Design Review Board

TOWN OF MOUNT PLEASANT, SOUTH CAROLINA COMMERCIAL DESIGN REVIEW BOARD JULY 10, 2019 MINUTES Attachment 1-Staff Report Present: Beth Santilli, William O'Neal, Richard Lambert, Cameron Swails. Absent: Brian Boan, Brian Wurst. Staff: Eddie Bernard, Brittany Johnson, Peter Stone, Jane Yager-Baumrind Ms. Beth Santilli called the meeting to order at 5:17 pm A. Approval of Agenda Mr. O’Neal moved for approval of the agenda. Mr. Swails seconded the motion. All in favor B. Approval of Minutes Mr.O Neal moved for approval of the minutes. Mr. Swails seconded the motion. All in favor. C. General Public Comment There being no comments, Ms. Santilli continued with the agenda. D. General Correspondence Ms. Johnson stated that there is no correspondence. E. Consent Motions No Consent Motions F. Business 1. Market at Mill Creek Gas Canopy, 2100 Hwy 41, TMS# 594-05-00-228, Final Approval of Site, Landscape, and Architecture This item was withdrawn by staff  Design Review Board July 10, 2019 Page 2 of 6 2. Midtown Mixed Use, Midtown Ave., TMS# 559-00-00-017, Preliminary Approval of Site, Landscape, and Architecture Mr. Stone and Ms. Johnson reviewed staff comments with the Board (attachment 1). Mr. Jason Hutchins, Thomas and Hutton, and Mr. Nick Galizia, McMillan, Pazda and Smith, reviewed the project with the Board. Mr. Swails referred to page 23 of the plans and asked about the recessed entryway and if there would be a balcony above the entryway Mr. Galizia answered in the negative. Mr. Lambert asked about if the entrance and parking area would be one way with angled parking and suggested that 90 degree parking would be a better option and more functional. Mr. Hutchins agreed and stated that this could be reviewed. Mr. O’Neal agreed that there should be 90 degree parking spaces with the addition of island cutouts for additional landscape. There being no comments, Ms. Santilli closed public comment. Mr. O’Neal stated that Mr. Wurst reviewed the project in his absence and offered the following comments: ➢ projections in/out lack clarity and legibility and appear as interventions and not well integrated. They should be treated more similarly to each other and as a foil to the brick warehouse feel, it would be more successful. ➢ Corners are clumsy and lack hierarchy. Mr. Swails moved for preliminary approval including all staff comments. Mr. O’Neal seconded the motion. All in favor. 3. Pet Paradise, 1045 Tupelo Forest Drive, TMS# 615-00-00-173, Preliminary Approval of Site, Landscape, and Architecture This item was withdrawn by staff.  Design Review Board July 10, 2019 Page 3 of 6 4. Aiden Fabrics Revision, 1117 Hwy 41, TMS# 580-00-00-028 & 060, Final Approval of Site, Landscape, and Architecture Mr. Stone reviewed staff comments with the Board (attachment 1). Mr. Giles Branch, Earthsource Engineering, reviewed the project with the Board. Mr. O’Neal asked what the “clouds” on the site plan means. Mr. Branch answered that these were revisions and reviewed these changes with the Board. There being no comments, Ms. Santilli closed public comment. Mr. Lambert moved for final approval including all staff comments. Mr. O’Neal seconded the motion. All in favor. 5. AAA Carwash Revision, 691 Long Point Rd., TMS# 556-00-00-440, Final Approval of Site, Landscape, and Architecture Mr. Bernard and Ms. Johnson reviewed staff comments with the Board (attachment 1). Mr. Denny Gappens reviewed the project with the Board. Mr. Lambert asked about vegetation and if there would be plantings in the retention area. Mr. Gappens answered that he was not sure, but there were no changes in the landscape from the previously approved plan. Mr. Lambert stated that he would prefer to raise the height of the screen wall for better screening of the equipment. Mr. O’Neal asked if all of the retention would be underground. Mr. Gappens answered in the negative. Mr. Swails suggested that there should be plantings around the retaining wall. Mr. Gappens stated that this would be reviewed. Mr. O’Neal agreed that there should be plantings and the wall height should be increased.  Design Review Board July 10, 2019 Page 4 of 6 Mr. Gappens asked what height is preferred. Mr. O’Neal answered that a ten foot, 4 inch wall would be preferred. Ms. Santilli agreed. There being no further comments, Ms. Santilli closed public comment. Mr. O’ Neal moved for approval with staff to approve the screening and planting of the retaining wall basin. Mr. Lambert seconded the motion. All in favor. 6. Kids R Kids Revision, 3650 Bessemer Road, TMS# 583-03-00-183, Final Approval of Site, Landscape and Architecture Mr. Bernard and Ms. Johnson reviewed staff comments with the Board (attachment 1). Mr. Giles Branch, Earthsource Engineering, reviewed the project with the Board. Mr. Swails asked about the changes to the driveway. Ms. Johnson answered that the driveway was changed based on Transportation Department comments. Mr. Lambert asked about the middle of the driveway. Mr. Branch answered that this is a temporary obstruction. Mr. O’Neal suggested that the original plan should be required to be submitted with the revised plans. He suggested that there should be better up-front coordination prior to coming before the Board would be beneficial. He asked about the fence on top of the drainage pipe that could not be addressed. Mr. Branch answered that there is a 12-inch pipe that crosses the fence but the post is not as close to the pipe as originally thought. Mr. O’Neal stated that he is comfortable with the fence. There being no comments, Ms. Santilli closed public comment. Mr. O’Neal moved for approval including addressing staff comments with the exception of the fence on the drainage pipe. Mr. Swails seconded the motion. All in favor.  Design Review Board July 10, 2019 Page 5 of 6 7. Publix Endcap, 1000 Johnnie Dodds Blvd., TMS 535-00-00-020, Final Approval of Site, Landscape and Architecture Mr. Stone and Ms. Johnson reviewed staff comments with the Board (attachment 1). Mr. Thomas Martin, Earthsource Engineering, and Mr. Losse Knight reviewed the project with the Board. Mr. Swails asked about the courtyard and suggested that this could be used for outdoor seating. Mr. Knight answered that the tenants have not been finalized, but could be used as commonplace for the entire shopping center or outdoor seating. Mr. Lambert asked about the rear of the building and if the rear of the property could be screened. He suggested that the dumpster was in an “awkward” location and if relocated, could provide a few more parking spaces. Mr. O’Neal asked about the drainage layout at the courtyard and suggested that it should be more centered so it is not in the pedestrian pathway. He questioned the amount of concrete at the rear of the building. He suggested that an outdoor entryway could be considered as opposed to a courtyard that could be utilized for a possible restaurant use or prominent retail use. He suggested that it could provide more interest. He agreed with relocation of the dumpster should be considered. There being no comments, Ms. Santilli closed public comment. Mr. O’Neal suggested that the in-twelve pipe location should be reconsidered so that it does not impede the footings. He suggested that the courtyard should be more integrated with the endcap. Mr. Swails moved for approval with addressing staff comments. Mr. Lambert seconded the motion. All in favor There being no further business, the meeting adjourned at 6:24 pm. Submitted by,  Design Review Board July 10, 2019 Page 6 of 6 L. Lynes DRB07102019