My WebLink
|
Help
|
About
|
Sign Out
Home
Browse
Search
07/28/97
Public Access
>
City Council Minutes
>
1997
>
07/28/97
Metadata
Thumbnails
Annotations
Entry Properties
Last modified
12/6/2004 2:47:08 PM
Creation date
2/5/1998 9:48:02 PM
Metadata
Fields
Template:
Council Meeting
Supplemental fields
Minutes - Date
7/28/1997
SESSIONNUM
1702
TYPE
REGULAR
There are no annotations on this page.
Document management portal powered by Laserfiche WebLink 9 © 1998-2015
Laserfiche.
All rights reserved.
/
24
PDF
Print
Pages to print
Enter page numbers and/or page ranges separated by commas. For example, 1,3,5-12.
After downloading, print the document using a PDF reader (e.g. Adobe Reader).
View images
View plain text
Session 1702, Minutes <br />July 28, 1997 <br /> <br />Mayor Adams asked for the developer to come forward to answer questions regarding the project. <br /> <br />Mr. Mark Manlin, Manco Builders, Inc., said that the building is a three story building as originally submitted a month ago at <br />the Planning Commission meeting. The second story loft on the third floor is built into the existing roof line, so the building <br />heights have not varied from the previous meeting. The second floor is a loft built into the existing space that is upstairs in <br />the roof area. There are quite a few three story buildings in the vicinity. Traveling south from the subject property along <br />Meramec, approximately a block away, as University City turns into Clayton, there are a number of condominium or <br />apartment type buildings. The square footage of the units are 1674 square foot up to 2600 square foot, with the 2600 <br />square foot units being the top, lofted units. The units are two and three bedrooms, two or three bathrooms. As far as the <br />lot lines are concerned, a fifteen foot transitional area has been maintained on the site plan. In addition, the front set back is <br />twenty five feet, which is consistent with a number of buildings in the area. The footprint of each building is 62 x 98 feet. <br /> <br />Mr. Wagner asked Mr, Manlin to review the parking arrangements for the building. Mr. Manlin responded that they are <br />meeting the ordinance requirements of thirty-two spaces, which will be underground. <br /> <br />Mr. Munkel wanted to bring up Ms. Sciortino's issue of the sloped land area. He asked what the vertical rise would be from <br />the top of the buildings to the bottom. Mr. Manlin responded that the maximum distance from the top of the roof to the <br />grade would be forty-eight feet. Responding further to Mr. Munkel, Mr. Manlin said that looking at the south elevation from <br />Delmar, the street elevation was approximately forty-five to forty-six feet. <br /> <br />Mr. I ieberman asked Mr. Manlin if he was aware of any developments that Clayton might be planning, south of this project. <br />Mr. Manlin said that he knew that there were several real estate sale signs up in the area, but he was not aware of any <br />concrete development projects which Clayton might be planning. <br /> <br />Responding to Mr. Munkel, Mr. Manlin said that they were not the owners, but were currently under contract to purchase. <br /> <br />Mr. Ollendorff wanted to encourage citizens to stop by the Planning Office to review the plans in the next couple of weeks. <br />Action could be taken by Council as early as August 18, 1997. <br /> <br />Mayor Adams declared the public hearing closed. <br /> <br />AGENDA NO. 3 - SITE PLAN - 501-515 NORTH AND SOUTH: <br /> <br />Mr. Ollendorffsaid that this involves the site plan for the properties just discussed at the public hearing. It is here tonight for <br />information purposes only. Action will not be needed until the next meeting. <br /> <br />AGENDA ITEM #4 - SITE PLAN - 6901 DELMAR: <br /> <br />Mr. Ollendorff reminded Council that this proposal was tabled at a previous meeting, in order to advise the neighboring <br />subdivision. This has been done. <br /> <br />Mr. Wagner moved that this proposal be removed from the table. Mr. Lieberman seconded the motion, which carried <br />unanimously. <br /> <br />The staff review found if a number of conditions were met and agreed to by the applicant, that it could be approved by the <br />City Council. The most difficult provision to deal with was the shortage of parking, if the building was put into its full legal use. <br />To comply with the intent of the zoning code on parking, the applicant has agreed to his suggestion that they limit the <br />daytime occupancy to eighty, which should not overtax the fifty-four space parking lot. They will limit their evening <br />occupancy to one hundred, except that six times a year, on special occasions, an occupancy limit of one hundred-fifty would <br />be permitted. v~r~h this provision agreed to in writing by the applicant in addition to other conditions such as daytime <br /> <br /> <br />
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.