Design Review Board

TOWN OF MOUNT PLEASANT, SOUTH CAROLINA DESIGN REVIEW BOARD DECEMBER 19, 2018 MINUTES Green arrows in minutes are hyperlinks to the recording Attachment 1—Staff Report Present: Beth Santilli, Chair, Mickey Seabrook, William O'Neal, Brian Wurst, Brian Boan, Napporn Kichanan (arrived at 5:08 pm) Staff: Michael Robertson, Kent Prause, Eddie Bernard, Julia Copeland, Jane Yager-Baumrind Ms. Santilli called the meeting to order at 5:00 pm and reviewed the procedures with the public. A. Approval of Agenda Mr. Wurst moved for approval of the agenda. Mr. Boan seconded the motion. All in favor. B. Approval of Minutes Mr. Boan moved for approval of the minutes. Mr. Seabrook seconded the motion. All in favor. C. Consent Motions Mr. Wurst moved for consent approval of the following requests including staff comments: ➢ Wando Crossing Façade Upgrades, 1500 Highway 17, 559-14-042, Final Approval of Site, Landscape and Architecture ➢ 1767 Highway 17, 1767 Highway 17, 558-00-00-083, Final Approval of Site, Landscape and Architecture Mr. Seabrook seconded the motion. All in favor with Mr. O’Neill abstaining. D. General Public Comment There being no public comment, Ms. Santilli continued with the agenda. E. General Correspondence No correspondence was received. F. Business 1. Legacy Apartments, Corner of Patriot’s Pt. and Harry Hallman, Jr., Blvds., TMS# 517-00-00-246, Final Approval of Site, Landscape, and Architecture William O’Neill recused himself due to a conflict of interest.  Design Review Board December 19, 2018 Page 2 of 4 Mr. Eric Ballam, GCI Residential, Ms. Angelique Agelopolous, Mr. Gary O’Gracki, and Paul Peoples, Seamon, Whiteside, and Associates reviewed the request with the Board. Mr. Boan asked about sight lighting and if it would be provided by the utility company. Mr. Peoples answered that a final decision has not been made. Mr. Wurst asked if the garage would be naturally ventilated. Mr. Ballam answered in the affirmative. Mr. Wurst asked about the amenity building and if the third story is needed. Mr. O’Gracki answered that the third story is needed for programming needs. Mr. Bernard and Mr. Robertson reviewed staff comments with the Board (attachment 1). Mr. Kichanan suggested that the massing of the building is more differentiated and is heading in the right direction. Mr. Seabrook suggested that the 160 inch per acre requirement for trees has not been resolved and a variance might be required before the Board can render a decision. Mr. Boan suggested that changes to the lighting plan is needed and the developer should be cognizant about light trespass. Mr. Wurst agreed that the plan is progressing. He referred to sheet 2.0 and suggested that the core elements need to be “strengthened”. He suggested that using white stucco as opposed to a third material might be a better option. He suggested that there should be a 2-story base with stone or brick striped in other sections with full stone or brick at the entrances so it does not appear as monolithic. He agrees with staff’s comment about raising the parapet and incorporating the balcony. He suggested that the elevation facing Harry Hallman Blvd could be simplified to three or four masses. He agreed that the rhythm on the garage should be more vertical. Mr. Ballam asked that the Board consider preliminary approval with comments to be addressed prior to final approval. Mr. Wurst moved for deferral. Motion failed due to the lack of a second. Mr. Robertson stated that the Board cannot approve a plan that has zoning violations. Ms. Angelopolous asked if larger trees could be planted and use the buffer trees to help meet that requirement Mr. Robertson stated that the deferral would allow the applicant to determine how the requirement would be met or to request a variance from the Board of Zoning Appeals.  Design Review Board December 19, 2018 Page 3 of 4 Mr. Seabrook moved for deferral in order to resolve all staff comments and until the requirement for tree plantings can be addressed. Mr. Boan seconded the motion. All in favor with Mr. O’Neal abstaining. 2. Earls Court CM3, 404 & 408 Hibben Street, 532-01-00-265 & 532-01-00- 138, Final Approval of Site, Landscape and Architecture. Mr. Vince Graham introduced the design team for the project: Mr. Todd Richardson, Mr. Chad Besenfelder, Mr. Kenny Craft, and Mr. Matt Cline. They reviewed the request with the Board. Mr. Kichanan referred to the planting plan and asked about the trees being planted close to the building and suggested that they should not be planted that close to the building. Mr. Robertson answered that the intent is to have street trees and urban massing as close to the right-of-way as possible. He stated that they would be maintained and pruned through a monthly maintenance plan. Mr. Kichanan questioned that the trees once mature would be 15 feet in diameter or larger. Mr. Richardson answered that with the maintenance and the fact that the trees are in a shaded area, the growth would be retarded. Mr. Wurst asked about section A-220 and the trellis and where the double columns are located. Mr. Craft answered that it would be an open-ended courtyard with a panel that would be centered with the outer columns to create a privacy screened wall. Mr. O’Neal asked about the columns on the first floor in the covered parking area. Mr. Craft answered that the columns would not impede into the parking spaces. Mr. O’Neal suggested that the columns be shown the site plan. Mr. Cline answered that they are shown on the civil site plan. Mr. O’Neal suggested that the proximity of the footing for the columns be reviewed to ensure they do not impede the trees. Mr. Mike Tinkey, 208 Venning Street, suggested that there should be more coordination between the various Town boards to ensure that the quality of life, livability, traffic, parking, and safety are considered to maintain the ecosystem of the Old Village Historic area. He suggested that the mission and vision of the Town should be upheld and kept in mind when reviewing these types of projects. Mr. Bernard and Mr. Robertson reviewed staff comments with the Board (attachment 1). Mr. Boan thanked the applicant for addressing staff comments. He suggested that some indirect lighting could be considered for the undercarriage area to soften the area. Mr. Wurst suggested that the brick continue to the first parking space to have a better transition. He suggested that the parapet should be reviewed.  Design Review Board December 19, 2018 Page 4 of 4 Mr. Wurst moved for approval including staff comments on the site components and Board comments on architectural components. Mr. Kichanan seconded the motion. All in favor. There being no further business, the meeting adjourned at 6:20 pm. Submitted by, L. Lynes DRB12192018