Master Plan Citizen Oversight Group - 2026 - Regular Meeting

Me too. are ready to get started. Thanks for coming. Uh, welcome all to our 19th meeting of our 10-year master plan update committee. I would like to take the time to commend our land use presenters, our concerned citizens, staff, and the members of this committee on how well we have all worked together to further develop a robust plan that considers the needs, wants, and expectations of all Wildwood stakeholders. Our last meeting was a shining example of that collaboration and we should all be proud of the results. Thank you all again for your participation and input. Joe, is the mayor available? Okay. Melanie, would you please call roll, please? Um, as stated, Mayor Mayor Geritano is not here. Uh, Chair Routin

here, Vice Chair Loyal, member Avery present. Uh, here via Zoom. Uh, member Baker, member Batty, member Boomergel, member Borne, member Clark, member, uh, member Clayton, member Coleman here, member Deppler here, member Hellfrey here,

member Hman Present. Also on Zoom. Member Rubis here. Member Jackson here. Member Con. Council member McCutchen. Oh, I guess member Hutchen. Uh, member Mets here. Member Pick here. Uh, Council Member Rambo here. Member Ren here. Member Shaken and we have a quorum. Thank you very much. Would you all please join me in the pledge of allegiance?

I pledge allegiance to the flag of the United States of America. To the republic stands one nation under God, indivisible with liberty and justice for all. Okay, regarding minutes from last time, I think we've got a couple minor changes, but we need to discuss and finalize. The first one would be in regard to the valley road project. We talked about three specific points. The first one was land use category which remains unchanged. The second was using the PRD where applicable and then lastly uh entrance to that particular property be limited to Valley Road. Uh the first two were covered in the minutes and in the report out. The last one regarding the uh limited access through Valley Road to the property was not like to propose a motion that we include that in the minutes as well as the report out.

I'll second that motion. Theresa. Um yes. um the the the PRD um to make sure that it is in that area. We it's memorialized. Maybe that in the the note as well if that's appropriate.

All in favor? All oppose. Melanie voice.

Yes. Remember Avery? That's fine. I'm fine with it. Sorry. My kids were yelling in the background. I'm sorry. What do we Oh, okay. I thought we Yes. Yes. Yes. Uh, member Hellfrey. Yes. Member Hman. Yes.

Member Hman. Yes. Okay, perfect. Uh, member Rubis, yes. Member Jackson, yes. Member Mets, yes. Member, perfect. Yes. Council member Rambo? Yes. Member Ren? Yes. Member Shiken? Yes. Perfect. Thank you. Passes.

Motion passes. Thank you very much. Uh Joe, regarding the Piglia presentation, if we could please like the last presentations when you are done with your part, we would like them to speak before we vote. Certainly, sir. And regarding the minutes, our apologies for missing those couple of items. We'll certainly strengthen the discussion relating to the overlay district and add the Valley Road access per your motion and action. Thank you.

Thank you. Dr. Rambo, that's a very good question and probably a question better posed to Mayor Garitano. But in the case of planning and zoning commission member Conn when he resigned from the commission at the beginning of 2026, he stayed on to serve as part of the master plan group. So if past practice is any indicator, um we would welcome Miss McCutchen's participation to the very end. She had a family commitment tonight and contacted the department right around 6:00 just to remind us that she wouldn't be available.

Travis, could you help with Joe's mind at all? Thank you. Thank you, Mr. Chair. Mr. Chair, and members of the group, first of all, I'd like to thank you for your attendance tonight. Certainly, achieving the quorum is a goal of the department and this group, and tonight, you've smashed through that number 12. So, thank you very much. We do appreciate it. As the chair mentioned in his opening remarks, this is our 19th meeting. Certainly, that's a milestone for many of you as well as us. And so, again, just want to extend the department's appreciation for your persistence and tenacity. Robin, Travis, Melanie, and I can't do this without all of you. So, you're an intricral part of making this city work and continue forward to be a great place to live, play, and work. Um, tonight under the miscellaneous item, there is a proposed schedule. And so, I think that schedule shows that there's light at the end of the tunnel. So hopefully we'll get there as u quickly as we can and we can kind of put this process to rest and have the plan in place for the next 10 years to make um Wildwood um the place we all

want it to be. Um as always we have drinks and snacks at the back of the room. There's coffee, water, soda, cookies, and fruit. So, I want to thank Melanie, Dawn, and the others for setting up and trying to make the place as hospitable as a city hall council chambers can be. So, thank you. And then one last note, um we didn't get a chance last night to acknowledge Miss Boomer Schlaggel, but she received a proclamation from our mayor and city council. So, congratulations again, Mr. chair and members of the group, as you know, we spent much of our last meeting at the end of April talking about four properties. The four properties um were dispersed around the city in many ways and the property owners had requested consideration of a possible land use change relative to the conceptual land use categories and the associated map. As we went through them, each of them were discussed, the property owners, other representatives presented relative to their requested changes and as we reached those conclusions, the motions were made. Tonight there is a summary of the four properties and I just want to briefly go through those summaries in terms of site A which is the properties relatively speaking in the Wildwood portion of Chesterfield Valley. The group recommended by unanimous vote to retain the industrial designation under the master plan but to allow downtown district uses as part of

potential development. The question that the group asked at the conclusion of that action is to make sure that they understood what downtown district uses entailed and included. And so as part of the summary tonight, we now have that list of uses, 35 in total that represent what the downtown district here in town center could accommodate, not necessarily just by right, but as part of a zoning process that would go through our planning and zoning commission and city council. A key component of the action of the group was that no residential be allowed within that portion of the industrial area. And as you can see from the list of uses, there are no residential activities as part of those that could be considered. If there are any questions regarding the list of uses, many of which may not be practical in the area, but certainly some that could complement what's what the development pattern is at this time and certainly offer some options for the owners of the property for the future. That's site A. Site B is the Valley Road property. Uh as you know there was a bit of a joke that uh three strikes are out and so from the department of planning's perspective we've endorsed potential change here three times and in each time the volunteer group has said no let's stay the course and the course is the property the 120 plus acres retain its non urban residential area designation and that was a unanimous vote again by

the group. As part of that and now reflected in the amended minutes, the discussion of the plan residential development overlay district was extensive and the ration for that extensive discussion was the fact that the overlay district will allow for more tree preservation, less disturbance of the site itself, protection of the waterways, and in many ways a less expensive devel development for the developer, meaning less miles of streets or feet of streets, less infrastructure installations, etc., etc. And so, again, a key component. And then finally, as part of the amended minutes tonight, the motion now addresses that access to that 120 acres be only via Valley Road. That means the two existing stub streets in the Bretmore Place subdivision will stay stub streets and not be extended to future development. Site B. Site C was a property that is located on the southeast corner of Route BA and Route 109. For many, many years, it has been a plant nursery with green houses with limited wholesale sales. The broker representing I believe the owner requested via letter that it be changed to industrial to allow for a greater utilization. Its current designation is non-urban residential area. The non-urban residential area defers to the non urban resident district zoning category and the permitted uses there. permitted uses

include plant nurseries with green houses and limited wholesale sales. The group said no change and the rationale again was that it is an area where new residential growth continues to occur and that residential growth is on large lots um new homes and so from the perspective of this group changing that character would be a disservice to those that have invested in in the area for residential purposes. Site C. Site D was kelp contracting. Matthew Kelp provided the presentation at the last meeting. Tom Kelp was here and the group discussed the nature of the current use legal but nonconforming under the provision of a board of adjustment variance granted many many years ago. The group agreed that this is a generational business that the kelps will continue to operate it through now Matthew and others. And so from the group's perspective, the change would be not the land use category. It would stay non- urban residential area, but that we would add industrial uses. And as part of that description in the updated materials, the department provided you the list of permitted industrial uses that would be appropriate for consideration on this particular property and the one immediately to the north. That list of uses contains 12 OP options and those options again would

be considered by the planning and zoning commission and then city council before being authorized to occur on that property or the adjoining property to the north. That was a unanimous vote as well. So those are the four actions that were taken by the group at our last meeting. The department would like to think that it captured um the intent and the discussion as best as it could in given amount of space to write. So certainly as we know we're going to strengthen the discussion in the minutes relative to the memorialization of the PRD and we'll add the Valley Road access allowance and none other but for the most part we're presenting these four summaries for consideration and any changes by the group tonight. Thank you.

Are you looking for a motion? Yes, I would appreciate it and action on the summaries. So, first of all, I want to say I thank you very much for the breaking down the uses in the final category that that clarification for everything helped me tremendously. I'm sure it helped other people as well. So, thank you for that. And second of all, I I would make a motion that we uh can approve those things and continue on. Is that what you're looking for? Yes, ma'am. That's that's my motion that we approve those as they are and approve those with the addition to the minutes and the report down with those changes. Yes. But you already covered that, right? Yes.

Yes. I think we're just kind of capturing it now into this document as well. Yes. Okay. So, if you could please add those into that, that would be my motion. Thank you. All in favor? question

those um uses looking at the uses that are listed. Um I I started thinking about where that's at. Is that are some of those things um going to cause us any problems down the road in the future with like the filling station and um the it's a hospital or the research laboratories something that because of the location next to the river

well certainly as you know it's protected flood plane So under the current zoning map it's shown as M3 not FPM3 flood plane industrial. Um so from that perspective certainly the caution I think the group took was residential in a protected flood site. It's one thing to be uprooted so to speak from your business environment. It's another not to have a place to call home or go back to home after a flood event. So we've removed the residential. Some of these uses certainly I think are highly improbable you in terms of happening at the at this location, the Wildwood portion of the valley. Certainly hospitals are based upon certificate of need. Is there a need in this area? I don't know. Um, Barnes Jewish Christian has a facility across the river near Highway 94 that could serve this population easily. There's St. Luke's. So, like I say, some of these certainly um are improbable. The department though didn't feel uh it was appropriate for it to start lining them out and saying we don't think this works here. We don't think this works here. This may work here better. I think ultimately that's a decision for the planning and zoning commission and city council based upon your direction via the master plan update. If

I may respond to that, I I think there's a few of them that maybe environmentally would would need to be off the list because not all of us are going to be here 10 years. just to think about the the motor oils, the lubricants and things that could get into the groundwater and into the river. The we had that discussion about um the research lab that wanted to go in over in the old bars and how much controversy there was with that. just um not knowing what a research lab might bring and being that close to the water source. I'm I just was a little concerned. I don't know how close you can be without causing water contamination, air pollution from the carbons and the nitrogen. Again, I I appreciate the context, but first and foremost, underground storage tanks won't work in the valley, period. That's why it's all surface storm water management. The rip wrap, the the basins, everything is at surface or near surface because of the water table. So from that perspective, I think again is it a viable use? not to the department of planning. Is it something that someone might might apply for? Possibly. Um, in terms of the water source, certainly that's a consideration. And in the case of for greenhouse and the and the the technology or the the biotechnology company the concern there

was is that residential was on all four sides and that residential pattern depended on the aquifer for potable water. here it's Missouri American and the that there is no well per se that would be accommodated to a development of any of these. It's just not a it's not practical and that's part of the reason that portion of the valley hasn't developed. Many of the necessary utilities including potable well water aren't readily available. They're there but not readily available. So certainly if over the course of between now and the next meeting collectively there are some suggested changes to the list, deletions, additions, we can certainly discuss those at that time. But again the department's opinion was the commission and the council will ultimately make the best determinations under the current review processes. You're welcome. Every opportunity as always is going to be looked at in a case-byase basis. Every time the environmental concerns are going to be looked at in I don't necessarily know how we can just magically come up with five things that aren't appropriate because we don't know how those five things are going to be implemented. So, if staff can guarantee that those concerns are going to be taken care of or at least looked at and measured, I don't see a problem.

Well, certainly the department would never guarantee success either one way or the other. 100% perfection is not what we achieve on any basis. I wouldn't say necessarily the other three planners in the room, but not me. Um, however, as part of this process, we have the advantage this update versus the other uh the other two in 2005 and 2015, we have it all on video and we have a record now. So if there are concerns about a filling station or a vehicle service or repair and the potential contamination of the groundwater via their activities, we have it on video. We can basically annunciate that at a meeting and at the meeting then the commission and council can say no this master plan group identified that and said it's a problem. We concur or we don't concur but if we don't concur how do you control it? How do you guarantee? And I think the council and commission are in a better position to guarantee it as the decision makers versus us.

So your recommendation was one either accept it or we wait a week and think about it. Is that where you are? Well, I'd love to meet with you all in a week, but I think we've got a few uh I think it's a few weeks, but yeah, but if you're willing, um but no, if if the motion on the floor is accept them as presented, uh the motion could be amended to u pull out side A and have the opportunity to review the list of uses. it I think that am I understanding that what you're asking is if we can itemize what can go in zoning. Is that what you're saying?

Is that what you're asking, Miss Clark?

Um, yeah. Just like we're doing for the industrial the other where we've got listed certain things that they can come in with that are not all the industrial um items. this um at this area. The only reason I'm asking this is because of the it says filling station. It says service center for vehicles. And um even if it's not the portable water, those those organic those B um VOCC's are there. They'll be there if somebody comes in. if we're not all here or we have some other group of P and Z that doesn't that makes some mistakes. Not that they're going I expect that. I just think that there's a few of these things. It's just like on the um the dry cleaning. It's only for pickup for a reason. You wouldn't want them to be dry cleaning in that area with all of those chemicals getting into the soil and into the water. And that that's my only concern is getting some of these chemicals that are contaminants and they will be contaminants. If just a small amount odor oil gets into the river, it's a big cleanup issue.

So, you're only concerned with the area down in in the valley. Is that the area that you're only concerned with? I'm the I'm just trying to make sure I understand. Valley, not Valley Road, but the valley down in the valley, right? Yes. The valley. Yes.

Okay. Okay. Well, I mean, it it seems to me and I I appreciate everything that you've said. I I don't necessarily disagree with it, but I think at some point we have to let the city kind of guide us in those things. And we have something that's zoned industrial. That's the only area we have industrial. Correct. And so I think that there's some things that we can't hamstring them on. I think that we have to trust that they and the the planning and zoning people will will do well. I and I the reason I don't disagree with you is because, you know, I'd like to say no data centers on there, but you can't say that. So I just think that that might be the only place in the city that any of that stuff can go.

Well, again, remember these are downtown district uses being transferred from town center. So conceivably in town center where we have greater population densities, we allow some of these uses. We have two filling stations so to speak, right? Etc. But everyone here is on potable water from Missouri American Water Company. And so the protection is obviously we don't want to disregard the aquifer. the aquifer spreads a great distance from it knows no right

land use boundaries or municipal boundaries but again I just think the process that's in place with our planning and zoning commission and city council will capture many of the they'll see a red herring in the bunch so to speak I I would agree with that and we have an airport down there already and gas stations down there already and warehouse down there in Chesterfield right not on our our property So the hope is that we, you know, Lewis, yeah, ju just west of that, is it Golden Triangle Concrete already over there and Dalco and there's a bunch of indiges now that are probably contributing environmental issues. So are they grandfather? I mean, we can't say yes to them and no to the next one.

Well, I think that they were grandfathered in and they and they do cause issues.

Well, first and foremost, they weren't grandfathered in. They're permitted by the underlying zoning, which is the M3 Industrial District, and were vetted through St. Louis County's planning process and county council. So, yes, there are some uses down there that I look at and think, wow. And the batch plan is one of them. But the batch plan is authorized under the zoning and there's an approved site plan. And so they do the best they can, I hope, to manage their processes, but certainly I think from the list of downtown district uses, we're actually deintensifying it to a certain degree, I think. So, thank you.

So, we have a motion to accept with a second. We have a motion to amend. We don't have a second yet. We have a second to the amendment. I did not make a motion to amend. I was just making comments. Okay. And if if that's the consensus, I just want to go on record that. Sure. Um in the video that like Mr. Bunch was saying, it's on record that that Understood. And we'll make sure it's in the minutes as well for the benefit of all of you. All in favor of the motion? I I

That's a delay. I think that was an affirmative. Okay, motion pass. Thank you, Mr. Chair. With your permission, I'll jump into the new site. Excellent.

Mr. Chair and members of the citizen oversight group, as you know, we received an application for consideration from Piglia Nursery um right after the deadline for submitts. Uh the department brought it forward at the last meeting noting that the day or two in terms of tardiness would have a 10-year impact in many ways. And so the group agreed to allow it to be added to the list of the four properties. And tonight the intent is to present the proposal to you all for consideration. As we did in the other four instances, the department will give a brief overview. Mersiglia are here. Pete and Chris. I've advised them they have up to 12 minutes to present their proposal or their request and then as we've done in the past there'll be questions and comments and then if there is um an inclination motion second can be made and a vote. So the site as Mr. Newberry has placed on your monitors and behind you on the wall is Piglia's nursery. It's the compilation of three properties to form the track of land. It is located on the west side of State Route 109 at the intersection of Clayton Road and as you can see is adjoined by St. Alban Row Catholic Church, Lafayette High School, a five five lot single family subdivision to the south and then across the street is a 10acre tract of land that's vacant but farmed. And then to the north is Babler Elementary School. The site itself

um has been under utilization u since the mid 19 around 1990 or so for a plant nursery with green houses and sales room. Um, I like to think the business has been very successful as it enters what I believe now is almost 30 years of operation at that location. Over that 30 years of operation though, obviously things have changed. If you look at the report from St. Louis County that granted the conditional use permit, it does not show Lafayette High School. It shows a future Clayton Road extension to Route 109. And for the most part there is no residential development in its near vicinity. The three properties again um have um have active utilization at this time and from the perspective of the department a lot has changed in its vicinity. The department notes that because again as prog as development has occurred, Route 109 south of the subject property is now a four lane arterial um and has a number of roundabouts to the south and a traffic signal at the intersection at its frontage. Traffic volumes generally are medium to high, particularly during peak hours or school hours when students are arriving or departing. Tonight, the Piglas have submitted a letter. That letter is dated April 3rd and part of your packet. Also, as mentioned, there is the conditional use permit that was granted by St. Louis County in 1988 for the activity and the most recent site development plan is

included in the packet of information for your reference purposes. The department does note as part of its summary that obviously this business has a commercial component to it. It has a sales room, conducts retail sales. It has outdoor storage of materials and salailable products and for all intents and purposes acts as a commercial use but it's zoned nu non- urban resident district and designated under our master plan as non- urban residential area again not a nonconformity but an allowance under a conditional use permit. The department looks from the perspective at it and thinks maybe some additional commercial could be accommodated, a different type of use. However, across the street is a 10 acre vacant parcel of ground that's used for farming purposes, but certainly any decision relative to the Piglia nursery property will have ramific ramifications across Route 109. And so tonight, as the department summarizes in the um information, it is wanting direction in terms of what the group would like to do. And with that, the department will conclude. And if there are any questions relative to the information that's been provided by the department, it'd be glad to answer them at this time. Can you elaborate on what you just really said about the adjacent property across one? What does that mean? Well, from the department's perspective,

the it is not recommending that any change be made to the Piglia property until a discussion is held by the group because what happens on Pigglia's property obviously will have ramifications across the street. So, it's I can't see the group being able to separate the two. There are dis distinguishing circumstances. The one the 10acre property on the east side of Route 109 is vacant. It doesn't have an activity. It doesn't have a commercial component so to speak. So there is a difference. But if we expand what's there in terms of Mr. the Siglia's business, then I think it's very difficult to tell the property owner across the street, you can build three three acre lots.

So, my first question is what exactly does Biglia want us to do? So, can we can we hear from them in a few minutes? I think they'll be able to if there's any questions about anything that we've provided. Well, I I just my question is I don't really quite understand what the diff what they are looking for because it's surrounded by schools and homes. So I and I I just don't understand what change they they want. And so I'll I'll defer my questions until I hear from them. Thank you. Rob. Yeah. Is your microphone on?

I'm sorry. That 10acre parcel. Um, do we know anything about the ownership? I mean, it's right between Lafayette and the other school. Um, and uh, right now we have right now it's just a black hole to all of us. You're right about the you can't tell them just to build three three acre three homes on three acres. um it's not set up for that because there's a lot of high density, you know, homes already on there. Do we know do we know anything about it or are we just supposed to take our crystal ball and say, um, well, we should change the zoning of that. I mean, what are we looking for in terms of that parcel uh even before we get to the Pacia folks? So in terms of ownership, it's owned by the Bertlo family,

right?

The Bertlo family and the Bertlos own much of the agricultural property at Valley Road and Streker Road. So farmers there, farmer here. They actually grow crops here. Um, has there been interest in a commercial type activity on the 10 acres? Yes. Um, at least on a couple of occasions. um convenience stores with gas pumps and car washes have asked if that would be an allowable use or a use that the city would consider favorably and the department has advised them. The master plan um recommends against that. Um it is a difficult property. It's an orphan in many ways because around it as you've said developments occurred under St. Louis County and Lafayette High School's been developed. Babler Elementary has been developed over the years and Dartmouth developed as well.

Yeah, this is tough. I mean, because we can't tell people not to, you know, not that they can't achieve the highest best use of their of their property in the future. It has to remain farming. That's no good. And threeacre homes, they don't belong there. So, um I think we need a strategy. Uh

can I just make a comment? I lived in that neighborhood that backs to that lot and I I don't think that anybody in that neighborhood had any idea that this was that lot was going to be under discussion for tonight. And I don't think that we should change anything for that lot because all of those people lived there. That is a it's a unique piece of land. It's got it's got valleys and and I I just don't think that that we should consider changing anything with that lot right now.

I wouldn't suggest that. But what I was suggesting is that we as a group need to consider it and if we need to have a public hearing or anything like that, we should probably try to nail that down. Um and maybe we sort of do it in tandem with the Piglia proposal such as it is because um we can't make a decision on one without the other. I don't that's my that's my personal opinion

and again I'm not the department is not trying to confuse the issue but I think it would be um an error on the department's part to say act on pigia and if the group were to add a list of commercial uses and not know that there's a potential ramification across the street that's all I'm saying you can make a standalone decision based upon the letter and application before you from the piglius, but know that someone is going to look at that and say, "Okay, now how about us?" I and I understand that. So, I'm just I think that we can't make any decisions until we know what particularly it

certainly. What about changing or making a recommendation for that piece of property to subvert? Well, um, that's an option. If Mr. Newberry would bring up the land use map and if you'll give us a second, Mr. Chair, we'll show have it up there shortly. Hey, Dan, you didn't if you could zoom in a little for me. Sure. Appreciate it. So, um, as you can see, Lafayette High School and the property across the street, the 10 acres we've been discussing are suburban. So, I'm incorrect in my assessment. I apologize. that could accommodate potentially up to eight or nine home sites.

Um, so I'm just thinking about giving them a little bit of recourse, still get physically what they want, make a possible recommendation to Vickiy's point. Those people make we don't know what they want yet. Nobody has said what they wanted. It's coming. It's coming. We should have a discussion on what

fair. I'll yield the podium, gentlemen and ladies. Well, my name is Chris Biglia and um been a nurseryman landscaper out in Wildwood for 35 years and um I wouldn't be here if I didn't think we had a unique piece of property. Um, you know, you have Clayton Road that's dedicated that runs straight through my property right in cuts it in half and then stops. Um, I feel that there's more uses than than just a nursery and garden center. However, you know, one thought that I had was uh well, it could be a an event center tied in with a garden center with a high-end landscape around it. Um, but I don't think that would consume the whole property. But I that would be I think a good different mix and maybe something that the the city would have would appreciate or the uh but I feel that maybe there's u some uh if it's not you know an indust not industrial but um um additional uses could be for you know maybe the school uh maybe there's um a small light retail um um and I feel that you know I don't see I don't you know if it's just building homes there if if it's not a nursery you know you're not

going to I don't think you know three homes are going to be you know fit in that property you know so I feel that there's just additional uses that you know I see there you know um and maybe it's something that the city, you know, can help me with, you know, develop, you know, because it is a unique land piece of land. Um, you know, again, if it was a couple blocks down and it wasn't at an intersection with a, you know, state highway that runs through my property, I wouldn't be here. But, um, we just feel that there's additional uses for my land than than just a, you know, nursery and garden center, you know. Um, and I feel that there's, you know, with the amount of traffic that is at that intersection and and the amount of frontage that I have along the road there, um, you know, there's just that just a high visible high there's so much visibility there along with, uh, the road frontage that I have. Um, and again with the high school right next door, the church next door, um, you know, I just feel like there's there's many other uses than than just the um the garden center. However, I you know, I know that's I don't see a gas station there. We've had gas stations u uh inquire. We've had fast food joints. of course I'll I'll all inquire with our property and um we understand that that's never going to you know be there you know designation there but we're just looking for you know additional designation than what we have at the current our current designation now so

let's ask a question I so I think everyone asked what's your ask well my ask

you want a new zone as the master plan is that where we're at Well, I mean, believe me, I you know, not you obviously know that I'm in my busiest season. So, the I I've it's been a question that it's been burning with me for the last week. You know, what is my ask? And um yes, I mean do I see uh uh you know a you know my our garden center in a different light or if it's there it's tied into a an event center that maybe has a small cafe attached to it. Is it um uh you know you know some additional green houses you know additional parking um you know that would be one you know aspect that you could we could maybe see in our property but you know I'm I'm approaching 60 years old. I don't know that you know that's a large investment but it's it's just something that I you know that could be a something that would work there. Um and I also feel that you know maybe it's a if there's you know uh something that maybe an office building that would work there for you know maybe the school or you know light and u uh uh yeah so my ask is u you know just additional usages you know uh what you know what what the city would allow us. Okay, I'm g just give you an example from the planning and zoning just to give you Yes. There was some other nursery out by St. Albins's and they wanted to partner up with Monsanto.

Yes. And they decided that and everyone was worried about chemicals and all this other stuff that's going on and it did not get approved. Now, that conditional use permit allowed them to be a nursery and an honor, right? If I got that right. Yeah. So if you wanted to do something, I think it would go through the planning and zoning and you would say, "Hey, I would like to add to a conditional use this other property and would like to do this." Whether you partnered with the school and they jointly did it with you or the city for something. Yes. So from from the perspective, does does the zone need to be changed or just leave it alone and then that's something between you and the planning and zoning in the city? I feel like I'm educating here and I just to kind of help. Yeah, I I see what you're wanting to do. That's fine. But I

Yeah. Why change the non-urban residential for this? Right. If that's what you if you would like it changed that draft or Yes. I I would like a change in the you know to commercial um town center. It would be town center. Okay. Yes. So yes. And that's your designation. Yes. Louis, but how big of a how big of a parcel? How big is that?

It's the little It's eight and a half acres and acres. So, are are you looking when you say for uses, are you looking at doing something passive income wise where you want to have the ability, as you said, to not it's not going to be a Pigia family. It's not going to be a second revenue stream, but you want the ability to be able to parcel it off and sell two acres so that somebody can put a small office building. or is this more is that is that what you're trying

I I don't know if um that could if if for if it's a nursery garden center that's you know again when I say the when I say the word event center you know you know a place where you know maybe you're you know you have the green goods there tied in with you know a well landscaped property with you know again larger green houses That's that's one take and then but I I feel that I would need in order for the property to be you know valued enough I I think I would need additional usage you know other than just that you know

the I from the master plan perspective looking at this I you know there was more issue more things I would ask and one of my problems is urban sprawl. So we have the town center and that is 2% of our whole 68 square miles where we want to keep everything and keep those all of these different things that you talked about keep it in one place retail businesses and um so putting something there I would in my mind I'm thinking is that going to stretch it out so somebody else is going want to put something else and another person want to put something else. So now we've got town center all the way out there. Another question I have and I have sent a note to um Mr. Brown asking him about the capability and the um the the uh capacity and the capability of that intersection. if there was something else there to bring people in. Where are we on our our capability of that intersection? And he's he's supposed to be getting me the intersection safety evaluation calculation to see because it is so close to two schools and a church, which causes it to the scoring to be uh a little different than if it's just a regular intersection. Right. So those things would concern me before I would say anything about changing that designation. Um the the the area across the street that 10 acre plot also worries me that something else is going

to want to go in there. So that's in my head is what is this going to start? because it's going to start like a snowball of other people wanting to extend our town center which is not something that really our residents are mostly.

I guess my my my answer to that is again I wouldn't be here because of the the the intersection and where I am if I was a block down and I wasn't at that intersection. I I wouldn't waste the the committee's time, you know, but I feel that there's just, you know, it's such a visible piece of property and it has a light and um and Clayton Road um through through my property. It makes it I think it makes it just a unique piece piece piece of property. Jim,

well, I mean, as Um if it's if it's not a nursery, I'm not going to be in the nursery business for the next 30 years. You know, hopefully I'm here for another 10, you know, and uh God willing. But um I I I think it's in order from um a financial standpoint from our point is, you know, an additional designation and and additional things that I could put there would be advantageous for us. But again, you know, the intersection help or I think it's um it's a help, you know. Um Yes. You know,

definitely. Yes. Is it that was put there by St. Louis County future plans of obvious blocked off. Well, I mean at some point in time, you're not going to play road running through the problem, right? And since useless, it's not right.

What would what would it take to just remove that portion of Clayton Road and just have Clayton in Yeah. And that could be, you know, looked into and, you know, that's Yeah. No, I'll just say you know is far ahead by any time because you want to put Well,

right. Yeah. No, I I understand that. Um probably

Yeah. Right. Yes, Vicki.

So, this is my opinion if I mean this is where I sit with it. You have residences to one side of you. You have three schools surrounding you. You have the empty lot across the way. You have a church. Um, and you're at the intersection of Clayton and 109, which is quite honestly a nightmare when the school's coming and going. Um, but you have a business right now that the lights are off at night, so it doesn't impact those residences, the people that are there. Um, and and while I respect I absolutely respect your ask, I don't know that I personally would vote for you to um to have a commercial aspect to it other than I mean if if it was so very narrowly defined just for that reason because it's surrounded by children in residences and um so if we were going to consider anything any kind of a zoning change to that it would be It would have to be the narrowest in my mind unless we continued on with the cup. I I I would not be in favor of changing it just for the reasons that I stated.

Rob, yeah, this will be quick. First, a question. Um, this is Joe. This looks like it's threequarters of a mile, every bit of threequarters of a mile from the uh from Town Center proper. Um, do we have any other uh non-ontiguous parts of our town center zoning? No, okay. So, this would be a a new thing if we were to decide it was town center.

Okay. Can can we uh is it appropriate for us to ask you to to make a recommendation or a suggestion? Because you're right. We I think it's incumbent on this commission or this this group to to consider that other parcel um in you know in this area. I mean it's otherwise it's we're kicking it down the road. Um and maybe it's okay to just let the um let it go before planning and zoning commission. they do a fine job. Um, is that would that be your suggestion or do you have other things that we haven't heard you say?

Well, to discuss the planning and zoning commission, what would happen if no change is recommended by the group relative to its conceptual land use category and a developer wanted to come in and propose something of a more commercial nature on either property?

Yes. It would be a tandem request in that they'd have to ask for a master plan change. Traditionally, the planning and zoning commission says that's only done every 10 years. And so from that perspective, the only uses are those uses that could be considered permitted or conditional in the NU, non- urban resident district zoning category, not land use category, zoning. And so that's why the discussion of land use is so imperative as part of the 10-year update. The policy has been we don't change during that 10 year that intervening 10 years.

That's that's what you would re that's what you would suggest is that we don't change it. Well, it's it's a difficult one because as I say it it walks like commercial. It talks like commercial and from my perspective is commercial. Is it its highest and best use under the non-urban resident district? The only thing I could think that is also a conditional use is a child care center. That might be even a higher and better use. I don't know. 10acre child care center is pretty extreme. I'm sorry. Can I ask a question? Sure.

Okay. Sorry. I apologize if I'm on delay. My I internet here is not the best. Um I hear everybody's concerns and I also just I empathize with Mr. Piggly. I would not want to hand tie any business owner's ability to um you know adapt their business to create passive income or to just change with the times. But I I do as a resident myself feel that my I would be much more likely to support something if he were to say exactly what he wanted to do. When I hear an event space, yes, he's got a lot of plants on the property. And as a millennial myself, I feel like that's a real big thing right now. You know, if you want to create a little venue on your property, utilizing what you have for bridal showers or, you know, graduation parties or something like that, that's not going to really spill outside of your current business hours. I feel like that is something most people in this room I would hope would consider much more strongly than throwing out the idea of potentially parceling it off to we don't even know what. Um is that I it just sounded like you have a very broad idea. I do you have anything in specific at this time or um is that something you'd be able to come up with for the group? Well, I think it's it's you know, I I guess I'm looking for, you know, you know, maybe some suggestions that would that the the group would consider, you know, knowing that, you know, you know, it's it's not going to be, you know, CA commercial or um you know, a gas station or, you know, I understand that that's, you know, going to be a far reach um But um maybe it's something that um again it's has you know that's something that's communitydriven but has a higher use and um maybe an

additional revenue stream other than just the nursery business. you know, some something that would that would maybe complement it or um and that's where, you know, the event space, you know, idea kind of came to mind. And uh um and then but maybe not being able to fill up the whole eight 8 acres with that particular you know uh vision. Then maybe it's, you know, something that uh again it's, you know, maybe it's an uh an office building of some sort with light commercial um that's um that's maybe low impact. You know,

Scott, last thing I'll say is I always like things where there's balance. So something that So the way it works in P&Z, you would come up and right, we would see it. Joe would work with you and Travis and they would say, "Hey, we'd like to change the zoning, right?" And then everyone gets notice, all the neighbors, the school, and everyone else gets notice and then they have their say as well. And so the community, if we did it here, my concern would be we would be skipping that step of the citizens that live in the area of, oh, I'm okay. Now, I I assume with what you're describing, the things you would do very be very low impact, right? Probably might not be a problem. and and maybe it's just an extension of a cup, right,

for the next person that comes along. Yes. As well, I don't I don't know that master plan is the place to do this at. I think this is a P&Z. But Joe, you're the expert. I was just my two cents. That's all I got. And again, I I would not be here if it wasn't for what I think is a unique piece of property, though. That's that's why I'm here. Sydney,

thank you. Um I I will say I agree. I think it is a unique place. Um, and I think it could get a lot of utility no matter which way which direction we would go. I kind of had a question for Joe. So, the property where it's Parkside Grill at Streker and Clayton, how is that handled? Because that's part of suburban residential, but it has the daycare and it has the really popular restaurant as well. Mr. Mupper, um the the actual commercial zoning of the four corners occurred by St. Louis County and when the city incorporated it didn't want that commercial pattern on the four corners to expand. So it made it suburban. But in the suburban definition, in the master plan, we accommodated the lots that had existing commercial and gave them what I would call a caveat.

Okay. Thank you. Yeah, because I was thinking, you know, the same way we could utilize a CP or something, but Thank you. Yes, ma'am. So just for clarification, are you would we be voting to allow the consideration, not necessarily stipulate what that would be? Is that how I understand it?

Well, I think you could do either. The department would probably not recommend picking a single use and saying this is what we think it should be. The likelihood of that being successful probably would be slim. Um, I think from the perspective of the department, we would never recommend that the land use designation be changed to town center creating an island or as was described the sprawl. The best I could offer to the group is that we retain the non-urban residential area designation, but we look at what would be reasonable uses here and if it were to occur on the adjoining or the abuing or adjacent 10 acres, would that be reasonable there as well?

Mr. Piggy, I would love for you to have freedom to be reading your just so you know, but I also understand that all the ramifications that come with that were probably not would love that. Yeah, bro. Okay, I was just going to say um it kind of is uh concerning to change a zoning when you don't know specifically what you have in mind to do as far as like you said maybe an office building. Well, well, I personally I cannot see an office building there. We have

well the town center for that sort of thing. But does it mean that you need to change zoning if uh maybe you wanted to open a little cafe as part of your

business? Would that require you to change your zoning? Like if he said, "Oh, I want to have a little cafe off to the side or something." Would you have to change the zoning for that? Well, again, Miss Coleman, remember the non-urban residential area land use category says the only zoning district that can be considered and the uses associated with it is the non-urban resident district. So, commercial activities in the residential district are few and far between. The Piglas have one now, the sales room in conjunction with the plant nursery. And as I mentioned, there's a child care center allowance and a couple of others, but nothing to the scale that obviously would probably satisfy the piglas.

So, okay. Well, it just seems to me um to change zoning when we don't really know specifically what for. I mean, right. So when I say office building, you know, maybe it's something institutional, you know, that ties in with the school, the church or, you know, so

I think there like needs to be more specific. Well, again, um, you know, since the, you know, there's a 10-year span between, you know, the the the planning or the I I feel that I needed to be here, you know, and have at least an opportunity to speak and to recognize how unique this piece of property is. Otherwise, I would not be here. I wouldn't waste your time that, you know, so that's

so I don't want to put words in your mouth. Yeah. To kind of summarize, I see two things. Sooner or later, some point in time, you may think about retiring. You may think about selling a property. If you decide to sell a property, a change in zoning would be significant as far as your Yes. portfolio. Yes, everybody understands that. It's also the most hardest things to accomplish. Yes. Second alternative is considering other people's input. Maybe like businesses and I don't know what a like business is but right you have a little retail shop in your right

landscape business. Maybe you say hey I want to add a thousand square foot lawnmower shop next to that. Right. Yeah. And that's a like business. Yes. Or if I want maybe you want to start a tree trimming business. maybe that lines up with your business. Those kind of things presented would get a lot more traction than and I understand I understand. Yeah. Does that make sense?

Yes. Um but I feel you know you know that's where I thought well if the you know again the event space would be something I think that would be unique and uh it would you know have a lot of u you know tie in with what we do with the landscaping business and you know I could uh you know so I feel that that would be a nice reach but I also thought about you know rental like a rental business of some sort you know equipment or stuff like that. So,

yeah, there um there's things that I don't know about this project. Like some of the people have have already mentioned, we don't know what the um allowable uses would be if we kept it at the non-urban plus uses. And so that would be make it really hard to vote on as well as um where it's at. So close to the schools. I don't know how close you can be to a school and serve alcohol have alcohol like at an event center or something. How close you could be to those schools if if it's a certain number of feet or if uh you know you're far enough away. I don't know. But that would be something that we'd need to find out before we made a designation of or any change to there's just a lot of unknowns at this point and like um the chair was saying we don't know how long you will have this. So if we gave you know an o if if it was changed to a town center we wouldn't know what the next person would just come in and do. We would have to do this and I agree with Mr. Rambo or Dr. Rambo that we have to think about that other property, the other properties that are around their large open places or places that we've had um other people inquire about to make this um fair to every years ago Gilbergs used to have seminars where they would teach people how to garden and and such. Um, that would possibly be a an associated use to your nursery business.

And I'm I'm assuming you're going to keep the main focus of that property with the nursery.

Yes. Um, yes and no. I mean, uh, that could be the case, but, um, as Dan said, you know, as I approach retirement age, yes, you look and a nursery works all his life and then he, you know, hopes to someday sell his business and his property for the highest use and the most valuable value. and uh uh under its current designation, it's you it's you know again um you know we've built a big business long a long-standing business um and yes I I'd like to see that you know you know continue um with some variations you know to that property's use category. That's that's we're looking for additional use and it's, you know, and I don't want to be I'm not I don't want to be vague in what I what I'm asking for. I it's just uh again with the Town Center uh review, you know, every 10 years, you know, I feel like I had to come up and speak, you know, now to at least get in front of you and uh hopefully um you'd um you know, give me some advice, I guess. So

take it from here. I think if we look at it a little different way, we've had other builders, whatever, come to us at the 10-year plan or say you brought us somebody that said, "Yeah, we want to buy your property." They come here and they give us a pitch. We want to buy Piglia's property and we want to put in an office building, right? And this is what it's going to look like. And then we would have all the discussions about is that really the place for an office building. The answer would probably be no, right?

But nine out of 10 things that anybody that wanted to buy your property and do other than residential would be a pretty steep hill to climb. And I think that's kind of where everybody's coming.

Right. Well, yeah. As I stand here before you, I I understand that. you know, I I you know, I I I Yeah, again with the unique, you know, property where it sits, you know, and the and the traffic light that I have and the corner and the city or the the like the highway that or Clayton Road that's uh designated to go or that's through my property. Yes, I can, you know, go through the channels to try and retrieve that property back, but um uh it just makes it um yeah, just looking for some advice from the city. What is it?

Everybody think about we can take a vote on this tonight. Probably know which way it would go. Yeah. Or you can come back in a week and say this is the specific use that I want to do on this property and we can vote on that. So, we should Can I Can I make a motion? Okay. Okay. I'm sorry. Mr. Vunich would like to First of all, can I can I say one thing to you? I I don't think that this was a waste of time for you to come here and I'm grateful that you came. I'm uh just so that you know. May I ask for just one more question? I'm sorry.

Okay. Just to summarize real quick, you you're just looking for the opening to say I don't know what I want to do. I just want it to be something that you will consider at a future, right? That you're just wanting that at this point. We don't have to say this is what your business is going to be and this is exactly uh you know what comes with that. So that's why I'm asking is it just that we say yes, we will consider it. Am I missing something here? Yeah. Can I just Can I ask a question?

Am I delay? I don't know.

I agree with you. Should be in planning and or it's, you know, um I guess uh you know something other than a you know 3 acre designation for a developer if it's you know it's a uh you know town homes or or you know condom many or not condominium names, but you know, uh, detached homes or, you know, something where we, you know, maybe a a a developer would want or I have, you know, single family homes, you know, would be, you know, maybe not my the best use for it. I I think unless it was

um against because it's there's, you know, it's at that intersection. It's such a busy intersection. I just see, you know, something that's commercialized with that's that's tasteful to the city's liking and and uh you know, I'm sorry I don't have the plan, you know, fully thought out, but uh you know, again, it's you know, that's why I'm here. You know, the you know, what what possibilities there could be. Um, Director Renich, I I have a question. Maybe I misunderstood. So, this is not a zoning issue. This is a land use issue. So, it wouldn't be something that he could go to planning and zoning and get taken care of. Am I right about that?

Certainly. If the group were to say keep the current land use designation unchanged, it doesn't preclude a developer to come to the planning and zoning commission and say I want to change the master plan. What I've said is it the the commission and city council has said we don't typically change the land use categories midstream. We do it on that 10-year cycle. And that's been pretty much the case for the last 30 years. So I appreciate Mr. Jackson saying this is something the commission can handle, but the commission has said no, it's something that the update of the master plan should should have addressed and that's been the practice. Saying that everybody has a right to come to to get their day in court, so to speak. So, black and white, we're at a point where a presentation is made tonight to change the land use category and we need to vote on whether or not we agree to do that.

Yeah, that's center. Change of period. Yeah, just change your period.

So, to the group, I would offer this. There seems to be a reluctance particularly on the part of the department to create an island of town center not contiguous to its current boundary. I think that has ramifications that you all don't realize. That would be Highway T and Route 100. That be Fox Creek Road and Route 100. That be every major intersection throughout town. That's not going to work. Don't do it. I'm just telling you. You have the right to do it as a recommendation, but I will tell you it's a problem. I've done you a disservice because I've categorized everything as permitted or conditional uses. How about you give Robin, Travis, Melanie, and I an opportunity to look at something called accessory? Meaning the non-urban residential area would stay in place. The primary use would be the plant nursery. What would be appropriate and compatible with the plant nursery? Maybe it is lawn maintenance, tree service. Maybe it is an event center that takes advantage of the trees, the shrubs, the bushes, all the things that make an area, the garden area attractive during the year. So, I guess what I'm saying is I wouldn't necessarily encourage you to vote on what you've heard tonight. Maybe a little more opportunity for the department to offer you an option for consideration that may be a little fairer to the property owner and the overall community. Remember, accessory uses the dog wags the tail. So, the dog is the plant nursery, green houses, sales room. The tale is what's accessory to that and what works with that and that would be my offer to the

group. So devil's advocate say we approved a lawnmower shop. Could the guy on the opposite corner put in a lawnmower shop? Remember it's still non- urban residential area and it has to be accessory or what I would consider compatible with a plant nursery. Neither of which exist there. Okay. Yes, ma'am. I would move to um to to postpone our vote until we get that information that um Mr. Bonich just mentioned. Rob, I I will second your motion. All in favor?

I I All oppose. Motion pass. Thank you. We'll be back at our next meeting with hopefully something that you all can kind of more put your teeth in. So, thank you. Yeah. And gentlemen, we did not it's not our intent to drag you through the you know through the mud. It's just a lot of questions, a lot of unknowns and as things materialize the decisions get a lot easier. Yes, sir. They use one of the ears we're going to take over.

Have enough conversation. I got one left. Understood. Get out of there. Understood. It's really good when you go to see mother. That's tough. Thank you.

We appreciate your input that Thank you all for having Thanks. Well, Mr. chair will return with hopefully a an idea or two so you can consider such and respond to the piglius request. Mr. Chair, with your permission, we can talk about the transportation element next if you'd like. Please.

Thank you. Well, first of all, I do want to recognize Mr. Brown. Our director of public works is here tonight. Excuse me. He is also our city engineer and our traffic expert. As you know um earlier this year we did go through the transportation element and talk about the goals objectives and policies. A component of that transportation element is the classification of arterial roadways for the city of Wildwood. We also noted that the designation of arterial roadway has some ramifications relative to priority funding for improvements, maintenance, um ice and snow removal, and even in our zoning ordinance, certain regulations favor more signs along arterial roadways, larger signs along arterial roadways than nonarterial roadways. So, we had a great discussion about the list of existing arterial roadways divided into two categories, east, west, north, south. Mr. Brown was kind enough to stand up at the podium and respond to your questions, comments. And for the most part, I'd like to think um the efforts of Mr. Brown and the Department of Planning have led to the information that is before you tonight being accurate and reflective of your comments. Saying that, I do want Mr. Brown to come forward if he'd like and mention anything that he has um developed as part of this. We've also, and this is key for Mr. Brown, defined what an arterial roadway is. That was a request of the group as well. So, Mr. Brown.

Um Joe, thank you very much. I don't um members, I don't know that I have any prepared or any additional comments for you tonight. Um I think Joe did a fine job and pretending or putting together the information that is in front of you tonight for the meeting. So, um if there's any particular questions I can help out with, I'd be glad to do that. Otherwise, I do believe that what Joe's put together is very good. Thank you.

Yes. Last time uh we had talked a little bit about East West Arterial Roadways and we had if I remember right me mentioned Babler View Drive and then I thought in reviewing this how about Pawn Grover Parkway is as designating those two as major arterial east west. Um I do recall at least the discussion about on Grover Parkway potentially being added. Um uh that certainly could be considered. U it is a short street. It does not continue through or any length. So I from that perspective it would be maybe less desirable as an art roadway but um it it could be considered. On my five minute dog walk this morning, I counted 30 cars going by on Babler View Drive.

And Babler View, I would I would venture to say it would be more of a local street um or a collector rather than arterial quite frankly. Um it it while it may carry a higher volume than many other res residential streets, it's still doesn't function more as an arterial roadway. It's more of a collector connecting through from 109 to Westland Farms. And Mr. Chair, I could add the Babler View Drive from the perspective of the Department of Planning and I think the Department of Public Works was would concur. Arterials typically don't have direct residential access. And in the case of Babler View Drive, people have to back out onto it. That is not necessarily what you want to do. Basically, it designated as an arterial. It truly is a residential street at the very least. It may be a collector, but with its design, um, I would argue that it shouldn't necess it shouldn't be an arterial. And if we were supposed to add it and it didn't get there, my apologies. Um I I don't know if this can be added into this this document or not, but is there any way we can designate the weight limits on some of these rules because it's not followed very well. Um I would defer to Joe, but um uh the weight limit restrictions are a function of in large part um if there are restrictions relative to structures on the roadways that exist in place. So that's not something that would necessarily be in my mind perview

of the master plan. It's more of a restriction based on what's already constructed in the field. Um, so we may have an older structure that's not designed to accommodate trucks. Then we typically put a a weight restriction in place on a route. Um, actually we have some of those in residential streets as well. But and Miss Clark, I would argue arterials are the streets you want the heavier vehicles on, not the local collectors residential streets. So placing weight limits on arterials would for all intents and purposes in my mind create a an untenable situation where we're saying these are the roads that can accommodate more traffic because they are designed to accommodate such but we're saying you can't have larger vehicles on it because of weight limits. Um so I see them as kind of counter my apologies. Suppose I'm I'm thinking specifics in my head of of Wells Creek Road that um the there are weight limits on Wild Tours Creek Road that are not followed very well. So I I just thought maybe if there was a a note on the ones that have those weight limits in your list. I I don't know. Maybe it can't be in this list, but just trying to think of a way to point that out.

I appreciate that, but I don't think the truck drivers are probably following the master plan when they're driving down the road. The signs are probably your best bet. We we do have the signage out there. Most of the regular truck drivers, the responsible ones are aware of those weight restrictions. Obviously, can't guarantee what all of them will do. Um, and it is difficult to enforce those those type of restrictions, quite frankly. Joe, are you looking for approval of this list? Mr. Chair.

Sorry, Mr. Chair. Yes. Um, obviously there's been a few questions relating to Babler View Drive, Pongrover Parkway. Um certainly we can consider those but tonight we are presenting to you what we believe is the direction received from the group relative to the arterial system and we would also ask for an approval of the definition of an arterial roadway. Any motions to Joseph? Make that motion Teresa. All in favor? I

motion passed. Thank you, Mr. Brown. Thank you. Mr. Chair, with your permission, we can go to the next item on the agenda, which is the first two of the six narratives for each of the elements. And before beginning the presentation, I do want to acknowledge the assistance from um Miss Clark who provided input into the narratives that will be presented to you tonight and at a future meeting. So, thank you Mr. Chair and members of the group. The initial master plan that was adopted in 1996 contained a narrative or preface relative to each of the elements. the content of those narratives were specific to the individual elements and spoke to in many regards why the goals, objectives, and policies were part of that element. Meaning in the case of the environmental element, the disregard by St. Louis County for the characteristics of the land causing problems in each of the watersheds where overdevelopment was occurring specifically Cox Creek etc. So in the information provided to you there are three columns. The first column is the recommended revision. The second column is the existing version from 2016. And then the third column is the submitt from one of our group members, Miss Clark. And the department used that extensively in its revision to the original. So tonight I just want to kind of go through the key points of it very

briefly. So in terms of the revised description the narrative the department did first and foremost as each of them have for the last 30 years reference the plan of intent. The plan of intent was developed by the incorporators as a component and requirement of the St. those county boundary commission that was for all for the purposes of the discussion regarding the incorporation where everybody got their information. Here are our plans. Here are what we here is what we plan to do. Here is our revenue projections etc etc. So the plan of intent is referenced as part of the environmental element. the early incorporators as part of the plan of intent. And over the last 30 years, I've always said the environment is a key element that makes Wildwood unique and why Wildwood is here. And so it goes into the description of the ecology, the things that are so sensitive that past development practices and in some regards current development practices had to be abandoned. or revised respectfully. So again, the ecology it speaks to long steep hillsides, narrow ridgetops, dissected drainage patterns, clay and chury soils, young mature woodlands, all forming what we come to call wildwood and love because of it. Then it goes on to basically say that we can't sit on our laurels. We have to be vigilant. We have to always kind of cast an eye toward what's being developed, what's being proposed, and our regulations

keeping pace with the changes we're seeing or the consumer preferences over what have been the first 10 years, 20 years or 30 years. It also then goes into detail about the need for renewed efforts particularly as it relates to our watersheds. And as you know the initial efforts over the first 10 years focused a great deal on our watersheds and ensuring that we understood those that were healthy and those that were stressed. We spent a great deal of time addressing particular problem areas. Many of those being bridge crossings and the triple meander in Cox Creek. What we found though starting in roughly around 2020 is that the watersheds despite our best efforts were still experiencing stress and in some instances increased stress due to a number of factors. And so wershed erosion task force was formed and ultimately it came up with three recommended steps. Create a storm water m management master plan to retit retrofit older detention retention basins and to continue to repair critical locations threatening first public infrastructure and properties and then private properties. Finally, it goes into the steps that have been made to kind of keep us at pace with our changing world and environment. It talks about the land use categories and why they are there. the town center, the suburban, the non-urban, the industrial. And it goes a step further based upon the group's input about some of the

threats that we're facing. Not just storm water, erosion, and runoff, but also light pollution, noise pollution, and those things that are threatening the peace and quiet of Wildwood. It ends up with basically a group statement and that I like to think reflects what we talked about during the discussions of goals, objectives and policies. And so that's the first narrative relative to the first element environmental. I can go into the planning narrative, but we can stop here. And if there are any questions, suggestions, should we throw it all out and start over? Is there a better approach? The group has the discretion and we as the department of planning are waiting for your direction.

Yeah. Just one note, can we put links or appendices in for all of the different documents that we talk about in that?

Yes. the Melanie, Travis, Robin, and I, we think it's integral that we basically update the document, not only in terms of what we've been doing for the last 19 meetings, but also making it the 20th century document that we know it can be. That includes links and everything you just described because trying to put it all in the book is going to be a feudal attempt and the book will be too thick and people will look at and wonder why we did it that way. So yes definitely the planning narrative um that was our second element that we discussed and went through the goals objectives and policies. Uh what you'll see is some similarity in the first part of the narrative for the planning element and the again comes from the plan of intent. Three of the five objectives spoke to residential and commercial development consistent with long range planning and prudent land utilization, protection of the green belt and preservation and conservation of the natural environment. The department then references the environmental element. These are things that you immediately identified in the goals objectives and policies and supported. And so again they are the introduction to the planning element. The department also went ahead and retained in many in in in the purposes of tonight's discussion in a very much similar manner what function wildwood serves for the larger region. John Gunther many years ago described wildwood as the lungs of the metropolitan area. Meaning we have tree cover. Tree cover basically helps the

environment, the air quality, the climate change, the heat. So the department for the most part thought that was worthy of retention. The next area is just the major initiatives that have been accomplished over the last 10 years. Miss Clark's input was very much welcome here. She has much better memory than I. Um but as you can see there's been a lot done in the last 10 years on the planning side of the ledger to basically do the things that we have identified both in the environmental element the planning element and the others. I think some of the things that are worth noting and I won't go through the entire list of 19, but I the fact that we partnered with the United States Geological Survey and did a two-year study of the Cox Creek. You think, well, we know Cox Creek is stressed. We know there needs to be fixes. Why would you pick that one? that became the template because if that is the most stressed and we see that stress starting to occur or in progress in other watersheds what were the recommendations to arrest it and in this case more storage and better designs for that storage so that's what we're doing we put it into our environmental element I think it's also important to note that we basically kind of closed the loopholes in our tree preservation and restoration code and that was at the urging of our city council and former mayor James Bolan. Now, not only do we look at grand trees, but we look at grand groves. Those collection of trees individually, not the size that is that can that causes them to be considered grand, but collectively they create that

grand grove and would be a loss if removed. We had a great discussion on solar panels and whether they could be front-facing toward the street or not. You as a group of residents, many of you took a survey and said, "We need solar panels. It's it's time and how they face or whether they are visible from the street should not be an issue to preclude their application on anyone that would want them. So now we have a much more let's say userfriendly set of regulations for solar panels. Um we completed the Wildwood history book and if you haven't had an opportunity to see that it was a major endeavor for over eight years of our historic preservation commission and Miss Keefe was able to finally bring it home. So I extend my appreciation to her for that. We created the development and zoning review committee. So it is kind of a a I would say informal approach to land use discussions. The origin was a project on Ridge Road where the planning and zoning commission and city council along with the developer spent approximately two years trying to find the solution to it to the 80 acre development, the 80acre site development. Ultimately, it didn't move forward, but the developer spent the better part of a quarter of a million dollars to hear no. So the thought was, let's get them to the decision makers sooner in an informal setting and let them make their pitch. And then those decision makers, the mayor, the two ward representatives from where the property is situated, the chair of the planning and zoning commission and the city

council lay on to the planning and zoning commission. Get that developer with them. Let them hear it and let them hear then the developer those first impressions. We've been praised by many a developer for that process. And again, from the department's perspective, initially we thought we're going to basically b at it because it's just another step in already a multiplestep process. No, they see it as a positive. And so that's something we've introduced in the last 10 years. Um, we can we began offering um interpreted concerts for American Sign Language, something I don't know many other municipalities do at their public events. And I think most importantly, and shout out goes to Travis and a couple of others, we basically took the pandemic on and we continued to meet and we did it through Zoom and other um media approaches and we didn't miss a beat. We kept operating as a government and we continue to do that. I think we have probably one of the best transparency approaches of any government. So those are the things we did on the planning side over the last 10 years I think are worth highlighting. Obviously, the Department of Public Works has continued to do a wonderful job of improving our roads, both from the standpoint of ongoing maintenance on an annual basis, and also addressing those problem areas that have been identified by our residents, particularly Route 100, Route 109, Wild Horse Creek Road, and State Route 109, and etc. So again, from a planning perspective, our Department of Public Works look at the problem areas, looks for funding through

grant sources, and then ultimately makes them part of our 5-year capital improvement plan, and we get things done. So, congratulations to them. Obviously, there are some clouds out there. We had over the last 10 years 2010 to 20 20 excuse me 2010 to 2020 we had a decline in population. Not necessarily a good thing when you depend on population for your primary revenue source. We also saw in some regards um changes in our revenue sources from outside sources, the Missouri State Legislature. And so those are the clouds out there that from a planning perspective, our city council, mayor, and many of our appointed members on our boards and commissions look at every day and work to address. So before you is what is proposed revision to the planning narrative and certainly welcome any comments, questions, changes, deletions, whatever the whatever the group feels is best. Thank you.

Kudos to you. Yeah. Thank you. This is where we

Teresa director finish. What is there a reason that we don't include all of those initiatives that were on the previous one in addition to what we did in the last 10 years the last 30 years? Um, that's a very good question and I guess my answer hopefully will be worthy of the question. But as you know, we don't necessarily toss aside the 1996 master plan, the 2005 version, 2006 actually, or the 2016. Those accomplishments are part of that and there's a record of them. Um, I look at it and I start thinking, is it Germaine that we say in 1996 the city passed its first wild master plan? I don't know. So, I more focused on the 10-year window that you've all been involved in and wanted you to understand what we've accomplished there. Certainly, it'd be easy to add them. So, if that's the desire of the group, consider it done.

Maybe just put in parentheses the last, you know, from this date to this date, the previous certainly can do that. Be glad to Vicki, did you propose a motion? I can propose a motion to accept what the city presented. The department would appreciate that. Thank you. That would be my motion. All in favor? I all opposed. Motion passes. Joe, I think that's a great place to stop. I have one more thing and it'll be very quick.

Okay,

I promise. So, the last me memorandum you received for tonight's meeting. I came to you late the beginning of this week. We're still in the beginning of the week, but it was what I consider our proposed meeting schedule for the remainder of the process. In the memorandum, I do acknowledge that it has been something of an arduous process as we move from meeting 19 to meeting 20 and the department does apologize particularly as director. There are a lot of reasons part workload and part mismanagement on my part but we are at a point where the department is proposing for you all at least five more meetings which would take us through the end of July. So that's the goal. As you can see, on the 27th, we would like to meet after Memorial Day weekend and hopefully before the summer vacation season starts that we would take final action on all the land use components, presentation of the remaining nar narrative and act upon them. June 9th, you would have a draft plan to the group for your first review and the draft of the survey we intend to send out to our residents to basically say, have you is the draft plan appropriate, not appropriate, what we missed, what we need to add, etc., etc. the next meeting on um excuse me um on June on July 15th we would have the survey results before you and discussion on them at that meeting you would tell us yes that comment or that set of comments needs to be incorporated into the plan and the intent would be then have the

open house on the draft plan with the additions from the survey Okay. And then from the open house, incorporating the comments there for presentation of the public input from the open house and final action on the plan on July 28th. From there, it's out of your hands. It goes to the planning and zoning commission and then city council. We think by October, if all goes well, the updated master plan for 2026 will be concluded. I would ask you to consider the dates. If you can make those meetings, great. I would ask you to put them in your calendar, but I think this is the workable schedule because there are other meetings. There are other commitments for the building and these are the open dates that work. Also, one last item, Mr. Chair, as I've told you in the past, each time we meet, we provide to our city council a summon. And that's what attachment A is. It's a summary of the elements and the things we've discussed and things we've added and the important points and then the land use up to the four sites that we um acted upon tonight. So again, if you could put them on your calendar, great. If you can't make it, we understand, but we'd like to be done by the end of July. Thank you.

Next meeting date will be Tuesday, May 26th. Uh any outside comment? Okay. No. All right. Um, Heather has requested a couple minutes to address the group and please

make it real quick. I have two properties here within our beautiful Wildwood uh listed for sale right now. And if you know anybody who's looking, would love for you to potentially mention one of these properties. One of them offers almost a half acre of land and it is four bedrooms, three and a half baths. is a large block and it is listed at 6399 and my other property is in the beautiful Brightly subdivision and it's at 2319 Red Glory. It's also four beds, three and a half bath and it is part of uh where they take care of the landscaping. So, one house you you get a lot of land you get to take care of and you swim in the other one somebody takes care of the land for you. Both homes are beautiful. Do you know of anybody? Because our market's a little tight right now with everything going on. So, send them my way. And thank you.

Yeah. Thank you. Any additional comments before we close? Michael, you want to make a motion? Make a motion. All in favor? I Thank you, Joe and staff. Thank you all very