Planning & Community Design Commission - Regular Meeting

Okay. All right. Okay. We'll start tonight's city of Alvet Planning Community Design Commission for January 15, 2026 to order. Um, Miss Miss Secretary, would you please call the role? Certainly. Robert Jurgiel, present. Petri Powell, present. JennaNat, any word on no absent? Tim Spagel Glass, present. Sam Wallet present. Felicia Ford. Laura Ragdale present. Tim, you're so far away. If you want, you can move over if you

let it also be be known that our city council leaison council member Brian Lewis is in attendance as well as staff liaison Carlos Tjo uh Olvette's uh uh director of planning community development department Dawn Dodie senior planner as well as Jack Carswwell planning and zoning administrator. Uh we thank you for being in attendance and uh just for those who haven't been I feel like I have some familiar faces but uh we follow the agenda kind of item by item. We do have a time for public comments in the very beginning. These are related to items that are not on the agenda. U um and if you have uh something that you would like to talk about that's not on the agenda um and when we get to it just please raise your hand and we'll ask you up to the podium at that point in time. Uh we do ask anybody who comes to the podium to make sure that they state their name and address for the record. Um and we do ask that uh the comments uh public comments be limited to no more than three minutes. Just be respectful of everybody's time and make sure everybody's opinions get heard. Um it doesn't look like we have a big crowd, but sometimes we do. So it's it's kind of important in that regard. So thanks everybody. Um Carlos, do we have anybody online? You said we do have a few. Um, I believe there there are a couple of people online. I believe they represent uh one of the agenda items 1000 Len Lane.

Okay. And uh we'll bring them in once we uh we get to the that agenda item. Okay. I saw

I see Colleen Studios and and Paul Mertz. So if you guys can hold off, we'll get there in a couple minutes. if they have a public comment that they would like, you know, we would ask you to uh uh to when we come to it to make sure you raise your hand and then we can bring you on to the panelist. U anybody who is online and you are brought on to the panel u we do ask you to uh make sure that your uh uh your video is on as well as your microphone is on. By default, most of the times those are muted and with no uh video. Um, and uh, it'll help speed things up if you're already looking for, you know, how to turn those on. So, all right, Carlos, anything else? No, chairman. And I will open up the uh,

any announcements, Carlos. Uh, no, no, no. Uh, no. Uh, no announcements. Good, good, good. Okay, good. Any public comments? Remember, these aren't for the items on the agenda. And I will tell you if you do have a comment on the agenda, we just to let you know, we go through the petitions. We typically speak uh staff first. They go through their reports. We ask questions and have answers back and forth. Typically bring on the petitioner um you know to help answer questions and then at that point in time for that particular agenda item, we ask for public comments. So sorry about missing that earlier. Jack, you should have reminded me.

All right. Good, good, good. So, thanks everybody. Since there's no public comments, we'll move on. And what we're going to do is we're going to jump around a little bit. We're going to bypass old business and uh jump right to new business. U especially for the the people who are in attendance. It'll help uh get, you know, so you don't have to wait around as much. Okay. So, Carlos, we'll start with new business item a 1000. Luwell and lay Jack. Good evening, commission. So, before you tonight is 1000 Llewellen Lane. It is a residential addition which includes a garage, a screen porch, and two flatwork patios. Um, this item was actually before you guys or not before you, sorry, but before the board of adjustment in fe on February 13th in 2025 to seek a variance um a setback variance to permit the garage addition within 6 ft of the southwest property line. So the code in which the code required 11.23 ft. Um since the board's approval, the project has been modified with additional pro improvements subject to the additional code criteria which is including that engineered storm water detention and the tree preservation and replacement standards per the ordinance 2821. Um when the item was presented before the board that one of the hardships that was discussed was one of the large existing trees that is in the back of the property. Um what was stated as the hardship was rel related to the root structure and that how the moving of the garage to the rear would affect the tree and be in that uh general vicinity of it. It it was stated it would be underneath the drip line. So that was partial um was part of the hardship that they had. However, there was no information provided from the petitioners regarding the current condition of the tree or what proposed protection is going to be used for that tree. So with the concerns from staff, the only thing that really stood out was the the tree preservation information

just because no information was required or was provided and but it is required per the ordinance. And that ordinance states that any addition over 1,200 ft is required to have the arborist report, the tree inventory, and the TPRP, which is the tree protection and replacement plant. Um, I will note when Carlos and I did a site visit, there are some trees that have already been recently planted on the lot. Um, those do not fit the minimum standards. They are below by by my understanding below the 4 in. So, that's why they probably are not represented. However, I would like um the petitioner to speak on that because we have the lack of the tree information for me to really conduct an concise and comprehensive tree review to figure out, you know, how many trees would be necessary on the lot and so on. just due to the lack of that information, it was hard for us to conduct a quality review for that. Um, in regards to the square footage, the proposed garage is going up to 672 ft. The screen room is 215. Patio is 275.8, which is the one that is to the far left of the screen room. And then the patio on the right is uh 275.2 ft. Um, there were no concerns with staff related to um the concept storm water management review. They uh have to have an engineered system and they've decided to provide rain barrels that are attached to the downspouts. Um they are going to have two 150galon barrels and three 50gallon barrels. The 50-gallon barrels are attached to the newer proposed improvements. The existing or no sorry the 150galon barrels are attached to the far ed left of the home because the home was built in 1957 and there was no required detention at the time. So when and the improvements that they've had from 1957 to now, none of that ever triggered the storm water detention to be put into place. So the engineers have calculated this to actually encompass the the whole roof

area of the home and the additional um smaller barrels will do uh capture everything generated from the roof area of those improvements. Um just regarding to the community design guidelines, the only thing that stuck out was again the tree preservation just due to the lack of the information and that um staff conducted the on-site visits with the multiple trees that were planted recently on the lot and that we would be seeking an updated plan as part of the conditions of approval because they have something indicated on their site plan with X's through the circles of the trees. There's no notation provided on there. Every tree that is orange circle is the unclear notation and everything with green is the one that is supposed to be protected, but we don't know specifically because we haven't gotten an inventory plan of what's staying and what's going and if there is anything going. I'm under the impression there's nothing being removed, but we just want to make sure that we have all of that clear before we go down the building permit process.

Have you talked to the petitioner already about I spoke to the petitioner. I let the petitioner know that this is part of the requirements. They chose to not provide it. So I told them that they are able to approach the commission and have the conversation regarding that. Um any uh additional components? Carlos, is there another slide after that? I'm sorry. Okay. No. Then other than that, I can answer any other questions with staff as well as uh the petitioners online and the homeowners are present too. Okay. Great. Thank you. Any questions for Jen? All right, seeing none, we'll bring on Thank you.

Yeah, and please remember to state your name and my name is Pepin Lee. I live at 1000 Lala. Great. Um, we've been Could you kind of help go through some of the issues with the, you know, that were brought up by staff?

Certainly. Yeah. I was approached by my architect and civil engineer uh last week um regarding this new ordinance that was passed well after we had begun the the um the work to design the art the garage worked through the storm water detention. Um, you know, I looked to see whether, you know, what it would take to accomplish that survey and found there's a lot of questions that were that aren't answered that that have substantial financial cost to me. Um, and so I wasn't able to um determine get those answers in time for this evening's meeting. Um the questions the main question primary questions I have um I did speak to to a licensed arborist and got an idea of the cost. Um but that would require consent by all of the neighbors adjacent to my property for the arborist to enter their private property. Um, and I'm the ordinance states that the survey has to be done and the catalog has to be done on trees within 25 ft of my property line. It doesn't state which side of the property line. So, the engineer and the architect and I were under the impression that it was outside of our property. Is that not the case? This is this this law is very unclear and and and extraordinarily difficult to understand what I'm supposed to deliver.

Yeah. Well, the intent is not to make things unclear. So, you know, we apologize for that. Um Jack, I believe it's within the property, right? Yeah. So, it's not outside the property and I wouldn't think you would need to get permission from neighbors to do that. So, we we'll take a look at that, but I think does that help give you any So, so the ordinance says within 25 ft of the property line, but that means within 25 ft on my side of the property line. Can you guys answer that question? Because I don't have that specific because I thought it was everything on the property.

It's not clear. And so, that makes it very difficult for me to comply with the ordinance when it when it's not clear. Absolutely. Um because I also have public a city park adjacent to my property and it was unclear whether I had to pay to have a survey on the city. So I think the intent is just for you to survey the trees that are on your lot and it's written incorrectly. We we'll we need to address that. But I can assure you that based on seeing nods with everybody that it's only your property.

Okay. So when I approached this board of adjustment last year, I stated my intent was to protect the tree. The tree that was that could be pro could be damaged by this construction was more important to me than the garage. Uh when I first spoke to Mr. trail in the summer of 2024. Uh he stated that he his job was to get me to not do the variance and he presented a drawing that had the garage under the drip line of the tree which obviously wouldn't pass ordinance. Now um so my request given the uncertainty and the lack of clarity of this law is for a variance when you know I've stated very clearly why I you know the purpose of my variance was to on the on the property line was to protect the tree. There's only one tree within the immediate area of the construction. It's clearly stated that I'm going to protect the tree. Um, obviously I would protect any other tree in the in the on my property. Those are more important to me than the construction. Um, so but I was confused on this with this law and so I wasn't able to pro provide the uh get a quote and provide the report.

Right. Right. So your intent is not to take down any trees. I do not plan to take any trees down. Correct. Okay. And and further the rain barrels. The reason why we went with the rain barrels was there was no way that we could get a flow well and the trenches in our yard that wouldn't put trees at risk. It would go through the roots. So, we we had the uh the drawings revised and the the city engineer and civil engineer worked with the Missouri Botanical Garden to determine where we could put rain barrels to comply with the storm water runoff requirements. Very, good. Good. Good. And protect my trees.

Yes. Yes. That's good. That's good. Well, I'm not sure how everybody else feels on this or if anybody else has any questions um or has any strong opinions on the trees, whether we want to uh require that uh or go ahead, Jack. I just think from staff, we just want to see what protection measures are going to be used on exist. Yeah. Because they don't have anything regarding if they're doing tree protection fencing or something in there. We would just want to see them.

Okay. So, and and the tree protection fencing that's in this ordinance was clear and reasonable. So, if we added to the plan that that was we would put that and I would be put that against any tree that was deemed appropriate. I I want to protect the trees. So, putting a fence around helps verify that that's what I'm after. I have no no quarrel with that. That would certainly I want that done any certainly. I have I would want that. So, I have no problem with that. Good. Good. Good.

Okay. Um I I think from my point of view, I I'm I'm a I'm good with that, but how's everybody else feel? I think everybody else is nodding. We appreciate you trying to save the trees and doing what you can. So, I appreciate the intent of the of the ordinance to keep keep green. We'll look at that just to verify that it's it's clear. And if Jack, if you could check that out and if you have any questions, maybe give them a call just to verify because it's always a good way to double check. You know, sometimes when we get we might be too in the in the weeds with it. You know, it's clear to us, but it's because we're the ones that are kind of putting it together.

I read the ordinance when it was came through the city council agenda, but I think I read it with the same eyes. You know, I understood the intent of the ordinance to protect trees, and I thought that was great. Uh I didn't read it from a being, you know, requiring requiring to meet the law. So, Right. Right. No, it's it's it's good to put, you know, to see it from the other side. So, thank you very much. Okay. So, what are my next steps? I'm sorry.

Um, well, we have to, you know, see if there's any public comments, you know, um I don't think there's any more questions uh from the council you or from the the board here, you know, from you. Um, so we'll ask for public comments. Um, and then we'll have some dis more discussion and then take a vote on it and then if that's if it passes, then Carlos and Jack will be able to kind of help you through the next steps. Thank you very much. Thank you, Chairman. One second before Mr. Finley steps on because you do have a couple of consultants in there. Is there anybody you want to bring back bring up or that

uh only if there are questions for the the architect or the civil engineer? Are there any questions for the architect or civil engineer? Seeing none, uh I think we're okay. Thank you all. Okay. At this point in time, we'll just ask if there's any public comments related to this agenda item.

Um seeing none in the audience, uh if if anybody uh who's uh online wishes to speak on it, uh just please raise your hand. Otherwise, we'll just give you about 20 or 30 seconds and then we'll move on. All right, I think that's good. So, uh, appreciate it. Um, so is there any other further discussion uh amongst the commission members? Seeing none, do I hear a motion? Make a motion.

Go ahead, Sam. Uh motion to authorize approval of the petition for site plan community design review and concept storm water management review for a new garage screen room and two flatwork patios totaling 1,438 ft at 1,000 Luwell and Lane as presented in the memorandum from the Department of Planning Community Development dated January 15, 2026. subject to any staff conditions noted therein including um the addition of the tree protection fences uh in the final version of the plan. Um and then part of the conditions of approval currently lists the final arburous report right

which I think we are going to say that does not need so it's kind of it just to uh in lie of the final arburest report um is to identify the tree protection plans on the drops. Yes. Okay. Uh, motion's been made and amended. Do I hear a second? Second. And seconded by Laura Ragdale. Carlos, you please call the vote. Chairman, before reading the row, I'll note for the minutes purposes that Miss Ford had arrived right, uh, at the beginning of Mr. Carwell's presentation. So, right, she's in. Thank you. Okay. So, uh, Commissioner Ragdell, approve. Commissioner Spiegelass, approve. Commissioner Ford, approve. Commissioner Powell approved. Commissioner Wallock, approved.

Commissioner Jugale, approved. And the motion passes unanimously 6 to zero. The next step will be, of course, the application for the building permits. All right, good. So, thank you everybody. We'll move on to the next agenda item, which is uh uh new business item B, 800 Braxton Court. Jack,

good evening again, Commission. So before you tonight is 800 Braxton Court. This is a new single family home. It's subject to site plan, community design, and concept storm water management review. Um all of those reviews are subject to every time or every new home is subject to all three of those reviews. Um the lot area is 17,813 ft. The only things that came up with concerns was just tree preservation and storm water management. The only thing that came from storm water management, we don't have any concerns regarding the detention system and what they are doing on the site. It's just that we're awaiting comments from our off uh our third party consultant. Um regarding the tree preservation also, it's not that significant only because on the lot there's not many trees. They only have one inven or not inventoried one shown on the plan with the caliper. It's just not inventoried regarding the species. However, we have received from the petitioner um with a lot of this size and it being majority clearcut. they have decided to add five additional trees to the lot and plant it on their proposed site plan. We're just awaiting the species list of those trees just because through the ordinance and everything, they do have time until occupancy, prior to occupancy to get us that list so they can pick their species. So, just wanted to make you guys aware of that. That's why it's just labeled as a concern here. Um, we did receive some storm water management comments um from neighboring properties and Carlos and some of the other uh public comments will be able to address those their and state the concerns. Um, but before you in terms of the design mater guidelines, the only thing again were the concerns with storm water management and tree preservation. And uh, Carlos, if you could go to the next slide. So this is how you can see just the neighboring properties around um, Braxton. The one directly if you're looking towards Hastings to the right is 804 Braxton, a two-story home. Uh you can see that they do have some sort new builds or two-story homes on this property are on this uh culdeac. Uh Carlos if go to the next slide. So this is just a little diagram of the storm water uh information. and they're

doing the PVC piping and then they have a storm water or sorry storm sewer easement as well as a sanitary easement that both you can see run along that left side property which they will be tying into. Uh and then the next slide is just a little update on the tree preservation just to get you guys um to see exactly where that 18inch caliper tree is just right in the back left corner. Um, and that you can see I didn't I should have highlighted them, but kind of how that triangles, yeah, corners off, those are the areas where he's proposing to put the uh uh new trees or the replacement trees. So, we're just awaiting the species list for that. Um, other than that, staff didn't had no concerns regarding the uh the coverage and the additional uh components of the review. I can answer your questions as well as additional staff and then the petitioner is present as well.

I got a quick question. If we can go back to where the storm water detention, is that going to interfere with the tree canopies? I mean, I see couple 18inch diameters, but the canopy doesn't look that big, but I would almost expect it to be bigger. Does that make sense? Yes. I'm thinking just they uh seem to be when Carlos and I were on the site, they are farther to the neighbors property. Um and it that they do have a very drastic grade drop right there. Okay. So, I don't I would be unfamiliar, you know, how far they would dig down for that, but I don't I would think that maybe with it being kind of on the hill, it's a little away from the neighboring property trees. Just thought I'd point it out.

No, of course. You know, address it. Yeah. Does anybody else have any uh questions or comments regarding this? Um I do have one thing and it looked like on the drawings itself when I went through them. Um there was uh more than one foot of exposed concrete on the bottom on do you know which elevation? Uh let me I can pull it up here too. I know as a condition of approval we do have it noted on there to to limit the exposed foundation. So I will uh speak just send that over and I know the architect is present today as well. Just wanted to point it out. No good.

There was a detail that I thought said 1 foot6. Yeah, if you zoomed in kind of uh down there, but maybe that's one foot six to something else. So may maybe that's that's probably one foot six to the floor. But, you know, I just noticed some uh uh concrete, you know, concrete being shown. So, I just wanted to verify that that was uh in fact correct or less than a foot if you Okay. Anybody else have any questions or comments uh for Jack?

Okay. Seeing none, uh maybe we can bring the petitioner up. And as a reminder, we do ask you to state your name and address for the record. Uh my name is Pavl Ivanchuk. Address 101 South Brent Avenue. I'm the architect. Yeah. Yeah. Uh regarding the exposed concrete, um that's actually supposed to be sighting there and those lines indicate battens that are embedded in concrete. So that really that information should be on the construction drawings, not on the airb drawings, but that is intended to be covered up there.

Yeah. Yeah. I I see my mistake. I apologize. Um Okay, good. Uh does anybody have any questions uh for the petitioner or the architect? You guys, have you guys talked to the neighbors about water issues or anything? And chairman, if I can kind of address that. That's a good question because we do have one of the neighbors here and we did uh receive some calls and both Jack and I did meet with Mr. Sudden who will speak in in a second because there's there's a substantial grade drop between this property facing Braxton and then the properties behind facing fair uh Fair Green. Okay.

Uh in there um and they they are getting they are the lowest properties as you go down in that portion of Okates. Uh Mr. Sudden who is here uh will speak of that has the the lowest the lowest parcel uh what we talked about with him uh in in in both cases and bear with me uh trying to there's the the existing home on the house

and all its uh um downspouts release at grade. So you have like about 1,500 square f feet of roof that's just releasing at grade and then it flows down. Uh plus you have all the other properties north of this flowing down through this parcel uh in there with this new house. The old house and say 1500 is being torn down and the new house with this new footprint of about 2500 um is now capturing all that roof area. So, we're actually taking out 1,500 square ft of roof area that was coming in and adding that additional thousand. It's being captured and then going into the detention pit uh in there that is sized per per our requirements uh in there. And then typically there's a release point for that pit. So, when you get a big storm, the intent here is to hold back some of the water and then allow for slow release after the big storm passes through. In this case, this pit will be interconnected directly into the storm water system. So all that water they're now going to be re having a reduction of of water based on the size of this home uh completely from the site. So the only thing that they will be um in incurring will be what's coming down from the neighboring properties and then the flat work on the driveway which kind of drains more towards uh towards Braxton or towards the north and then however the finish grades are set. Fortunately the way this lot is set up it has such a back tail angle on the east side that there's no disruption or grading on that end. So that pretty much stays the same. Uh so in essence you know in in our review and we're still discussing this with our consultant uh there should be a reduction of storm water being generated from this site alone. Of course the adjacent sites are still going to drain through this site

and and down to the lowest parcel or or or point uh in there. Now as you look at these two uh there are two parcels directly behind this uh this house. Mr. sudden which is on the west and he's got a a street inlet right here and that's really the lowest point and that's where everything's draining right now and all of that kind of comes down from this site and and from the neighboring sites to the east on this home they do have a a ponding problem in their backyard and what it is is again this lot on Braxton is at a higher elevation almost 5t higher than the elevations of the homes to the south and when They built the home on the east and this was well before 2000 to the best of my knowledge. Um they mounted the house. Now we now have regulations to avoid mounting. So when they mounted the house they have a a uh a grade to the north of them that's 5 ft higher and a mounted house and then they created

this swell and that collects water and that's why that area gets mushy and such and unfortunately that then drains into Mr. Sudden's property uh to the to the east. So yeah, long story short, this in no ways in mathematically should improve the amount of storm water that's being generated off this site because it's getting redirected into the storm water system uh in there. I did talk to Mr. Sutton will speak to the commission in a second. Did talk to the neighbor in there. they, you know, they understand what's going on, but they would still like to, you know, have a discussion with the developer if there's ways that something that they should do on their property while the crews out that might be, you help facilitate some of the drainage on his side. My concern is yes, but it all will shift westward because that's the way the grade's going to go. It's water's going to flow downhill. Downhill is Mr. Sun's property uh in there. So, you know, there may be, you know, some some discussions between multiple property owners here if they want to solve an existing problem. Uh, but I it it's not something that can be solved up on on this site. This site should help out and mitigate some of the issues they're having now. Uh, but unfortunately, we're at the two lowest points, if that makes sense.

It it does. It does. I'm wondering, you know, uh, looking at this photo, the area that's far to the right, is there somehow we could kind of either make a swale or put a a storm drain in there, you know, inlet there and tie it back into the system. And that's something we can talk with the developer. So, kind of you'd have a like a French drain inlet that would run into the system. Yeah.

And there. Now, the one thing I would caution on, the intent of the system is to hold the volume of the roof since we don't know the volume of of that. But given that the volume going in here is now being uh released directly into the storm water system, then it's just kind of like a bypass, you know, hold some water, releases water. Hold some water, releases water. That might be something reasonable, but we'd have to take a closer look at that. Yeah. or maybe just run it as a a secondary pipe, you know, to that storm water area and that way it bypasses the retention system because uh I don't know, it's just well MSD the reason MSD will allow

you know a private party to directly connect into their storm water inlet is if they have uh like a uh a system in place where they'll hold it so it doesn't get inundated. during during the the storm itself. Gotcha. So, you know, again, we we can talk with our consultant and their their engineer and see what we can come up with and that might be something um yeah, reasonable if if uh and we kind of did something similar at 11 St. Alfred and maybe that, you know, that that works, but I don't want to commit. Yeah. Yeah. No, I get it. It's good to get the experts involved. Okay.

But it could be a good place. Maybe we could put a rain garden over them, you know, or something like that to slow that water down a little bit and capture it. But I'll leave that to the experts. All right. Okay. So, all right. Would you be uh willing to kind of discuss some of these issues with the adjacent neighbors to try to come up with a good solution to uh to make it better?

Um I think I'll have the Just to just to clarify, make sure make sure I understand corre correctly. There's a storm line right on the on the west side. So, are we proposing are you proposing to potentially review someone tapping into that line with the drain? Is that No, I think what we're trying to do is look to see if there's other solutions to kind of help prevent uh some of the uh the runoff into adjacent uh uh yards. Um you know, if you look at this plan, you are getting some, you know, you the way the slopes are, it's sloping into uh other, you know,

just the national Yeah. because just the grade of the of the line. Yeah. So, yeah, we're trying to do intercepting it into this the retention detention point. Um yeah, I and I guess would be preferred to Yes. Talking to the experts. So So I'm an architect. I'm not a civil engineer. Right. Right. I don't understand. Basically, Pavl, what what uh

I don't think it's going to let me do. So the way uh Clay Vance has it laid out, I don't think it'll let me write on this. Uh but bear with me one second. Uh after here here's the detention pit here. He has a pipe from the detention pit that is going to run and directly connect to the MSD main. So none of that water will ever see the ground. It's all going to go in there. What uh what we would like to take a look at is to this detention pit is maybe run another line this way with with a grate of some sort to pick up some of the water to go across. Correct.

Yeah. He thinks it's going to flow backflow the other way. I I see where you're talking about. Um like it'll fill up in the flow well and then it'll backflow and could make it worse. Right. Can I just ask a question of process here? Our storm water people have looked at this. Not yet. Not yet.

Oh, I thought they had determined that what they proposed for the house that they propose is adequate to meet the needs and suggesting that they need to go talk to the neighbors to talk to them and put their heads together. I that's not a professional opinion. You know, I I I'm having a hard time understanding, you know, if if storm water has experts have not looked at this and determined this, then let's let them do it. But if they've already determined that, I don't know what you are expecting, you know, the architect and the developer to actually do. No, we've had this happen before where we have known water issues on a particular property and so to see since they already had the equipment out there, they're already making changes to see if we can get a buy, you know, buyin from the different neighbors there to try to come up with a solution for, you know, to try to improve things. Um, it's been successful in uh other properties um to the benefit of of multiple neighbors. This is very difficult. We c you can't solve everything. You know, there's a limitation to it. But sometimes if you get buy in with everybody to try to work together, you can you can definitely improve things.

But that working together is amongst nonprofessionals. And to me, I would rather have a storm water expert tell me what are our options here and whether that is something that you can afford. But that that would be up to them to hire that professional, not for the city to tell us what to do for them to do it. We need them to say, "Hey, this is what it is. This will help approve it." It's not up to the city. They provided us with a storm water plan and I don't know is it in our code that they have to solve all the water issues that are happening on Braxton Court. No,

I mean if it So I just don't understand the point of the delay is is really more my question. It's it's more it's more, you know, if we want to send the storm water folks back to see if there is something that they can propose to the neighbors that's scientific and not just neighbors getting together and say, "Well, if you put a little garden here, it' be helpful." I don't know that that's helpful. and and that adds another adds another month onto the the schedule that just costs more money that way. I I'm it's just a point of qu question. I you know clearly somebody that knows storm water has put together this plan. So why isn't that good enough? I I think there's a philosophical thing that um I think a lot of people on the commission have adopted which is that we're only able to exert our influence on a case-byase basis and we don't have the authority to just go out to everybody all at once and say you need to do this except via adopting something through code. And so when a situation arises where we hear informally or formally through the from the public that there is another issue within this realm, we want to be responsive to everybody and we use this as an opportunity

and I appreciate that which is why I had I think from the very first meeting said why aren't we doing subject areas to look at the storm water issues more wholly than on an individual lot basis. I don't know that we, you know, us giving another month is going to accomplish what I think our intent is. And I get the intent. I get because I'm a big stormwater person. But I don't think

this particular applicant should have to do more without a framework for the whole area. And that framework needs to come from the city. Yeah, that's what we're going to talk to is have the storm water consultant look at this particular area. We've had discussions in the past to try to become more holistic to look at it uh broadly and that's part of some of the uh strategic plans is to look at things and to see if we I think there's been uh attempts to talk to uh you know uh uh uh who who's the storm water miss not Missouri American water

MSD to try to address some of these issues if we can. Yeah. And I'm I'm all for that. I just don't know that this is the time or the place for that. I think we you we should be evaluating all of our neighborhoods to determine where are our big storm water problems and look at them holistically and then we have something to work off. But to just say go back and talk to your neighbors I well

I'm just not not when it's clear that somebody has done some mathematics here. Right. But we want to make sure that the neighbors have can get their input of some of the existing conditions or issues that they have so that it makes sure that when they are putting their designs together, those items get factored in, those items get looked at, those items get dressed kind of to make sure that we're all we're not making the conditions worse. We want to improve things. Well, I mean that's we've been told that the storm water provisions of this plan accommodate the house that is being proposed. There's nothing in our code that says, "Oh, by the way, while you're building that house, you need to fix the storm water problems that's coming in from other properties." We know that this house is being appropriately plumbed for a lack of a better word because we've been told that. And so now we're adding to our code ad hoc that they also have to solve systemic problems in the neighborhood. Just I'm sorry. I just I I don't think that that's an appropriate approach. Petri, can we only enforce things if something adheres to the code? That should be the only question doing

I disagree. I don't think that's true. If if if I can and if we did that, none of these would come to you. We'd be approving them, right,

administratively. This is what is the site plan review process. We noted and Jack noted during the presentation and in the report that there are deficiencies in this lot and therefore the city has the right to talk about to talk about this. When we get comments from neighbors and all that, you know, they know their turf a lot better than I will ever do, no matter how many properties we visit uh in there. And they brought these items to our attention. And by site plan review, you are obligated to take a look at both not what's going on in the site, but also off the site. and it's my professional responsibility to bring it to your attention uh in there. One of the neighbors thinks, you know, this is going to cause a problem that's already a problem and I explain to them why it's not. But I have to bring that to your attention. The other neighbor, you know, talk to them. They're the lowest property uh in there and this should mitigate and re relieve a lot of the storm water that they are experiencing, but not what's coming off from the other sides uh in there. But that is what site plan review is. It's it's this it's this this thing where you know somebody could come in and say they don't like the windows or they don't like the door. Uh and because this is a unique lot, they have a right to to to express that concern and the commission may or may not agree with them. Now in terms does this meet code? Yes. the the consultant is hired to assist Jack and I and Don in reviewing the calculations because we're not engineers to review the calculations, review the volumes, and to make sure it works. And then just to look at the general grading, but then they too are not familiar uh with the turf as well as those property owners are. and you know going out to the site you know we talked about it and in there and all we could tell is like you know

in theory and based on these plans it's going to get better but that's a hard pill to swallow when you have a neighbor that says my backyard's always muddy you know

you know and you know I it needs to stop and like well I I you know all I can do is to tell you about the public meeting get you in contact with the developer in there uh in there but that's what we ask our consultant to do uh in that process not to look at designing this on their behalf. this is brought by by by their ends and you know we'll take a look at the process and see how we can try to kind of address that issue. But yeah, it's hard to again if someone brings something to my attention even regardless of what my personal opinion is, I'm all obligated to bring this to the commission's attention.

Right. Yeah. Okay. Um let's do this. Um let's uh we still have to hear from this our stormwater consultant, right? Um let's if there's the petitioner doesn't have anything more to address at this point in time, why don't we take a step back and then we'll see if we have any public comments from one of the neighbors and we can hear a little bit more about about some of the issues. Thank you. Are there uh any further discussion at this point amongst uh commission members? Uh then we'll take opportunity to have some public comments. Yeah. And if uh uh if you'd like to come up that'd be great.

We do remind you to state your name and address. Okay. Uh I'm Phil Sutton and I better spell the last name for you because it's not standard for that. It's s u t i n.

Okay. and that I live at 9717 fair green which is directly uh behind the 800 Braxton uh property. Great. And um it for many well over time through time the amount of water that's coming from the top has increased and now um the backyard the entire backyard pretty much is gets very soggy and it takes maybe a week to 10 days to dry out after a major storm. It it does not however impact the house. I should just make that that clear. Good. Um, so I thought with the I thought that with the new house coming there, this would be an opportunity to try to fix this or ease this problem. Um, one thought I I talked about was um extending the box that blocks the storm water to the to the west to to take in the area between the h, you know, between the house on 800 and the one to the west. Um it's it's it's not direct, you know, right now the box doesn't deal with anything that's um at the west end of the property and the water would still be coming the same. Um, now if that's not possible, um, then I would hope maybe that some sort of landscaping could could be done to slow at least slow the u the storm water down. And uh,

you mentioned what I had in mind, a rain garden, maybe across of the rear of his property line. So the so that the water would at least slow down uh coming onto my property. Okay. Good. Let let me just clarify a little bit about the box because the box doesn't take intake any water directly from the surface of where the grass is. Yeah. It takes it takes it from the gutters. The gutters are connected into the box. Oh, okay. I didn't understand that. I thought that

because um one of my concerns was when I first saw the drawing of the box is that that um the number of students who were all grades um crosscut from the west side of my property into the 800 Braxton property to to get home school or to and from school and I didn't want them to be tripping over anything, right? Anything in the bo in in in the box. You won't see anything from the surface. Yeah, that's what um Mr. Treyo told me.

Good, good, good, good. Fantastic. Okay. Well, I I think I I would like to thank the commission for take uh for your consideration of this of alternatives on dealing with the storm water issue.

Good. Good. Thank you for your comments. We appreciate it. So, at this point in time, I think I would like to make sure, you know, have input from the storm water consultant and kind of make sure the storm water consultant is aware of some of these other items um to see if there's a a good solution, you know, that's agreeable to all, you know, uh with this this thing. And sure enough, it it'll have to be made sure that the builder is is good with that of whatever is proposed beyond what they're required to do. Okay. So, um but at this point in time, I I think we should defer uh a decision on this until we get the storm water consultant, you know, to have his review on it. Um especially because we have some pre-existing, you know, issues with the nodes. U is that okay with the builder?

No. Uh if if you don't mind just coming up to the podium. Not not not um No. Uh that's fine. Um I was I understand you know from your discussion uh that's a reasonable thing to do is to wait and see what the experts say. Yes. Well, the builder I want to bring the builder up or the developer up. Hi, my name is Sol Durkage. I'm the owner of 100 Braxton, right?

So, I'm not agree to do something else with this because first of all, we already did what we can do with this. This is plan signed by professional engineer already. So, if you look on a plan, can you move a little bit Carlos on the side? That water what this neighbor has if you look on the plan it's coming from the right side of house just look the grading and coming through it's coming because the guy with the number which is behind on the left lot 27 he rides the house so high if you look at it where is the water coming from it's coming from that corner right here which is the house that was mounted

lot 27 lot 27 He put he put the pool up there. Everything rise a lot. It's exactly where is the water coming from and he doesn't have a water pit detention. So it's nothing coming from my yard and nothing I can change to water flow. So we already did we already put a big water pit up there. Collect the water more than it used to be collected before. So how you want to fix the you want to me fix the like neighbor's yard. No, it's exactly what my questions what what you expect more from me from my engineer. We already talk about that. This is what exact we already just

like twice more water we're going to hold in my my property plus it's going to be connected to the water drainage system, right? What else do you wants to do else for me? Well, I don't know. Talk to the neighbors and just ask them to fix the yards. Then it's going to be fixed. Well, I think we're going to wait until we hear from the storm water consultant. You I don't know what you're going to get have it from him else. Well, it it just helps gives us peace of mind to understand. So, okay. Any other discussion? Do do you I'll leave it up to the commission. Do you guys want to vote on this now or do you want to wait until we um hear from the uh stormwater consultant for the Senate?

Agreed. Great. Okay. So I think we're all in the chairman. There there is one person online. I'm not sure if they're associated with this. I didn't think so. But just in case Mr. Mertz, I'm not sure if there's any comments you wanted to do regarding 800 back in court.

Yeah. Yeah, I understand. We'll give it some time. Okay. Seeing none, I I think uh I think we will defer this until the next meeting, you know, until we get the answers from our storm water consultant for this. So, thank you and thanks for understanding. Okay, we'll move on to um uh item number C, which is uh the text amendment of article uh 16, accessory structures and uses and rooftop solar panels. Carlos.

Okay, chairman, this would be a new item uh in there being introduced to the commission. Bear with me. Let me catch up on the slide presentation uh in here. One one of the uh uh council encouragements was to uh streamline the process for the placement of rooftop solar panels. Uh in the agenda, we provided uh various resource information from other communities and for the American Planning Association regarding rooftop solar uh regarding solar um uh energy and uh and and and uh and equipment uh in there. This is just solely to focus on the the placement of rooftop solar panels. uh to uh codify the criteria that the commission has guide guided staff in their review and assessment and make them part of the code and not have to bring them to the commission's review. So right now the commission as long as they you know they they are parallel with the roof plane uh kind of contained within one area uh centralized and uh of a color consistent with what you would normally see on a rooftop. um you have authorized that we can or initiate the permit process, but we always bring it to the commission's attention in there. Uh when they are facing the street or they're scattered in different parts of the roof, they got some on the south, some on the east or some on the west. Uh or they're angled, we bring them to the commission as a formal item back to the commission for a vote uh before we start any of the permitting process. What we're asking the commission is uh for the exception of those that are angled uh in there, so they're not parallel with the roof plane or they have a a roof plane that's in excess of 45° where their placement is because then you get some glitter concerns uh that uh this ordinance would allow at you know somebody just to apply for a building permit as opposed to coming into the commission. The only caveat here is that

this would allow somebody to put them towards the street without a commission review. Uh we have and in your packet there are about 54 solar panels uh permits that have been released uh in there and it's a it's a pretty good area. There's one on uh for Cyia and Grand View where they're angled so the the the property has a uh a flat roof so the uh the the solar panels are actually propped up from the roof. you know, those I'd be more comfortable that the commission had the opportunity to review uh in there. But then we have uh various locations. I think Glenmary or no, Sleepy Hollow. Uh the the most prominent one is uh I believe it's a Crab Apple in Engle Lane in where the petitioner actually has the the solar panels on the front plane facing the street uh in there and they've you know they've become pretty common uh in there. So this is what that language would would do. I'm just introducing to you the language that's being proposed and not expecting the commission to have any action. We're not under any uh time criteria. I do have a motion if you if you want to consider it, but I would ask the commission to kind of look it over and think it think it over. I provided all 54 permits, copies of where they're placed, and if there's information you would like us or if you want us to take us some additional pictures so you can see it on the street, uh you know, just let us know and we'll bring this back to our next meeting. Carlos, have we ever rejected any or requested different placements for these? Even when all of these came in?

In our last petition on Heather Hill, there was some discussion and I can't recall if that happened at the commission or with the trustees. Uh if they were initially before the commission. Do you recall? Yeah. The commission. I think they weren't all together in the same We had the discussion about it but they commission the eventually discussion led to yeah beyond that. No. Yeah. Okay.

Uh on the definition of acceptable material finish as it relates to solar panels it says consisting of a compatible color but under 12 down at the bottom it says compatible in tone. Is that an intentional difference? No. We'll get that corrected for the next round. Thank you for catching that too. I I don't don't have any problems with this and I think it's the right thing to do. Does anybody else want to take time? Because otherwise I'd be willing to entertain a motion on it with that correction. All right.

Do I hear a motion? Uh, I'll make a motion. Go ahead, Sam. Uh, motion to recommend to the city council approval of a text amendment to section 425.010 010 definitions being part of chapter 425 community design general and article 16 accessory structures and uses being part of chapter 400 zoning regulations both being part of title 4 land use of the event municipal code to authorize administrative approval of certain residential rooftop solar panels. Motion's been made by Sam Lock. Do I hear a second? Second. and seconded by Tim Spiegelass. Carlos, you please call the vote.

Commissioner Ragdale, approved. Commissioner Spiegelass, approved. Commissioner Ford, approved. Commissioner Powell, approved. Commissioner Wallock, approved. Commissioner Joel, approved. And the motion passes unanimously. Do it. So, the next step would be uh we'll get this uh revised and then uh scheduled uh before the council, probably their second meeting in February. Okay. Fantastic. Okay. So then we will move on and I guess we're jumping back up to uh uh old business. It's a tax amendment for the light industrial district regarding data centers.

Okay. And just first and foremost, chairman, if I can note, we have no applications pending or any inquiries about creating any data centers in the city of all of that, but we did want to be proactive as we've seen the that's one of the the the hottest commodities going on nationally uh right now as uh you know in investment. Uh, a lot of our neighboring municipalities have adopted regulations, more specifically requiring special permits, meaning that they have to go through a commission review uh and then the commission forwards a recommendation to the council with the council having the ultimate say. Uh, that being said, the council has a little a lot more leeway and authority uh in the process, but you do have to provide some guidance to what needs to be met. Uh, we're proposing right now under our current code, a data center is permitted by right And if there was an existing vacant building and somebody wanted to put a data center in there, they're going to be going straight to the building division applying for a permit and an occupancy inspection and and then setup shop without any input from the community or the commission or council. What this would do would be that it would have to go before the commission first and then ultimately approved by the council uh through an ordinance. So what we would do is we would establish a definition for data processing, hosting and related services. That is the the national definition where a data center falls under. Um yep. Uh you know correct our code because right now it's it's permitted and administratively allowed. um make the changes to provide that definition, identify it as a special permit, and provide special permit conditions. Those have been in your report. We've talked about those uh for the past couple of uh meetings that there would be a minimum lot area, 120,000 square feet is typically a number we use for a lot of

different types of uses. Uh that there would be a buffer requirement from residentially zoned property. So this doesn't matter whether it's multif family or single family attached. And then that there would be certain performance standards uh that the uh that the applicant would have to provide to the commission regarding electric service, water service and sound and noise mitigation. And those are further explained of course in your report because what we're looking to do is is is the existing capacity there to service uh that type of use without impacting the current other users. uh that there's some restrictions on generators and restrictions on battery energy storage systems and both of those have to comply with uh building code requirements. What we're saying here is that we want to control like the hours and operations that they're put in to use uh and there and that's what they would have to meet uh in there. Be glad to answer any questions. Uh and again first I I do want to stress that currently we do not have any permits uh any pending permits or inquiries that I'm aware of uh for data centers. are just trying to be proactive about this.

I have a a question. Um, is there any cities that um have now defined it as heavy industrial use instead of light industrial use because of all the negative impacts of these data centers? Not that I I know of because like our heavy industrial uses would fall under our LI district that because we don't have just like we only have one single family residential district. So we we don't have uh heavy industrial district. We don't have any prohibitions on any correct heavy industrial

for a majority of those thus they meet certain requirements. So let let's say the the the most typical would be like a steel mill. I mean someone could technically locate a steel mill in all event in our light industrial district. Uh but there are certain performance standards in that district that they'll have to meet and then the fire department and is that are those standards h high enough to cover the data center use?

No, I don't think so. I think these here the performance standards and the the regulations would uh but not in terms of like what we've considered traditional heavy you know it it there they don't generate like uh coal and and smooth. No, but they sure generate a lot of object, you know, objection from most neighbors because of the noise, water use, utility use, and that's what this

tax incentives that we can't afford. I mean, those are those are all things that are probably as important as anything else. So, I I guess I'm just I'm struggling with why we have to allow this use at all. Why can't we just say we're we're not permitting this use? Just like if we wanted to put a hog farm up north, would we do that too if there's not anything in our code that says we can't put a hog farm there? I don't think legally that works. Okay. So, so it is possible to ban a use is what I'm hearing. I I don't believe so. Okay. Well, I mean, sorry.

It would require a special use permit and that's what we're suggesting. Yeah, I understand what but I don't I think to that point we can't say this particular type of business can't do business here but we have special use permits and then during that special use permits process we can deny it through the special use permits because we don't like it or it doesn't meet those things which has to not meet those things I believe because you look at the quick trip or all those other things that have come out recently. Yeah,

you can't ban something. They have a right to use it. You can restrict things. We can put like what they call reasonable standards and those reasonable standards I hate to say this in publicly but they don't have to be reasonable you know as long as you can substantiate it and put them in place and we've done done those I mean um you know the most famous type in in the planning world are um you know adult facilities you know we can't say we can't we can't ban them in our city but we have put in specific regulations and standards uh to try to minimize and and restrict where their locations would be. Uh and now we've done the same thing with cultivation and uh and dispensary not dispens cultivation, manufacturing and storage facilities of cannabis. Uh it'd be very difficult to try to locate a facility and all of that, but it's not totally impossible.

Right. Right. I do have a question. I've heard the term load test with data centers. Um, and I'm not sure if that's generators being used. Tim, do you know anything about that? Um, and it was on a project where somebody was doing a load test at a data center. All the ventilation systems were running at 100% capacity and unfortunately it well it was um I I won't get into what happened but something happened. Um, but I could imagine that would generate a lot of noise. So, I'm not sure if a load test needs to be specified for, you know, a certain

or would that be different than were they measuring like how much electrical was going on to operate at a full capacity? Yeah. Or was it? Yes. Yeah. There it's the same thing like they flush all the toilets at one time. Yeah. They try and so that that is in the the I didn't understand what you were getting but that that's part of it but you're gonna have the same problem with fire alarms with all those things when you're testing. Yeah. Yeah. You know you're that's part of it. You want you want to hear you want people to hear the explo. Okay. Okay. Does that happen do they have to do these types of tests on a regular basis?

I'm not sure. I would think for their insurance they would have to in this kind of a place and how much value there is in there would be my guess. Yeah. That they would have to do something like that. I guess that would cover the the excessive noise or noise issues. I look at it too is yes it generates noise but also what what I hear you're also saying is that they're also looking is the energy capacity there to run everything if everything had to be ren all at once. is the energy capacity there and then of course how much noise does that generate the first one the energy capacity that is one of the performance standards that we're asking them to take a look at so that I think addresses that second is

with all that on how much noise is going on and that's another performance standard we're asking them to take a look at if I if I understand you correctly

yeah as far as I know it was just uh it's it's something that I don't didn't know exactly what that meant but I knew I didn't know why they were doing things, you know, I heard it was called a load test. Um, but I knew it was a noisier, you know, uh, time uh, you know, at this part of it. So, appreciate the the info, but I agree. I think that, uh, we would have it already addressed. So um do you anticipate any more changes to this

unless no not based on our discussions unless the commission wants to you know increase some of these numbers or or so uh I caution you in the buffer because again we have to have an area allocated a reasonable area allocated uh in there and and Don did put together some maps for us to take a look at uh in that process. And then two, you know, if if there's any other things that, you know, we we talked about it a couple times. We looked at what other communities were doing. Uh so, for instance, CREF Core just says they're they're requiring a special permit where in Clayton they're they're asking for more than just it's not just a special permit. We also want these things uh in there and that's where some of these come in come into play. Um, so

have we had the city attorney review this? Not yet. So we can have them take a look at it before consideration. We can also have the the uh the question addressed about the prohibition completely. Yeah. Because then at that point you're kind of like at a moratorium or a prohibition. Right. Right. So yeah I data centers in that definition. I just you know data touches so many things. And I'm worried about, you know, that definition of how you're defining, you know, is the computer lab that, you know, is fixing computers in this process. I mean, there, you know, that's a lot process.

Every and every business around here might have a server room, which you could argue is a data center. It's not what we mean reasonable, but it's it becomes an interesting conversation. Yeah. And just some background. So, what we use is the is the the federal classification that's provided by the uh by the uh I think it's the labor bureau or or or so. So, that definition is the common definition that's used throughout the United States, Canada, and Mexico for the data center. uh because we did I did note at our last meeting we have charter has a major knock facility here and what they do is that they they're just they're they're like the highway they're just transmitting stuff where a data center actually kind of hosts and we didn't want to impact charter charter's been here for for ages and uh without any issues or so but their major web I don't want to call it hosting area is just down the block from here uh in there and When we put together our 2004 comprehensive plan, we saw that as a as a major potential opportunity to to to exploit because they have all these cables coming in. Unfortunately, you know, this wasn't the big issue at that point. Now, uh under the current comprehensive plan, you know, we want to be a little bit more considerate on those the type of industries uh in there. And these aren't the highest and best type of uses uh when you have limited land availability. And then there are the the the um you know the sustainable and environmental effects uh that these are having. So we'll we'll have that draft uh sent over and then we'll have her provide some comments and then I'll ask her about can it be completely prohibited.

Good. Good. Good. I think that's great. All right. Any other further discussion on this item? Okay, good. We'll move on. I think it's we're moving in the right direction. So, we'll go to uh item five, 2024 comprehensive plan update. Uh Carlos.

Okay. So, I think we are done with our surveys completely. uh Modia's uh accumulated all the data and put that together and uh it was posted in the agenda link for you to take take a look at and you'll see every goal along with how the commission prioritized each individual uh potential community action. Uh in there we have of course the the ones that were put by council um and then those by our comprehensive plan by grouping along with those of the council. Uh it's a lot of reading. I'd hope you know everybody takes takes some time to take a look at those. At our other meeting too, we kind of talked about well what are some um you know uh easy to you know easy food to take off the tree uh in there in terms of there were not classified as a pri priority. So we're starting to take a look at that and we'll break that down for the commission. It does not appear that we have anything scheduled for our first February meeting for the exception of maybe this this home and the storm water.

Yeah. Uh so that and I don't think that that should take too long. So uh we hope that uh we can get uh a good commission discussion uh and and start to outlay some you know u you know a schedule of what we we would want to get done before the end of this calendar year. right

on on different amendments and those uh a lot of the things that that we we kind of heard uh in terms of the prior prioritization is um on housing and lot sizes and density uh in there and they're they're called all different things but you know uh since I've been here and I think in 1985 the city went to one single family residential district and all you know we we used to have like four or five different districts and we went to one one district only. Um and you know and so now everything's kind of based on that and that might be probably one of the main things is to kind of re reook at that and consider uh individual districts like you know Chvy Chase is completely different from High Acres and High Acres is completely different from Stony Side uh in there and we're applying the same standards on both ends. Now we use percentages to take you know the differences in sizes into account. Uh but sometimes they they they work both ways. It could be good and bad uh in there. We may start taking a look at that. The other thing is about the bulk and height standards. Uh we did a big assessment back in 2004 and in 2008 that that led to the guidelines and to what we codified. Uh because we never had caps in in the zoning in our residential districts. um we might want to reassess those numbers again and take a look at those uh in there and then how the commission feels about you know you know multi-unit type of structures whether it's a two-unit structure to a four-unit structure to attach unit structures like across the street uh in there the other thing was on uh on the environmental sustainability side uh storm water storm water storm water and a lot being dealt with the type of

plantings and trees being used. Uh and then a third third one was the Olive Boulevard corridor uh in terms of uh uniform appearance uh you know funding and adopting more uh native type of plantings as opposed to the general streetscape plantings that we we've uh we've allowed in the past uh in there. So hopefully that gives a nutshell. If there's any questions, all three of us will be glad to answer. Any surprises? No, I didn't. Uh yeah. Okay.

You know, if there was anything that jumped out and you're like, "Wow, I didn't expect this." So, okay. Good go. Well, and we kind of work within the frame that was there already, right? Uh and there there was I think when we did the the first two surveys uh some input from the commission about other items, other potential actions and then it stopped. Everything else was with within there. But those first two surveys hit the two main ones which was housing and sustainability, right? So I I wasn't too surprised with that.

Okay. Good. Good. Fantastic. All right. So, uh any more discussion on this item? Okay, seeing none, let's move on to uh other business. U I see meeting minutes are here. Jack, you've been busy. I appreciate it. And pretty recent dates on this. We skipped like six months of meeting minutes. How did this happen?

I'd like to acknowledge receipt of the December 18, 2025 meeting minutes. That's the last meeting, right? Wow. Are you up to date? Wow. Very impressive, Jen. All right, good. So, if there's no other questions on those or if you see any comments or issues that need to be addressed, please uh refer to Jack uh to get those corrected. Uh we'll move on to reports. Carlos,

uh just a couple of things for the commission is aware of. Uh things are going well at lot 3 at Olive Crossing. Uh the uh the brass tap and the Paris bag were uh guests at the uh coffee with the mayor. If you have a chance, they are posted online. Uh both of them great couples uh really anxious and eager to to be part of our community and and and uh looking to open uh by late February, early March uh in there. So uh pretty exciting. Uh they had positive things to say about the diversity of the community and just the people in general uh in there. Uh we haven't had anything submitted for lot six, which is the the hotel uh in there, they do have a council deadline to start moving dirt uh by the end of January. Uh so we're kind of waiting to see and given, you know, while we're kind of now starting to get a little winter, you know, there was no movement when it was nice. So we'll find out what happens as as this goes on. Uh there's been some discussion about lock five, which is kind of in the middle. Uh the council gave them the the option of in in lie of building an office they can do some sitdown restaurants and I think they're looking at those uh pretty closely now. Uh Irvington Place across the street it's looking great. It's coming in place. They were pouring the the the the sidewalks on on Alice uh looks very sharp if you get a chance. I mean that that part of the city was fully disconnected from from everywhere else. Uh now there is a crossing to get to the Audi's. There's a sidewalk on the on the on Chevys and the CVS side. Now there's a new sidewalk into the industrial area. Um and there and we're not done yet. You know, there uh you know once the Great River Greenway Trail goes in, they'll have access to Warsson Park and Indian Meadows uh you know all the way through there. So uh really trying to integrate that uh in the community as a whole. Um across the

street's going pretty smooth. Go ahead. I'm sorry. Do you know? Yes. They're looking for uh occupancy starting in March. What about that last leg of the Great Rivers Greenway? What is that? Yeah. So, get through that. So, that will go from the CVS all the way to Dealman and they they actually finally after I think I started in 2002 and 2004, we started the plan and and discussions with the railroad. They finally purchased a railroad property last year. Wow.

So, you know, and now it's this little piece of property on Dealman, which we think we have a buyer and and an arrangement to get it through there and then they have the full connection. So, construction on that probably wouldn't start till 2007. Okay. So, but I think the biggest obstacle which was the railroad was finally resolved. 200 2027. Thank you. Yeah, that'd be nice if going back. Thank you. looking. Okay. Oh, good. Good. Great. You glad to answer anything else on there? I don't know if I forgot anything, Don. Or or Jack, how's the development across the street going?

It's moving along. He's got four I think all the units on building seven, which is the northernmost unit, is completely sold. Uh he's working on six. They were bringing in the roof trusses uh in there, and we haven't started on on the five unit buildings. uh in there. But it's do you have to have all the infrastructure done to occupy those those buildings? It it depends on because we we'll have escros in place, but all the all the storm, all the the sanitary, all the water, all the gas are all all the utilities are in place. What about like the sidewalk going through there and like

Yeah, that that we hope to get that opened sooner because they've been doing like the the screen wall. They started work on the screen wall behind building what I'll call seven and six uh in there, but they kind of stopped midway in there. Um we would want the Dealman side open, but it's going to depend on how we can phase that in. So, and I I I would think I mean for us it would be nice to have that sidewalk fully open uh and put in place. I think it's about time. I'm not going to lie. I think it's beyond We'll push on that. Good. Good. Good. All right. That sounds good. Uh, anything else? Oh, go ahead. The little property next to the Oliver.

Yes. Uh, green space property.

Uh, we're we're we're they were at the council uh approximately about a year ago back in February. Uh we are doing we hired a consultant to look at the road right adjacent to that to uh look at acquiring uh a strip of property and relocating the entrance in there to align it with Plant Haven. So they'd be directly across. Uh an ultimate goal would be then to try to pursue a signal, but it's going to be tough because the light at Indian Meadows uh in there, but you know they they allowed that to happen creep core at the Bear campus. So, we're kind of hoping they give us some flexibility uh in that process. Yes. But that is our city center and that is the type of environment we want to create. So, it's more pedestrian friendly and easier to cross uh from that point to from point to point. Um it's a difficult site because it's it's got a restricted in entrance right now. It's right in right out and it's not the the ideal place in there. We've had some interest from uh for for drive-thru type of establishments, but they're not permitted in that district. We allow them in other areas, but they can't have a drive-thru there. Uh our goal has always been to get some type of um dining or activity use where you would have some outdoor users, you know, during during the the good weathers where it was like a fitness center, yoga place, coffee shop or or so. And we're still pursuing that um in there. We'll have something to report back to the council I think maybe in April or May and then decide where they're something they want to allocate and pursue uh to to reorient that and that would make the site a little bit more useful.

Good. Okay. So, fantastic. Any news on the Bear East campus?

Oh, okay. So, that I got to get my orientation. The creps plan commission I believe did act or at least or is scheduled to act on a comprehensive plan amendment in there. So bear is of course putting the property for sale. I think there is some type of entity that has interest in purchasing the property but what nobody knows is what they want to do. It could be just you know a leverage buyer or you know some type of LLC. So what what Creed Corps wanted to do because what Creed Corps wanted to do was okay before anything happens let's establish what what would be our the standards for redevelopment because right now it's it's zone research office. Uh so anybody that wants to do something different they're going to have to go through a resoning. The reasoning is evaluated based on what is on your comprehensive plan. So that gives them a good leverage to kind of control what what can and can't happen. They did a really good assessment, market assessment. Uh all the information is on their website if you get a chance to take a look at it in there. And you know, some of the priorities was to preserve a lot of those trees on the south end. Uh to be concerned about traffic and and traffic mitigation uh along Warren Road. And then uh couple of things on the type of uses that they would like to see like limited retail, no big box, excuse me, and and and all that.

Uh but the the synopsis of what went before the commission uh is on the website. Urge you to take a look at that. It's got some good information. It was a pretty good job that they did. I think PGAB was the uh the consultant team. Yeah. Yeah. But as far as we know and what they've told me, I mean, yeah, there there's nobody out there with a shovel yet. It's like on the west side. So, Gotcha. Gotcha. Okay. Good. All right. Any other questions? Seeing none, uh, we'll move on, bro.

Uh, very little report. Uh, you mentioned the pet adoption event up here, uh, announcing the city had a blood drive. They had a couple of them. They exceeded their goal. So, that's good from the community. And the council actually has a uh they call it a retreat coming up January 25th where we are going to spend most of the day here talking about the goals of the council just to make sure we're kind of aligning on what is you know especially with the new a lot of new people on the council. Um you know and this plays into a lot of what you guys are working on as well some of those goals. So what are our main goals? What are our main objectives and where we go kind of from there kind of our focus right now. Correct.

Chairman, one last thing and again commissioner, keep in mind as we get towards March uh on the schedules, we we didn't you we talked about you know because of spring break uh in there. But uh that way we can give a a reasonable heads up to any applicants that are coming in uh if anybody has especially that second meeting is the one I'm concerned about. Yes, that's sorry. Yeah, it's the 19th. And so far it sounds like I'm okay, but you know, I know things come up. So you do have me not being there, right? You Yes. with an asterk that says I will zoom in. Yes. Yes. So if that if that's no longer going to be the case, yes. Yes. Wow. Okay.

Well, and I know and I I think I mean the goal here is just to give people an ample time as we're working around that. Yeah. Yeah. I think it makes sense. So all right, any other discussion? Seeing none, we'll adjourn at 8:28. Thank you, chairman. Thank you.