Architectural Review Board - Regular Meeting

Like I said, I was a little surprised when I saw it. I thought, "Oh, I thought they might be done enough construction for a while." But no, I think they're going to I I don't remember all he told me, but but they did have all that emissions and financial aid. All their those things were in that first floor of the older building and now they've got all that space that can be used for other purposes. Mr. Chair, it is 6:30. And do we have everybody we're expecting? We do. All right. Uh this is we'll call the meeting of the architectural review board to to order for September 11th. and ask that you call the role if you would please. Absolutely. Vice Chair Jones not with us. Chair Lavaly

here. Uh, Secretary Ritter here. Member Parsons here. Alternate Blesmeer is not with us. Alternate Rderman here. Our council member liaison Nyion is not with us. Um, but our commission lee is on con. Yeah, we do have forum. Thank you. And I thought I saw that council member Nyam was going to be here. She was and then she ended up having another

Oh, okay. All right. I just remember seeing a notice earlier. Okay. Um, you have before you the minutes of the July 10th meeting. So, a motion will be in order to approve the minutes unless there are any amendments or corrections. Motion, please. Commission. very gr is there a second Mr. Parsons. All those in favor say I. I.

Those opposed nay. The eyes have it. The minutes are approved. Um the agenda we have two uh issues which are sign links tonight which we will be dealing with. Uh any changes or additions to the agenda that we need to do before we proceed? If not we will proceed. Uh public comment. uh we have to allow for public comments which would be not necessarily signed to these cases and are there any public comment or any online or anywhere that we have uh at this time if you are online and would like to make public comment please use the raise hand feature we just lost our online attendee so we have no public comments

no public comments all right there any old business I don't see any that I know of and if no one has any we will now proceed to new business and the first case would be the Mint Martin martini restaurant and ask that you read in the case if you would please. Thank you. Mint martini restaurant 2490 Kaylor Road. An initial review of three permanent flat signs of fixed to three out of four facades of the building which require multiple variances from the board of adjustment. This particular property is located in Ward 8.

All right, Mr. chair, members of this board. Uh tonight, our first case involves a restaurant that is located in the downtown district of Wildwood uh town center and it's on the western outskirts of the Deerberg shopping center on a parcel of ground which total 17.42 acres. It is in the southwest corner of the shopping center. It is zone C8 planned commercial district and has an underlying uh governing uh ordinance associated with it. The restaurant does have frontage on Taylor Road. Uh this new business is requesting variances from the Wildwood Board of Adjustment uh for the purpose of maintaining three permanent flat signs that are already affixed to three out of four walls of the building. Uh these signs are identical in character and each of them exceed the following requirements of the city. Uh the height of the lettering of the signs are 36 in and le the required 24 in. Uh the signs are internally lit with the governing ordinance specifying that s wall signage be externally lit or back lit. And the subject walls are not fabricated with individual pinned on channel uh letters but rather a band style arrangement which does not meet the minimum mounting requirement of one inch of separation between the applicable representation and the associated building elevation. Uh the applicant has provided the following uh depiction of the sign to the department. Uh the sign is uh 3 feet tall and 10 ft wide um and three and has three inches of depth to it.

Uh the department did visit the site and take a few pictures of the signs. Uh this is a closeup of the signage. Uh this is the east elevation of the building looking at it from the Dearbirds uh shopping uh parking lot. This is the northern elevation uh standing in the inner courtyard area looking at the building. And this is the southwestern elevation uh facing Taylor Road. Uh per chapter 415400 sign regulations general, the architectural review board is asked to provide its comments, suggestions and recommendations uh which will prov be provided to the board of adjustment in the form of a department uh memorandum. And typically we send this out either tomorrow or early next week so that you have a chance to look at it before the meeting. Uh at this time we ask for your discussion. Uh Director Bunage and I are available for questions and I don't know if Director Bunage wants to make a few comments.

No sir did fine job of summarizing the situation. Right. Thank you. And is the representative the applicant here? No, sir. Okay. Looking at your pictures and actually looking at it in person when I drove through there, these signs are already up, right? Okay. So, so we're looking to approve the signs as they are in place, right? How did the card get before the horse?

Yeah. The applicant installed the signs without the benefit of authorization or permits. Once the signs were installed, began a lengthy process of trying to educate the applicant that first and foremost you should have gotten permits and what you've installed, which is identical to their sister restaurant in the city of Chesterfield, not consistent with our code. Months went by between the city and the applicant discussing next steps and finally summons was issued to the business to appear in municipal court the violation of the permitting requirements. That's what prompted finally the board of adjustment application which leads it to here tonight. So, isn't there a new, excuse me, a new sister restaurant that they're um where Indigo Joe's used to be? And that's, I believe, opening this week or next, but that's under the same ownership, isn't it?

Yes. And their signs are up as well. So, is there a problem there? It's they're temporary banners.

Oh, is it? Okay. So, their interim signs happened to be driving by when the sign company was installing the banners and stopped them. Um, they had yet to apply for the temporary banner permit and so had a discussion. Owner of the company was contacted by the installer was able to have a conversation. they've submitted the application and the application is in process. The banners are appropriate, meaning they meet the minimum, the maximum size, height, and so the paperwork needed to catch up there as well, but it's not necessarily a permanent sign complicating the this particular situation. The signs were made in India and shipped here.

Wow. before the tariffs. I believe so. Yes. So, what happens to the Oh, sorry. What happens to the citation that they have that puts them in municipal court? All this goes forward. Does that go away or do they still face that because it existed before they got the approvals? The citation would go away if the board of adjustment grants the variance. We won't pursue that. We've delayed the court case until the board can act.

It seems we're having a problem with people following the established guidelines prior to putting signage up. How do we educate them? I mean, we know about the trailer at the reserves while it's on the agenda tonight. I find it difficult to, you know, go backwards and approve something when no one even bothered to go by the rules. I can assure you that Tom Lee, our city administrator, and I met with Miss Patel, explained the steps in the occupancy process, starting with the reoccupancy permit submitt that then is ultimately managed by St. Louis County and their inspection crew. to the business license. And one of the last things we talked about was signs are a separate permit from the reoccupancy. So don't get confused. Um and yes, we seem to have a number of signs that either are installed without the benefit or permits when I after the installation and go visit them. They're not installed according to plan. We have two of those up in Village Plaza. So, we're working with the um the owner of the village plaza center to address that.

The one that we previously acted on. Yes. Yes. So, that was installed. The monument sign. Monument sign.

We That's the leverage that has allowed us to make some progress on a number of issues at the center. There was there's landscaping issues out in the parking lot along the and including in front of the leasable spaces. There's lights stalled on the parking lot standards that shine onto the buildings that are shielded. There were just a litany of things and well slowly but surely they're clicking them off. So, we're getting close. And once we have that addressed, then we can issue the uh the authorization further.

Thoughts on the signs themselves? I'll be the first to admit they're not unappealing in appearance. They're not. No, they look fine. It's just a problem with uh Yeah, we'll put them up and let worry about the city later.

Yeah. Particularly with the size of that building that it they were okay. If it were a smaller building or more compressed space, they might be kind of overbearing, but with the size of the structure they have, I I found them kind of generally appealing and but I don't know either what you do when you kind of committ ask permission after you've been slapped in the hand. It might be I'll just throw out a thought that we we communicate to the board the uh uh it goes to the planning zoning board of adjust

board of adjust excuse me that you know while we are concerned that they have not followed the procedure uh we would find a variance uh in this situation to be acceptable because uh in light of the size of the building and the size of the appearance of the sign, they look good. That's just a a thought in terms of how we might approach it. But but I think including in our comments that we were disappointed for the part of the record.

So yeah, it's fine. So going forward, let's say that what for instance there's a six-story building going up at Maine and Taylor and we there can that developer have internally lit signs if we grant this uh to this particular particular petitioner. Well, in that particular instance, there is a governing ordinance that would prohibit internal signage for that particular type of use that inclusive of the first floor commercial and then anything that's in association with the apartment complex. Does that same ordinance apply to the Deerberg Center?

No. Back in 1999 when the Deerberg's Town Center was approved, council was very concerned about Deerberg's not proceeding forward. And Deerberg's had a list of demands. And those demands included that the Deerberg supermarket and the inline retail attached to the supermarket could have three types of illumination, internal, external, and back lit. they did um accommodate our desire to have the outuildings either just external or back lit. So there's two types of lighting associated with that center. Certainly if the Rose Holdings wants to address the illumination of the signs, they can come back and request an amendment to the ordinance covering the site.

I don't think they will. They typically like to follow the rules. If you look at building D, which is across the street from the theater and the vacant lot where the apartment complex is, they all they have external or backlid signage. I think it's functioned well, but that's just my opinion.

What does it set a precedence uh when we do this that we have to be concerned about downline? to your recommendation would not because obviously it's a recommendation versus an action but certainly your recommendation could carry weight in future discussions. The board of adjustment we've been told by the city attorney on multiple occasions an action by the board does not set a pattern for the future. So it has to do with case law and a lot of arguments that have occurred from the United States Supreme Court down to the Associate Circuit Court in St. Louis County. So yeah, signs are great.

So has anyone seen these signs lit up at night? I haven't. So I don't know if they look tacky. They do not actually. I think they have met the requirements in terms of the wattage of the lamp and the Kelvin, which is that we used to call it temperature. Martini glass isn't animated or anything. Yeah. Well, fortunately, if it was, I'd probably be down and try to catch it when it's on the down side. Yeah.

Are there because it's being lit different. Are there any conditions we would need to be concerned with that if we haven't specified they might change because it hasn't been specified. We made the variance with a sign but intensity the light or or something there that they would take advantage of it because of the variance. I guess that's what I'm getting asking.

Mr. Sure, that's an excellent suggestion. And if you are going to make a recommendation that the signs fit the wall proportionately and that for all intents and purposes, it's not a necessarily a badl looking sign, but you would want the sign to meet all requirements of the the city's sign regulations minus what the board would grant. Okay. Yes, that makes sense. That's a great suggestion. Thank you. Any other comments, questions?

Is there any concern on the materials used in the building of these signs? You said they were built in Asia and shipped. They seem to have they've been up for a bit and weathered several storms and um the ones in Chesterfield, I drive by those on my way home at night. So, when you say the sister store in Chesterfield, that's the one by the former mall. Yeah. Yeah. Exactly. I think it's called Red Pepper. Yeah. Red Chili. Oh, is that the sister company? Okay.

She This applicant owns that as well. So, in terms of material, seems to be a well constructed site from what I could see standing by them and looking up at them. But

any other comment thoughts? But I mentioned plus the I guess is what will be our comments or recommendation plus what we the extension the discussion Joe and I had in terms of the lighting and the other conditions here. So thank you. the the department will summarize those comments and uh allow you to review its memorandum next week. Is it open for our formal action just our comments, right? That's correct. Okay. Thank you. We're on to our next case and I believe there again the reserve at Wildwood I guess is so we'll read in whatever we need to read in.

Sir, thank you Mr. Chair. the reserve at Wildwood 17225 Manchester Road and initial review of a temporary final banner sign to be mounted to a temporary construction trailer with each associated with a 15 mile residential development project both requiring variances of the old public this particular property is located in the north

Mr. Chair, members of the board, I believe you have become pretty familiar with this site. Uh this is the site of the reserve, a5 lot residential subdivision that's currently being developed by McKelby homes. It's located just west of 100 or 109 and north of old Manchester Road and has frontage on each of them. It is uh this parcel of ground is 50.7 acres in size. It is zoned R3 10,000 square foot residence district with a planned residential development overlay uh district associated with it. It is located in the neighborhood edge transition district at the Wildwood Town Center. Most of you are familiar also uh this is the lot layout of the subdivision. This is the grading plan uh that was provided by the applicant. The applicant requests an exception to the regulations governing temporary structures and signs for the purpose of maintaining a construction trailer on site that is to contain and secure materials for development and construction purposes along with a wrap covering um or temporary sign uh covering the side of it that faces 109. Um and then in this on this plan you can see circled uh the red area that is the location of currently. Uh but my understand my understanding is that it will be moved around um as the development progresses if uh this temporary sign is depicted here. Um, it displays the name of the company, the name of the development, and a phone

number. It is 8.5 ft high and 47 feet wide and a fixed to the side of the construction trailer. Located within your packets this evening is a material sheet for the sign. It's a polyester uh sign that would wrap the entire uh side of the trailer or already does, I should say. Uh the department did visit the reserve site and took these pictures. Uh this is from Highway 109 looking west at the trailer and the sign. And this is a closer view of the trailer and sign. Uh again, uh every sign going before the Wildwood Board of Adjustment does, uh require feedback from this board. Uh so again, we're looking for comments, suggestions, and recommendations that the department will provide, uh to the board in the form of a memorandum that you'll have a chance to review. So no formal action is requested of you. And director Vunich and I are available for questions at this time.

And like the other that sign is there now, right? Correct. Yes, sir. Um, with your permission, Mr. Chair, Mr. Tholey is a representative from McKelie Holmes. He is, I guess, the construction manager, for lack of a better term, or the reserve as well.

Yeah, thank you. Appreciate you guys taking a look at this. Um, you know, it's one of those things. I think it was a bit of a misunderstanding um to start with that we had talked about having a temporary construction trailer the store materials and but had our name on the side of it you know that would be we understand we're going to need that and I must have misunderstood what that meant which is why this is out there before having approval for a variance um so as soon as we were made aware of it we submitted the application um uh and And uh Miss Keef asked us to submit u you know for review here as well um as part of the signage requirement for review uh before going to the board of adjustment. So um you know we're excited about this development. We're not looking to ruffle anybody's feathers and um you know we appreciate uh any insight you have on this and um you know at the end of the day if it's not acceptable to the board of adjustment and and architectural review board then um you know we're happy to remove it um it's not we we can remove the wrap and just paint it white or what have you. it wouldn't be considered a sign at that point. Um, is the way I understand it. So, thank you for your consideration.

Anyone just real quick, a construction trailer is allowed on the site. It's just the signage that's the issue.

Yes. Um, so there's two type of temporary structures we allow. both have to be in conjunction with development. One is um a display trailer for a new residential subdivision. So while the display units are being built, the residential builder can bring a display trailer and make sales from there. And then the other, as Mr. Con just mentioned, construction trailers are allowed, but there's a number of things that have to go into that. There's a bond requirement of $1,000. The bottom has to be skirted, so you can't see the wheels. So part of the discussion tonight is if it stays, what makes it look good and if and then from that perspective um and the board of adjustment I'll have that information from you all and just as part of construction trailer trivia um we've done one of the the board of adjustment has granted one such variance in the past 1999 9 gave Deerberg's markets a variance to do a trailer like this and they had a countdown timer on it in terms of construction would be complete and the facility would open.

We've only done it once. I mean, there's only been one Yes, sir. There've been other sites that they just have needed them. Well, they they have construction trailers on them, but none of them have signage associated with the project. Like I said, Dearberg's the countdown timer caught everybody's kind of attention and thought, well, that's kind of a neat idea. So, the board of adjustment granted it. You going to have a countdown timer. I was that good and could predict that when they're all full. Make it. Once you have a building permit, I can predict it pretty well. But uh

did Deerbergs make it in in time on on their countdown? Actually, as I recall, they were like maybe seven to 10 days late. Yeah, it kind of zeroed out. They were they were working long hours near the end there as I recall getting everything ready. If you'll bear with me just for a side a side story to this because you see what's going on with the legislature and things like that. And I went to college in Indiana and the Indiana legislature has an absolute deadline as to when they have to adjourn. At 11:59 they pull the plug. It's by that clock and the clock gets pulled if they want if they need to continue to meet.

So you cheat a little bit is what you're saying. Little diversion. Yeah. Any other comments or questions? We okay with it? I am. It looks fine to me. I see it once in once in a while. And it's considering that they have to move it around. Yeah. They don't want to go through the effort of skirting, moving it. Will they still have to skirt it or not? Well, that

I might add, I think we could probably add some skirting and still be able to move it. I mean it's it's we're willing to do that if that would be. Um, so one of the thing Mayor Bolan as part of the planning and zoning commission used to be seated on it and one of the things he required as part of the recommendation from the planning and zoning commission the city council is as soon as the grading's completed along Manchester Road and Route 109, the developer is required to start the final landscaping. So, in some regards, the landscaping along those two major roadways will be in long before the development's complete. And obviously, if that all happens in the winter, it will be spring. But make a long story short, some of what you see now won't be visible or as visible, let's say, if the landscape is as successful as we hope. I mean, I don't have any problem with the decoration now, but I guess as it developed further, if it's in an area where they've got some other work, it would probably enhance, but that's probably from their standpoint, it'll look better anyway in terms of marketing if uh if it's skirted or in some way enhanced,

Mr. Chair, with your provision, could you share how's sales going? Have you? We haven't started sales yet. Um, our interest list is, I believe, in the 200 range right now. um 200 people, 200 uh people on our interest list. Holy cow.

Um and we've kind of released the layout of the site and um those sorts of things and I believe which homes, but I don't believe pricing yet. There's still a few moving targets on uh what the land development work is going to find be the final cost on that. So, but yeah, we're very we're very excited about it and um I think you'll probably see a um petition for a display plat here uh within the next week or so. Good. As well. So, we are starting some sewers this week too in case I

any other comments other than saying it looks okay, which is what I said. Yeah, I think we're I think our comment that would be we're okay with it. All right. Thank you. Anything else that we have for this evening? If not, a motion would begin. Is it likely we October 9th we're likely to have a meeting? You have any sense at this point? I realize it's early. I believe we do have one case at least. I just curious what what the expectations. So, um any other comments or whatever? Okay, not a motion to adjourn will be in order. Motion vote second. All those in favor say I. I. Those opposed? Nay. The eyes have it. Mr. Chair, if I may. Oh, yes.

Couple of things. First, thank you very much for attending tonight. And then next Saturday is our 30th anniversary celebration down by the theater, the B&B theater. And if come on by, we'll be glad to give you a couple of food vouchers. You can walk the food court, get maybe lunch or dinner. We have a great band coming and it all ends with 9:15 with fireworks. So, we hope to see you there.