Clayton commission approves site plan and architectural plans for 123 Lancaster with stormwater conditions

The Clayton Plan Commission and the Architectural Review Board voted Jan. 6 to approve the site plan and architectural plans for 123 Lancaster, allowing demolition of a single-story house and construction of a two-story single-family home, subject to two staff conditions: recording a deed restriction about dry-well location/maintenance with the St. Louis County Recorder of Deeds and submission of a percolation test by a qualified geotechnical engineer assessing the performance of the proposed dry well for the 15-year, 20-minute storm event.

Staff told commissioners the property, in the R-2 Single-Family Dwelling District and the Clayton Gardens Urban Design District, meets height, setback and lot-coverage standards. Impervious coverage on the lot is limited to 55%; the proposal measures 54.8%. Staff reporters said the existing canopy coverage (6,337 square feet) would be removed and the plan adds 4,250 square feet of new canopy, which staff said exceeds the minimum replacement requirement; the landscape plan was described as meeting native-species standards (about 73.3% native species in the plan).

Anna, the city planner presenting the staff report, said stormwater will be managed on-site. Engineer Eric Veyer described the drainage approach and the sizing of the front-yard dry well: “We are increasing the runoff a little bit — I believe it was 0.07 CFS — but the entirety of the roof area goes to the dry well in the front yard, and that is a volume of 0.21 CFS.” Veyer said the dry well is sized to accommodate the full roof runoff for the 15-year, 20-minute event and that, if the geotechnical percolation test indicates the dry well is undersized, the applicant will enlarge it.

Neighbors raised questions about potential effects on an existing retaining wall and driveway. A neighbor identified in the record as “Mr. Bold” asked whether the work would peer or otherwise affect the north property line and the retaining wall. Architect Lauren Strutman and the engineer said the driveway was intentionally placed on the south side of the new home to avoid affecting the wall, and that yard drains were routed to a single larger yard drain at the front (used as an emitter) rather than into the dry well. Lauren said landscaping adjacent to the property line would be retained for privacy. Laura Bolt, a neighboring resident, told the board she preferred the railing detail shown in the architect’s rendering rather than matching her own house’s railing.

Commissioners asked whether the percolation test should be done before or closer to dry-well construction; the applicant and staff said timing could be coordinated with staff so that test results reflect actual soil conditions before final dry-well construction. Staff’s two conditions were read into the record: (1) record a deed restriction with the St. Louis County Recorder of Deeds describing location and maintenance of the dry-well system and provide proof of filing before a building permit is issued; and (2) provide a percolation test by a qualified geotechnical engineer demonstrating the dry well will handle the 15-year, 20-minute storm; if not, the dry well must be upsized.

A motion to approve staff’s site-plan recommendation with the two conditions carried; the commission then approved the architectural plans as submitted. Commissioners praised the design for fitting the neighborhood context and for height mitigation. The applicants, Mark and Debbie Melman, spoke briefly after the approvals and said they were “very excited” to build and remain in Clayton.

Votes at a glance: the transcript records the motions as approved by voice vote; no roll-call tallies were recorded in the meeting transcript. The approvals include the staff conditions described above.

Why it matters: the approvals allow replacement of an older single-story home with a new two-story single-family residence in the Clayton Gardens district while formalizing stormwater controls intended to prevent additional runoff onto neighboring properties and requiring verification by a geotechnical percolation test.

What’s next: the applicant must record the deed restriction and submit the percolation test report to satisfy the conditions before a building permit will be issued.