Design Review Board

TOWN OF MOUNT PLEASANT, SOUTH CAROLINA DESIGN REVIEW BOARD APRIL 25, 2018 MINUTES Present: Beth Santilli, Chair, Napporn Kichanan, Brian Boan, Brian Wurst, William O'Neal, Mickey Seabrook. Absent: Michael Bertin (excused) Staff: Michael Robertson, Chris Luly, Eric Pohlman, Eddie Bernard, Lynnette Lynes Ms. Santilli called the meeting to order at 5:00 pm and reviewed the procedure with the public. 1. Approval of Minutes Mr. Boan moved for approval of the minutes. Mr. Wurst seconded the motion. All in favor. Mr. Wurst moved for consent motion including all staff comments for the following projects: ➢ Gregorie Ferry Landing-Building 1, 1135 Muhlenbergia Dr, 580-00-00-004, Preliminary Approval of Site, Landscape and Architecture ➢ Gregorie Ferry Landing-Building 2, 1146 Muhlenbergia Dr, 580-00-00-004, Preliminary Approval of Site, Landscape and Architecture ➢ Gregorie Ferry Landing-Building 3, 1161 Muhlenbergia Dr, 580-00-00-004, Preliminary Approval of Site, Landscape and Architecture ➢ Gregorie Ferry Landing-Building 4, 1151 Muhlenbergia Dr, 580-00-00-004, Preliminary Approval of Site, Landscape and Architecture ➢ Moultrie Middle School Additions, 645 Coleman Blvd, 532-02-00-030, Final Approval of Site, Landscape and Architecture ➢ MUSC Midtown Parking Expansion, 1600 Midtown Ave, 599-00-00-534, Final Approval of Site and Landscape ➢ Ferry Wharf Hotel and Parking Garage, 100 Ferry Wharf Road, 517-00-00- 245, Final Approval of Site, Landscape and Architecture ➢ 1767 Highway 17 Commercial, 1767 Highway 17, 558-00-00-083, Preliminary Approval of Site, Landscape and Architecture ➢ Sea Island Hamlet, 1047 Chuck Dawley Blvd, 532-08-00-001, Final Approval of Site and Landscape Mr. Kichanan seconded the motion. All in favor with Mr. Seabrook abstaining.  Design Review Board April 25, 2018 Page 2 of 10 2. Public Comment & General Correspondence There being no comments, Ms. Santilli continued with the agenda. 3. Business A. Johnnie Dodds Lifestyle Storage, 602 Johnnie Dodds Blvd, 514-00-00-067, Final Approval of Site, Landscape and Architecture Mr. Giles Branch reviewed the request with the Board. Mr. Kichanan asked about the large live oak and if the remaining area around the tree is pervious. Mr. Branch answered in the affirmative. Mr. O’Neal asked the elevation of the dumpster pad in relation to the elevation of the tree. Mr. Branch answered that the dumpster pad is approximately 23 inches and the tree is approximately 22 inches. Mr. Kichanan asked if the generator is required to be located above flood level and if this was possible to allow pervious surface as opposed to paving. Mr. Branch answered that this could be accomplished if desired. Mr. Luly reviewed staff comments with the Board (attachment 1). Ms. Santilli closed public comments. Mr. Wurst suggested that removable bollards should be considered for protection of the generator. Mr. Kichanan moved for approval of the request. Mr. Seabrook seconded the motion. All in favor. B. Walmart Wando Crossing Revisions, 1481 Highway 17, 559-14-00-033, Final Approval of Site and Landscape Mr. Clay Green, ADC Engineering, reviewed the request with the Board.  Design Review Board April 25, 2018 Page 3 of 10 Mr. Kichanan asked about the sign details and if they would be posted. Mr. Green answered that the signs at the parking spaces would have one post. Mr. Wurst asked if the pickup is for online orders and if notice of the pickup area could identified through the confirmation email. Mr. Green answered that the signage was to provide clarification on the location of the pickup area. Mr. Seabrook asked if some of the signage is painted on the asphalt. Mr. Green answered in the affirmative. Mr. O’Neal asked the location of the pickup spaces and if there is a drive-thru option. Mr. Green answered that there would not be a drive-thru area and showed the pickup space locations on the plans for the Board. Mr. Robertson and Mr. Luly reviewed staff comments with the Board (attachment 1). Mr. Luly noted that although designated spaces are not typically allowed, the previously approved plans showed cart kiosks in the parking area that were not installed; therefore, the designated spaces would not take away from any required parking. Mr. Seabrook asked about the pickup wall sign that was approved by staff. Mr. Robertson answered that the sign is large enough to be visible from Highway 17. Mr. Seabrook suggested that the additional signage would not be necessary because of the wall signage. Mr. Wurst stated that he is not in favor of additional signage because of visual clutter. Mr. Boan agreed that some of the signage would not be needed; only the signs numbering the pickup spaces and the wall signage would be needed. Mr. Kichanan agreed with previous comments. Mr. O’Neal asked about the dashed line around the perimeter of the parking area. Mr. Green answered that it indicates a disturbance area. Mr. O’Neal asked if the drive aisle to the right of the pickup spaces is a shared drive aisle. Mr. Green answered in the affirmative. Mr. O’Neal stated that he concurs with staff’s comment that the signage should not be located on the shared drive aisle.  Design Review Board April 25, 2018 Page 4 of 10 Mr. Wurst asked if which signs Mr. O’Neal has an issue with. Mr. O’Neal answered that he is not opposed to the painted signs with the exception of those located on the shared drive aisle. Mr. O’Neal moved for approval of the request as presented with the exception of pavement markings shown within a shared parking drive aisle and any signage displayed in areas outside of the parking field. Motion failed due to the lack of a second. Mr. Robertson clarified that internal directional signage is allowed as long as it is not excessive and can be reviewed and approved by staff. Mr. Wurst moved for approval of the signs for eight parking spaces at 4 foot height and pavement painted signage as long as not on the shared drive aisle. Mr. Boan seconded the motion. Motion passed on a 5 to 1 vote with Ms. Santilli, Mr. Boan, Mr. Wurst, Mr. Kichanan, and Mr. O’Neal in favor; Mr. Seabrook opposed. C. Gregorie Ferry Landing-Building 1, 1135 Muhlenbergia Dr, 580-00-00-004, Preliminary Approval of Site, Landscape and Architecture D. Gregorie Ferry Landing-Building 2, 1146 Muhlenbergia Dr, 580-00-00-004, Preliminary Approval of Site, Landscape and Architecture E. Gregorie Ferry Landing-Building 3, 1161 Muhlenbergia Dr, 580-00-00-004, Preliminary Approval of Site, Landscape and Architecture F. Gregorie Ferry Landing-Building 4, 1151 Muhlenbergia Dr, 580-00-00-004, Preliminary Approval of Site, Landscape and Architecture G. Moultrie Middle School Additions, 645 Coleman Blvd, 532-02-00-030, Final Approval of Site, Landscape and Architecture H. MUSC Midtown Parking Expansion, 1600 Midtown Ave, 599-00-00-534, Final Approval of Site and Landscape The Board approved these items through a consent motion.  Design Review Board April 25, 2018 Page 5 of 10 I. Bowman Place-Building A, 1136 Bowman Road, 559-13-00033, Final Approval of Site, Landscape and Architecture Mr. Kyle Hoyt, Mr. Gary Berenyi, and Mr. Rush Dixon reviewed the request with the Board. Mr. Rush Dixon stated that they would like to delay the location of the restrooms at this time until they have a tenant. Mr. Kichanan asked about the streetscape and if there is a precedent for this requirement. Mr. Robertson answered that staff has previously met with the applicant, but a full review could not be completed until the plans were submitted. Mr. Kichanan asked about the proposed restroom locations and what the demo space is for the building. Mr. Hoyt answered that it is approximately 47 feet on the right and approximately 49 feet on the left. Mr. Kichanan asked if the requirement would be met once the tenant was secured. Mr. Dixon answered in the affirmative. Mr. Seabrook asked about the pocket park. Mr. Robertson showed the plan for the Board. Mr. Seabrook asked about the plantings in the SCE&G easement and if SCE&G has approved the placement. Mr. Hoyt answered that they will coordinate with SCE&G. Mr. Seabrook asked if the uses would all be retail. Mr. Hoyt answered that it could be either office or retail. Mr. Luly answered that a mixed use of retail and office use would be allowed. Mr. O’Neal stated he appreciates the flexibility in space. He asked about drainage. Mr. Hoyt answered that the drainage plan has been submitted to staff for review. Ms. Santilli closed public comment. Mr. Luly and Mr. Pohlman reviewed staff comments with the Board (attachment 1). Mr. O’Neal stated that the requirements of the UC-OD should be upheld. He suggested that some public engagement is seen with the pocket park, but suggested that additional work is needed. Mr. Seabrook stated that he understands having coordination of streetscape among the three buildings, but it should not be a condition of approval. He  Design Review Board April 25, 2018 Page 6 of 10 suggested that the placement of items such as restrooms, bike racks, etc. can be approved by staff. Mr. Wurst suggested that some of the elements should be studied such as the site wall design having similar brick as the main structure. He stated that recessed black brick near the top of the cap wall to emulate the floating cap on the building. He suggested that the color of the dumpster screening could be similar as well. He stated that he would be amenable to working with the different developers in a subcommittee to provide input on coordinating the streetscape for all buildings. Mr. Boan suggested that building mounted lighting should be considered. He suggested that the lighting should be restudied as there are areas that appear to be rather dark as currently designed. He agreed that elements of the building should be restudied as well. He stated that there is redevelopment occurring along Georgetown Road and the “bigger picture” needs to be kept in mind by the Board. Mr. Kichanan commended the applicant for addressing staff comments to this point. He suggested that there could more “lusciousness” in the planting areas so there is less mulch and more plantings. He also suggested that the sidewalk near the rear on-street parking should be closer to the parking spaces for better access. He suggested that a more cohesive streetscape should be considered for all the parcels along Georgetown Road. Mr. O’Neal suggested that the pocket park may encroach into the SCE&G easement and this should be considered. He expressed concern with the protection zone of the oak and ensuring preservation of the tree. Mr. Luly stated that the applicant has been working with staff on this issue. Mr. Seabrook moved for deferral to a subcommittee of the Board and staff to work on streetscape issues and staff and Board comments. Mr. O’Neal seconded the motion. Motion passed on a 5 to 1 vote with Ms. Santilli, Mr. Boan, Mr. Seabrook, Mr. Kichanan, and Mr. O’Neal in favor; Mr. Wurst opposed.  Design Review Board April 25, 2018 Page 7 of 10 J. Bowman Place-Building B, 1561 Highway 17, 559-13-00-044, Final Approval of Site, Landscape and Architecture Mr. Hoyt, Mr. Berenyi, and Mr. Rush reviewed the request with the Board. Mr. Wurst asked if any color changes have been considered. Mr. Dixon answered in the negative and stated that the two buildings were intentionally mirrored to provide “book ends” for the area. Mr. Wurst asked about reconsidering the sun screens on the north side. Mr. Dixon answered that this could be reviewed. Mr. Wurst asked about the color reveal between the north elevation and if this would be a third color. Mr. Dixon answered that this would be an additional color and was included to provide a break in the building. He stated that this could be reviewed as well. Mr. Luly and Mr. Pohlman reviewed staff comments with the Board (attachment 1). Ms. Santilli closed public comment. Mr. Kichanan stated that his comments are similar to Building A. He stated that the landscaping should be more lush and full. Mr. Boan asked what part of the photometric plan did not comply with the checklist. Mr. Pohlman answered that the photometric plan should have the landscape plan included. Mr. Wurst stated that he has similar comments for this building as with Building A. Additionally, the north side screens should be reviewed. Mr. O’Neal stated he has similar comments to Building A. He suggested that stormwater detention should be considered as the project moves forward. Mr. Seabrook moved for deferral to a subcommittee of the Board and staff for further review and approval. Mr. O’Neal seconded the motion. Motion passed on a 5 to 1 vote with Ms. Santilli, Mr. Boan, Mr. Seabrook, Mr. Kichanan, and Mr. O’Neal in favor; Mr. Wurst opposed.  Design Review Board April 25, 2018 Page 8 of 10 K. Aloft Hotel, 1365 Old Georgetown Road, 559-13-00-025, Final Approval of Site, Landscape and Architecture Mr. Branch and Mr. Chris Allred reviewed the request with the Board. Mr. Kichanan asked about the art piece and if it would be transparent. Mr. Allred answered in the affirmative. Mr. Kichanan asked if it is one layer. Mr. Allred answered that there would be a top and bottom layer, with the color layer in between. Mr. Kichanan asked how the wording would show through. Mr. Allred answered that the wording is negative space. Mr. Kichanan asked about the pedestals along the sidewalks. Mr. Allred answered that they would be cast stone and similar to the bollards. Mr. Kichanan asked about the detention basin and if there was any space. Mr. Branch answered that they pond is at the maximum needed. Mr. Kichanan asked about the landscaping along the building and why the change in the rhythm. Mr. Branch answered that this could be reviewed to provide a more even landscaping. Mr. Boan asked about the down lighting and dimmable LEDs. Mr. Allred answered that an LED strip and down lights would be color changing with the remaining be white lighting. Mr. Wurst suggested that a more simple design should be considered. He suggested that the bracket size should be reviewed and a smaller bracket considered. He suggested that the windows could be similar size for better consistency. He suggested that the continuous line of the roof continue through the stairwell section. He suggested that the white sections could carry further down. He suggested that louvers could be considered to provide a more lowcountry feel for the building. He suggested that the parking sidewalk should be better aligned with the pedestrian pavers under the porte cochere. He suggested that a rigor of order is needed with the layering and massing for it to be more consistent with Mount Pleasant architecture. Mr. Neal asked if the dry detention could be wet detention with a fountain. Mr. Branch answered that it was considered but the dry bio swale was considered a better option as a fence would not be needed. Mr. O’Neal suggested that the on-street parking on Old Georgetown Road might be an issue as it would require SCDOT approval.  Design Review Board April 25, 2018 Page 9 of 10 Mr. Wurst asked the cul-de-sac requirements. Mr. Branch answered that the circulation has not been reviewed and suggested that it might not be an issue as it is existing and there is fire access without use of the cul-de-sac. Ms. Beth Bell, 945 Law Lane, is the property owner adjacent to the hotel. She suggested that the location of the hotel should not be ten feet from the property line. She asked if the buffer and setback are allowed to be combined. Mr. Luly answered in the affirmative. Mr. Luly and Mr. Pohlman reviewed staff comments with the Board (attachment 1). Mr. O’Neal stated that he is not opposed to the Aloft signage, and asked if this is under the purview of the Board. Mr. Robertson answered in the negative and stated that any variances would be reviewed and approved by the Board of Zoning Appeals (BOZA). He agreed with staff comments that should be addressed and resolved. Mr. Boan stated that he agrees with the comments on the photometric plan and stated that the project has heavily high lit and low lit areas. He suggested that the photometric plan should be reviewed by an engineer to ensure optimal lighting with fewer fixtures. He suggested that light pollution could be a concern as well and should be restudied. He suggested that the building fixtures should be reviewed as well as they are not compliant with the dark skies requirements. Mr. Kichanan suggested that the detention basin should have sidewalks on both sides. He suggested that the addition of the sidewalk could also help in providing more emphasis and a “landing” at the porte cochere. He suggested that a different CMU for the walls should be considered. He suggested that the rhythm of the landscaping and lighting along the street façade should be carried through the entire length of the façade. Mr. Seabook moved for deferral for consideration of staff comments and discussion of streetscape with the two other projects across the street with the project to come back to the Board for approval. Motion passed on a 5 to 1 vote with Ms. Santilli, Mr. Boan, Mr. Seabrook, Mr. Kichanan, and Mr. O’Neal in favor; Mr. Wurst opposed.  Design Review Board April 25, 2018 Page 10 of 10 L. Ferry Wharf Hotel and Parking Garage, 100 Ferry Wharf Road, 517-00-00- 245, Final Approval of Site, Landscape and Architecture M. 1767 Highway 17 Commercial, 1767 Highway 17, 558-00-00-083, Preliminary Approval of Site, Landscape and Architecture N. Sea Island Hamlet, 1047 Chuck Dawley Blvd, 532-08-00-001, Final Approval of Site and Landscape These items were approved through a consent motion. There being no further business, the meeting adjourned at 7:21 pm. Submitted by, L. Lynes DRB04252018