Planning & Zoning Commission - Regular Meeting

Hi. Uh, good evening everyone. Um, I'd like to call to order the April 8th, 2026, uh, meeting for the City of Fenton Planning and Zoning Commission. Uh, the first item on our agenda is actually the pledge of allegiance. So, uh, for those who can stand, please do. Okay, thank you. Uh, next item we have is our roll call. Um, Secretary Abbott, if you could call roll, please.

Thank you, sir. Chairperson Yman here. Uh, Vice Chairperson Cheryl here. Abbott's here. Alderman Harold here. Mayor Morath here. Commissioner Whisbrock here. Commissioner Vorhees here. Uh, Commissioner Glover is excused. Commissioner Nelson here and Commissioner Billy here. Thank you. Um, go ahead.

I wanted to also recognize some of our uh city members that are here. Um, we have uh older person Robin Hules and we have alderman Scott Maserang and we have Mike Abbott from the Parks Commission. Welcome. And we have Gary Sabbert. Gary Sabbert from the board of adjustment. Great. Welcome. Thank you for joining us. Bruce Rogers is also on Zoom. Alderman Bruce Rogers. Okay. Thank you. Excellent. Can't leave anybody out. No. Thank you. Okay.

All right. Uh well, thank you uh Secretary Abbott for that. And uh next we have a few notices uh I'd like to go ahead and read into the record. Uh first is our notice to the public and our ground rules. Um so this is our public meeting ground rules. If you wish to speak, uh please pick up a speaker request form. These forms are located at the sign-in table. Uh they're not necessary if you're a petitioner. This is just for members of the public. Please complete the form and present it to Secretary Deb Abbott prior to the public comment section of this agenda. The chairperson will call your name during the public comment section of the agenda. Your comments and questions from the members of the public will be limited to 3 minutes. You will not be recognized to speak until you have filled out the form. Please address all comments to the planning and zoning commission. If you have a question for a petitioner, please address that question directly to the commission. All questions will be referred to the petitioners at the end of the public comment portion of the agenda. The commission demands respect and courtesy for others during the proceedings. Inappropriate behavior will result in the forfeite of the speaker's allotted time and may result in removal from the proceedings. The planning and zoning commission wants to hear what you have to say about the items on today's agenda as it relates to cases at present. So those are the ground rules. Uh we also have a few notices for petitioners. Uh first, a simple majority vote of the commission shall be necessary to constitute a positive recommendation to the board of alderman. Also, the next board committee meeting is Thursday, April 9th, 2026. And the next board of alderman meeting and public hearing is Thursday, April 23rd, 2026. Okay, that concludes our notices. Uh, the next item on the agenda is our approval of our minutes from our March 3rd, 2026 meeting. Uh, did anyone on the commission have any questions, concerns, or comments regarding the minutes?

None. Then I will go ahead and move that we vote to approve the uh minutes from the March 3rd meeting. Can I get a second? A second from Commissioner Nelson. All in favor? I. Any opposed? Okay. Minutes are approved. So that takes us now to our public comments portion of the uh of the agenda. I don't believe we actually did receive any. Is that true? Yes, sir. I have none.

Okay. None. All right. We will keep on moving then. Um, we're going to start with old business from last uh last month. We have case 2026 SP01, a petition by Leonard Walter of St. Louis Marble Company for site plan review of a new office warehouse building at 1565 Fen Park Drive. The property is zoned BP3 business park district. Amy, did you have a summary for us? I do. Um, this case was continued from the March meeting so that the petitioner could amend the site plan to come into compliance with the minimum park. Um,

an echo. Um, this is a reminder that this is a request to redevelop the lot with a new larger office warehouse building with a new off- streetet parking area and a new drive entrance to the north. Um so the existing structure and site improvements will be removed as part of the redevelopment. Um it is noted that the footprint of the proposed building was reduced slightly from 23,000 square ft to 21,329 ft. So it was just a small reduction from u the original submitt. So according to the site plan, all required building setbacks are met. The lot coverage of the proposed building is below the 65% maximum for lots in this district. Um the building is proposed to be 29 1/2 uh feet tall which is below the maximum height for the district and the propo proposed facade materials are architectural metal panels which meet the building material requirements. Uh the dumpster enclosure, the pavement details and the photoometric plans all meet the code requirements as well. Um so two overhead doors are proposed along the north uh portion of the building um with two 10x40 loading spaces adjacent to those doors and the required 75 ft of adjacent maneuvering space for trucks um has also been provided. Um the plans provided with your packet show that the rear and south uh landscape buffer areas are provided and if you'll recall the property received a variance to reduce the north side buffer uh area to zero. However, in order to meet the minimum parking requirements, they are proposing six um according to the plans that were in in your packet, they were uh proposing six additional parking spaces along the north side of the property. Um however, the first uh parking space um parallel parking space does encroach the front buffer area. Um revised plans were submitted to the community development department after your packets went out. So on April 1st um they they uh submitted um a revised plan that shows that that first space has been removed

from the buffer area and they are going to now provide two perpendicular spaces and five parallel spaces along the north lot line. So overall the uh parking stalls drive aisle dimensions meet the requirements of the code um as stated in your memo with the exception of the accessible spaces. Um that revised plan that was submitted in April also did uh amend the accessible parking spaces. They are now in compliance. Um with the additional spaces along the north property line, the minimum parking requirements are now met since the plans show a proposed reduction in the square footage of the office and warehouse area from the original plan. So that brings the total needed uh parking spaces to 29 and they are providing 29 spaces. Staff does note that the lot does not provide circulation around the building and no information was provided to explain how cars parked in the parallel spaces are intended to turn around to exit and I believe um the petitioner um will address that tonight. Um we did have a short conversation about that. Um it is also noted that the amended plans that were provided after the packets went out, so again not the not the plans that you reviewed show that the new drive entrance will provide the 20 foot uh radius for driveways. So, they did make the amendments to come into compliance with the driveway regulations. Um, an island between the proposed drive entrance and the existing drive entrance for the property to the north will be provided so as not to create a shared um driveway entrance between the two lots. And because the buffer area was reduced to zero along along that north lot line, an asphalt curb and retaining wall are proposed to provide separation between the two lots. um landscaping within the remaining buffer areas and the landscape islands will consist of grass, trees, shrubs, and ornamental ground cover. And finally, um separate reviews and approvals will also be required by Fenton Fire Protection District and MSD. And so staff is uh recommending that uh

any minor changes required by other reviewing agencies be administratively approved by staff when in compliance with the code.

Okay. Thank you. Um, so one point I want to just be clear on, Amy, with the revised plans you received. Um we'll have the petitioner come up in a moment and speak to the circulation thing, but um a aside from the circulation comment you made, the minimum amount of space required to uh get the semitrs that I think are contemplated in the docking uh places as well as any other parking places that th the city's requirements are met for those.

That's correct. Uh we require 75 ft of adjacent maneuvering area and that is provided um right here that the 75 ft of maneuvering area. Okay. All right. Um does anyone else have a question for Amy other than the circulation item which we'll have the petitioner come up to discuss in a minute? Okay. Do we have a petitioner in the uh audience? If you could uh use the microphone, we do have uh a few folks on the phone um and they won't be able to hear you if you don't speak into the mic. If you could please give your name and address for the record.

Sean Aley, 15997 Deer Trail Court, Chesterfield.

Yeah, I'm Sean Ackley, the civil engineer with Ingenuity. Um, as far as the circulation and the maneuvering for the parallel parking spaces, um, there that for this west space, um, I ran a turning movement with, uh, the vehicle tracking software and a car is able to maneuver to back up and maneuver in that that the truck loading area outside of the 75 ft is able to turn around and get out the entrance. So, there is room for them to be able to turn around and get out. and the the parallel lots that are sort of closest to um the front edge of the building is the expectation that those would sort of pull forward and then use that extra space where the um where the truck bays are to turn around.

Correct. Okay. It would be my recommendation if if that is the area that they are proposing to use for vehicles to turn around that markings be provided to indicate that that is the turnaround area and to to mark them as no parking so as not to impede um vehicles from being able to turn around. Okay, we can do that. Other questions for the petitioner? I do. How comfortable are you that your software is going to adequately be able to turn cars around with outbacking into the building?

The the software is actually very conservative. Um I've found that especially with larger vehicles, the trucks, the truck drivers can can actually do much better than what the software um allows me to do. So I I feel very confident that um a car will be able to turn around in that area. So Amy, according to uh your handout, every item has been met. As you know, and this is for the record that uh this uh this request came to us after a board of adjustment uh uh approval to reduce the setbacks to zero. There's no circulation. I'm very concerned about that. Uh there's not much we can do unless the board of alderman wants to take the board of adjustment to court and reverse this. I don't think that's likely. But I just want to go on record uh as saying that I'm very concerned about the circulation that will not be existent on this piece of property. And quite frankly um down the road the potential for this to create a problem should a new buyer come in and require more parking spaces. I think you're going to have a problem selling the building and getting an approval from the city if more parking's required. So, um, once again, I think it's important. I have a hard time understanding what the hardship was, but that's out of my league right now. Thank you. Um, other comments or questions from the commission? Alderman Harrell,

I was just going to ask, did you use that same software to back a truck into the dock while six cars are parallel parked? I did. And how did that go? It it can it can make that. So, do I understand it? Where's Maybe I just don't understand. But the trash is at the back, right? So, is that not in the way of turning around? No, they would turn around in in the further east. Okay.

Right. So, so my question is at the end on the west side, northwest side, you have a trash container there. You're going to have a trash truck. I guess your software says that's okay, too. They can reverse. Yeah. Okay. So, will there be any parking in that area? No, they're not proposing any parking there. The parking is just along the building. The parking is going to be just along this portion of the north property line. Okay. All right. That that was my mistake. Yeah. We can also add the condition that that this area be striped, no parking to to alleviate any concerns there.

So, it's just I guess fire trucks can get through and whatnot. Yeah, we actually had this a plan approved by Fen Fire as far as the site circulation. Yeah, I do have that on on record. So, have you gone to MSD or not yet? Nope.

Okay. Um Amy, I'm thinking that the conditions that we had printed up are probably a little bit off in the sense that um a few of these have been met now, right? Yeah. I would I would suggest still keeping them in because the packet that you reviewed included um those amendments that were needed. So um they'll just have complied with the conditions as we read them into the record. Okay.

Do we have other questions? None. Okay. So, um we do have some uh conditions that we would like to um include in our uh motion to approve. I'm going to read them into the record. If you could acknowledge them, please. Uh first, this approval is strictly for the proposed site development for a new office warehouse building at 1565 Fen Park Drive as indicated on revised plans uh dated March 20, 2026. Understood.

Um as Amy indicated, those plans have been updated, but those are the ones in reference for these conditions. Um the site plan shall be amended as follows. Uh, remove the first parallel parking space along the north lot line that encroaches the front buffer area and amend the plans to provide the required minimum parking. Mhm. Indicate the required 10 ft width for accessible parking spaces. Yep. Indicate the minimum 20 foot radius for the proposed driveway entrance.

Uh, three, a demolition permit will be required for the removal of the existing building and site improvements. Separate municipal zoning approval for building permit and land disturbance uh will be required for the proposed redevelopment. Yep. Evidence of MSD approval will be required before a land disturbance permit will be released. Yep. Uh when in compliance with the code, the community development director may administratively approve any minor changes to the site plan as required by another reviewing entity such as the Fenton Fire Protection District and MSD.

Yep. Um, I'm going to add one here uh that says that you're going to mark the uh certain uh specific areas as no parking. And we discussed it would be the areas um that are uh I guess sort of behind where the loading uh bays are for the trucks as well as the areas to the north of the building uh that provide access to the trash receptacle. Yes. And then last uh compliance with all other applicable city of Fenton codes and ordinances.

Okay. Uh, with those conditions, I'll go ahead and uh make a motion that we vote to approve case 2026 SP01, a petition by Leonard Walter of St. Louis Marble Company for site plan review of a new office warehouse building at 1565 Fen Park Drive. The property is zoned BP3 Business Park District. Uh, can we do a roll call vote, please? I get a second. I'll second. Oh, we need a second. Sorry, we got our second. Now, can I get a a roll call vote? Chairperson Yman I. Commissioner Nelson I. Vice Chairperson Cheryl I. Secretary Abbott I. Mayor Morath.

Yeah. I would like to say before I vote that based on uh the all conditions have been met under the uh variance request. Uh I reluctantly vote yes. Alderman Harold. Yes. Commissioner Whisbrock. Hi. Commissioner Vorhees. I Commissioner Bilicki. Motion approved. Okay. Thank you. Thank you.

All right. Well, that concludes our old business. Um, next we move on to new business. Uh, the first item is case uh 2026 TXT1, a petition by uh I'm going to say Sacko. I don't know if I'm saying that the way they would, but um auto limited partnership for amendments to the zoning code as follows. Uh one to amend section 400.030 definitions to add the terms automobile/commercial motor vehicle service facility and automobile/commercial mo motor vehicle washing facility. And two, to amend section 420.010 010 land use matrix to allow an automobile/commercial motor vehicle service facility as a use allowed by special use permit in the BP3 business park district. Amy,

um, this uh request is in conjunction with the following case, case 2026, SUP3. I'm happy to uh to go over both the text amendment and then the SUP um before discussion if you'd like or we can do them separately. Um, let's let's talk through the text amendment and then Sure. Go ahead.

All right. The code currently has separate terms and definitions for automotive service store, automotive washing facility, and commercial motor vehicle repair. But because we do not have a term and definition for a service or a washing facility that include includes both automobile and commercial motor vehicle, um the petitioner is proposing to add the following terms. Um, an automobile commercial motor vehicle service facility defined as an establishment primarily engaged in the sale and replacement, repair or servicing of spark plugs, oil, water hoses, brake fluids, batteries, distributors, tires, brakes, fuel pumps, mufflers, radios, transmissions, glass, and engines or engine parts or other parts or accessories for automobiles and commercial motor vehicles. an automobile commercial motor vehicle service facility may have short-term outdoor storage of such automobiles and commercial motor vehicles until such repairs are performed but exclude dismantling or salvage an automobile commercial motor vehicle service facility may have an accessory use as an autommobile commercial motor vehicle washing facility. So, I do want to note that it uh this proposed definition does not include the straightening of body parts, painting, welding, or other major repair that's typically associated with commercial motor vehicle repair or collision shops. Um, and they're also proposing a definition, a term definition for automobile commercial motor vehicle washing facility, which is an establishment engaged in washing and cleaning of automobiles and commercial motor vehicles and related equipment. Um they're also proposing to add this use an automotive auto automobile commercial motor vehicle service um as a use allowed by special use permit in the BP3 district. The purpose of the BP3 district is to provide a mix of office light industrial retail and service uses in a business park stat setting. Staff notes that there are currently two existing legal non-conforming service establishments for automobiles in the BP3 district. a tire and automotive shop

um located at 1866 Larkin Williams Road and a tire and service um center at 600 South Highway Drive that serves both automobiles and commercial vehicles. Okay. And one other point I think of clarification that I want to ask I'm sorry, did I cut you off? It sounded like you paused because you were done. I'm done. Yeah.

Okay. Um the I I understand that part of the goal in these amendments is to allow for commercial motor vehicles to sort of be added to a definition that previously just said automobiles. I think that's one objective. But then they're also asking to change the allowed uses within BP3 because um and even in our old definition uh the BP3 did not permit the um any automotive service store or commercial motor vehicle repair as the code's drafted today. There is this exception of the two non-conforming units.

Correct. Mhm. But the code wouldn't allow for this use if it fit the definition. Correct.

Okay. Um, so I'm just going to sort of take the lead a little bit here with a few thoughts that I want to share with the commission. Uh this particular petitioner and the one following are both proposing developments on either side of what I view as a key access point to uh Interstate 44. And um we do not have a lot of market I'm sorry of uh traffic study information to base our decision off of. Um now we do have petitioners here who I'm sure can speak to those concerns. Um, I would propose, if the rest of the commission is open to it, to have the petitioners speak uh about their proposed developments so that we can consider before we vote on any of these items uh their comments related to um the impact that they uh believe their developments may have on traffic as well as other concerns that we may have. So, it's a little out of order from how we normally do things. We would normally make a decision on the text amendments and then go on and hear more of the details. But I do think it's important uh given the potential impact on on that one uh particular point uh that we hear from the petitioners on traffic. So if everyone is amendable to that, uh I'd propose that we kind of shuffle the agenda around in that way a little bit. We'll still make sure we have an independent vote on all four, but we'll let we'll we'll have more information flow before we make decisions. I see everyone nodding their head. I don't think I need to actually move for that, do I?

No. Okay, but I'll go ahead and do a staff uh summary of the the following case. Um, please.

Okay. Um, case 2026, SUP3. It's a petition by Seikko Auto Limited partnership for a special use permit to operate an automotive vehicle service facility at 470 South Highway Drive. The property is zoned BP3 Business Park District. Um the petitioner is under contract to purchase the vacant 2.24 acre parcel at 470 South Highway Drive. It is located at the intersection of South Highway Drive and the exit to Rudder Road. They are proposing to devel to develop the lot with um a 15,000 foot automobile commercial motor vehicle service facility. The lot will be accessed by the existing drive entrance off of South Highway Drive and they are proposing a new drive entrance off of Rudder Road as well. The uh proposed um site plan shows 76 parking spaces which will exceed the minimum 70 required for the use. The facility will have 16 um service bays with an accessory 24-hour washing facility that is located at the southernmost portion of the building. The facility will accommodate automobiles and larger fleet and commercial vehicles, but not semi-truckss or tractor trailers due to the length um and size limitations of the building. The proposed redevelopment will require a sep separate site plan review and it suggested that the site plan review include a traffic study for the washing facility showing um the average service time per customer, expected vehicles during peak demand times and any traffic or circulation impacts that that might have on on site or on the adjacent streets.

Okay, thank you. Uh do we have a petitioner uh who would like to come up and speak about this um particular uh development? If you could give your name and address for the record and uh please use the microphone.

Sure. Um my name is Patrick Hensley. My company is Hensley Construction. Uh my address is 10880 Bower Boulevard, sweet 145, St. Louis, Missouri 63132. Um, like I said, I'm with Hensley Construction. Um, and I I appreciate you guys listening to what we have to say tonight. Um, just to clarify things, the Seikko, SACO stands for Sunset Automotive Company. That's our abbreviation term. Um, if you're familiar with Sunset Ford at the corner of Lindberg and Gravo, this is uh will be a facility for them. Um, but we are uh with me tonight. I have our whole team and we're here to answer whatever questions that I don't know. We'll have that answer. Um, I'll just kind of briefly introduce everyone here. Um, I have the owners of Sunset Ford, Justin and Peter Hyle. I have Carl Ulig who is the architect. Um, I have Paul Shakcoin with Wind Engineering. Um, and Dan Olri is with Intel Real Estate. So, um, and then Jim Atkins is legal counsel for Sunset Ford just to answer any clarifications of how the text amendment would be. Um, but there is a lot going on with this project. Um, but we are pretty excited about it. I know it's been a very extensive search uh to find a piece of property that fits for Sunset Ford, but not only Sunset Ford, it has to fit for Ford Motor Company. Um and this particular site was identified and uh Ford Motor Company has approved it as a a site that would be would work really nice in conjunction with the Sunset Ford operation. Uh the like you said the facility is a it's

it's referred to as a quick lane. It is a branded type facility that Ford has come out with. Um, a lot of times you see these facilities, they're located on existing Ford dealerships throughout the country. Um, this particular one would be a freestanding one. This would be one of the largest uh quick lanes in the St. Louis metropolitan area. In fact, I think it's going to be in the state of Missouri. U, so it's kind of a flagship uh for for Ford as well as for Sunset Ford. Um, as we stated, it's not just to service your basic automobiles, which doesn't have to be a Ford. It can be everything from a Nissan to a Toyota, whatever you're driving. Um, it will also service commercial vehicles. And when I mean by commercial vehicles, we're talking about um, as you guys know, uh, there's larger vehicles that are out there like, and I always pick on it, like a Spectrum truck that has a boom on it. they can they can actually pull one of these into one of their garages to service that type facility. Um, with the way that these uh vehicles have been made today, they're always bigger. They have the F F50s and the DY and and they don't normally fit into just a typical service bay. Uh so we've got a couple bays on the end near the fleet wash that would service these facilities, these uh particular cars, automobiles. The fleet wash at the end of the building is really designed to also be able to wash these type of vehicles. They're not designed, the fleet wash is not designed to wash semi-truckss. Um, it really is not designed to wash your average car because you would probably go to a car wash. It's designed to to wash a an

ambulance. It could take a fire truck, an RV. I did I did actually bring some uh additional information I can leave with you with types of vehicles that you see every day when you're driving on the road um that this fleet wash would be able to service. Um, it is unique in St. Louis uh because it's it's it services that size of a vehicle. There's not any uh these type of facilities that I know of around here other than there's one up by the airport which is a little freestanding one. Um so this would be very kind of unique in this area. We think that uh this will actually service a lot of the um the businesses in Benton. So they'll all have clean cars when they are driving around. Um, so with that kind of little background description of what I'm telling you, I you know, we we know we've got the issue with the zoning and we felt after talking with Amy that maybe it's a text amendment and then creating a special use to incorporate these items to have the vehicle service and the ve the commercial vehicle service and the fleet wash to be incorporated. Um, Jim, I don't know if you want to maybe step up and say a few things as well and maybe introduce yourself.

My name is Jim Atkins. I'm with Burger Cohen and Brandt in in Clayton, Missouri applicant. Um yeah, I think this is um talking about the traffic study and based on the information that Dark provided to you require a traffic study. She already took

we're presenting this in kind of a phased application process. Maybe a little unusual right now asking for the text amendment and then following up and then and then the special use permit as well. And then we understand we do have to follow up and get site plan approval. Uh a little background on that. Um well I believe um I believe the site plan was provided to you very detailed and I thought we did we not provide I thought another one as well. Okay.

Um this is one of the site plans. I mean it's very thorough and I think it's it's very close to being being finished. There's a couple of things that are still outstanding on it. We don't have the the lighting plan is not done and the landscaping plan is not done and we understand that the city may be requiring a traffic study. And the concern was is is we're under contract to buy the property and there's a very tight time frame under that contract. And uh based on the contract timing and and the time it takes to finish the light and landscape plans and get the traffic study done, we we wanted to find out whether the use was going to be acceptable to the city as soon as possible. And uh I mean concern was if we waited until we got the traffic study completed and everything, the site plan review and everything went through together that uh we may be past our contingency periods under the contract. was trying to make sure that this use was going to be permitted and then we we understood we would have to follow up with site plan review and and that would also entail a a traffic study.

Okay. Well, thank you for that. Um the materials we provided are very professionally done. Thank you for all the information uh that you did give and it looks like uh at first glance a very thoughtful layout. I think I'll speak for myself, but I suspect I share this opinion with some of the other members of the commission. Um, as I was stating uh earlier, that particular uh entry point onto Interstate 44 uh is a um fairly uh highly used entry point by not only all the businesses in the BP3, but also um virtually all of the residential that is um south of the BP3. And so, uh, especially at periods of peak, uh, traffic activity in the morning, um, when folks are, uh, commuting to work, uh, we see a lot of traffic through that section. And so, um, my personal concerns are less about the way that you've laid out the property, um, and more about like what is the impact going to be on the morning commute when you put a business right on that corner. Part of what might help me at this moment to understand um is what are you guys thinking in terms of the volume of traffic? Uh it wasn't entirely it are you only working with commercial accounts or can you know Kenyman drive up in my car and say hey I want an oil change. Yes, Justin, why don't you come on up and you can kind of discuss the business too aspects of it. But yes, to answer your question, you could bring your car in there. You would you would call and schedule it and just like you'd do at a Firestone or a DOS or something like

that. Um Okay. And uh Yes. But uh commercial is just another feature that something that has been um you guys have been doing this at the existing dealership for quite some time. So it's expand. Can you give us a sense for sort of the traffic flow you're thinking?

You'd like to say I'm I'm Justin Hyel. So 11700 Gravaway Road, St. Louis, Missouri, 63127. Um so um yeah, oil changes on anything we do. You think about it like a a DOS competitor. So currently DOS has 130 locations in seven states. um the Quicklane Auto Tire Center that's backed by Ford Motor Company. They have 800 locations in the US and they have,00 locations worldwide. Uh so this would be one of the first one standalone in the state of Missouri. Um like like Patrick kind of said initially and and possibly the largest and the only one that would have a fleet wash. Um so it it definitely would be a flagship to the Ford Motor Company family. Um and certainly for us, I mean, we've been in businessund 14 years and um you know so Ford definitely uh has got our back behind this and they really would like to see this this go through for sure. Uh but we're at a point where we're at capacity at our current location at Gravway and Lindberg. Um and we've done a uh a fairly nice job of of of reaching out to fleet owners and customers and servicing them and selling to them. Um but we're running out of uh physical capacity and space to serve them properly. So both both for standard vehicles, F-150s and you know Fusions, edges, all those types of things. So we need a facility that can kind of facilitate all customers um but also serve our fleet customers. Uh Amron UEE or we've got uh Pinsky Enterprise. We've got anything you can think of like Pat mentioned ambulance. We've got everything that comes into our facility that's got a Ford chassis on it. Amazon delivery, Prime Vans, those FedEx, those are all on a Ford F56 chassis. So, that's what we serve at the dealership and that's what we'd be looking to serve here as well alongside all residential

vehicles. Um, you got your Ford motor homes, RVs, uh, we service all those now. We actually converted our body shop back in 2021. We closed our body shop and converted that into an a fleet space to serve these customers now. Uh, and it's already at capacity. So, um, so we're just trying to meet the market demand and find a place, find a location, find another home, and we just like it to be close to our existing home, and it kind of makes sense that, you know, we've been next to Fenton our entire life. Uh, our greatgrandfather actually served on this board. Uh, never met him, but we know he was here. But uh um but uh so yeah, we're just trying to trying to find a good home that's close to us that we can serve our guests and and um you know, serve them well. So if is there more questions you think you have with it at the moment?

Yes. Uh I mean, so the hard thing for at least me to judge and I'll I'll let others ask questions too in a minute. Hopefully I'm I'm sort of representing the group a little bit here. But, you know, you just mentioned all the different types of vehicles that could come through. And I have no sense right now for what that's going to do to Rudder Road. So, you know, Rudder is a hightraic uh road that helps with all of the businesses below as well as the residents uh further south of that to uh come and go from the interstate. And if you're now going to create a um curb cut right there at Rudder and have a bunch of cars coming and going as your business is uh being done. Um especially during hightra parts of the day, like that's a that's a traffic concern. And what we have to as a uh decision-m body sort of understand um you know we went through a uh comprehensive analysis of our um of our city plan. I'm sorry I'm calling it the wrong thing. What's it called?

Comprehensive.

Comprehensive plan where we thought through all of our zoning very um very carefully. And uh and you know the I think the reason this type of business doesn't exist currently in this zoning area is because uh you know we want to be aware of what the t traffic patterns are going to be through that business park and um some businesses create more traffic than others and and we just I personally don't have a good basis for information to understand what uh your business in that particular spot is going to do with an important artery for the rest of the community south of 44.

It's actually impacting the north part of 44, the northeast, because several people what they'll have to do if you're headed if you're headed east, you've got to go under 44 to get to, let's say, the soccer park or um Herz Hitserve road. So, it's actually affecting both. Yeah. So, um, so I I don't know if there's anybody on your staff that has any like ability to speak to the volume of cars that come through on a daily basis or some sort of data point that we can lean on to try to make a decision right now. Uh, which I understand you want us to do, but in my mind right now is difficult.

Yeah, because it might not be a problem. We just don't know.

Sure. I mean, with 16 bays and at least four to six of them being dedicated to more of your fleet style vehicles, your fleet vehicles are typically um you might see um what they call like an RO turn, repair order turn count, one to two per day. Okay. So, if I have four or six bays that are dedicated to large vehicles, think of like your your Ammon UE truck or your Amazon Prime truck, I might have one or two per day per bay maybe, right? Um, those generally take a while to repair. Um, and we're doing things by appointment and or by drop off. So, there's there's some organization to it. Uh, when you're dealing with a a fleet client like that, it's there's some organization to their business, right? because they can't leave their vehicle downed. So, they're not just going to leave it on our lot indefinitely. They're going to schedule it with us and that's how we do it now at the dealership. Um, so there's there's a lot of planned um inn-out if if you want to kind of say on that side of it. The other half of the business, the other six or so bays, that would be like a typical uh dos, right? People are going to come and go. There will be appointments. There will be non-appointments that can just come in. Hey, I got a flat uh flat tire that needs repaired. Um so that'd be very comparable to your do store right down the street here and the traffic that you kind of see come and go from there. Um again, that would probably be two to three vehicles per those six other bays or so per day. So, you know, I don't I don't know how much that you know impacts your your traffic flow or what you guys look at, but that would be kind of the the rough guesstimates on my end. And as far as the car wash goes, um Patrick alluded to the the location that's up by the airport. So that's uh backed by this company that we're working with, DNS uh car wash. They're local here, I think, in High Ridge. And um they've got a

location up there by the airport. and they see um roughly one vehicle for every 15 minutes during their peak hours, which is from 5:30 a.m. till 7:30 a.m. and 1:30 p.m. until about 400 p.m. Beyond that, it's it's spotty. It may be dead for for a while. So, again, it's being that you're you're advocating to these larger vehicles, um like an RV, you're just not seeing a a lot of them come through. So it'd be a lesser it would be a lesser um if this was a 16 bay dos it would be more but but being that you're advocating to these larger vehicles it it would it's going to be a little bit less.

Okay. Thank you. Other questions for the hours of operations only through the week or on weekends as well or so the uh the car wash would be 24/7 because it's an automated touchless wash so anyone can come and go as they need but the uh the facility for the quick lane would be minimum 7:00 a.m. to 7:00 p.m. U Monday through Saturday closed Sundays. Thank you. other questions.

Um, I just wondered, and it's hard to tell, was there ever the thought or could there be and maybe would this help or not help? Because South Haywood Drive, it's crazy in the mornings. And um, especially if there's an accident on 44, everybody's jumping on South Highway to get through. And could you have an exit ramp kind of thing off of South Highway onto your property to get people off of out of the way? I don't know if that's a consideration and would that be allowed or I I don't know. I just I think that's something that MDOT would have to Yeah.

Oh, I'm sure. But it's just is it I've sat there many many of morning and the other question that I have and um it's a little bit off of this but in part of what I was reading you talked about having the bay face a certain way so that noise bother that's actually the next case. Oh okay I'll say that. Thank you sir.

Absolutely. Other questions? I don't necessarily have a question, but from my perspective, um, I don't want to discount your concern about the traffic flow and the congestion that may be created. Um, because I think that's real and we're going to talk a little bit on several other cases about that area. Um, but um, and you're exactly correct. We just went through our comprehensive plan, had many discussions and so forth and the ability to change the uses. Um, and I've looked at the BP3 and I've looked at all the uses. You have the matrix in front of you. Um, the only thing that I would say uh is that we do, as uh Amy mentioned, two uh automobile and truck facilities within the BP3. Understandably, they're uh legal non-conforming. I, however, they've been very successful, have created very little that I'm aware of. um you know problems within the city and their traffic patterns, one being Purcell and the other Alexander Tire. Um so I think our first mind thought is of the ask are we uh respondent to changing the ormending section 430 and if we are then I think we can move forward because I think what you're alluding to and this may help the petitioner uh to go back to the owner of the property and say hey you know we've gotten this zoning changed or we haven't that would give you a them your the owner a better perspective if they'll go on a little bit further with with your potential here. Um I I don't know if that'll help you, but it'll certainly buy you some more time. That propertyy's been for sale for an awful long time. I know recently it was bought, now it's under for sale again, but I I don't know if that'll help you. But I think our

first order of business this evening should be to discuss whether we're so inclined to amend that section. Okay. And if we are, then we can move from that point unless the petitioner sees something different. Yeah. And I want to make sure the petitioner understands any vote we make is a recommendation to the board of alderman uh until you know they have a final decision uh we're just a recommending body. So

but I don't want to discount the fact that we may have circulation issues and I if I'm not if I'm correct there is a curb cut from MDOT on South Highway Drive. Correct. There is you can see it in the satellite p pictures. I was it's hidden by trees at the moment, but it's there. Right.

And I I want to be clear, too. I'm you guys appear to run a very professional business. Your everything about your presentation and the nature of what you're proposing, uh it's exciting that you want to bring that sort of business to Fenton. So, I don't want to suggest in any way that this is that that my concerns are a reflection of the business itself or you all as a as a company. It's just um you know once something is built you there's no you know there's no easy you can't do you don't have a doover and uh and it's our responsibility to make sure that um the citizens of the community are not going to be like why is this thing here because of a big traffic problem that we didn't investigate thoroughly um when we had the opportunity that's that's my chief concern

and also I think it's use can be with through a special use permit as well, which which kind of I I was just going to add I think what the mayor and you can correct me if I'm wrong. What you're saying is we can go forward if we're comfortable with approving the the text amendment itself, but if you would if you're not comfortable with the SU that we could continue the SUP until um some additional information comes forward. But you're not sure wouldn't necessarily be

and again we discussed at length the comprehensive plan and and the BP3 and if I look through here BP3 you know uh the allowed uses are financial institution fitness instructions and there's a reason for that uh there is a little bit of automotive uh use to it and again in my decision on whether or not this is a good foot in the BP3 is the fact that we have two functioning longtime functioning automotive businesses that really haven't created us an issue. Um, from my perspective, I think for a financial institution and some of the other BP uses, this would uh generate a little bit of revenue for the city.

Gotcha. Well, and I want to emphasize something that is the mayor is making a good point of everybody needs to make an independent decision. I'm obviously uh maybe I don't want to unduly bias anyone just cuz I'm the chairperson and I have the mic. You know, I I want each of you to make the decision that um you think is most appropriate for the city? Um that's why we have representative uh government here. So, does anybody else have a question they want to ask the petitioner or statement they want to make before we uh have a vote? I do think a vote on the text amendment makes

so the only question that I would have with the petitioner is is if this body would you know recommend and again it's a recommend recommendation to the full board would that help you in your negotiations with the property owner because because there are some serious serious concerns with the traffic patterns and the traffic flows and I think we have another case you know coming up that we're going to have I'm going to have uh issues with not not necessarily issues But I think there needs to be mod needs to be brought in and and hear their their side of this because that is their property. Yeah. And it could be that there are no issues like I could be. Right.

Yeah. I I just I don't want to rubber stamp something in the absence of information. That's my that's my position. Um okay. Any other comments or questions? Okay. The the only question that I ask the city attorney is is if she foresees a problem with this commission moving forward again with your concerns of uh traffic, traffic study, whatnot. Your your response?

Yeah. No, as Amy said, I mean, the text amendment is more whether or not the use is appropriate anywhere within the district. So you're really looking at the purpose of the BP district as she read and what the uses are and whether it's appropriate anywhere within the district. So if you're comfortable with that, you could move forward and then if you're concerned about traffic in the specific area rather than have it be a condition, you could continue get more information on a traffic study for the Would that help you all? Yes. Yes, it would. Understood. Well, they certainly can't move forward unless they get the amendment. So correct. Yeah.

Okay. I will uh go ahead then and move that we have a vote on case uh 2026 TXT1. Uh do I have to read the whole thing? I'll just say a petition by uh Seiko Auto Limited Partnership for amendments to the zoning code as written into the record. Okay. Uh can I get a second? I'll second. You have a second. Further discussion. Sorry. Further discussion. Can we have further discussion? Yes, we can have further discuss.

So, um I don't know. Did we adequately discuss the amendment with the entire board? I I feel like I said the most. That's a fair that's a fair point. Um so, the amendment uh because we did spend a lot of time talking about the uh spot if Yeah, if we could put it on the board. So I my understanding is it would take what is currently defined for automobiles as a service facility and essentially add commercial to it

allowing commercial vehicles to to have all also have those services but it wouldn't be um um the heavier major repair that we typically associated with a commercial motor vehicle repair facility. Right. Okay. And then kind of the same thing for washing. It would amend the definition to allow for washing. Yes. And they are not proposing to add the washing facility as a use allowed by special use permit. They're just providing the definition because it is going to be provided as an accessory use to the automobile commercial motor vehicle service facility.

Okay. So point one of the text amendment is to make these definitional changes. Correct. Point two is to also allow as a special use in the BP3 these two items just the automobile commercial motor vehicle service as a use. Okay. Yeah. By SUP. Is everyone clear?

What is the largest truck that you think you'll have in that facility? Not a tractor trailer. So it we're we videotape for the record. I mean the largest I'd say the largest vehicle that we serve now which would be the same here is an RV. So if it's on a Ford chassis which they can range you can get a class A up to like a 35 maybe even 40 40 foots big. We don't really serve anything more than that. So you you're not you're not looking at tractor trailers or dump trucks or

uh No, you now that you dump truck is a blended term because you have an F550, you have an F750 Ford dump truck. I'm thinking of the tandem. No, dual tandem. Nope. No, that would not necessarily be our facility. Um yeah, it looks like U just handed out to you some pictures. You can kind of see these vehicles I took pictures of this week. These are on our lot currently up at the dealership. So, these are vehicles we serve. These are our customers like city of uh I don't know if it's Manchester. There's a dump truck in there. It's an F550 or an F450. So, we're going to circulate this through the crowd if you don't mind. Sure.

Yeah. You got shuttle bus. You got KUV bodies. Most of these are all chassis cab vehicles that have been outfitted with a body on them. Amy, can I ask another point of order? If we vote on the text amendment and for some reason it doesn't pass, can we still then move to continue or asking for more information? Yes, because the it would still go to the board of alderman for final consideration of approval.

Okay. Okay. Good to know. All right. Any other questions? Okay. So, uh I will re or I close further discussion, I guess, and uh continue on the motion that was seconded to vote. Can we do that? Mhm. Okay. Would you like to please uh have a roll call vote on this? Chairperson Yman. So my vote is only because in the absence of information on a traffic study, I just for the text amendment. I know it is. Okay. Okay.

But in the absence of information, I am not and you can put this in the record. I am I'm not open to additional uses in the district, I am going to say nay. Okay. Vice Chairperson Cheryl. Yay. Secretary Abbott. Yes. Hi. Mayor Morath. Hi. Alderman Harrell. Hi. Commissioner Westbrook. Commissioner Vorhees. Hi. Commissioner Nelson. I. Commissioner Bilicki. I. Motion approved.

Okay. So, that's the text amendment. Uh on the SU. Um I know you read that uh to the group and we've been discussing. uh we'd still need to make a formal decision on the SUP. Um so we can also submit that to a vote if the commission is comfortable doing that. I think our alternative would be uh to consider continuing for more traffic information. Um anybody want to speak? I I would be in favor I would be in favor of continuing more information.

Okay. Um is there anybody who is uh wants to advocate for us voting tonight?

Um we all travel that road. We all travel that road. We know there's traffic, but it's periodic traffic. And I feel that a traffic study is in part of our summary recommendation that's going to be read into the record and we still have to do a site plan review in the future. So in my opinion, I think we could vote on the SU as it stands knowing that all these things could be read into the record and then provided to us for the site plan review. And at the site plan review, we have the opportunity to say if we feel that curb cuts need to be changed or whatever. I mean, there's a lot of changes we can make during the site plan. That's just my opinion. um with the lessening of the um Unigroup trucks that used to be there and things like that, I feel like it opens up more opportunity for other traffic. Not saying we don't have a lot of traffic, but it's kind of an exchange to me over the years. We used to have that Chrysler plant where we had three shifts going in and out. And that's when they changed it to oneway traffic on either side of the interstate. Those of you that weren't here, that used to be two-way traffic on both sides of the inter. So, I feel like progress goes with the traffic flow that we've seen change and and we've addressed these traffic issues. So is MDOT. But I think the numbers they're talking

are not as large as I feel would make a big impact on what's already out. Thank you. That was very well stated. Um, did you have a comment?

I I do have a comment. So I I'm just thinking what we did. We just made a recommendation to the full board to amend section 400. Um, if for some reason this business doesn't go through, that amendment is now in the BP3 section. You definitely want automotive to come to us as a special use because BP3 is a large area. So, I don't think we want to discount special use permit. I think we want to do that along with the amendment. that unless somebody has a different idea.

Well, the vote I think we I think with the text amendment we said any future recommendation would require a special use permit. Correct.

So I don't think we lose the opportunity for any one that is not this one to still be special use. Now I think that there is a point of clarification though that is important. If we say yes to the special use permit tonight, that means that we've said this business can be on that lot, all we'll have control over after that point are the sorts of things that Commissioner Nelson eloquently pointed out. We can say we don't like where the curb cuts are. we don't like the traffic flow, you know, things specific to the site, but the amount that that could impact traffic may or may not be adequate once we learn more about the traffic study. Um, and we can't at that point say, well, we're repealing your special use permit. At least I don't think we can. I

I think you're right. Yeah, I think a continuence would work better for us. Speak into your mic, please. has a special use permit the owner of the he were to sell the building he would have to come back to us not the micro he would come have to come back to the new owner would have to come back to us to get another special use to use the building for what it's designed for correct use it for anything

yeah a subsequent owner We would degree we will have still have control over that piece of property only for the next user. Well, if if it if for if Sunset were to back out of this after having the building for a couple years, it um for a traffic problem, for any other kind of problem, the next person that they would sell it to would have to come to us again to make it an auto a truck. It could be an automotive repair, but it couldn't be a truck repair. Correct.

No, it couldn't be automotive. is that's actually not allowed in the Okay. It's not right now, but it couldn't be either. It have to Yeah, they're not transferring. They don't have to correct. They're not trans. Okay. They have to go. I think the point you're getting at is one of the findings for an SUP is that you have to find that operation of the business will not affect or negatively affect the public health, general welfare, and traffic is one of the items listed in that. And I think your concern is you don't you're not sure you have enough information that the traffic won't negatively impact control making that

I have an idea. Can we make it a condition of the special use permit that we receive a market study that we're satisfied with? I don't know if the petitioner likes that, but can we can we give ourselves the flexibility to effectively pull back the special use permit because we weren't satisfied with the market stud? I'm sorry, the traffic study. What does that mean? Yeah,

um if if what if about the condition adding a condition that needs to be approved by the city, we're still going to have to go before city council. Is this something that can be provided and then assessed by city council? Well, what I am suggesting is that uh I mean it would have almost the effect of a continuence because you would ultimately this board would still want to see the market study and be comfortable with it. So maybe maybe it doesn't really get you there because it's not really an approval if we have an ultimate right to veto it. Yeah, I agree. I thought it was a condition for the You mean traffic study? Traffic study. Traffic study. Yeah, we'd still

I didn't know if you were saying, "Well, we're going to approve it, but the city council has to approve that." So, you're saying it would still have to come for you to see the traffic study. Yeah. At some point, the traffic study would have to be approved by this board and the next meet is a month from now. So, we might as well just continue it if that's really what we're going to do. I think I mean I can't procedurally it would put you in the same spot. feel that the traffic study is part of the recommendation that we're going to meet it to the record. So I feel that but wouldn't you make a decision based on that traffic study, Linda? No, but the board can. Board of alderman can. I think what I think the commission would like to I think there's members here on this commission that would also like to see the traffic study before making the recommendation.

That's right. Yeah. Just receiving a traffic study is what's in the conditions right now. Um and it's one thing to turn one over. It's another thing to like what is inside of it. And uh I agree. I'm proposing that we have to be comfortable with what's inside of it. If if if it was a condition based on what I'm proposing, it's the same thing as continuing though. So I think we either need to decide if we're voting tonight based on what we know today or if we're going to uh continue. And I think based on the order of operations Aaron proposed, we can vote first on approving. And if it doesn't pass, we could also vote to continue still. I believe

city attorney. Well, usually I would vote on the continuing first and then if that doesn't pass because usually if you vote to forward it and it doesn't pass, it does actually go onto the board with a negative recommendation. Okay. My concern with doing that procedurally is that's the safe answer. And uh you're likely going to get a pass and then we're going to push uh these nice gentlemen on to next month and I know they want an answer if they can get it tonight. It seemed like maybe the tax amendment.

Fortunately, I don't I mean you all have to do what you have to do, but I don't think we would have a traffic study completed by time for your next meeting. I mean if if I don't know how what what would be the deadline for us to submit it still have this heard uh in the May meeting.

I mean under the under the SUP um if if this were continued um I would say I'd have to have at least um maybe let's see the May 5th the next meeting is May 5th. Um, typically I like to have uh 10 days or two weeks to to review and to get it to any other staff that may need to review it. So, um, if I could have something by maybe the week of April 20th, if possible, maybe they could get We can try to do that, I guess.

Yeah, I I realize. Yeah. Um it is because it is something that that our that our uh public works director who is our our city's traffic engineer would would have to look at um and you know staff would have to review it. So if it I mean if what about and I this is but it's like a summary as opposed to the full-blown traffic study like a summary that this is going to have a negligible impact on on traffic or something like that. I think that's going to be it's going to be very close time wise, but I'm I'm just asking

I mean something you absolutely can can submit if you only have a summary and then that would be up to again up to the commission to to look at it, review and and see if they feel comfortable with the information provided summary. Recently we had a traffic study with no data and that was very frustrating from our perspective. it said, "Yep, we did a traffic study." That's really all it was. Yeah, but they didn't provide the data. So, I mean, yeah, I think I understand where you guys are coming from, but like just to say that we did a traffic study. No, it's not a matter I can still have a summary saying this is I don't know what they'd be and I we'll we'll see what we can do.

Okay. I will I will also note that what's weighing on this commission's mind, at least for me, I don't know how far you guys look down the agenda, but the next item is another hightra business on the other side of that intersection.

Mhm. And so, um, it's coincidence that they both came on the same night, but combined they put, at least me in the position of being really unsure what that, uh, is going to look like when we have both businesses up and running. And they both look like stellar businesses. I really don't want to in any way come across like we're discouraging uh, how much Fenton wants to be a good partner for our, you know, business community. It's just putting pressure on a at a spot where um it it feels like it could go badly if we don't have more information in my opinion. Uh I don't know that every commissioner feels that way. And I do think Commissioner Nelson did a good job of sort of arguing the opposite point that um you know this particular business may have traffic flow that's you know minimal and it does peak and valley at that spot. So um okay, we need to make a decision guys. Uh, so I, um, I can't tell if we should put it for a vote. I'm And I'm not the only one who can make motions. So, uh, isn't that right? I mean, anybody can make a motion.

Well, then I'd like to make a motion to continue it. Okay. We would just ask for I mean to table this. I I mean, I just from what I'm gleaning from this conversation is it it may not get approved right now. So, I would prefer to table it rather than than have it disapprove. Well, I will second the motion to continue. Um, okay. So, do I need to read any conditions at the moment or can we just say that we are moving to continue case 2026 SUP3 uh a petition by uh Seiko Auto Limited Partnership for a special use permit to operate an automobile commercial motor vehicle service facility at 470 South Highway Drive. Uh the property is owned BP3 business park district.

The only thing I could think is maybe upon further information. It doesn't have to be specific, but

yeah, I mean I think the Well, do we have to specify any conditions to that continuation? Yeah, I mean obviously you guys know what we want to see. Um the more detail the better. I'll just be honest. We want to understand specifically the impact to interstate access. I would say at, you know, peak times of rush hour. Um, particularly the morning, you know, everybody's kind of coming back from work and there's less pressure when they're coming uh on the westbound side of 44. Um, it's really going eastbound in the morning where I think we see the heaviest traffic. But I I suspect your traffic study will figure that out pretty quickly.

You're you're not limiting yourself to South Highway Drive, are you? because there's different access. There's Iran and there's South Eighway Drive. Yeah. You're saying you want to see all of it? Well, I think that would be I think that would help the cause. Yeah. Sure. Um I think that's right. Okay. So, uh so we've had a motion to continue. Seconded. Can we go ahead and do a roll call vote? Vice Chairperson Cheryl. I. Chairperson Yman. I. Secretary Abbott. Hi. Mayor Morath. Hi. Alderman Harold. Hi. Commissioner Westbrook. Hi. Commissioner Vorhees. Hi. Commissioner Nelson. I. Commissioner Vilicki. I.

Uh. The motion to continue is approved.

Okay. Thank you all very much for a thoughtful presentation and um you know, we'll hopefully have a really good discussion next month. You're welcome to hang around and listen to the next case. Um I will go ahead and read it into the record. It is case 2026 TXT2. A petition by Scanal Properties LLC to amend section 420.010 land use matrix of the zoning code to allow a truck terminal as a use allowed by special use permit in the BP2 business park district. Um similar to the to the previous um uh two cases, this case is um in in conjunction with um the following SUP that u 2026 SUP04. Um so this is a request to amend the land use matrix to allow a truck terminal as a use allowed by special use permit in the BP2 district. A truck terminal is defined as a facility where freight is unloaded from interstate trucks, interotal trailers, and shipping containers before being loaded onto local delivery trucks. Currently, truck terminals are a permitted use in IP1 and a use allowed by special use permit in CP1. According to the code, uh the purpose of the BP district, this is the district where the petitioner is requesting to add this use as an SUP. The purpose is to provide a mix of light a mix of office and light industrial uses with service and convenience uses in a business park setting. Uh the CP1 district um sorry the CP1 district the only other district where this use is currently allowed by SUP provides a similar purpose which is due to the district's location to Interstate 44. The purpose of the CP1 district is to provide a mix of office, retail, service, and convenience uses in a business park setting.

Okay. I think similar to the last petition, unless other ones or the last item, unless others feel differently, um it might be helpful in this case to hear a little bit about the business.

You bet. Um, so case 2026 SUP04, it's a petition by Scanel Properties LLC for a special use permit to operate a truck terminal at One Premier Drive. The property is zone BP2, Business Park District. Uh, the petitioner is also under contract to purchase this property, which is the current headquarters for Unigroup. Um, the petitioner plans to redevelop the lot with a new 231,000 square foot truck terminal. Um it is noted that this location is um actually two lots. So the redevelopment um in addition to um a special or site plan review to develop the lot, it will also require a boundary adjustment to consolidate those two lots. Um so according to the application, the package packages and parcels will unload from interstate trucks be placed on a conveyor system before being loaded onto local delivery vans for distribution. um they are proposing approximately 18 interstate trucks to deliver to the site per day. The petitioner has initiated a traffic impact study and has met with MDOT and city officials for a scoping meeting. Um so based on the data provided during that meeting um uh for the the traffic impact study neither the city's public works director who is the city's traffic engineer nor MDOT had any immediate traffic concerns based on what we were provided at that initial meeting. So once the traffic study is submitted to the city it will be re reviewed um comprehensively by the the city's public works director. access points to the lot um will be reduced from existing six access points. So there are currently two on Rudder and four on Fabic. It will be reduced to two points, one each on Rudder Road and Fabic. Um this will reduce conflict points along the existing roadways and help uh to better control traffic and site circulation. The site will provide sufficient internal parking, loading and

drive aisles to prevent stacking or queuing on adjacent roads. Uh the required parking which is a minimum of 153 spaces according to the plans will be exceeded u as the site offers 525 spaces. The site is adjacent to existing hotels to the west so that they are proposing to locate the dock doors um on the north and east elevations and are proposing a sound wall on the west side of the property for noise mitigation. A noise study's been commissioned uh for the proposed truck truck terminal and staff suggests that if the the um the noise study um suggests that um additional noise mitigation measures such as trees, shrubs, or other landscaping be provided for noise um control. Staff is also suggesting that if the public works director or community development director determine that additional traffic or noise mitigation measures are required in the future that the petitioner provide those measures as well.

Okay. Thank you. Any questions for Amy before we talk to the petitioners? Okay. Uh you guys heard the last conversation. I'm guessing you might know what we want to know about. I know a hot button item or two. So, um if you could state your name and address for the Absolutely. Uh Justin Alashik. Um our address for Scanel Properties LLC is 8801 River Crossing Boulevard in Indianapolis, Indiana. Um Amy, I don't know if you can pull up my presentation.

I can. And there is a remote on the um you should be able to control the slides um just by pushing the up and down buttons, but if it doesn't quite reach this, just let me know and I'm happy to uh to go through the slides for you. Perfect. Just point it directly at the this laptop. That should work.

Go. Um so just starting off with a brief company overview. Um, this is what isn't what we're here to talk about, but wanted to introduce you to Scanel Properties if you are not familiar. Um, we're a privately owned real estate and development investment company. Um, we are headquartered out of Indianapolis. Um, founded in 1990. Um, we've grown to over uh 10 uh US-based offices. We also do development uh across the pond over in Europe. Um over those 36 years um we've done over 615 projects over 175 or I'm sorry over 75 million square feet developed. Um one of the things we pride on is you know the majority of our business comes from repeat clients, repeat tenants who um are impressed by our product, impressed by the quality that we deliver and want to continue working with us. So, um Amy did a great job introducing this project. We're here one for the text amendment to um allow truck terminal uses um within the BP2 uh business park district as well as um the special use permit to operate said truck terminal um at the location of one Premier Drive in in the city. Um Amy did a great job of introducing the how this facility operate. you know, this will operate as a local distribution hub. Um, and I will kind of go into some of the the rationale behind, you know, why we're here and and why we are um requesting the techn and the special use on the next slide. Um but it is a a local parcel distribution facility um where we're taking trucks uh packages from trucks to local delivery vans um sorting them and and processing them through the facility before local delivery. Um proposed site you know it's

roughlyund or 4 527 automotive parking stalls. Um there are 53 trailer parking stalls. Um there'll be six tractor stalls where uh a semi cab could park if needed and 150 van staging parking stalls. Um as Amy mentioned, we'll have one access point off of both Rudder Road and Favic Drive. Um this will be an architectural pre-cast concrete structure facade um in compliance with the uh zoning code and and in uh continuity with adjacent uses. So why are approvals needed for this um this use here? Um so Amy had had defined the truck terminal um a facility where freight is unloaded from interstate trucks, interotal trailers and shipping containers before being loaded onto uh local delivery vehicles. Um this proposed use I would not call a standard truck terminal. Um when you think truck terminal, you think of the Estus freight that's directly across the street that was that is in within the CP1 district. Um this proposed facility shares a lot of the same criterion characteristics of a warehouse or a light industrial use as defined by the zoning code. However, um this facility will not store product within the the facility. So it did not meet the threshold for a warehouse and although they are processing packages and parcels through the facility they are not manufacturing these parcels here. So it did not meet the the definition of a light industrial use. So since the primary function of this facility is to take goods and uh product from a truck trailer to a local delivery van. Um it was deemed after meeting with

staff that this best fit the truck terminal definition um and therefore requires this text amendment and special use at this location. Um just pointing out a couple different um you know cover couple differentiators between what a a truck terminal classific classification sounds like versus how this operates. Um this facility interstate trucks are a small fraction of the total uh traffic volume here. Um we're uh anticipating through uh data provided by by our tenant that we will see roughly 18 semi-truckss a day. Um roughly one an hour um that bring the parcels and packages to the facility. Um and then they are uh load up at the dock and they are unloaded and uh parcels are uh distributed to the local delivery vehicles for local delivery. Um interotal trailers and shipping containers. That's something that you could take off a boat onto a tractor trailer and haul it to the facility. Um that's not utilized here. Shipping containers straight off a boat are not utilized at this facility. um differing from the the truck terminal classification. Um and also, you know, the the biggest differentiator, the the traditional definition of freight is is bulk products, pallets, um large distribution that that goes from truck to truck. Um that's not what goes through this facility. It is individual packages that are loaded onto a trailer, distri or uh unloaded by hand onto the conveyor system, processed, and loaded onto the the correct local delivery vehicle. Um so you're familiar with the location um of the uh Unigroup uh site um existing condition um office building.

Um there's over 900 uh passenger uh automotive stall or automotive parking spaces on the site in its existing condition. Um truck use is uh is currently um a part of the operation here for Unigroup. Um they they currently park um semis towards the south end of the property. Um tractor trailers are located on the east side off of uh Fabick. Um and historical areas have shown that they had previously parked trailers um along the western boundary uh adjacent to the uh the hotel uses. So this is a site that is used to seeing truck traffic um generation from the uh from the existing use. Um, so this is just a a conceptual rendering of our site layout. You can note our proposed drive location off of Rudder Road on the north end. Um, this uh access point will be used by uh the delivery vehicles for ingress and egress. Um, it's located in the same location of one of the existing cuts that the Unigroup site utilizes. Um, we also have our secondary cut down at the south end of the property off of Fabick. Um, this was where the uh semi-trailers will be entering and exiting um to uh deliver their load to the facility. Um, all of the uh pedestrian autos will also be entering from that south end. Um concept elevations are are provided. Again, uh architectural pre-cast concrete. Um we do have some renderings of how this would lay out on the site. Um you'll note it's it's difficult to see from the distance, but you'll note on this second page we have shown the recommended soundwall. Um the sound study for this facility has been

completed and the recommendation is to provide a 8-ft um soundwall along that um that uh western boundary um and that is to meet both uh required code as well as tenant um design goals uh for good neighbor practices. I will point out one other uh site consideration um that I didn't discuss previously. Um this facility has been laid out so that um we purposely put the truck trailers um facing away from the hotel uses to again mitigate any sound um generation from our proposed user here. One more rendering of what the building product look like. Um, I won't dwell on this one. Amy did a great job again explaining, but currently only available in the IP1 and CP2 district, um, which are located just north of I44. Um, you know, the the most, uh, important factor we have here is just the the call out that both of those districts have um, related to the proximity of I44. Um that is obviously in a an operation like this it interstate access is critical to reach the the national um uh distribution network the the interstates and um you know the the existing BP2 districts that the the city of Fenton does have um also meet the the criteria that they are located directly adjacent to I44. So, as we look at this text amendment um utilizing uh that that location proximity um as the the justification for the CP1 district, that does um hold true from our our our BP2 zoning.

Um, I already spoke to uh the the the uses and and just how these uh different um classifications within the code didn't specifically we we didn't fall in that bucket. Again, warehousing, we're not storing anything here. Um light industrial, we're not manufacturing. So, um Amy had mentioned uh we have commissioned a traffic study. Um we have uh received a a preliminary copy of that. Um we did meet with city staff um board of public or uh public works um and MDOT to uh discuss this proposed use and discuss the access to I44. Um no major concerns were um brought to the uh the no initial uh concerns were brought by MDOT um in terms of the access to and from I44. Um and we set the scope for the traffic impact study um after uh at the conclusion of that meeting. Um this was not provided as part of this um special use application um because it was not a requirement of the application. Um but we have acknowledged Amy's conditions that you know this will be provided. It's already in process. Um and we asked that it it it could be um reviewed and approved at a uh later site plan review um hearing. We would be also committing that any recommendations for improvements to the public roadway system would be incorporated as part of future site plan review. Um and uh uh the uh any recommendations would be addressed from that traffic impact study. Um just wanted to to quickly run through for the special use permits um addressing the the criteria listed in that permit. Um so it would be

designated, located and proposed to be operated in a manner that the public health, safety and general welfare will be protected. Um, as previously discussed, although tra uh classified as a truck terminal under city code, um, truck traffic represents only a small portion of the overall site activity here, um, with majority of the traffic being generated by local delivery vans. Um, the facility expects approximately 18 trucks a day, um, with one arriving every hour to be unloaded. Um, public safety would be enhanced through the reduction of the site access points uh, to the adjacent rideway. Um the six curb cuts would be reduced to two, eliminating those conflict points and improving the safety and function of public roadways. Um the proposed layout considers the adjacent hospitality uses by orienting the trucks truck docks away from the nearby hotels. Um additionally, the sound study was commissioned. It's been received and has recommended that an 8-ft sound wall be constructed along the western boundary to help provide additional sound mitigation. Um and obviously storm water will be collected and obtained and treated on site per um applicable code. Um this is a slide um to address the uh what the volume of traffic um is expected here when it's going to be accessing the site and um just providing the overall breakdown. So it it might be difficult to um to see it. it is small tech so I do apologize for that but um you'll know uh there's going to be multiple um times of day where you'll see shift changes and um the dispatch of any uh local delivery vehicles. Um so this would be a a two-shift operation for employees that remain at the facility um throughout the

the entirety of their shift. Um the uh the first employees would uh the first shift would start between um 2 and 4 a.m. Uh with the the first uh round of employees um coming there between 2 and 3. Um the balance uh coming to the facility between 3:00 and 4:00 a.m. That shift would end uh between uh 10 and 11 a.m. and and 11 12 or 11 and noon. Um that would be the the first um dispatch or of the employees accessing the site. Yes. Um I will try and do it slower. No, I wasn't paying attention. I I got you. It'd be me.

I gotcha. So, the uh employees that will remain at the facility throughout the duration of their shifts um would start accessing the site at um 2:00 a.m. Between 2:00 a.m. and 3:00 a.m. is the first arrival of that first shift. Um with the balance of the the first shift, employees coming to the facility between 3:00 and 4:00 a.m. Um they would be leaving the facility uh between 10:00 a.m. and 11:00 a.m. at the end of their shifts. um with you know the the the second grouping of that first shift leaving between 11:00 a.m. and noon. Um the next shift would then start um folks would start arriving at 100 p.m. between 1 and 2:00 p.m. Um and again another half of that shift arriving between 2 and 3 p.m. Um so that that is workers that are physically at the facility for the duration. Um, you will also have a second round of uh employees or uh workers who are arriving um between your your typical 7 and 8:00 uh a.m. time frame. Those are going to be the local van drivers who um park at the facility, pick up their loaded van, and depart the facility half hour after arrival. And that is going to be the operation that does overlap more with the peak traffic conditions as traditionally defined by the traffic impact study. Um the uh the time frame that was used um with the Lock Mueller traffic impact study peak was defined between 7:15 a.m. and 8:15 uh a.m. uh for the AM and it was oh man 4:15 to 5:15 p.m. uh were those peak hours that um that were you know the the most concerning for the traffic flow. Um the benefit we have here is

again the the local staff that are at the facility are missing that peak and the only major generator during that time is going to be the uh local delivery vans. Um this chart also has the uh the uh linehaul tractor um arrivals. Again you can see it's roughly one per hour. Um and again those will sit on site for you know roughly two hours for those parcels to be unloaded and uh distributed and then we'll um either drop a trailer an empty trailer and just the cab will be moving or we'll take the the full uh assembly back to the the regional distribution hub to again get get additional packages to uh to bring to this facility or others in the area. So the visual compatibility of surrounding land uses, building height for materials landscaping um will maintain full compliance with city zoning code. Um will be below the max building height. Um this fill will not exceed 45 ft uh below the the 50ft maximum. Pre-cast concrete panel um will meet all the the front side and rear setbacks um as needed by code. Um our principal lot or principal building lot cover is only 15.2% well below the maximum of 65. Um and all required landscaping buffer areas uh provided per code requirement. Um in terms of ex accessibility again I44 is is critical to this operation. We have uh uh very short access uh off of I44 with the existing onoff ramp. Um and we are currently studying the traffic impacts uh traffic impact of this facility and are happy to provide that traffic impact study with our site plan application. Um we're we're protecting the adjacent roadways by ensuring that the the the

fenced in yard uh has adequate stacking space for both vans and trucks. Um prevent queuing on the public streets. Uh the reduction of the access points. Um the existing use here does uh accommodate tractor trailer traffic without issue. Um will will provide uh full access to all fire protection, refuge collection, municipal services, etc. Um and off- streetet parking meets the requirements of the city code as well as incorporates the tenant feedback for um total employment at this facility. um will not substantially injure the value of adjacent lots um due to this being in a a district that already has uh surrounding light industrial and warehousing uses. Um and also we have already considered the uh hospitality neighbors we have with the sound study and the orientation of the docks. Um and we'll conform to all uh regular or all applicable regulations of the zoning district in which it's located. With that, I will turn it back over to you. Apologies for if that was long-winded, but uh happy to answer any questions.

Sure. Thank you. Um I do have a few questions. So, uh, westbound or any of the service vehicles, be it either local delivery or large tractor trailers who are wanting to access Interstate 44 westbound. Um, is there an intended sort of path that they will follow to get there?

So, westbound, they do have one of two options. Um the first is to to go east um and wrap around adjacent to the soccer fields, get on the north side of I44 and follow the frontage road to to access um I44. There also is the option for them to um turn left out of the facility um off of Fabick onto Rudder, route their way through the existing industrial park and utilize the onoff ramp that is further to the west of this facility.

Right. Okay. And is there anything in your traffic uh study that you've seen thus far that sort of either makes a recommendation or presents sort of a clear preferred option between those two? They we do not um we do not. So the um the scope that we got from MDOT um we did not extend outside of the uh existing onoff ramp that's 500 ft from the property and all the proposed act existing and proposed access points. So um intersections that are outside of that area um were not studied with the initial report um just simply because it wasn't requested when we had the scope meeting.

Okay. But there was nothing that indicated that westbound traffic would put any sort of undue stress by traveling through the intersection if they took the lefthand turn and went down rudder.

No. So I can provide some feedback on that existing um signalized intersection there um that uh per our initial uh traffic impact study in its existing condition. It operates at a level of service uh a and a or b um depending upon the movement which is as good as you can ask for um for a existing intersection. Um you know I know there was a comment about if there is an accident on I44 that is obviously a uh you know not a typical occurrence not a daily occurrence and that is going to cause uncontrolled traffic issues that that no matter what what is proposed will not mitigate. Um, but that intersection does operate very well in its existing condition.

Yes. Sorry. I think the locals are questioning whether there may be a daily accident on 44. Feels that way sometimes. No comment. Um, I uh I have a question too that you may or may not have the answer to. Um, you noted that there are over is it 900 parking spaces for unitroup currently? Currently, yes. Do we have a sense for how much of that is getting utilized um relative to the 500 and almost 600 spaces I think you're planning for?

You know, we uh we visited the site multiple times. Um I I can certainly say it's it's not fully utilized. Um I can Amy, you look like you might want to. Yeah, based on um the business license applications that we get yearly, um they used to operate and and house about a thousand employees per per day. Um they're down to less than 300. Okay. But there was a point in time where they had a volume of traffic that Yeah. It was exceeds what's posed here in some respects, right? And uh yes, absolutely. Mhm. Okay. I don't know if I lived here. Was that before 2013?

Okay. All right. Fair enough. Um other questions I I have always have questions. Yes. Amy, uh Unigroup was under what use on our matrix? Um, looking at the file, um, it is a an office use. All the the office I'm just curious. Um, I could never figure that out. I I don't know that they really operated as a truck terminal. I know they had truck sales and storage, but not so much a terminal.

They did. I mean I they have been in the city for long decades. Um so how they were approved, what the code was like at the at the time that they were approved. Whether it allowed those sales, I'm not sure. But yeah, looking at them, they were all approved as as offices. Those parchment papers are gone. So are you at Liberty? Who is the uh company? Um so I am under NDA. Um I I cannot disclose. Um, I can offer some generalities. It's a Fortune50 company who has facilities across the nation. Um, when I say they deliver parcels and packages, that certainly narrows down the list.

I had to ask. I I I I appreciate that, mayor. All right. So, uh, a couple more questions if I may. Terminal. This is a truck terminal for tractor trailers and you mentioned there's going to be 18 a day. So that is the quirk in the code. Um it is defined as a truck terminal because it operates as transfer of goods from a truck to another vehicle without storage at the facility. I understand. So, so it is a truck terminal by use, but I would consider it a distribution facility.

Okay. And I understand that. So, you're saying there's going to be 18 tractor trailers in and out a day. Correct. How many vans will pick up those? Do you have that?

Yes, that was listed here. Wrote it down. Um, it is 256 vans uh per day. That's a lot of in and in-n-outs and and that is so um that was one of the things that was uh listed on the the traffic distribution. Um it is it's essentially it is a release over 3 hours in the morning and then those vans slowly come back to the facility throughout the day. So it's not you're not having times where you're going in and out in and out. I think your traffic study will address that. Yes. Okay.

Yeah. How many employees will you have? Uh roughly 400. 400. Um I'm good for right now.

Yeah. I I think one thing I want to point out, and it's just cuz I've personally experienced it, the westbound route that would be a right-hand turn ultimately requires another left to go under the interstate. Tractor trailers do not do great at that lefthand turn. Um, and I don't know if that's something that the city is looking to address, mayor, but um it might be something we have to get the uh mod involved with, but a lefthand turn from those trucks to try and get westbound right there under the interstate. I I usually find myself having to back up. Are you Where are you talking? What's that?

Where are you talking? So, right where um the soccer park is, if they're coming, if the trucks are turning right out of this facility, going in front of Fabic and then needing to go left to get under the interstate, it's that lefthand turn right there where they tend to want to cut off anybody who's traveling southbound on the river road because they're just, you know, of the angles of the truck and how much room they have or or they end up going off the road to try and give themselves more space. So, it's not it's not ideal. I don't know how many trucks are going to go that way, but um it's not a great intersection for semis.

Yep. I I I can't kind of speak to the distribution. It will be roughly 50/50 in terms of who wants to go westbound and who wants to go eastbound.

Yep. Okay. And then, of course, the issue with anybody coming down rudder is that it does put more pressure on that intersection. anybody who wants to take a left coming eastbound, it's a yielded left. There's no dedicated arrow there. So, um if there ends up being a lot of traffic coming uh down rudder, that will be difficult for people who are trying to turn left, which is all the residential and other BP uh traffic trying to get to the interstate that way. So, um I'm sure your traffic study will address that. Um, okay. So, other questions? We have We have to do the same sort of routine here. Go ahead, Ron.

Yeah, I just had a question. You mentioned the hours start at 2 a.m. U, but I never heard a close time. What What time in the evening do they go? It It does have the potential to be a 247 operation. Okay. How many days a week? Seven days a week. Thank you. And for the record, you're going to raise the existing building and build this new one. That is correct. I just I know several people have asked what was going on there. And I didn't know if I heard all that. So your renderings here show I guess detention areas. So you've met with MSD and

we have not made the application to MSD. These are are designed per code um using Stocken Associates. Um, so we we need to get to that level where where we'll start the the technical review here.

That is correct. So that that was a major consideration. Um, this area is outside of the flood zone, which is a a major positive. Um, but that was one of the items we did discuss when it we we when it comes to access because if that area down there floods and somebody wants to go westbound, where is the alternate route? We do have another option here. Yeah, there's nothing that saves traffic around here when the river floods. Uh, Nikki, uh, Amy, have you had any inquiries or concerns with any of the local businesses in the area? I've had none.

Okay. I will note that the BP2 is a much smaller district than the BP3. So permitting a truck terminal in that district will I think if I'm reading this correctly only impact this parcel uh is it Fabic and Stratford? No. Um Stratford's further to the Yeah, this is a Stratford here. It would be these um parcels here on North Highway Drive. Okay. Fabic, the current Unigroup, and then this uh parcel here. Um Okay.

Which is the former rug doctor building, if that makes sense to you. Are you under any time constraints to finish your traffic study if this were to be continued?

I would feel better if it was not. Um we we do have uh a satisfaction notice uh next month um to uh uh give notice on the property that we we be moving to close. Um so it would would be appreciated if if it could be heard knowing that we are currently conducting a traffic impact study and and we'll be providing that for uh public works approval um with the site plan review. Um but we do understand if if the board the commission is not comfortable and wants to have more of that traffic impact study um we will be coming back next month site plan review. Yeah they have submitted for site plan review for May.

Okay. Um I mean are there other questions? You look like you might want to talk. Commissioner Nelson. Okay. I Okay. It's really tough. I mean, it could be that the traffic study comes back really clean and we're wasting everybody's time for a month, but I just feel challenged personally to have vote in the absence of something that's more data driven that tells me it's going to be okay. That's my personal feelings on it. You're welcome to put it in the record. Everybody in the same fashion as before has a right to vote however they deem fit based on the information provided. Uh I think similar to what we did before, we can go ahead and vote on the text amendment first. Uh so I will go ahead and move for approval on uh case 2026 TXT2, a petition by Scanal Properties LLC to amend section 420.010 010 land use matrix of the zoning code to allow a truck terminal as a use allowed by a special use permit. Actually, before I submit this to a vote, does anyone want to move to continue the text amendment? Now, now is your chance. Okay. So, I'll move forward with the motion as read into the record. Can I get a second? Commissioner Nelson seconds. Can we do a roll call vote?

Chairperson Yman, for the same reason I stated before, I don't want to expand the code without more information on traffic. It's a nay. Commissioner Nelson, I. Vice Chairperson Cheryl, I. Secretary Abbott, I. Mayor Morath, I. Alderman Harrell, I. Commissioner Whisprock, I Commissioner Vorhees, I

Commissioner Bilig, motion approved. Okay. So, with that approval, we have uh the SUP request um which uh we can move to continue uh seeking more information on traffic or if uh we did get a good amount of information. Thank you for that. On the traffic flow. So, if others feel like uh further information is unwarranted, then um or if you have more questions about what we're going to receive before you vote, you're welcome to take the floor. Anybody need anything? No. Okay. Um, does anyone want to make a motion to continue?

Okay. Would you So, de uh Secretary Abbott formally moves to continue uh case 2026 SU4 on the expectation that we would wait for the market study, traffic study. I'm sorry, I keep saying market study. I have a commercial real estate background. I look at market studies all the time. It's just in my vernacular. A traffic study. Thank you. Yes, definitely need that information because with uh the case previous busy there, but that's fine. It's that's a good thing. Okay. So, we have a motion. I will second that motion. So, can we go ahead and do a roll call vote on the motion to continue?

Secretary Abbott I. Chairperson Yman. I. Vice Chairperson Cheryl. Hi, Mayor Morath. Hi, Alderman Harrell. Hi, Commissioner Whisprock. Hi, Commissioner Vorhees. Hi, Commissioner Nelson. Nay, Commissioner Bilicki. Motion approved. Okay. Well, thank you very much. Uh hopefully uh the graphic study will reveal that there are no issues. It's a it's a wellthoughtout plan. Totally understand what you're wanting to do. Excited that you want to bring your business to Fenton. Um we're just trying to understand the impact. So thank you for that. We'll see you next month.

Okay. Thank you. All right. Um last we have case 2026 TXT3 consideration of amendments to section 400.030 030 definitions of the zoning code to add the term data center and clarify existing terms related to the same Amy.

All right. I want to preface this by saying that the city has not been approached by any data centers any data center developers. This is a staff initiated request. Um so with the rapid growth of data centers making the news, we have been kind of keeping our finger on the pulse. We've been doing some research and we've noted that there are some unique impacts um associated with data centers, specifically strain on power grids and infrastructure effects on water resources, pollution concerns, noise concerns. Um and what we've been seeing is without clear definitions, developers and cities are relying on broad commercial and industrial uses um which creates uncertainty about zoning compliance. So staff is requesting amendments to the code to one define data centers and then two to clarify that certain existing terms that we already have in our zoning code do not include data centers. So what staff is not asking to do is we are not asking to add data centers to the land use matrix um as either a permitted use or a use allowed by special use permit. In fact, our code already says that any use not specifically listed in the land use matrix is prohibited. So data centers by not being included in the land use matrix are already not prohibited. The purpose of the text amendment is to avoid uncertainty and mclassification by proactively defining data centers um and distinguishing them from existing commercial, industrial and warehouse uses and to clarify that those existing industrial uh commercial and warehouse uses are not considered data centers. So here's the definition that we are proposing for the data center which is a facility used primarily for the storage, management, processing and/or transmission of digital data or cryptocurrency that typically cons, network equipment, systems, servers, appliances and other accessory components necessary for digital data operations and may also include air

handlers, power generators, water cooling and storage facilities, utility substations, and other associated utility infrastructure to support the oper operation. This term includes server farms, telecom hotels, teleah house colllocation or any other term applicable to facilities that are used for such purpose but does not include facilities in which data storage, management, processing and/or transmission is incidental to the principal use. So we're saying that if you have a server room in your office building, we're not considering that a data center. So um we're also proposing to amend the following terms. financial institution, heavy industrial, light industrial, research center and warehouse to specifically state that they do not include data centers. So we are clarifying those uses are not data centers because we are defining data center as this thing here. And again we are not adding it to our land use matrix. So we're not adding it as a per permitted use. It's not a use allowed by special use permit. We are making some changes to to clarify our zoning code. Thank you, Amy.

We We need to clarify. We need to eliminate a not and the city attorney will when you were describing the matrix, you said because if it wasn't allowed, it was not prohibited. But because it wasn't allowed, it is prohibited. If it is I just want the record to reflect that. Thank you. So that there's no mis no miscommunication. I don't know if anybody else caught that, but I did. Okay. Thank you.

Um, you've been stellar tonight, Amy. Thank you. And I I want to compliment the uh city on taking a proactive approach on this. I I saw it come through and at first I was like, "Oh god, I hope someone's not asking for a data center." And then I read it and I saw what was happening and I think you guys are doing a great job. There has been a lot of negative press about the impact of data centers on uh you know the local grid and residents complaining because their utility bills go up as a result of it. And I can see why uh the city would have a real concern uh should something like this come along. It doesn't mean we can't I mean I'm sure if somebody really wants to put a data center in Fenton they'll do the same thing we saw tonight. they'll ask to amend the code, but at least we'll have taken a proactive approach and a very clear stance uh that it's not currently allowed. So, and if I may, for the record, uh you know, I'm not I'm not for or against I don't know enough at this point to understand it. So,

Sure. I'm neither. Don't don't make it vague. Yep. That's at least what we're doing. Yeah. Uh does anybody else have any questions or comments? Okay. And I'll go ahead and uh move for approval of case 2026 uh TXT3 consideration of amendments to section 400.030 definitions of the zoning code to add the term data center and clarify existing terms related to the same. Uh can I get a second? I have a second. Um can we do a roll call vote? Chairperson Yman I. Commissioner Vorhees I. Vice Chairperson Cheryl. Hi, Secretary Abbott. I, Mayor Morath, hi. Alderman Harrell, I. Commissioner Whisper,

I. Commissioner Nelson, I. Commissioner Bilicki. Motion approved. Great. Thank you. Okay, that takes us to the end of new business. Um, uh, we have announcements now. So, first, our report from the community development department. Um, we have received two new petitions for the May meeting. One of them being the site plan review for the uh proposed truck terminal. Um so that will be coming to you in May and then the continued cases again will be on the agenda as well.

Okay. Uh next is a report from the chairperson. Uh I don't have anything special to report. I just want to thank everyone for thoughtful uh discussion tonight. Um and I you know I hope we made the right decisions. I'm sensitive to the fact that these uh traffic studies, if I can call them the right thing, traffic studies, uh they may come back very clean and I will personally feel a little bad if we uh asked folks to incur extra cost and time um as a result, but I feel comfortable then that we'll have had a little bit more of a record for making a decision. And um I don't know, at least for me, that's important. Uh but grateful for everyone talking through it tonight. question about a traffic center. So, do they do this for 30 days in a row or do they pick Monday one week and Tuesday the next week and Thursday the next week? I mean, we're only giving them basically two weeks to do a traffic stud. And in my mind, traffic is so seasonal day by day. I mean, we just got done with spring breaks and you could tell the traffic was lighter because the schools were in session. So, I'm curious as to how a traffic study is done. If you know, Amy,

I mean, I think it it really depends on the specific um use um that they will look at what is an appropriate amount of time to to do the study. Um, I think that, you know, a truck terminal is going to have a a way different um uh impact than than the auto automobile um service facility. So, I think I think they're going to probably I mean, they'll have their engineers look at the at the uses um and what is appropriate. I know that the um the truck terminal has already begun their traffic study um and the uh automobile uh facility will will need to begin theirs. Um they may have some information already started u because it was something that we discussed when we had our initial conversation, but I think it's going to depend on on the engineers determination of what is an appropriate amount of time.

I I know in the past um some of the traffic studies rely on MDOT numbers. They have them periodically. Um, I'm sure that's what they're going to rely on as well. And as uh Amy said, the Scanel, they've started their traffic study already, so they're kind of ahead of the game. But I know that they do kind of take MDOT's uh numbers. MODOT does it periodically and that I think they have a better system of doing that like counts on the outer road that's theirs and on the highway at least that that's how it was counted.

You heard them say that scoping meeting pretty much every time a traffic engineer will have what is called a scoping meeting before they start and there'll be different parties within it. If the city requires a lot of times it requires city to be the party of it because that scoping meeting is really what is setting the parameters of what they have to look at and that's going to look at you have to look at this road you have to include this road you need to look at Monday through Friday these are the peak times and then the company will also set forth kind of what they expect there's also the national traffic that will actually have standards of how much a typical terminal will use and they'll use that and compare it as well with data and then as he said they'll get data from mod as well and kind of put that Um, glad you're bringing this up because I'm also curious, Amy. Uh, I for one, I don't know if everybody would want this, but I'd like to see the full traffic study. I know we'd normally get summaries from the city. Um, in the case of when this comes back, I would be very open to actually having if it if especially if there's an electronic version you can just attach to an email. I'd like to see the full traffic study. Um,

yeah, it really depends on what they what they provide for us. Um, sure. Okay. But Sure. I I do anticipate Scanel um giving us a full traffic study. Um, especially since it's something that we would like our public works director to review. Okay, great. I don't know if others want to see that, too. I guess if you're able to easily attach it to an email, but everyone can choose how much they want to review it. So, um, and we'll trust that you'll provide a summary of the city's conclusions either way. Yeah. Great. Okay. Uh, thank you, Commissioner Nelson. I really appreciate your input on these matters because I think you raised some really good points.

Know when we did the library one, where the library ended up is not in the city of Fenton, but as far as traffic goes is very much impacted. I see. Gotcha. Yeah. You know, it's a fair point. Just because the stud is done doesn't mean that it's the perfect sort of uh you know silver bullet to fix all problems but it's it's another it's another piece of information and don't forget who pays for that. I know I was here that traffic study. Okay. Uh I am done with my report. So next is the report from the mayor.

Not a lot to report. Uh but I do want to commend our staff. this uh this agenda was uh was a little hairy, if you will. I mean, a lot of concerns. I had concerns. I know staff's done a lot of work, and I have to commend this commission because I didn't think it would go as smooth as it did. But I do want to say that, Mr. Chairman, I do respect your your no vote. I totally agree with you, but understand as a recommending body. We also rely on the board of alderman to review what you have and I know that they do take that very heavily your your concerns and so forth. So, you know, your due diligence really helps the board.

Well, I appreciate that. And yeah, thank you. That's true. uh say he never speaks into his mic so I couldn't hear that. Any uh any other uh thoughts, Mayor? Uh that's it. Thank you. Okay. Uh next our report from the planning and zoning liaison. Uh well, we just relived uh St. Louis Marble tonight and I brought my wrong notes. So Amy, am I forgetting? Other than St. Louis Marble. What did we

Yeah, we uh you did deny uh you upheld the the commission's um recommendation to deny the special use permit to reduce the parking. So that was um uh I guess they yeah denied by ordinance. Um and then the the STL marble um site plan review was came forward as a continuation. Okay, that's all. Gotcha. And Ron, I uh apologize. I think you ran uncontested, but I believe you uh you did win the election and you are now uh our alderman for another term. Correct. Congrat congratulations. That is so Thank you.

All right. Um wonderful. And then uh next we have our report from other commissioners. Anyone? Okay. Our next planning and zoning meeting is Tuesday, May 5th, 2026 at 7 p.m. at city hall. Uh, with that, I'll go ahead and move that we adjourn. Can I get a second? Second. All in favor? I I. Any opposed? Meetings adjourned. Thank you.

That whisper. I was looking down.

What about that stretch of highway? The most unpredictable area. tax.

Thank you. All right. Okay. Somebody call your kids. Yeah. Is it I will.