now you've got this new idea. You want to come back with a new idea. So what do we do with your prior application?

It seems like the cleanest would be to withdraw it or allow us to deny it and then start fresh.

With your new idea that you've got some guidance on tonight.

But I'd have to have it submitted by today.

For the next meeting, or you could submit it then for the first meeting in October.

But either way, you need to resubmit it.

No, I get that.

Okay.

But this is going to cause a crash and burn at the courthouse there.

No, the court case is totally separate. Right,

right. But it's contingent upon resolution of this matter.

Right, but if he's going to submit a brand new application, he can't get it on. It's

contingent upon the resolution of this matter, but we'd be resolving the matter tonight.

By withdrawing it?

Well, if you withdraw it, then the court just acts on what's there. It sounds like either way, the pergola is going away, so...

I don't know that the city attorney sees it that way. I don't know.

Well, here's how I see the court case. Your violation was a long time ago. So right, right, right. I get it. When I say you, I meant property owner. That violation occurred a long time ago they're probably waiting to see if it gets cured. And so far it hasn't, but the violation has already occurred. And, and if he's willing to extend it some more than, you know, that's up to him. But, you know, and if you resubmit quickly, you can let him know that you've submitted this new application.

Again, with the pergola, I think that that's clear. With the planters, it's less so because what's being asked is to allow those planter pieces to remain but just on the property. So would that not be a – I

think the confusing part of that is that you haven't actually – you've now submitted four or five different things that we all don't really know what one you're asking them to consider.

Well, there was something that's existing. And again, that's being asked to be moved.

Well, we would need to see how and where it's being moved and we don't. That's been submitted here. Okay.

With all due respect, that information has been asked at the last two meetings too. We've asked for a survey. We've asked and each time we've just gotten new renderings and we haven't had only until the meeting to observe anything. So I know we asked for a survey a month ago at this point, and we still haven't seen a survey of the property. Even two weeks ago, I believe you were stating that the pergola was within the property lines, and now we know that the pergala is not within the property lines. So it makes it tough for us to make any sort of judgment without the proper documents in front of us.

Okay. Sheet A9 addresses those questions. Now they'll be part of the future application. I understand that,

yeah. Chairman, I will offer – I mean, I think we need to get some clarity on what exactly they are asking you to make a decision on because now we have various things that have been provided at different moments in time and more information at meetings versus not. According to Ryan's calculations of the 60 days, the reason that's important, even separating from the code enforcement case, is because the code states if no decision is made by this board within 60 days of an application – that application as they provided it is approved. And that is the design that sits out there today that clearly has not been supported by this board. According to the calculations of that 60-day, we do have the September 14th meeting would be the absolute dead drop time. if you have provided all of this information by the end of the week, if we continue it to that meeting, then that would actually allow staff to properly review the proposal, write a staff recommendation, and then this board class commission would be able to actually review that proposal in advance of the next meeting. And that would give you time to take action. And then I also might provide some clarity if you can submit along with the plans that you are actually asking them to consider, along with a letter stating that you are withdrawing all previous designs that have been submitted under that same permit number, then that would clarify what design this committee is actually ruling on. Fair enough. Thank you. So then we can... You do have one more to continue, and I think that right now there's just a whole lot of clarity of what even he would be withdrawing out of the five different submissions. So my staff recommendation would be give them one more meeting if they are able to provide that clarity via a formal submission with a letter that identifies all the previous submissions. designs have been you know withdrawing those designs and what they're actually asking of you if they don't the staff recommendation of the next meeting is going to be to deny all all the items that have been presented.

Ana would it be probably and I'm kind of talking out loud too I guess you and everyone here would it be problematic to just deny this we denying this uh stop the applicant in any way from making a new application since what is going to be presented is so materially different than what's there. So I know if they were basically presenting the same thing, he would have to wait a year. But since the plans that we've looked at, whether that be today, whether that be two weeks ago, are completely different than the original one stated, it seems at least possible that the cleanest way would be to just deny what's in front of us and then start fresh, whether that's two weeks from now or any time in the future.

Yes, that could be the case. And the separate... code enforcement that is pending against municipal court. Every day that the violations continue to exist, the city does have the right to file a new code case against that. So I do recommend that you get this resolved as soon as possible on behalf of your client.

then at that point, I would request a continuance so that we can address this at the end of the week in order to have it in front of everybody for discussion. At that point, then if we end up denying it at that meeting, it's no harm, no foul, just as you say, but whether that happens today or in two weeks.

Why do you feel it'd be problematic to deny it tonight?

Because at this point, it's in motion. Because again, we're reutilizing some of the planter pieces that are part of this application as the intent. I see it as a continuation of the current situation, not as something new.

Well, it could also fit very cleanly into a brand new application, as if this current one never existed, if we move beyond

it. I'm concerned continuing it to another meeting, if I'm being honest. Just because we've had two continuances up to this point, we've asked for specific information at both of those continuances and it continues not to be presented, especially if it looks like a plan that's going to be fundamentally different is going to be put forward. It seems easiest just to weigh in on what's in front of us and then be able to move forward in a new direction whenever something new is submitted.

I tend to agree with that. Clean this one up. And, Anna, what you were saying, if the new application can be in by Friday, it would give staff enough time.

That was under partially already pending an application.

Right. Otherwise...

this would be a completely new one. So that would be a whole week extension. Right,

in which case then, again, I think that affects the client in a negative manner. I think that if we get a chance to do the continuance, let's discuss it one last time. And at that point, if it gets withdrawn or denied, again, that can happen on the 14th. Well,

yeah, there will be a definite decision on the 14th if we continue because that's our last day to vote.

Right. But if we withdraw or deny now, then we're kicked back to the start line. I don't know how the attorneys are going to see that.

Well, you do realize you can go out tomorrow and remove that pergola and bring it into compliance.

Which is what we suggested. That's what we have said here.

And you don't need this. You don't need approval from this body to go out and remove the pergola. So that would bring you into more of a compliance with the court case, which is totally separate. You can go out tomorrow and just remove it and then submit your new application for whatever it is that you want to do.

In that case, I appreciate that. Thank you. How do we look at the planters that are there? Are they able to stay in place and be moved? Do they have to be removed from the property? They're

in violation right now, so they'll also have to be moved while you're getting this approval.

Moved off the property? Yeah,

unless you want to leave them in violation and risk another citation or risk how the prosecutor's going to respond to that. But right now, they're in violation.

Are they in violation because they're over the property line or in violation because they were erected without a permit?

Both.

So just moving them will not take care of that code compliance issue.

City Attorney Carr, I'm sorry, I have one more question. If the vote is to continue and there's not, I believe we have five here, so it would take four votes of yes to continue it. If those four votes aren't in the affirmative, then does it get denied?

Well, actually, given that we only have the five votes, a motion to continue it is just a simple motion that would only require a majority of those here. So you would only need the three to continue it. And so if you did not have the three... to continue it, three votes affirmative, then the motion to continue is denied, which then leaves you still with the application sitting in front of you. So then you would need to take affirmative action somehow on that application.

Thank you.

Is there any benefit to the applicant continuing it that we're not aware of? I'm just trying to figure out Is there costs associated with filing a new application that we're trying to avoid? Or what is the reasons that we really don't just want to shut this down?

Again, I'm just really, it's not my business, none of my business at all. But again, I understand that there's a problem with the city and they got a court case coming up. And if I feel like if we don't continue this, then we're kicked back to the beginning. They have the right to say, oh, y'all didn't meet what we asked. Well, here we are really trying to meet what you asked. Allow us to do that, to fix this temporarily or permanently, or certainly we'll move it and get rid of it. Sure. If that's what it is, fine. But it'd be nice to leave some of that there and make something cool out of it. But if it's just a matter of compliance, we'll just move it. I mean, but I just don't want them to get in trouble because it's something I didn't do. You know, it's on my shoulders now.

Well, to move this forward and to get it on the 14th agenda, we would have to continue it then.

Right?

Right. Otherwise, we're into October.

Right, right. And then on the 14th, then staff is going to have to be very careful in doing the staff report. We're going to have to very careful in doing our motion because the original application is based on what's there now. That's what you're asking them to approve. All of this other stuff has not been properly submitted. These are just ideas that you've thrown about. So when it comes to the 14th, if you do continue it, when it comes to 14th, you're going to have be very careful in what you're approving because the original application What is there? I

don't know. Okay. But given that, I'd still like to ask for the continuance.

Well, with that information, I think I would... really see to move it along, I would support continuing it. And we would have to look at the details as you were just detailing two separate things that we would have to deal with on the 14th. Right. And that would be the last day we could handle the original application. And we know how that will go.

Right. No, and with any luck, that pergola will be gone by then, and maybe I'll have stuff moved over to the side. We're trying to work with you.

It would be the whole thing in the original, and then... Then from the beginning, sure, I'll come back with

this workout. It

would be a continuation, but it would be a different concept.

That would be

great.

Now, it's my understanding that if he were to submit this rendering that he's presented today that we're just informally looking at, by the end of this week, it would need to have something in there that would have what we're looking for in terms of very specific details in order for us to really look at it at the 14th. Is that correct?

Yes. We'd need the materials, methods of construction, all the sizing, every other detail presented to communicate to us what it's going to be. Well, we

would need a lot survey too. Are you able to get a lot survey that quickly?

There is an existing survey that's included as part of that on sheet A9. I think it was in the original.

The original submission did have a survey. What's been requested at previous meetings is a site plan based on that survey. So, for example, the site plan that you see on this screen is not based on that survey, or at least doesn't clearly identify the property line accurate to the survey.

If you look on the handed out page A9, there's a That's the most recent survey and that's showing the location. Oh, that's just a survey.

Is that our sheet A9? That is not.

That's just

the

survey, I believe.

Right. The information shown on the screen is from a previous submission.

That's the actual survey. Sheet A9 has an overlay of what we're proposing onto that survey. Okay. Well, I'll have all that submitted by the end of the week with more details as requested in time for the continuance on the 14th. So I'll get construction details, materials, everything you need.

So basically then, I think we would have a motion to continue to the 14th period, I believe. Nothing else. Yeah, let's do that. And we can either vote that up or down. We require three votes.

We continue

it. I move to continue this to our next meeting, September 14th.

Second. All in favor? Aye. Opposed? No. Is that right?

Okay. Thank you for your time and consideration. I'll come back with some better stuff to look at. Okay.

Thank you. Okay, our next item is new business, and it is 7931 Forsyth, a conditional use permit. And we will start with the staff report.

The applicant is seeking a conditional use permit to allow a bar at the subject property, which is located at the northeast corner of the intersection of Merrimack and Forsyth. The property has a zoning designation of high density mixed use and is developed with a two-story mixed use building. The bar would be located on the ground floor, measure 2,926 square feet and include 128 seats. Deliveries and waste management would be made via the adjacent alley. Loud music could present a nuisance to the residential uses located on the second floor of the structure. Staff have the opinion that live music hours should be regulated in accordance with Article 16 noises. Based on the information provided, staff have the opinion that the business is compatible with surrounding uses and meets the criteria governing conditional use permits. Staff recommend that the Planning Commission recommend approval of the CEP to the City Council with the condition that live music not be permitted between the hours of 12 a.m. and 8 a.m.

Thank you. Good evening. Please identify yourself and add anything you would like.

Tracy Collins, the architect.

Brian McCormick, founder operator.

And while this is listed as new business, this project may look familiar to you. We came to you before at a different location that was a basement location right down the street. So we found a new spot. So everything else about our application is the same except we've got a new address.

Okay. Yeah, and a lot of the same concerns we had the first time, especially with sound containment. Now, rather than having IV above us, we are going to have our landlords for units for Airbnbs, I believe is this plan to use that. So we're going to take the same extensive steps to make sure that we're controlling that with isolation boxes, some of the stuff we addressed in the meeting back in March, I believe it was. PB, Harmon Zuckerman, So yeah, we're excited to be on this corner, similar to the last gentleman up here. We believe this is a very important corner for Clayton and to be able to activate this with some robust nightlife. And again, those hours after offices closed down and trying to get some more of that foot traffic that The residents have been seeking as well. So yeah, not much has changed in terms of the operational standpoint. I know ADA concerns were with the basement space, but now being street level, we don't have those. So I think that's all I have.

Well, we do have many corners that are very important. Yeah, yeah, yeah. But I would agree this one is quiet. So to enliven it, make it more viable for pedestrians, for people looking for entertainment, I think is a vast improvement over the previous location. But I'm concerned about sound in two areas of it. Number one, the sound for the potential residents above it. And number two, for the sound escaping onto the street.

So with the windows on the street level, we're planning on covering those with sound absorbing materials. So the street level side on Forsyth, we would look to do some like record casing, like illuminated record casing that looks nice to, again, illuminate and activate that corner, but also catch that sound from escaping out to the street level. and then going wherever it may go from there. So soft surfaces there, and then on the Merrimack side, looking at doing something similar to what we were gonna do in the entrance on the street level with maybe an upcoming events marquee in one of the window spaces, and then maybe some artwork in the other. Obviously having to go through the proper permitting processes for those and whatnot, but that's the plan to keep the sound within the space. And then for the ceiling, similar, our speaker systems are going to be installed in those zones, not big amplified speakers shooting out towards the walls. And then we're also going to be utilizing sound like buffering panels on the ceiling to trap that high-end noise as well.

The stage is virtually at the corner.

On the Merrimack side, yes.

Yeah. Adjacent to the Forsyth door. Yeah. I guess I had envisioned like a double door with an airlock or something in there that I don't see.

Okay. Yeah. um i mean

i don't know if it's necessary it was just

yeah yeah no that that's that's definitely a good question um we will not have any amplified sound coming from the stage so the the drum set will be within like a sound barrier and then the amps will be in isolation boxes we discussed this briefly last time but very nerdy uh technical stuff so The amplification will not exist coming from the stage. So when you open the door, if the sound is down on all the speakers, you will barely be able to hear anything coming from that stage because it will all be contained within that space. It's supposed to replicate like being inside a recording studio to where the sound is dead in and there's no interference with what's coming out of those speakers.

Okay. Well, I've said that. Let's go on. Ellen?

No, I like that you've moved. I like the street presence. I'm sorry to hear that you have to cover the windows, but I understand from the acoustics and noise inside and even outside. you know, outside. You get it both ways. The acoustics will not be good. Glass is not good for acoustics. And I like that it'll be accessible to all. Using for... people under the ada having to go down the alley just was not appealing

yeah

i mean we deal with a lot because you can't change everything but i think this is wonderful so yeah

um I didn't have any concerns until I heard about the covering of the windows, and I'm wondering how this fits into other spaces. And, Ada, maybe this is a question for you, where, I don't know, did it come up as part of signage or when we've had other spaces, especially on Forsyth, where they've wanted to cover more than 50% of the windows and we haven't been amenable to that? Would this... come under architectural review or just not the CUP or how would that be handled?

Yeah, that wasn't identified on these plans. So staff has not provided, has not completed a review of that.

Is that something that, is this a project that would have to come before architectural also? This is just for the conditional use permit or is this, would this kind of be the only stop?

Ideally, this would all be done under one set of plans for us to see. So at this point, I'd have to go back and look, to be honest, just to make sure that there wasn't sort of an exemption made for an entertainment use of this style. But generally speaking, covering the windows would require ARB approval and would be limited based on the percentages that you've seen for other projects.

The project overall, I think, is great. It's something that I think can bring life to the corner and stuff like that. I worry about the impact of that if all the windows are covered and we can't see what's going on inside. And that's a little, you know, in a basement space where there really are no windows, that's one thing. But here where you're talking a prominent corner covering all the windows, that's definitely concerning.

Chris?

I like the fact that you're moving away from kind of the residential area. That was the only, you know, we were kind of concerned of sound overflowing on the other side of Maryland. The fact that you're over a block, I think helps mitigate that. I love the concept still. I remember I was in Berlin in 2013 and was at A-Train. And so I'm familiar with what you're trying to create in some, you know, some part, Black Dolphin, Green Lake, like all those sort of clubs. I think if you have just a modicum of success that they've had, this will be fantastic. I don't, I think we can't have our cake and eat it too. We want vibrant downtown areas, but we don't necessarily want the sound associated with that. And in this case, part of the excitement I remember from A-Train in Berlin was that as you were walking towards, you could hear the sound start and then stop and start and stop. And it was the door opening and closing from the club. And I think that that level of sound is completely fine. It's to be expected. I don't want to go to a downtown area where you're not hearing a little bit of a hum of activity. So while I wouldn't necessarily want to stay in the Airbnb directly over the club, I might want to if I was coming and really wanted to see whoever was performing there and had the opportunity to stay there, go down and go to the club. So I'm all in favor of this. I don't have any concerns. I would like to see how the windows are covered, but even that – This seems one where I'd like to limit the number of obstacles that we're putting up in front of you in this case, because it seems like the benefit is going to far outweigh any sort of the architectural considerations in this case.

I have some examples, like some mood board examples of what that like record casing elimination would look like. Just like it's very high end looking. So if there's a way I could share that to help you guys visualize it, I'm more than happy to do that if we need to go to another step here.

Later.

I think maybe if you were 20, you might want to stay there. Yeah, probably. Maybe. Yeah, I still love the concept. Super stoked about it. My only question was now that you've increased your occupancy, are you considering food more?

We are doing food.

You are? Because when we talked, it was like maybe some small bites, right? Like

probably a 10 to 15... item menu but like it'll be a dining as well as drinking okay cool

okay just wanted to maybe I was remembering incorrectly so that's great thank you nothing else for me

any comments from the audience any hands up

I do have one question. I forgot this. What happens between 12 and 1? Because I know live music, how are we defining live music? Because we have no... I

anticipate just the way that the nightlife is now, like post-COVID, that midnight is kind of when people go home anyway. So we don't really anticipate pushing it to 1. Because I don't think the demand's there for it. So I think it'd be like a, maybe like a last call 1145 or midnight music stops and then we start pushing people out. Definitely.

Were there any hands up? Okay, makes it easier. Well, what we're voting on tonight is just the conditional use permit. Now, none of the architectural that we've really gotten into. So I think we're all in agreement. This would be a great addition. And let's see if we can have a motion.

Okay. I move to recommend approval of the conditional use permit to the City Council with the condition that live music not be permitted between 12 a.m. and 8 a.m.

Second. All in favor? Aye. Opposed?

Okay.

Not through this hurdle. All

right. Thank you very much. Just for my own education then, would we need to go to the Architectural Review Board? or to be determined.

Once you have kind of a concept of what you want to do, just shoot us an email of what you're thinking about. We can give you some better ideas of whether or not what you're looking at is going to have to come before this point.

Sounds good. Thanks. Thank you all.

Okay, we'll move on to the next item, which is 7507 Westmoreland. And is the applicant here? Okay, we'll get started with the staff report.

Subject property is located on the north side of Westmoreland between Hanley and Jackson and is zoned R2. On March 7th of 2025, the PCA ARB approved site plan review and architecture review for the construction of a new single family house. On August 17th of this year, staff reviewed an as-built survey of the property, which identified removal of a section of the middle of the driveway to be filled with gravel. This design element was not part of the originally proposed plan approved by the PCA ARBI and does not meet the ARBI guidelines for driveway design. The applicant is seeking approval for this driveway design. often referred to as Hollywood ribbon drives. Examples in Clayton are limited, but often fall near or behind the front facade. Driveway slope and gravel infill are likely to limit visibility at this site. The project was approved under previous lot coverage regulations, which served the dual purpose of managing stormwater and preserving green space character. Staffer of the opinion of the proposal may manage stormwater as effectively as the originally approved design, so long as the drywall is sized appropriately. I'll additionally clarify that the engineer has reached out today and provided documentation that that drywall does effectively manage that stormwater runoff. Additionally, staff have the opinion that the chosen design limits the impact of the reduction in green space to the least visible part of the property. Should the design utilize the following recommendations, staff are of the opinion that the design would minimize the visual impact and demonstrate effective stormwater management. Staff recommend approval with the following conditions. One, the driveway ribbon shall not encroach forward of the front facade. Two, should the reduced driveway ribbon result in lot coverage exceeding the maximum coverage, coverage shall be removed from alternative locations to compensate. Then three, the applicant shall provide a revised civil sheet showing the pre and post construction runoff calculations based on the updated design, including calculations and specs for the drywall French train. Which verify the installed systems can support the estimated runoff that sheet that the engineer provided me earlier today does meet the what criteria three is asking for.

Okay. Welcome. Thank you, Mr. Chairman and ladies and gentlemen. My name is Scott Partridge. I am the owner of 7507. I also happen to be the owner of 7511, which is directly next door to 7507. I appreciate the privilege to be able to address you. I was before you about a year and a half ago with Paul Fendler. when he presented the plans for this house. And I will tell you, we couldn't be more pleased with what has been built here at 7507. I wanted to give you a little bit of background as to why approval of the condition of the house as built now is important to us. My wife and I, we moved up here in 2006 from New Orleans. It was a year after Katrina. We had two boys, then teenage boys. Schools were out in the entire city. We lost our house. We had seven feet of water for 16 days and then the house was looted. We lived in nine different places trying to get back to New Orleans to get the kids back into school and to get my law firm up and running. And out of the blue, I was offered a job in Monsanto, long-time client of mine. And so we moved to St. Louis. I knew of Clayton as a place with great restaurants and wonderful entertainment when I would come visit clients like Monsanto and Anheuser-Busch and Emerson Electric, but I didn't know about the community of Clayton. And frankly, coming up here, our intention was always to move back to New Orleans. My wife was born there, I lived there for 45 years. It's just a wonderful city. But we fell in love with Clayton, and we fell in love of this block on Westmoreland between Jackson and Hanley. With the Hanley House across the street, with the higher educational institution of Centene University also across the street. But this is an eclectic neighborhood. It is a really cool place for... We have teachers, we have doctors, and the mayor lives down the street from us. And the kids in the neighborhood, it is just fantastic. So we made the decision that this is home for us. The house we bought, though, was not a good house to grow old in. Halls are narrow. It... It didn't have an elevator. And as we approach our mid-70s, a nursing home is not very attractive to us. So we decided we wanted to build something that we could grow old in. So this is what we built. We also wanted to build it with some character. We wanted it to fit in the neighborhood. I don't know if any of you have had a chance to drive by it. I welcome you, invite you to do so. It is a beautiful home named Markway. uh who's been building homes in st louis and clayton for 75 years through his dad and his family it's absolutely beautiful we wanted some touches of new orleans brick looks like it comes from a river warehouse it's brand new but it looks like reclaimed brick we have some gas lanterns in the front that adds some character there are no other gas lanterns in They're actually lanterns that are made in the French Quarter in New Orleans. So we took some steps to just remind us of our roots while also dedicating ourselves to living in Clayton. This driveway and the decorative slot that's filled, I noted the report says it's filled with gravel. It's not filled with gray gravel. It's filled with decorative rock that is identical to the rock that on both sides of the house and both sides of the retaining wall. The reason for this is we noticed that to try to get into the garage, go down the driveway and turn into the garage, we were driving over the dry well or flow well. This well in the back is, I believe it's 15 feet in diameter and 10 feet deep. It's huge. and very expensive too. And what I didn't want to do was drive on the grass and potentially damage the flow well, so we moved the driveway back some. We then reduced in the front, we reduced the impervious surface in the front by narrowing walkways and removing one walkway and replacing it with stepping stones. The decorative slot, the inspiration for that actually was from Andrea and Steven Rosenblum's house right down the street. I've never heard of Hollywood driveways before, but they have the same sort of decorative slot. Theirs is grass, which is much more apparent to me, much more apparent than what we did because our rock matches the rock on either side and also matches the color of the driveway. When I talked to Henry and Stephen about what was the process, and they said, well, there was no process. They approved the plans, and there was no issue. And I noticed when looking at their decorative slot, and I... And I think there's a typographical error in the report, Ryan. It says that their slot goes only to the front facade of the house. It does not. It goes beyond that. And we actually modeled our slot based upon the Rosenblum slot. Their slot goes to the end of the retaining wall. And that is where our slot goes, to the end of retaining wall, to provide symmetry across the front of the house. I would really appreciate your consideration and approval of this. I'm going to ask Mr. Markway to explain exactly what was done as the construction went forward. We've been ready to move in for three weeks. My wife is anxious to get in before our fourth grandchild is born, and I'm anxious to stop paying two mortgages. So any consideration that you can give us would be much appreciated. I thank you for your time.

Thank you.

Good evening. My name's Nate Markway, president of Norbert Markway Construction Company. Been working in Clayton for 75 years. Not myself personally, but my grandfather, my father. Very proud of what we do in Clayton. Clayton and Ladue probably make up 80% of our work, maybe 85% of our work. But... We're known, I don't know if anybody knows, has heard of us before, but we're known for craftsmanship and customer service. And that's what my grandfather started this business on. And we've carried it on. We found it's very easy to succeed when you stick to those two things. And transparency is another one. So long story short, when we took this job on, I had 14 feet of cushion for pervious work. green screen space. Okay. I didn't realize that at the beginning, I saw it was tight, but I wasn't as concerned as I probably should have been. Okay. So we build this house, everything's going good. Everything's laying out perfect. And we get ready to do the driveway. And I said, Scott, let's come over here, pull down here, make sure everything feels good. You know? And, and what, what happens to me at my, my, my dad used to, um, He used to reprimand me for this. But as you listen to Scott, he's a client of mine, but he's also become a good friend, right? So I hate that I'm putting him through, him and Kitty through what they're going through right now. So anyway, so what we did is we added about 18 inches for 20 feet, roughly, across the back. So he could come in. It still takes a couple little jogs to get in, but they can do it, you know. And I'm like, okay, we're right there. We're pushing it. At that moment, my concern wasn't on the numbers. I got to be honest with you. It wasn't that I wasn't worried about it. It was that I wanted Scott and Kitty to be able to pull into their garage. And so down the road a few months, we get the as-builts, and I'm over a little bit. And I... Don't want to shorten the driveway. I can't do that. I look at every other option on the lot, and there's just really no place to do it. I didn't realize – and that's extreme ownership. I didn't realise that those driveways – I see them all over the place. I think they're more prevalent than not. The old part of Clayton has a lot of the grass centerways, and I thought, okay. This makes sense. We don't compromise anything, their quality of life at all. It's barely visible from the road. We'll cut this slot in, put the decorative gravel in. It's very close to the aggregate driveway. It'll catch some of the runoff and we're good. I did that and. Ryan, one of the worst phone calls I've gotten or emails says, Hey, those aren't allowed. And I'm like, Oh gosh, what am I going to tell Scott? You know? And then, so, so we discussed it. The reason, the reason it's in the front of the facade of the house is again, with the Rosenblum's home, there's, there's, So architecturally, cosmetically, it made sense to stop it right. Also, the driveway, you know, comes out level from street and then it takes a pretty severe dip. So I'm like, okay, we tuck it here. You don't see it, you know? So we try to do the best we can to give, I mean... I'm very thankful to the taxpayers of Clayton. They've put food on my table and my carpenters' and laborers' tables for a long time, a couple generations. So I'm very thankful for that. The last thing I want to do is come into Clayton and cause trouble and be known as, oh, that's the contractor that wants to get one over on everybody. It's not at all. We're very lucky to be where we are. I take a lot of pride in who we are as a company and as a, as a family. And that's, that's how we ended up where we are. So I realized we're pushing the envelope a little bit, but I don't feel like if you'd be hard pressed to find somebody that would snoop around there and say, Oh my goodness, it doesn't stick out. It's very, very camouflage. So, Well, I didn't realize I had to have everything in two weeks ahead. But I put a slideshow together that I was going to plug in and show. But it's just different angles of everything that's up there. But I learned from the first guy that that's probably not a good idea. So I hope that what I have up there – and I emailed you the slideshow, Ryan, during the first – I had a little bit of time back there to prep. So I did email, it's about another eight or 10 pictures of the different angles and why we did what we did and the looks of it. But I would ask you to please consider letting this slide for lack of a better term, but I would love to get Kitty and Scott into their homes as soon as possible. Thank you. Any questions for me?

Well, not a question, but a comment. Yeah. I don't see this as a trouble issue. I see it as a potential challenge for us. But I've gone by both your... future home and the Rosenblooms. And there's a difference between the two. I think your lower level garage, you have a much steeper slope down than the Rosenblooms do. And the way I was looking at it, it's going to have very little vision from the street. Um, I think it's the right way to go right now, even though I don't like to set a precedent, but we have one down the street. I felt the material was fine, so... Basically, I'm comfortable with it. I think we have to look at the staff recommendations, especially number two and three. And I'm sure you read those and deal with that. But let's move around. Helen?

I like the fact that you've used the rock and not grass.

Mm-hmm.

I don't know how much time they spend maintaining the grass. It's 75, 33. But I think a lot of the dislike of the Hollywood driveway is the fact that that piece in between.

Hard to maintain.

It becomes weeds. You know, whatever lands there. Right. Where with the rock, even if you get things that shouldn't be there, it's still the rock is what you will see. And the color is close. So I don't like setting precedents, but I think you've done the best. And I can appreciate trying to get in and out of a garage. It can be challenging. Cars have not gotten smaller. They're smaller than they were when I first started driving, but they keep the SUVs and everything. They get bigger, wider, and it becomes a challenge. So yeah, it's hard to get a lot on a small lot.

It was a real challenge. And you know, this isn't an excuse, but you know, we build a lot of big homes in Ladue and Frontenac where you've got three acre lots and you've got, you might have, you know, 1500 feet of cushion on the impervious and stuff like that. This was the tightest lot I have ever been on. And it was a constant battle just to keep water off the neighbors while we were doing that. And With that being said, you know, we did some other safety measures in order to keep all the water on the site. There was an extra French drain put in on the north side of the driveway. There's already a slot drain across the driveway, which catches the majority of it. Another one was put at the very base. And then there was berms built up that surrounded the whole backyard to keep the water. There's a pool. I don't know. What's that address, Scott? Do you know? I didn't. Yeah, so there's a pool there and the whole lot goes to this corner. The whole lot slopes to this one little corner. I'm like, how are we going to keep mud and water out? And it got in the pool at the very end. I'm going to blame that on the landscaper. But other than that, we kept it fine. And Scott had spent a little bit of extra money with the raised berms and tree plantings and stuff like that. to contain it. So it wasn't, I, it was never a, well, I don't care. I don't care where the water goes. We're always very, very cognizant of that. So.

Oh, I'm fine with it.

Jim. First, I want to say, I'm very glad you found such a wonderful home in Clayton. Um, And I think it's credit to the home that you've built, the positive reception we've heard from a lot of people talking about how wonderful the house is. I can say I hate it in these meetings when we have a line of projects of things that I've been very passionate about in the past. And I have definitely been probably the fist pounder more than anyone as far as wanting to drive ribbon drives completely out of Clayton. And part of the problem is anytime there's a new one, then you have other people saying, well, they did it. And we have literally that exact thing of saying, well, these people did it, so we should be able to do it too. I do not see this as a situation of malfeasance. The problem... The problem that we run into is I feel like we have other developers in the city, especially with speculative development, that have abused this feature as a way to shove as much possible home onto a lot. um

and i and i and i understand that argument the difference here is the house was already designed right it was just very small cushion we went over a little bit tried to make it and i know it's it's it's literally the same thing but it is when i look at it i'm like there was nothing malicious done here nothing trying to slide up another thousand square foot on the

house i wouldn't be 100 clear i do not think anything malicious was done here uh I more kind of just want to explain all of my thinking with all this. Sure. Because also going forward from here, say this is approved, then people can say, oh, maybe it's easier to get permission. You know, maybe it's able to get forgiveness after the fact and permission on the site plan.

Yeah.

and people are like, this is our way in. I can think specifically that this is a signage issue, not a building issue, but a building where we approved a sign. Within two months, we had two other buildings in a similar area applying for a similar sign saying, well, you let them do it, so we should be able to do it here, even if the situation wasn't 100% lined up. I don't know if staff or anything knows as far as if there wasn't a ribbon drive as far as what percentages were over, especially with the additional drainage that's been put in. It seems almost extreme, but I almost wonder if I almost wonder if me personally would be more okay with the ribbon being filled in and being just a little percentage over the previous area than setting the precedence of a ribbon drive. Once again, this is just me thinking out loud. I will say, I think the rock is an improvement over grass. I think that if we're looking at this feature in a vacuum of just how it's presented across the city of Clayton, Usually when we see it, it is on a flat surface. It's not a grade going down. So I think there's many ways where this is better than ones we've seen in the past. At the same time, I really think that the ribbon drive, I worry about the precedent going forward. I think it's been said, like, I'm kind of torn based on all those things. But yes, I do very much want to say, like, I don't think that this was a case of, hey, we'll just do it and see if they catch it or anything like that. It does not seem like that was the case at all.

Well, you don't stay in business for 75 years by burning bridges and upsetting city officials. It just doesn't work that way.

Chris?

It's a beautiful house. Welcome to Clayton after 20 years. I agree with Jim. I won't add more other than to say, I think it's an oopsie that it's a, you know, do it once, shame on you, do it twice, shame on us. I don't foresee Markway doing this sort of thing again and coming back and saying, you know, we've got it approved here. So I think on record, this doesn't really set a precedent. As a committee, we're not looking at any existing builds out there that are going to build ribbon drives and saying, well, they did it in that. So I'm fine with this one. I just would hope that it just doesn't do again, but I think it's a nice elegant solution in this case.

I hope that for you too. I realize that we're putting you in a precarious spot, but. Literally, though, the picture, I said, could you go down and show that picture again? That was me standing in the middle of the street. And if you look at that, you can see like the last maybe three feet of it at the base. You don't see the start of it because of where we started it. So unless you're in Scott and Kitty's front yard, I don't even think it's ever seen. And not that that makes it any better, but, you know, it helps. So.

No, it looks identical to really when I look at my house and I look at the driveway, the same sort of curve to it. I don't have a ribbon drive like this. I do not agree with the recommendation to push the ribbon drive back. I think that it's correct. I drove by the house, and I really couldn't see it. You can see it under some lighting, but I have no problem with it going out to that retaining wall. Okay. My hope, I think, when I see the cantilevering on the house and I know that the house was approved, you know, I think that there was an intent to try to put as much house on this land as possible. And in the case of this, the driveway... All throughout Clayton, we have these issues of new builds where the driveway is hard to navigate. My driveway is hard to navigate. Our neighbors are running over our lawn all the time because theirs is hard to navigate, and I get that. And maybe the solution is just in the future that we just decrease the building envelope a little bit so it's not such an issue. But that's not the case here, and I think it's a – I think that the house is built to a high level of craftsmanship. It's a beautiful house. And we've received several impassioned emails from neighbors saying that they had no issues with it. So I have no issue with it.

Thank you. Claire.

Hi. Hi. Maybe I misunderstood or I wasn't catching it, but the strip was put in after the fact because you were over? Because

we went... So when I did that addition to the end of the driveway on the north side...

Put you over, so that's why you did

this. It did. And it wasn't like our first thought. We looked around. Where can we... make adjustments and we just didn't see

okay

but we could do it

i thought i was understanding correctly

yeah you were right

on um i'm okay with it i agree with chris and that i think it should remain at the location that it has started um i i actually think that the rock that you chose blends in i feel like it goes away it is much better than a grass uh aesthetic um so i'm okay with

I think the two things we got going for us as a whole is the color, the chosen material, and the elevation. If it was flat, I think I'd have a tall hill to climb.

And you guys do great work. Thank you. Thank

you. You know that? It's so funny. My grandfather and my father, large boots to fill, right? but my brother and I are now owners and my son is in it. So he's fourth generation. And, uh, it's just super exciting to do what we do and, and to stay in the same neighborhoods, you know, we just started social media, which is crazy, but most of our work is just word of mouth. And I mean, that's exactly how I got Scott and I don't want to embarrass Scott, but you know, he interviewed or put it out to bid and, um, And we were a little bit more than the other contractor. And we sat down and talked, because he wanted me to do it. So we met some middle ground. And I'm so glad we did, because I've gained a great friend out of it.

First time I've selected the most

expensive

option. Well,

Scott, congratulations on the house. Nate, it is always an issue trying to cram a Clayton-style house on 7,500 square feet. But this house looks good. And I see no real problem with going ahead with the ribbon drive as you've shown it coming out to the retaining wall. I think most other people felt the same way. But I think we do have to talk about item number two, about the lot exceeding maximum coverage. And I would really feel that we would let that minor over 55% go in this case, not to have anything else taken out at this point. And then, of course, I'm sure you... understand the revised civil sheets, or was that what you were saying we have?

That's what you have, and that's what I received today. Yeah, so just to clarify, condition of approval 2 was just in the event that you said, hey, you've got a you know, remove some of that ribbon. We just want to make sure that we're not approving something over coverage. That's what that was referring to. Not saying that it currently is over coverage. Conditioner approval three was related to making sure that that stormwater functions. The engineer reached out to me today, provided updated calculations. and can very confidently say that that drywall is sized appropriately for the coverage of the site.

That's the biggest drywall I've ever installed on the smallest lot I've ever built on. I mean, it was, it's really the whole back. It's the whole backyard. It's, it's huge. Like, and it, but we, it did like, I was surprised. Like there's no way we're ever going to fill it. But on some of those toad stranglers we've had over the last six months, it, it, it came up, but it handled it. So.

So in reality, if we were to approve the ribbon drive, all three of the recommendations disappear. Correct?

Based on what you've described, you could approve as submitted if you would like the ribbon to stay as is. Yeah. And then no further conditions. Correct. Yeah. Okay.

Are we concerned with Mr. Partridge using the drywall as a sauna or a hot tub or anything in the future? Is there anything? Little swimming pool, anything? I

did catch him off guard when he came home one day and saw it. And it caught me a little off guard. I knew it was big. I just, we had never put one in that big. So you never stop learning. I've been doing this since I was 19 years old and you never stop learning, so case in point.

Well, before we proceed, any other comments from the audience? We received yours, Mr. Vales.

I move to approve as submitted.

Second. All in favor? Aye Opposed? Okay. Thank you very much. Thank you for coming, and welcome to your new home in Clayton. And you really should do some PR for the city

also. I do as often as I can. And I just wanted to thank the staff, and Ryan in particular, doing all the work the staff has done. And if you all are ever in the neighborhood knocking on the door, you'd be stunned to see what's inside. The work that these people have done is just absolutely first class. So thank you very much. I appreciate the privilege of being in front of you.

Thank you. Okay, we've come to item three, which is Adia Rundle. Thank you for sticking around. And of course, we'll start with the staff report.

Subject property is located on the south side of Arundel between University and DeMunn. The zoned R2 is in the Hillcrest subdivision. It was developed with a single family house and accessory structure. The project scope includes demolition of the existing accessory structure and construction of a new accessory structure. The project scope would generally be reviewed administratively. However, the design does not meet the material ratio requirements and therefore ARB review is required. Siding is considered a secondary material and cannot comprise more than 25% of facade. The structure would primarily comprise siding with brick presenting on the lower three feet of some facades. The design is inspired by an addition on the existing house, which has siding on the upper two-thirds and brick on the lower third. The siding is proposed to be hardy board with both brick and siding matching that of the existing structure. Staff have the opinion that the design would have a minimal visual impact due to cohesion with the existing house, limited size, variability of materials nearby, and limited visibility from adjacent properties. Staff recommend approval as submitted.

Okay. Good

evening.

My name is katie neeson cook i'm the architect, and this is the homeowner Brent Williams. So as Ryan mentioned we're proposing a new detached accessory structure to replace the original storage structure that was significant significantly damaged during the tornado last year. The previous structure was approximately 12 by 18 and served as a small exercise area and storage shed. Given the extent of the damage. They've opted to replace the previous structure with one that would better fulfill the needs of the family. The new structure gives them a space to work from home, the flexibility for the exercise equipment or recreation space when the family uses their pool, as well as much needed storage space. As mentioned, the design of the new structure was inspired by a previous addition to the house with brick up to the windowsill and then switching to hardy lap siding. The rear yard has an existing privacy fence minimizing the visibility from neighboring properties and from the street.

The neighbor to the south is Concordia?

Yes.

Correct.

Okay.

Anything else? Brent, do you have anything? No. Okay. Well, we looked at the addition on the rear of the house within the last year, I believe.

That was there before.

Oh, it

was?

I guess it was a very similar house that we did recently. They all begin to run together after a while. Sure. I thought it was a simple building. I know it does not meet our material recommendations, but I had trouble seeing back there without walking down the side of your house. So I really feel there's no problem with it the way it's designed. Okay.

I think you've done a really good job of tying it to the existing. That if you had more brick, if the brick were higher, it would look strange. So I think you've a wonderful job with just very simple shape. I'm jealous of the fitness area. I think there are many of us who would like that. But I think it's a good addition to your house, a good accessory.

Jim? Have you considered a ribbon drive leading to your accessory structure? In all seriousness, I agree with the comments Helen made. I think the material selection matching the addition, I think it's nice. I have no problems. Thank you. Chris?

So I'm going to disagree in this case. I don't think that the existence of the siting on the residence is justification for not meeting the primary material guidelines in a brand new build. So I agree that it would look strange to have the brick go up higher because it doesn't match this, but I'm not certain what percentage of that. I mean, it looks like the rear elevation of the existing house is around 50% material. So I'm disinclined to approve the hardy siding because, just because I like the quaintness of that small little structure. I feel for you in the sense that that is not practical. I can't quite understand if it's a garage that's being taken down and an accessory structure, or if it's just the accessory structure. I shouldn't have put this where there's mint in my mouth either, but I'm disinclined to approve it just because of the fact that it matches the existing house. That's the only comments I have about

it. Later.

Chris literally said exactly what I was going to say. I actually completely agree. While I do hear what you're saying, I think that it feels okay with that sort of mirroring that extension of the house. I actually think it might look better and feel better all in brick or some variation of that. I also think following the guidelines is important in this one.

Other comments?

Technically,

yes.

I mean, technically, yes, we could make it all brick. We were somewhat concerned about budget in terms of but also wanting to, I mean, the experience in that backyard is going to be between the structure and the addition, not so much the full two story brick. So I guess my inclination is that it feels more cohesive to match the addition than it does to match the house beyond. And I understand guidelines and wanting to have the 75% break, and it just didn't necessarily feel applicable in this instance.

Other comments? Of course, there's no one in the audience. We do have a staff recommendation to approve as submitted. So unless we change that, that's what we vote on.

May I ask, could you extend the brick that you have around you have it on the west elevation could you extend it all the way around instead of having some that are totally right siding and then some that are brick and siding it won't i don't think it will change the percentage much but Maybe it will convince my other two cohorts to, you know, a different view of it. You've got more brick. I understand budget totally. And you're taking down a brick accessory building, whether or not you can reuse that existing brick or whether it even matches is, something else um reusing brick is not only expensive to clean it and everything sometimes it really doesn't work um

we're open to carrying the brick all the way around at the window sill height i don't see a problem doing that um

that would not sway My feelings only because that's the rear elevation of it. And I don't see with the privacy fence necessarily. So it wouldn't sway in that case. For me, necessarily, I don't know about Blair. It's a hard one, and I think this is more of a precedent sort of case. Just like the ribbon driveway, it is very hard for us to back down. Once we've approved this, then we have another ADU or AUD or something that's proposed that says, well, they did it, so we should be able to do it too. And it's not taking away. I think your design aesthetic in this sense is right on. That it does, if you're sitting in the backyard and you're by the pool, you want to have something that is matching in that case. So I don't know if the front facade of it is matching that, and then the sides in the back are all brick. If that brings it up more, I don't know what the fine balance is. I don't have a solution for you. I just think it's a shame when I look at the original building that is there, that has a certain character in and upon itself being all brick. I don't know when this building, when the house was originally built. I do know that if I had been on the plan commission back when the addition was built, I'd have the same concerns. I'd say, why are we having this siding on the side of the house? But I wasn't involved with that. So now retroactively, how do I address that? So I don't want the project to not continue. And I feel for the applicant and the needs of the family. I think I don't wanna set a precedent for other accessory units that might be the case.

Yeah, I don't know if it sways. I 100% agree with you that we always have to think about precedent as far as when we're making these decisions. And I look at like two weeks ago when we approved an accessory building that was largely hardy in this case because it fit the context of the House decision. that it was going with. And I think we've had multiple, especially where it's an accessory, not a primary structure, not the primary front-facing facade of a building, where we've gone down on that strict 75% when there's a design reason for it. So especially in this case, I think where we should be especially wary is in cases where it appears that cost is the primary driver. When a lot in this case, I think you do see, let's just say if we're talking arbitrary numbers, if we took this brick sill and said like, I want it to be six feet instead of roughly three feet. Well, then we have these two surfaces that were not really talking to each other and says, you know, I see the reason as why they did it to talk to the structure that's there. Certainly we could say all brick, but I, I think that there's been several accessory structures that go in the back that aren't primarily viewable from the street where we've laxed on those rules. Now, I think a primary structure, I think especially a speculative primary structure, those are areas that I think we should be much more stringent to those rules where they're created. But at least for me personally, that's how I see the dichotomy of those two things.

Yeah, that does help. Jim is swaying me. Adding brick would not sway me.

Other comments? As I said, we do have a staff recommendation to approve as submitted in motion.

I move to approve as submitted.

Second. All in favor? Aye. Opposed?

Okay. Aye. nay

nay no i think you can say i

get confused every time

okay congratulations when will it go up or when will the old one come down

when swimming season is over

yeah well good thank you thank you okay Well, we've come to the end of the agenda. And Laird, any comments?

None for me.

Chris?

I just appreciate the dialogue. I think that comes a little bit from having served with you for a little bit now. But I appreciate that dialogue and being able to explain in a rational way that you're seeing this the wrong way. Thank you, Jim.

I appreciate that we can talk through these things and that I think we, I think we learn a lot from each other. And I think it's better when we are able to air all our thoughts and talk through these things, because I think oftentimes someone brings something to the table or picks out a detail that maybe someone else didn't see. So I appreciate that as well.

Nothing to add.

Well, I think it is a team that we're working as. And having the discussion, whether it's negotiation or whatever you want to call it, really does work at times. And it's good to see. Hopefully, we can continue it. So, Ryan, any further comments? Nothing more from me. Ana, thank you, Stephanie. You've been extremely helpful tonight. and I'm sure you'll have more chances to do so. Okay, we will see everyone on the 14th, and we are adjourned.