Master Plan Citizen Oversight Group - 2026 - Regular Meeting

Vice Chair Loyal here. Member Avery. Member Baker. Member Batty here. Member Boomer Schllegger. Member Borne. Member Clark here. Member Clayton. Member Coleman here. Member Deppler here. Member Hrey. Member H. Home. Home. Home. Home. Home. Home. Home. Home. Home. Homeman. Present. Member Rubis here. Member Jackson. Member Con. Uh, member McCutchen here.

Member Mets. Member Pic. Member Rambo. Member Ren here. Member Shiken here. And we have a quorum. Excellent. Deborah, would you please lead us? Help me out if I mix up my lines. We got it.

Don't stand for the pledge of allegiance. Sorry. I pledge to the flag of the One indivisible. Thank you.

Moving on to the approval of the minutes from the meeting of Tuesday, August 19th. Motion to accept our address. No. Yes, ma'am. Move to accept. Second. Second. All in favor? I.

All oppose. Pass. State. and Mr. Brun's review of the second review of our plan element and a little bit of a recap. Thank you, Mr. Chair. Mr. Chair and members of the group, first of all, like to thank you for attending tonight. mention we had to forgo our meeting of that meeting due to the lack of quorum. So your participation is very much appreciated tonight. We do have some people that are waiting for us to get to the land use his component. So every time we meet we get a little step closer and that makes them happy and so we're glad you're here. So thank you. Miss Clark was kind enough to do some baking tonight. Miss Ripetto is kind enough to visit one of our grocery stores in town and obviously we have snacks and drinks for you. So please help yourself now during the meeting and after before you go home. I do want to welcome Mr. Hman formerly with Electro Savings.

Yes. Before they merged with Community America. Yeah. So and president of the

No, I was a director of Meredus at the end. So we welcome you and thanks for participating. Um I'll give a brief recap for the benefit of him also Mr. Batty for the first time tonight due to some scheduling conflicts. So, as you know, we've completed for all intents and purposes the environmental element and each element has three components, the goals, objectives, and policies. And we've been very thorough going through each of those, discussing them when necessary, and ultimately making decisions on each of them, whether they stay as is, stay, whether revised or ultimately. Part of that too, we also then talk about anything new. And that's been the most interesting part I think to the department of finance staff that we've talked about accessibility affordability of housing things along those lines that we've generated a lot of good ideas and thoughts and ultimately as we refine those the document to a finished product. Hopefully those things that you thought were important ultimately agreed upon by the group will be retained as it goes to the funding consenting commission council. Tonight we are still on the planning element and this would be the final step in the planning element. We've done the goals, we've done the objective, and then the sheet that was provided to you, the summary sheet. All of the goals and objectives that have been completed are kind of highlighted. Policies are the ones that will start tonight. Following a typical procedure, there's an objection. been a summary of each of the policies.

If there are questions, please ask them. Uh in the past, let me go through them, each of them, and then we come back. But again, if there's a something I say wrong or something that you say before you forget it or I forget it or what the situation might be, kids do. Also, as part of the packet, we have the two narratives. So, each element has an introduction. The introductions for the most part 1995 adopted in 1996 and primary author was Jonathan Barnett nationally known planner that helped us with the first master plan. Clark has helped me with some changes to that. You'll see all of that eventually. I along with Ravage, Robin, and Melanie have kind of prioritized that we need to get through the goals, objectives, and policies because those are kind of the meat and potatoes of the dinner. So, the narratives will come back to so please don't feel like they're being ignored. We've made some we've updated them with some of the items we think are important. I have gotten some feedback from Miss Clark. So eventually that'll all come to you but until we get through the elements and those goals, objectives and policies I hope you'll be patient in that regard. So tonight as I mentioned we have the policies for the planning element and we'll start there. Also in the packet there is the community services element. So if we're successful in moving forward tonight we still have time available. So the third item under policies is consolidate future commercial development within the boundaries of the city's town center. That has been a key element town center plans and stay liable. We do

have a few outliers of commercial development uh beyond the boundaries of the town center. For example, Clayton and Striker Road. That's Alart Creek Road 101. If you don't know, the Gleno Post Office Manchester Road by Route 100 is a commercially zone property. All of those were done by St. Louis County, although the commercial development was occurred since 1995. Has been in our town center for all intents and purposes. The department's recommendation is to retain it as is. It's a key element in creating core, our community center, our town center. The next policy relates to what we call as a suburban residential area. So in some of the preliminary comments when we started the process we talked about our land use plan and that is part of the master plan. There are four primary categories. There's the non- urban residential area and don't confuse that with the non-urban resident district zoning. The non-urban residence area is a land use category. There is the suburban residential land use category. The town center and then we have a small area of industrial up in the Chesterfield Valley portions of the suburban for the most part was designated in the northeast and southeast quadrants of the city. So the focus or the nexus is route 100, route 109. So in the northeast direction and the southeast direction where St. Louis County did majority of the reszonings subdivisions like Evergreen, Westland Farms, Winding Trails, Harbors at Lake

Chesterfield, Copper Lakes, all of those those are designated suburban. There were greenfield properties where the city incorporated and those that were surrounded by let's say an additional higher density residential subdivision part of the suburban. The founders did one thing very quickly. They recognize that probably four or five units per acre of clay and ch with steep slopes and heavy woodlands shouldn't be the pro shouldn't be the policy or the practice we follow as the city of Wildwood. So our initial suburban residential area allowed two units or two lots per acre. In 2006 that was changed to one unit per acre because what we were seeing is even at that reduced density we were still struggling with some of the issues of erosion siltation in the nearby creeks too much removal of woodlands etc. So we've reduced it down to address the environment but we kept it at one unit per acre because it is in an area where there are some instances four units per acre. So, it seemed like a reasonable compromise. Tonight, the department is recommending it be retained. I think a key element in this is just the simple fact I think there's only a handful of let's say developable properties that remain in all of the suburban areas because there wasn't many to start and those that have have become Windrest Woodcliffe Heights Ly Cliff a lot of areas around the structure and Clayton verd So we reduced the density, we reduced it again. Now the opportunities for

application are somewhat limited. The next item is probably the core component of what started the incorporation effort. It continues to appropriate many of the discussions we have when land use is um a topic at our city council meetings, planning and zoning commission meetings, etc. And that is to continue the non- urban resident district zoning as the primary category of land use in Mississippi. If you look at the zoning districts map over here on the all of that yellow area is non urban resident district zoning and as you can see it's a substantial area of our city and for all intents and purposes except for around wild Creek Road where we have West Hampton Woods, Oak Ridge Trails, Garden Valley Forest all county zonings We did that because the system of roads is rule. There's limited utilities generally just electric and back then telephone and the topography is more challenging from the perspective of the incorporators. It's also the area that's heavily wooded or woodland areas or green belt as Mr. Ray and I were talking for the meeting. So the anon urban is what differentiates Wildwood from almost anywhere else in the St. Louis region because in many instances you can drive five minutes west of city hall and feel like you're in the country and people particularly like that component of Wildwood

as we should as a group. So the department in this instance is recommending that we do nothing to change the solid footing we have with the non-urban resident district as a zoning category. The non-urban residential area as a land use category they work very well and I think when you drive west of Route 109 or south down towards St. Paul Road and Ridge Road wherever the situation might be really it was a special place due to the rural character and the preservation of the woodsman's slopes the character of the lands retain. Uh, next one is incorporate the land use categories of our town center plan which we call the regulating plan into the vicinity zoning code and we've done that and it was more of a pressing issue 10 years ago because 10 years ago we were talking about wanting to kind of address how we define land use in town center. So I'll be very brief. For a long time, we wanted retail. Everybody wanted retail. Generate sales tax, bring fibrance into a community came Amazon. And for the most part, brick and mortar stores started to kind of suffer. And now when you go to retail tenants are mostly services, the places to eat, fitness centers, nail salon, auto shops, hair salons, etc. So from the perspective of the city, we knew that with our characteristics, not being on an interstate, not necessarily having a full five mile radius of homes around a potential candidate for retail development.

We decided that we still want commercial. It is a generator tax and we also use the airspace above the retail or the commercial. So from that perspective, we started integrating into our commercial districts as well as some of our residential districts used to use it is basically the same that in certain instances we can have on the same block and in the same building like the apartments commercial on the first floor, residential and the airspace above and whatever number of floors is appropriate. In this case on number four policy we have retained. It's a good policy. It hasn't been abused after and where we've used it principally has been in our downtown district and trying to add varity here at the core center found. Number five at the bottom of the list. This is something that's kind of evolved over the last probably five years. Miss Keef isn't here tonight. Way to go on vacation for a week and we sure the best of times, but you really evolved our historic preservation. Miss Coleman used to be on that group of

the historical I was on that.

Um but we do a lot now in terms of just grant applications. We've been awarded a number of grants and as we've grown necessarily direction from our master plan tonight we are recommending that we retain that commitment to preserving that historic assets both culturally physically [Music] but also better integrate that historic preservation component into our different land use processes and do more to preserve those assets. And then finally, as we've been doing more so than ever in the last couple years, partner with those agencies, organizations, individuals that can help us achieve our goals of historic preservation. So in terms of number five, we recommending that we retain the key policy, but expand it to incorporate those three subpolicies, so to speak. So I think it's important to note if I'm talking too much just tell me and I'll jump on to the next policy. Recently we probably lost one of the most important historic assets in all of Wildwood and probably in St. Louis County and that was the Mary Cliff residents at the Marinus Retreat Center on Route 10. Oh, it was a it was a gorgeous large house that had been built by I believe one of the industrialist in the city of St. Louis. They would come out here in the summer and spend the summer out here, get away from the heat of the city. It had been used by the Marinus Retreat Center for many years as a meeting space, chapel, etc. Um, they removed it and it was a great loss. So

when did that happen? Uh it was within the last month. Oh. Oh wow. So I should have been going there to check that cell tower more right now. Are they going to do something with that property or that's a lot of acreage, isn't it?

Yes. The the retreat center is being retained. It's just they took out this one building. Um there were issues with um American with Disability Act acts act requirements. Um it was also becoming an area where vandalism and was occurring. I'm not sure from where or how and the province which is in Toledo, Ohio just felt it was more of a drain on their resources than it was a benefit. It was 200 years or 250 years old was

it was about Yeah, it was over 170 something years old. So, and all intents and purposes was in wonderful shape. But so part of what the department is saying just number on number five. Sure. Do we need to delete anything that exists currently or are we just making the additions?

Additions. That's the recommendation. Thank you for clarification. I should have said that but thank you. So obviously the next concern that's in line is load institute because obviously we've all heard that's for sale and that is probably Mary Cliff wasn't in first place. It's because Lal Institute is is the in first place.

And so from the perspective of the department, we have a voluntary historic preservation program. When we updated the historic preservation code in 2014, that was the first question we asked. Do we want to keep it voluntary? Everybody said yes. I guess we never thought we'd be dealing with the loss of these key treasures that have stood the test of time. the case of Marcliffe, World War I, World War II, the Great Depression, Korea, Vietnam, it saw it all. It's gone. And they're putting it in Paul lost into the demolition. So,

so you may eventually have something from the department as part of this process that maybe puts a little bit more strength in some of those some of our work. So I I know I'm not trying to go down the rabbit hole, but I'm just curious what kind of what, you know, like for Lal, it's first of all, it's haunted. So that's number one. But um what is the what would be the incentive for somebody who's going to buy that property? How could we incentivize someone to keep that? I mean,

it's a very good question. Um they are a retreat center. So in the non-urban resident district which it is designated the conditional use permits they could do the retreat center and it started as an orphanage it morphed into a retreat center has a chapel place of worship. So as incentives we use zoning and subdivision. So from the perspective of the department there could be some type of commercial activity not a sea store with gas pumps and a car wash but convert some of the structure into offices or something like that. Um, we could also offer incentives in terms of residential venues, size of lots and densities and wellplaced we preserve the front and the back where you wouldn't necessarily see it and the view that you get from Route 109 wouldn't need to spoil. So there's Sony and then the subdivision goes along with that.

So there's a there's a cemetery there. So that can't be disturbed. Is that correct? That's correct.

Okay. And then my final question on that is um you know when you talk about this other the baron has decided that it cost too much money to maintain that are is there a way that we as a city can help them discover grants or are there even grants or some sort of financial aid available to property owners who have a historic building who is that is in disrepair or that needs help. Is there I mean how could the city play a part in that? this particular the sale of the property. This has been on and off again for a number of years. Um and over that course of time we have tried to offer them some options placing the building on the local registry which then allows us to promote it being on the national register. But the problem is is all of the tax incentives and property tax relief, they're religious institutions, so they don't pay those taxes. And so they're places of worship, so to speak. And so those things didn't necessarily register because they don't have that that same issue. So, what we offer is zoning incentives and subdivision incentives to go along with that. These are substantial. I mean, if it's 200 acre, well, let's I'll keep it simple. If it's 180 acres, they've got 60 lots with zoning and subdivision incentives. Would it be unreasonable to say you could have 120, double your investment? Could it work? I don't know. We we haven't studied it but

so I think it has to stay voluntary to stay that way or can we change it? I mean make a motion to I mean would you would you think that would be a good idea? I think we need to explore it and I think this is the place to start that now. I do too. Well, if if you're exploring it and all that, if you say it's 180 acres, that would be like one house to three acres. Are we staying with that? That's the rest that's the restriction on the property now.

Okay. Okay. We don't want high density, correct? Well, maybe because if high density were to enjoy the building, the viewscape, the route 109, the gro all the things that make Rosal Institute special and we can do it in a way that doesn't basically end up basically betraying the character of the integrity and I think it's a reasonable proposed but that is outside of the high density area, right?

Yes. Yes. it. They have public water, they have black brick, they have internet, they lack sewer, sanitary sewer, which is a big determination that's so yes, Miss Clark, I think time has come. No matter what we've offered to different property owners, they're determined to remove the asset. There's very little we can do to remove it. In this case, the M Mary Cliff resident, we asked for some of the stone that formed the foundation of the base. They put us under duress to get that out of there. It was all just them showing who owned the property and who didn't. And so it's like I didn't feel very good about them treating the city that way.

Yeah. So, and so that was never on the historic property list that we have or it was. Oh, but they

and I will give credit to the province in Ohio. They gave us a little over a year to try to bring them options and we probably brought them a dozen. At the end of it all, we thought we had a an individual that would be actually willing to pay the price that they originally described for the for the property itself. And they said, "No, we're we're bound and determined to do what we're going to do." So, so I I'd like to move that we go in go ahead and and investigate that, but I I need your help to word this because I'm struggling with words right now. So I think what Miss Clark is asking that as a potential policy not knowing how it'll be finally written for your consideration as a potential policy that the historic preservation the historic preservation restoration code wanted to do historic assets be voluntary in all instances. Well, that's that's just so that's so vague.

Well, I want it to be vague right now because I want to basically prepare something for you that's a little bit more thought out. Okay. But I guess I want direction from the group to basically explore shifting the burden of preservation from the city to the owner. I think that's a fair request. There are properties by the time we get there aren't worth say are they're just not by age they're significant but by design construction materials condition they're not I think you need to bring us something back next meeting that's what I'd like to and then let's have a discussion at that point

I would move that we do that we go ahead and give the step that I I would also like to know what would be the parameters you know what is the criteria that the city says says this is when you can no longer be voluntary. This is when we feel like you should be managing. What's that? What does that look like?

And we have a great start on that. The National Park Service of the Department of Interior with the federal government, you have 13 criteria cover everything that it was done by a famous architect to George Washington there that kind of thing. So, um we have those in our code now. Like I said, I I it may be all is said and done, it's too ownorous and you all say no. It may be that trying to split the baby. Some don't, some do. Maybe he may be that we end up where we are. I'd like to explore that with you all.

Would we be uh behind the curve as far as the SA property? I mean, is it I think so. Okay. So, because nothing's actually happened there yet, is under contract. There's a lot of steps in the process. And just not not to get specific, but realistically, if someone were interested in that track, it would make sense for them to at least come to you guys and say, "Hey, would this work there?" You know, before they show out their own money and then would take Yeah, that has not happened. theory, if a builder bought it, they could pretty much put inif 50 homes without us being able to say no. Right. For the most part, yeah, they have to come in front of us for sewage.

Not necessarily. But you all see the preliminary plat. Yeah. We might not see it till site development plans, Teresa. Yeah. Um, well, we've got the list models, but you know, when I was on historic preservation, the I remember walking through houses right alongside Mr. Scott who was explaining all of these things about these houses that we really didn't have handle on other h other places like the one over on St. Alvin's.

Yeah, that one. It was such a beautiful place. I mean, walking through it, you wouldn't you you might not see it, but if you look through what was there or the one out on the um West Eden property, you know, those those homes had so much to offer and really were at their discretion, right? They just if they want to take it down,

right? And in some instances like the one Clark just mentioned at West Eden subdivision which is at no road by the time we got out there supposedly vandals had already removed the shutters some of the windows things like that. So we get there to do our inspection and try to convince them not to demolish it. It's already halfway there. So, like I said, I just think we need to kind of step back and say maybe voluntary was okay, but now we're seeing inventory of lots that are available for development continue to diminish. So now the properties that have additional costs like historic assets to be demolished are getting into the cycle. Maybe we need to reorientate oursel. Another option to it's going to be very difficult to make it mandatory but an option to make it a mandatory may be a very documented review process which expends a puts a significant amount of time for you to do the negotiation to talk things through versus trying to let them know in two weeks or two months time.

Mr. route was on Historic Preservation Commission. And really the way the code reads, once we schedule the site visit and hold it, which usually is within a 30-day window, we have the 60 days to make the conclude the process. So, it's really third basically three months. That's all we have. And some could extend that. Yeah. So, that's a thought too. Any So, I made a motion. Do we have a second to that?

So, Miss Clark made a motion to authorize the department collectively us to investigate strengthening how we treat our true historic assets. I didn't hear a second. Second. Sure.

Discussion on that.

Yeah. All in favor? I. All oppose. I just one more mention about the house because it really is so beautiful about Wildwood that you know that's something we have here that not every that's so unique and that um building over there at St. Alvin's um that's that um is as I understand one of the last one with that architecture. It's like the pond school the structure is and it's the only other one we have in wildland

pond school and this house called JP common house is a little generally the same type they used stuff because fond school had burned down several times prior and so they were trying to figure out a way you can't keep building it and burning it down. So where is this other one? It's out at across from Tom Kelp's property at St. Albins's road in Highway 100.

Right at T 100 is actually a major commercial developer. KGY they own Grace Blouse commercial center. Harry and Christine, two of the groovies have contract on the property and do want to restore JB compost and use the remaining property for cattle ranch. For what? Cattle ranch. Beautiful out here. Cattle ranch. All right. Nice. Yeah. Like those fluffy cattle like they have in South. Yeah. What was going to be proposed as a cattle ranch?

The JP Connell House. Oh, does Neville still own that that September St. Alden's properties owns it, which is was Tony Nlli's company, right? But the Grooies have a contract on it. They're doing their due diligence now. They're having an altar survey prepared. They've met with our historic preservation commission last week. I think originally when they came to us they wanted to put 12 homes or something in there. Yeah. We had talked about doing that incentive component right and retaining the JP Connell House on a lot and then doing additional lots on the remaining say right or so.

Oh okay. So that it's extraneous to their needs now. Yeah. Okay. Actually Mr. Guru has property off road. He has cattle there. He wants to expand the operation. Couldn't Could the retreat center Lasal become a cattle ranch? Sure could. Farming's permitted by right the non- urban resident district.

I can see a bunch of black Angus. got. So, um item number six, policy number six, um limitated land use and environmental policies to protect regional park system. So, prior to Wildwood, um St. Louis County didn't necessarily create the park boundaries, that being Green Shelder, Rockwoods Reservation, Walkwoods Range, Bambler State Park with any special protections. um from 2006 on there was a feeling amongst the master plan volunteers that we needed to do that. So we apply our policies um and I think more importantly we bring the park facilities into the process. So they're one of the first ones that are notified. So in this particular case, the department is recommending that we retain. Um number seven policy is promote the development of consistent regulations between other service providers, fire, school district, utilities, city land, use standards, etc. Um what I will tell you is I think our service agencies do a great job. Fire districts, the school districts, we have good cooperation. All goes out the door with the utilities. They become each and every legislative session in Jefferson City, they become stronger, stronger we as the city or cities become weaker. Mr. Steppler, Miss Hellfrey, Mr. Rubis, Mr. Bey, they're all on zoning commission. I can tell you we've broke ground on telecommunication facilities,

small cell technologies, homebased businesses. Um I heard today at the coffee with the mayor that this last legislative session and public projects used to require utility relocations. The utilities had to pay for. So it just adds cost to our our projects and the cost. So utility companies seem to keep getting big and farther removed from us being able to enforce our code. Um it's just hard because it's now it's not AT&T that does the work. It's a contractor, a subcontractor to a contractor to a subcontractor.

Okay. So, I I'm going to mention this here because I was going to also mention it Monday planning and zoning. So, be ready. Uh I want us to be ahead of this data center stuff. So I I don't know if this is the place to to to mention it, but um if you want how I would like to word it, I would like it to say never ever ever ever can there be data center in the city of Wild. That's what I would like for it to say. But so I think that we absolutely need to address this especially if this document is going to be 10 years old because this news about how many of these there were going to be within the next three years was was mindboggling. And I think that if I remember about two weeks ago, I read something about how on the east coast they are affecting the people in nothing but a negative way. They're affecting the the water. They're affecting the people's utilities. The people are having to pay the utilities for these, you know, their fees. So, I don't see the people that live there benefit in any way from it. So, if we're going to spend all this time doing this, I hope that we address that in this document somehow. Jim,

is a data center part of the is that considered a telecommunications? That's a very good question because as you know in all of our district for the most part except for industrial which they are some instances permitted by right so that be down in the valley but in our districts in C either permitted by ride as a local public utility or with the conditional use as a utility but they're not a utility they are a data center and they are usually owned by a corporation like Facebook owns it or Google owns it or Amazon owns it and if so that's not a public utility. Well, it doesn't have to be a public utility.

I just think we need to address it. I don't know. I don't know enough about it to say be the defining voice, but I think we need to address it. Well, we've Lauren Edens, who used to be a city council member World War II, had identified that near the end of her last term as a as an issue. So, I think we'll certainly add it to our list of policies or for presentation, but I think actually the planning and zoning commission may have to do something a little quicker than our process.

That was on my list. So, So in this particular instance, the department just is recommending on policy 7 that we retain we revise it and have more let's say practical practical statement that and that practical statement may be the state legislature needs to recognize that are harming cities and residents effort

sorry um number eight maintain design criteria and standards for architecture and buildings so it complements the natural built environments obviously we've had almost 30 years of application of standards and guidelines in town center I would discourage us from changing them radically ally at this stage or recommending a radical change because we have a pallet. The pallet includes a French colonial hotel and an art deco theater, but it all works together. Um so in this particular case the department is recommending that we retain and for the most part make a good statement that we believe as a group that there's flexibility in those and may allow people to do good architecture materials designs. So number nine um this wasn't came uh in 2016 and instead any land use related matter needs to be acted upon by the planning and zoning commission before going to any council committee or city council itself. for the most part. Um, this had to do with some capital projects that were underway by the city and didn't necessarily get the full review. Um, the department is just basically saying retain it. And the last is a new policy and this kind of came out of our goals and objectives relating to affordability. And as you know, we have a lengthy discussion about affordability and how to make housing out here accessible to a larger group of people, different demographics, different ages, different abilities.

We ended up having the recognition that trying to do a housing affordability index trying to manipulate the free market on the US part is not necessarily something that we can do. So in this particular instance I had it as adding it. I think actually we may just want to forgo it at this stage. I mean, if we keep if we continue to not allow developers to build max density that our plan allows, it's just going to keep driving housing costs up and up and up.

I don't know the solution. Travis spends a little more time on the housing component with some of his outreach that he does for the city. Melanie also, like I said, it's just a tough issue. Um, you know, everybody, we had a project on Edington Road. It was a threeacre track to land. It started out with 26 homes. We got it down to a reasonable number. By the time we got it down to that reasonable number, they came back and said, "We'll do three oneacre lots in the heart of Town Center on Etherton Road." Um, so tough.

I guess that was saluted as a victory, but actually saw something like in town center, the one place where we can't have density, we ended up without so tough issue. Yeah. And the way we made McBride cut back with the lot that they the project they pulled out of the one across the street that's been downscaled so much. Yeah. McBride Homes has walked away from two projects in Town Center. But so your question really is, is this something that we can affect? And that's what I'm asking.

Well, I think that um I think it's worth looking into. I mean talking to um um Miss Keith last last meeting she had some you know some thoughts about this and how to how to go about creating a mechanism. So, I think it's worth keeping myself. I I I like putting it in there because it is something we need is uh more diversity in uh housing to keep our businesses going too. So, I I would be for keeping this new one that you've come up with.

I make a motion to get rid of it. I'm sorry. Make a motion to get rid of it. I second. Wait, what are we getting rid of? I number 10. Jim is affordable housing. Are we talking about both purchase or owner rental lease? Are we talking

from my perspective, Mr. Rubis? I think it's more owner occupied because obviously the rent structure like the new facility they'll have a studio that's about a thousand plus dollars all the way up to about $3,000 for the threebedroom. So depending on your circumstance if you can survive in a small studio it's affordable out here I think at $1,000 a month. Yeah. I I with the cross the land in Wildwood I don't I mean I don't know how you define affordable.

Mr. Shiken and Mr. Homeman may have some thoughts on this given their backgrounds economic development St. Charles County and former financial person. I also have opinions on it. pick. That was Miss Pic. Yeah, it was. Sorry. I just obviously this being um a subject that I'm pretty well verssed on. I do think that it's too broad for us to consider. Um it's there's just too many aspects that go into it. That's just my opinion. Thank you, ma'am. Yeah. And

yeah, I think you you definitely have to look at I mean there aren't that many properties within Wellwood that are probably affordable for certain level of individual. I mean it's that's but that's part of the nature of when you say you live in Wildwood, people naturally assume that you have some degree of affluence, if you will. So, I mean, I don't think uh what you might consider lower income are definitely coming out here to to look for a home or rent. There aren't that many rentals to my understanding. I was going to say the home I live in now, if I had to buy it on the market, I don't know that I could afford it.

Exactly. Exactly. And that's what that's why I don't want to get rid of it. But I just as sitting on planning and zoning, every development we see is like million-dollar homes almost. But a financial look at wild and the costs involved to build properties in this location. You're not gonna end up with an affordable place to live unless it's subsidized. Affordable is relative. Yeah. I mean, I get that, but Exactly. It is relative.

Gone. I I mean, I don't know that there's anything we can do as a city by itself, but the whole country in any all of these urban areas have affordability problems. because we've made it too hard to build homes.

Yes. And and because um this, you know, this is not going to keep people that we think can't afford to come in and rent. I mean, we can't prevent somebody to come in and use government monies to rent a, you know, and we would invite them in. I hope that we wouldn't say, "Oh, we don't want that person or don't want that person."

But I don't think anybody's saying that. I don't think that one person in this room thinks that. And you implied that the last time we brought this up. And I I don't think that anybody is saying that we don't want any particular person here. But I am a property owner and I don't want somebody to tell me that I have to reduce what I'm going to sell my house for to make it affordable for somebody else. So when you start putting when you start that's not what we're saying. I understand that. But my point is is that when you start putting all of this in here then it it has a negative connotation. I don't know how you make housing affordable. Mr. Vich supply and demand. Right. Right. But we can't get anybody to build. I mean that's just the thing.

Well that's because we will every time we get these developments coming before planning and zoning the residents are like oh that's too many homes on that lot. And then we cave to the other residents and tell the developers to cut down the number of homes even expect.

I don't know that we cave to the residents, but we do listen to the people who already own property there and are living there and have invested their life savings there. They should have a say at the table and I think that that's a fair thing. And when Mr. Vinc talked about this map on the wall, he said that we had we're very limited on what we have suburban development. So the majority of the stuff that we have to develop is non-urban. Is that a correct assessment? I I from what I deduce from being on planning and zoning and listening, I think that the more now now we're saying we're going to have a mechanism to measure and now we're going to have more hoops for somebody that wants to build to jump through. I don't think they're going to want to do that and I don't think this actually does anything. I don't think there's any teeth in this.

I have a question, Jim. the apartment complex that is going to be built. How many apartments? 188. And I'm sure when they went through the approval process, you guys talked about what they would rent for. That question was asked both at planning and zoning commission and city. But isn't that technically an illegal question to ask? I want to know the answer to that question. Yes. And as I mentioned, they were asked by different people. Typically, the city attorney doesn't like that question because price control. It does the same thing. Basically,

the purpose that balance keep those people out. The purpose of my question is that's an example of high density housing in Wildwood. How much is it going to cost and is it affordable? And if it's not affordable, then there's not much else we can do.

But but I think we're we're defining affordable a little different. I am I'm I'm a I'm I'm talking about like um what Robin was speaking about was determining what um how we can make some things how we can make some areas affordable and what would we have to do to get that to that point so that we can keep businesses with employees. But isn't it market driven a free market economy? Is that if I'm the land owner, Mr. Shak? Yeah. Go Lewis.

Yeah. Just got a quick question, Mr. Bonich. Does does the City Wild have any inclusionary zoning. So you were you were talking about St. Charles. Um I'm part of the St. Charles EDC and what what the some of the municipalities have started to do is require a portion of a new market rate housing development to be set aside as affordable units and then in exchange for for setting aside that area for affordable units they're they're um giving density bonuses or other incentives to builders to to come out and and build those affordable homes. Do we have anything like that in Wildwood? No sir,

we don't. That's something that that municipalities are going to where they do an inclusionary zoning where you set aside a certain number of acres and and um you cater it towards builders that are willing to come in and and build the affordable units that we're looking for in the in the the city. I'd like to ask a question. Jim,

I'd like to ask Lewis a question. How how does St. Charles define affordable? Well, um, we're looking at the medium household income. So, I I have a a report that I could definitely send to the group if you'd want to see. Um, so we work with Habitat for Humanity, and then they've done some research and some analysis on on medium incomes, medium home prices. Um, the number of people that make a certain amount of money, and and those people that are making the below average aren't able to afford a house, it's, you know, averaging out that way 325 to 350,000. So they're taking the affordable based on on the median income of the m of of of a select number of of um people that live in the area. So that's what they're basing it on.

When you say select people in the area, what does that mean? Like can you well just just just based on those that that meet that criteria? So if if the the median household income in St. Charles is75,000 and the average price of a home is 325. And then you say, well, they know that someone that makes $75,000 average can't can't afford a $350,000 house. Then they're looking at at catering to those based on their income level. So where would be a place in St. Charles that they're doing that? Like can you have an example of an area? They're doing it in Fallon. They're doing it in Wville.

A river. Lewis, how do they Okay, I don't make enough money and I don't meet I'm I'm excluded from the correct. I mean, you can't you can't make, you know, above the median household income and then and then live in in an area that's set set aside for affordable living. That just it doesn't work that way. So, where are you working? If I make $75,000, how do I afford a house in that area? What do you do in that area?

They're not. And that's that's the problem in St. Charles County. There's there's people just like I mean they're having the same problem we are where they don't quite have enough of that yet and they're starting to to go that direction where they're setting aside some inclusionary zoning set aside specifically for that. So they have the same I mean this is not a a wildwood problem. This is a a problem in the United States that people just can't afford. You know the cost of living has gone up. They're not making enough money to keep up with the the home prices and and they're just being shut out. But you don't have an answer.

I mean, I I I don't I mean, I can give you um I'd be happy to share um our last goound that we had um which shows some of the numbers and and data and where they're coming up with this and how they're looking at figuring out who who qualifies and who doesn't. And I'd be happy to share it. It's not um it's public knowledge. I I'll share that report with you guys. I'll share it with Mr. Vintage and he can pass it along to everybody. Be happy to share that.

How are do we know the demographics of current homeowners? Because again, if you got an older population like I live in West Hampton Woods and there's a number of us that are right up there, aren't going to be around long. And I mean, what's that going to create for the market, too? I mean, you got uh affordability problems on many of the areas. So,

well, Mr. Lee, our city administrator, is the one that knows our the most recent census results from 2020. We are an older community and I think 95% of our housing units are owner occupied. So, it's a very stable community in that regard as well. Tom, anything to add? Yeah, I was actually going to pull up uh one of the most recent reports, but we have seen, and this is just for some additional context, we have seen in 2020, we were at 35,417 residents, but the these are unofficial estimates from the Census Bureau, but since that date, we've actually seen our population decrease by about 500 people. Um, so that that's what we're typically seeing. and we're right at that 34,000 mark at this point. 34,900. Uh but overall, we do have, you know, one of the strongest median household incomes within within the entire St. Louis County and also quite frankly Missouri. Um we have really really high home values. There's a few cities in Missouri, but we actually have a couple areas within Wildwood that rank amongst the top in Missouri. So, we we are kind of just a it's a good thing to it's a good problem to have, but we are kind of a premier destination. I can pull up that report if we if we would find it beneficial for the for the group. Tom, maybe if we could provide that report to the group because tonight I think we're just seeing what we want to do in terms of a policy, but unless the group wants to go through it in detail right now,

I think are we at a point with presentation that we're ready for a vote on Teresa's motion? I say no. Yeah, we've got a We're carving out 10. Right. I I said no when you seconded. Oh, yes. No, just for 10. Yes, just for 10. Right. But then you also had a motion. I didn't have a motion. Just discuss if you want to leave it in. Okay. So, we have a first. We have a second. All in favor? What?

I just I just had one question. So first of all my opinion is this doesn't have much guidance to it or tea to it as it is. Um I guess it leads to my question if we would go this direction um how could it be implemented? Would we based on some of his comments, would we carve out a portion of Wildwood and say this is where we would potentially allow this if developers came in or would it be ad hoc like whoever would want to do a development um that we would try to facilitate something like this? Mr. Deppler from my perspective to try something inclusionary don right now we have the ability to do that nobody wants to build in there.

Yeah. I mean essentially right now I mean that I mean that's kind of how I feel I guess is what I was trying to get to. We have very few areas within town center I think that we could do this that yeah people that have come to try to present to planning and zoning it's always been you know knocked down so I just don't see how something like this is going to be mechanic mechanically Deborah

yeah I am just going to add to um the comments about um affordability Um I know a lot of 30s men 30s early 40s um residents were residents as they grew up and um frankly they're a little irritated that they can't come back to Wildwood and raise their families. So I I think maybe um if the department will or Mr. would take some time and to see what other options there might be. Uh maybe we can use some of our historic um residences that there really isn't anything. No one's living there. There isn't anybody occupying that property. Um maybe that would been a great place for Lasal. Um, but I think maybe we have to think out of the box on how we can come up with areas for um, younger generations just starting out in life, maybe with children or without children. But I think we're going to have to use out of the box solutions. Although I I get what uh Miss McCutchen is saying, but the dirty little secret on the historical properties is that they may be cheap to buy, but they're a maintenance nightmare.

Yeah. Yeah. Right. Somebody owns them. Yeah. Right. Right. Right. There's a reason they get knocked down. Yeah. I mean, I think we've had lots of discussions previously about, you know, think like councilwoman McCutchen has said, thinking out of the box like maybe allowing, you know, granny units, which you know are right kind of looked down upon, but other parts of the country use them significantly. So, we could think of things like that, but it doesn't quite fit in a policy. Deborah.

Well, you know, this is very mind-boggling for me. I mean, what is affordable? 200,000 and under 100,000. I mean, I mean, whatever the median income, right?

Okay. But, you know, every every area, Leoo, Ellisville, all of them, they probably all have this problem in St. Louis County. Correct. I'm sure. And what is the solution? like buy a track of land and have like a trailer park. I don't know. I mean, I went to school with a lot of kids that grew up in trailer parks because that's what they could afford. So, I mean, what is a solution? I mean, you don't want to do something that you can't undo later on and you say, "Oh my gosh, why did we do this?" So, I'm very mindbggled with this issue. I'm sorry. I don't I Heather.

Yes. Thank you. I I would like to again ask how we quantify what what exactly is affordable and also I'd like to mention um and I'm sorry I don't know who was speaking but she had mentioned is it under 200,000 well I would like to go on record we my brokerage that I own we've just recently sold in 2025 five condos within Wildwood all under 200,000 Yeah. I mean, very nice. Victoria Crossing, I those are probably starting to bump up to two. It's market driven. Yeah.

Yeah. We just closed one and it was 182,000 and that's to my knowledge the highest one unless something's clo closed within the last 30 days. But but those I mean I I lived in Victoria Crossing for five years like 20 years ago now. And I mean it was the only place I could afford at the time. But then my unit was seven years old. Now they're 27 years old or 30 years old. But we need to build my opinion we need to build newer stuff like that. Condos and town houses. You couldn't build it for that. You couldn't build it for 200,000.

Let's go with Lewis and then let's go with Mike. Yeah, just just real quick. I mean, you know, the uh US Department of Housing and Urban Development defines affordable housing as housing that costs a household no more than 30% of their gross. So, it's it's not necessarily the house price, but it's based on your demographics median income and then taking that 30% of their gross income. That's the true definition that the that HUD defines as affordable housing. 30% of a individual's gross income. Thank you, Michael.

I'm a believer in market economy. As us older folks start to try and sell our houses, there's going to be a lot of them on the market and it's going to drive the price down. So, I'm not sure we need to do anything as a city to uh try and solve this problem. I I think this is going to be a thing that's going to going to happen across our community and other communities is as as the housing stock starts becoming more available, the price is going to go down.

We have to live longer. Eat oatmeal. So, so the comment the commentary that um you have though it says

create the mechanism to understand the affordability or lack of and so creating the mechanism to understand that I think that's and and another thing I thought that we talked about this before that they we might consider the um additional home on on a property for grandmother or whoever a rental prop uh another property. So wouldn't that be under this this it looks to me like it would be if it's uh new or redevelopment types as part of the consideration. Just anything that would make us more affordable for some people. That's what I'm looking for at as the mechanism to understand.

So from day one in town center we've allowed accessory dwellings as part of any primary dwelling to develop on the lot. So, we've always had that option that you could do a garage and a living space over the garage for a family member, too. Oh, I could do that with my house. Make it work. It's according to the code. And then I think you all be surprised how many accessory dwellings are out in the non-urban non-d district zone areas. We have a lot of family members, older family members living with their kids in an accessory dwelling. We have provisions. There's a lot of things you have to do to make that work so it doesn't become a rental unit, but there's quite a few.

Yes. Just want to confirm that the motion on the floor is to eliminate item 10, right? First, you want to call the vote. Any more discussion? Any more discussion? Okay. Voting in favor is to eliminate. To eliminate it. Understanding. See, we have other if we eliminate this, this is something you will continue to work. Yes. Okay. Outside of our scope removed. All in favor? I I Let's go. Let's go. Opposed. We're going to go.

Oppos. And I'm You can abain. Huh? You can abstain. I will abstain. I just I don't understand the whole issue going here. Okay. So, do we inv call vote? Yes. Okay. Um should I call? Okay. All right. Um chair routin approve. Yes. Uh Vice Chair Loyal. Yes. Um member Batty. No. Member Clark, no. Member Coleman, abstain. Member Deppler, yes.

Member Helman, no. Member Hellfrey, yes. Member Rubis, yes. Um, member McCutchen, will you restrict the motion, please? I don't quite understand what we're voting on. to remove 10. Remove 10 to eliminate the policy identified as number 10. Uh, no. Member pick. Yes. Member Ren,

yes. Uh, member Shiken, yes. Okay. So, the yeses we have one, two, three, six, eight. Eight yeses, four nos.

Mr. Chair, there are a couple of other items under the policies relating to development. Well, I believe Miss McCutchen had identified at an earlier lead promised link back to them. One has to deal with development sites and ensuring perimeter plantings are add if trees are removed. The other had to do with some mitigation efforts in terms of construction practices along roads like group 1009. Mr. Pension, did I capture those correctly?

Um, yeah. If I I can just um if you want to talk a little bit about the sound study that we did and um the the reason that it came forward was that the the results of the sound study and also uh citizens uh comments regarding the noise level around roundabouts. Steve would you talk about that study a little bit please?

Sure. After the development of the villages at Brightleaf, we were we started receiving complaints from existing subdivisions like Evergreen, Westland Farms, Sandalwood Creek about the increase in noise coming from Route 100 and in some instances Route 109 for the Cambury development. After we did the improvements to Route 109, which included some roundabouts, those homes in the vicinity, the roundabout started also expressed concerns about the increased noise levels. So, we engaged a company out of Rockford, Illinois to do a sound analysis, and it wore out just exactly what we all thought. the closer you are to Route 100 or Route 109 or any of the arterial corridors, the sound levels are substantially greater than when you move 100 feet, 200 feet or 300 feet out. So in the case of the point at brightleaf which is at the intersection of route 109 and route 100 northeast corner we required additional sound mitigation and steps in the construction of the homes upgraded windows doors greater insulation so as when they are built they don't necessarily suffer from the proximity to the arterial roadway. Miss McCutchen at that time thought that was something we should require in future projects that are along arurial roadways or have the potential to be a problem. So the sound study bore out what we all believe and what we've taken a positive step toward that but we did it not as an overall policy but through a sightsp specific ordinance relative to a a single zoning. And so I think Miss McCutchen, anything else I missed?

Yeah, I think um one more item is that when a new development does come in, especially along 100 or 109, that they um leave the the existing tree line that faces either one of those highways. Again, that helps with the sound mitigation. And I will have to say um that the point at bright leaf um after discussions were um very amanable to the request that we made and are going forward um with insulated um windows and I'm sorry soundproofed windows and insulation and they are also going to leave the tree line um that is closest to their development. We did not get any negative feedback for that. um they were on board and willing to do that. Understood um resident comments over and over um about sound and the impact the negative impact it has on the quality of life. Mr. Vonich, do you have anything to add? So the proposal from Miss McCutchen to the group and I didn't include it in the as part of the category new policies would be to add something relating to sound mitigation for new housing along arterial roads and then um improved tree preservation along the perimeter of the property. So that's the proposal before you tonight.

Yes ma'am. So what is your your opinion on on how we address that? I because I think those are both valid things. So my question would be is this is the place to address it or is it a sight specific would be better. What is your your expertise tell us? My position is always if we could have policy that reinforces what we're doing daytoday, it's to the betterment because we can tell people look at the master plan. Look at this policy. This is the expectation. You're not doing it on a case-byase basis or exposing the city to well, you're just doing it because it's this developer versus that developer. There's a universality to it, a defensibility. So from the department's perspective, we get enough complaints about noise. We even had to do a special enforcement program with our county police out on Route 100, Route 109 for loud cars, speeding cars, which make more noise. So

that's what I was going to ask is if there's anything we can do about the cars with the huge exhausts. Yeah. And I've got heck, it's guy who lives across the street from me, a couple doors down, has a Harley, and I can hear that anywhere in my house anytime he starts that thing up. There's not much I think we can do about that, but they're just loud by nature. I know. Yeah. Well, I think there's some validity to it. So from the department's perspective, if the group were to accommodate us preparing two policy statements to be reviewed by you at the next show, I think that would be a good step forward. Did you have a question?

Would we would we say that it only applies to new developments that are going in with so many feet of the arterial roads of 109 and 100?

We can't do that, Mr. is because the sound study actually gave recommendations in terms of the distance that it was a simplistic approach to it. It's it basically said if you really want to address it, don't allow development within 200 or 300 feet of the arterial. That's a take plain and simple. That could be that would have been threequarters of the side of Brightling. Um so yes so if you're within that that distance we can say you have to do increased sound medication.

I'll just add to that maybe add some verbiage to it as well because where my house is it's more than 100 200 feet away from um highway 100 though the topography of that distance funnels all the noise right down to my house. So, you know, maybe some consideration of how the topography will funnel the noise to a certain spot as well. Voice tracker. Yeah. Yeah. Because and I get the same thing mostly with the construction trucks at my house. I'm curious, do you always

just, you know, you said there was consideration for the Bright Leaf Point. Was there any consideration or similar to for the Mckelby development? Are they making any sound mitigation um things there? Well, they have the single frontage on Route 109. There's actually a acre lot that separates the first of the house on the south side of the new main street and then there's about distance on the north side of the new main street. So, you're able to implement it in a more practical way and it was more say dumb luck than anything. It wasn't certainly good planning on my part because there's the creek there. So, they had to cross the creek and pushed everything more into the interior.

But the existing remaining trees now, some of those are still going to be lost. Is that correct? Um, they should be pretty much done with the tree. Oh, good. Theresa. Yeah. Um uh I guess I I would question Deborah if um she would consider changing the the motion a little bit to add some verbiage to it like Cindy was saying about um the tree line or a burm or a wall or whatever is deemed to be to um prevent the noise. I wouldn't say sound. I would say prevent noise.

Yeah, I don't have any objections to that addition. Um partly the sound BM and some of the other um amenities you just mentioned were also things that came forward from that study as well. So if it's if it's already existing uh neighborhood that may have been there for 20 30 years 15 years um then adding a burm and some plantings is a very good well way to mitigate the sound and that came out of the study as well

I just have a question about our tree policy. So when you uh so I think that I remember back when they were doing that sound study at Hidden Valley and the guy came and explained to us about how all the different the more blades of grass and leaves the better the sound dispersement. So as far as the the tree line goes, I think a tree line would be great. Uh but I guess my question is if if a builder is going to leave a tree line, does that um does that comply with our tree policy, our tree regulations? I'm all for it. I mean, I, you know, if you go to Hilton Head or it's in most places in South Carolina, when you drive down their main arteries, it's all trees. It separates everything from those roads to keep I don't know why. It's pretty, too. But, you know,

and there's no signage either. Right. Well, yeah. Actually, I've driven right past a couple places, but yeah,

trees. Alfred code already protects the structure of building setback areas with the exception of access and utility installations. So obviously you've got to get into the property. So there's got to be an access point. Um sometimes that requires due to sight distance that they have to clear back from the access point in either direction. So it's a safe ingress egress. So the grading code does a pretty good job there. Um in the case of the reserve we believe was adamant that as many of the perimeter trees be preserved along Manchester Road 109 and if they had to be removed to accommodate access or utilities that the proposed landscaping plan had to be implemented immediately. Right.

So the grading isn't complete yet. looks like it's going to fall into the winter when we probably couldn't get the stock, but I would expect that early spring you'll see what's going to be the robust plantings on the preservation.

I guess going forward, you know, if I Well, this is probably a way I probably way in the weeds on it, so I'll just be quiet. Never mind. Sorry. Go ahead. David, along those lines though, um what what steps do we have to make sure that those trees that are put put in are going to survive? Because one of I remember one of the things Mh. Mayor Bolan said was that he wanted bigger trees, but the bigger trees you put in, the more susceptible they are to dying, especially with our weather patterns lately where we go from swamp to drought and back again. Yeah.

Like I I don't know like up there at the roundabout at Wild Horse and 109, we put in all those trees. What are we gonna do to make sure they survive and don't start looking like that church that was

state of Missouri? Not us. But so the foundation of our protection of plantings is the escrow process. That's part of the platting creation of lots for sale. And so we basically escrow minimum $700 per tree. And we hold that escrow at a minimum two years. there's an an automatic extension to another two years and then thereafter there's replacement process. So we also as part of our escrow process have something called our maintenance agreement which means when 95% of the plat is the lots in the plat are occupied an 18month clock starts ticking and we hold that money for 18 months to see. We also now are requiring irrigation in common areas because we know it's just where weather's just doesn't p follow follow a predictable pattern as much as we like to think. And so those common areas they're irrigated. Now we did that in main street crossing. So the medians and the areas around the common ground where we had all the trees planted. They didn't start the irrigation because of cost until mid July. I told Travis and I were out there and the trees obviously they got stressed. They started they seem to be okay but can't necessarily force the homeowners association basically turn on their gate. We try well our we never got our bills switched over to us and then I I don't know if someone sliced it when they redid Manchester or Missouri American wouldn't tell us what we owed so we just shut it down and haven't run it in 15 years. Yeah.

Oh, I was just going to comment that you do have some kind of a um I don't know rule say rule uh to use native plants, right? Because that they will have more ability to survive than sticking in something that's not native. And do these people if they do a burn would they do native plants? That's so important. Yes. Because as you remember on our environmental element, we basically said they use fur. That's what I was remembering and Travis Melanie and I what we're doing now and all of our plans we have the landscape legend that shows the trees that are Yes. adding is it native or not, right?

And if it's not, we take a special look at it. We push them toward more native, right? Because that's just be better able to serve. That's good. Learning on our feet as we go. Aren't we all? Once you've been here a while and figure it out. Yeah. Unfortunately, it's about 40 years too. You're like, you know, now I know it.

The developer and the city took a lot of heat when they put in Bright Leaf with the deforestation over there. Just curious, the deforestation over at the reserve. Have we been getting the same kind of reaction or it seems relatively quiet and at the two mayor's coffees in the last that has never been brought up as a topic. So maybe it was the communications portion of it or what?

Travis has the enviable position of taking most of those calls. So I'm gonna let him respond. Mr. Mr. Rubic, I would say that regarding the reserve, um, I've gotten a handful of phone calls about the activity there, mainly for people who want to purchase homes to live in the subdivision. I've gotten, uh, no phone calls that I can recall that was criticizing the tree removal. Um, I would also say that with villages at Brightleaf, the communications effort was much stronger than what we did with the reserve. And that's not to criticize the communication component of the staff. Um, but we did a postcard or at least two postcards for villages at Brightleaf explaining what was coming um to the I think we did 5,000 ft um within um that area. Um, and we used our social media and our website as well for the villages of Bright Leaf again, and we still got the the surprise and the um negative comments that we did.

And I would argue that 109 may have higher traffic volumes than 100 at times. I don't know. Um, but that's my answer. Good.

If I can if I can I'm sorry I didn't raise my hand. If if I can make one more comment that I think often times when um a development has for no other term just the land has just been stripped. I mean that was what I thought was not supposed to happen in Wildwood anymore that that was a North County thing. Um but try as we might um they still took out trees that we had discussed that they should not take out trees and I don't think people who moved into Bright Leaf really understood the impact of the surrounding area the negative input putut around the surrounding area when they moved in and the like um Miss Deppler said when you didn't have the noise and Evergreen and Wesland farms and so forth when all that land was wooded and um vegetation and all that. It it definitely had a positive impact with um those noise provisions versus um what we currently have. Um, and that was one reason we worked so hard on the new point of Bright Leaf, so we would not make the same mistakes that were made with the villages of Bright Leaf. So, I think we have a good example of what not to do and we have a good example of what is an improvement and and what works. Thank you,

Ken. I'll respectfully disagree because I had code enforcement, including myself, out at the villages of Bright Leaf almost every week. There were trees removed. It's town center. It's 2% of our 68 square miles. And since 1995, the intent was to basically put all our commercial eggs and all of our highdensity eggs here. We can't have high density, affordability, housing life cycle, different types without Town Center. And it requires trees to be removed. I'm sorry. It's in the plan. It's in our ordinances. This is the time to change it. If you want to go to a three-acre community, tell us now to remove Town Center, reszone it non-urban, and we can do it.

Well, Mr. phonage. I was going by um citizens complaints and actually standing there and um watching trees be removed that were marked not to be removed. So, it's certainly not a complaint towards the department. We can't have code enforcement out there 247. Um it was just example of the comments that I have definitely received from many residents who live around the area. Okay. Uh I would like to make a motion to have you the city uh put forth something for us to read. That's my motion.

That was you mentioned like 15 minutes ago. It was just and we have a second. All in favor? I I Thank you. All opposed. Motion passes. Thank you. And again, my offer stands if you as a group master plan want to eliminate town center as a land use category, this is the time to discuss it because it's in the planning. That's why I moved here. So, no. No. No way. We're good. Then move on. Let's go.

Community services. That's the next element that we have probably about 15 or so minutes to discuss. Well, wait, did we vote on Yeah, let's all Yeah, let's back up. Can we make a suggestion of one more addition? Sure. So, and you'll have to tell me if this is where you want it or you want to wait till community um to about the emergency contingency. Community services. Community services. You want to wait till then? Yeah.

Okay. So, we went through all 10 of these. We've got nine left. Most of which were retained. A couple are going to be Joe's going to add a couple of things he did back to us. I propose a motion that we accept these as is as we talked about. And do we have a second? A second. And all in favor? I I motion passes. Thanks. Saved by B.

So community services. Um this is the third element of bill six. Again we have transportation open state as is described in the introductions. There are five goals in association that development six objectives 11 policies. principally. This is where we as a group the start of the city talked about how best to provide services to the community and how to basically protect our residents so to speak. And so the first goal relates to appropriate EMS sanitation and other municipal services need to be maintained. So context, this wasn't in the original master plan. It was added 10 years after. And the point being is in that first 10 years, everybody thought that there was a high potential that offer would fail. And what we proved this when you're providing services through contracts actually works. And so the group at that 10 year mark said, "Keep it up." And so that's what the department is saying. Retain The next item is something that came golden to two. I'm sorry I didn't number. It's the second one. Talked about concurrency. And this is something that came from Jonathan Barnett. And he was our planner, the original author of master plan and was participated in the first update as well. Basically what it means is you can't let development

you can't let the development tail wag the dog. Meaning you've got to have commenceable services, infrastructure, and other items if you're going to have development. Otherwise, you'll always be playing catch-up. The example that was used during 1995 and 1996 was all of the trailers at the Rockwood School District facilities. Too many kids, not enough classrooms, so they were in trailers. And the other example was just keeping up with the storm water and sanitary sewer needs associated with the community. And to a certain degree, we still have problem. It is with potable water in certain areas of town thinner. They have potable water from Missouri American North. It's not at the pressure or volume that is really suitable for what I would consider a typical single family home. And so we are working with Missouri American Water Company to basically address that. But concurrency regarding concurrency, Julie, when when a developer makes a proposal to PNZ or just is there a discussion with the school district about the possible impact adding 150 homes is to their or I don't recall in the fire district where none that there was ever a discussion we absorbed without without question. But are those discussions that occur? Yes, we require the developer to contact all of the utilities and all of the service districts as part of the start of the zoning process. And oftentimes we get letters or we get emails saying yes we can serve this or in the case of the fire district we usually just got not got but we got information on volumes hydrants things like that to ensure service could basically meet the minimum

levels of the fire code and when the reserve comes in is that going to help town centers water? Actually it is because they're going to further the loop. Okay. And that's the a lot of the water service in Wildwood ends it basically like is a dead end street and the best approach to potable water delivery is a loop and so we're lacking those and as we development fills in in the town center the loop gets extended and with Rockwood um impression is that the schools are shrinking right now. Yes, Travis one day say Dr. Ain was having coffee with the man.

There's a gentleman this morning that cited I think a 15% decrease over the next period of time. Um, but that was the gentleman in the crowd because um, like I know Eureka's been busting at the seams and like the line the Lafayette Eureka line's at 100 right now, but me living two blocks, three, four blocks south of 100. I think half of our half of the high school kids on our street go to Lafayette and they have no trouble bringing them in. We just I don't know. I see so many Lafayette signs. I'm like, really? They can't give us a bus with all these kids. But thankfully tried to spike

and then as we move through the zoning process, the site development plan, the plats, we send them back out to everybody because that's where you can basically ensure that you're getting the widths of streets, the things that are necessary to serve a development. and then that record plat the easements that are necessary for installation of utilities etc. So we probably at least three times during the process reach out to our partners and ask for information. It isn't infallib times that we'll miss something or a letter doesn't come before we make a decision. Things like broad I always like to feel there's a great recourse that's free.

Well, I when I'm looking at this and I was going to and then I've read ahead for where we have the internet next and I'm just wondering if the internet can't be looped into these services because anymore you have to have the internet. I mean, it is an essential service. Do you know anybody that doesn't have it doesn't have internet as part of their daily life? I'm serious. I mean, yeah, whatever. I'm They just made me change some of my stuff at home to internet and I'm mad about it. So, what? Yeah. So, I mean, could that be could we put that in with our essential services or is that too broad for internet? Yeah,

that's what the next one says. I know. Can it? But it can be merge it in with the first one. I think make it essential services because it is essential now. Well, it doesn't say utilities up on that one at all. One that we're talking about. Okay. Sorry. I thought we were talking about number two and I thought we were kind of talking. Sorry, I misunderstood. I moved on. Never mind. Concurrency does include utilities. It includes infrastructure, roads, and bridges. That's right. He started talking about the water and my mind went ahead. Sorry, Mr. Lee. Yes,

I was just going to mention it and just get confirmation, Mr. Bunes, that you know, if a new development like the reserve comes in that there's a guarantee that um highspeed and potentially fiber internet be installed on that land as part of the development review process. And if there's a mechanism already in our in our code that provides for that during the subdivision process uh the yeah the uh zoning process. Excellent input. Yeah. All of our sight specific ordinances require fiber to the home and in our planning process we require that internet be provided at the minimum broadband speed set by the FCC. Tom.

Yeah. And in that case, I I mean that would have to be something I think the department would have to research, but maybe that's something we could look at at um if you're coming in and building a new development that you would possibly install the fiber to the premises is great. Um and if usually you're at fiber, you're going to be at least getting 300 megabits per second. The state only requires uh the FCC only requires uh 25 upload. Um, so that is I if you're doing a coax install or you're doing a a copper install uh in today's age that's not going to stretch out for the next 10 years or even you know five years quite frankly uh with some of the speeds especially with the emergence of AI I do believe that it may if it's legally possible if the city could require that um they exceed that level maybe at 300 megabits because that's usually the service package that's offered at its lowest level So, just as an aside, I have I had um Direct TV and AT&T at my house because I I have a visceral dislike of the charter. So, um and so when I had trouble with my internet and they came out, the guy said, "Look, lady, something's wrong with your stuff. We've never seen it this slow." And I was like, "Oh, no. That's it." So, AT&T finally said, "Hey, we've got something in your area." And I said, "Hooray." And then it was a cell it's an a Wi-Fi based. So essentially my internet is now like my cell phone in my house. So I think that um and you know in order that's in order for me to watch TV or talk on the phone or have a home alarm. I mean so I just think that when we get to that part of this I think that that should be uh absolutely a thing.

Thoughts? Um the next item that she mentioned was goal three which is obviously for a long long period of time wasn't until recent times due to the efforts of council members like Miss Buchch and Miss Clark and others we actually have high speeded internet out to our rural areas we did 2100 households as part of the original phase one Tom I think you said 400 or so remain 395 But we actually just found out um well some relatively good news I can add to the discussion here if you want to finish your thought there Mr. Vish. Go ahead.

I was just going to add in that uh yes it's 395 homes today. We actually did find out um that a couple of those spots uh one of the neighborhoods off Old State will be getting highspeed internet from Spectrum. Um, and it seems like that's a package that's being delivered through the the subdivision itself directly from Spectrum without any any grant money or any federal funds. Uh but we also found out we're still we do not have full context or details but it seems that within this bead program which is mentioned in the memorandum tonight that um it I I'm aware that 400 homes in Wildwood were applied for by a certain telecommunications company that is uh very well recognized and they it seems that they are going to be providing fiber through that bead program in round two and that negotiations are currently ongoing. going with the state. So, it does seem that we might actually be able to close that digital divide uh even sooner. There will be a couple uh households that will still be kind of they were built after the the testing was done um and the challenge programs and there are a few that are in a very rural parts of Wildwood, but it will get down that that percentage that went from 85% had it, so 15% without to approximately 3% of households in Wildwood today. uh that that number should shrink down to less than 1% if what I'm seeing from uh this provider gets approved by the state.

Thank you. Yes. Regarding the if you're considering internet as a utility, does it come under the same exclusivity of like we Amron is the only electric provider in town right now? Republic or is it Republic? Yeah. Here's our trash hauler. Um, do we do we run into issues with competition and that or should we, you know, I know there's an issue now where you have two fiber companies digging up the same area, if you will. They don't all share. They don't share. They do not.

So that said, there is and that is a bigger discussion. I think this is something that maybe we could add in as a community service or potentially in another element for what we do to lobby with groups and other organizations. But I think uh what Vice Chair Loyal is saying here is an important one. It was a discussion we had earlier today at coffee with the mayor. Um we actually found out today some pretty positive news that this certain telecommunication provider that will be installing fiber in a in a very similar area. A lot of the houses that just got AT&T, uh, it does seem like they're going to cut back some of those homes and actually just use one street to cut through. It's not confirmed yet, but they are they need to connect their network. The way the the actual layout of the infrastructure works is that they have to have the main line running through to get to the households they're wanting to serve eventually. And they they have to make it practical by having passes. and passages the number of homes and the density number of homes with the amount of feet that you're actually running of court because that's how the contractors get paid. U that said what Mr. Loyal I think is mentioning here and wisely so is that the state currently restricts the city's ability. It's a recognized utility company if they are recognized by the state um they have access to the right of way and the city's only ability is to regulate it. We have done a really good job beefing up our right-of-way permit process to make sure that restoration takes place in a timely manner and it's done with pre-existing photos. We do require them to submit photographs of every household. We check the addresses on a thumb drive that's done prior to permit um being issued. So, we've done a lot in that regard to make sure that quite frankly they are not able to say well it was the the driveway was already chipped when we got there. The problem comes in though is that that's truly what the city can do at this point. And Mr. Vunich had alluded to the fact earlier that just this past session, it seems that these utility companies including uh telecommunications are getting even stronger with the fact that the city now would have to pay for their relocations

if we were expanding a street u or expanding a streets width and actually taking in some of that space. So that's just one thing that happened. But the other is right now there is no limitation on you know a fiber company say this uh one street that's going they're going to be going down it just got AT&T installed last year. The city can definitely plan around that and say okay we only can have one provider and one set of contractors going in at a time because that's a reasonable expectation and the law recognizes you can't have 50 contractors in there at once. That said, after that permit is closed, there technically is a right for that another provider to come in and say, "I'd like to put my line directly next to it," which would lead to the same thing. So, what just so we can kind of visualize this, a resident that just so happens to live in the, you know, a house that has the perfect spots, got easement in the front of the house. Um, it just had a trench dug into it for AT&T's line. It just got filled up. They just restored it, put salt, uh, put straw and seed down. the finally the grass is growing back after a year. They can actually come in apply for the permit and the city only has 31 days to review, put you know caveats and regulations onto it as much as we can and then we have to issue it. If we don't it's considered automatically approved. So that is a state law. It comes from the FCC itself too. So state of Missouri has just kind of made it a little bit more instigent. But this is something that does bring concern just in the sense that some of the homes that are most profitable in the minds of the telecommunication companies are it's the same groupings of houses within Wildwood that are next to you quite frankly there are a lot that are next to Ellisville, Clarkson Valley, etc. And I do believe that they always call it this rule of three within the fiber uh community. If there's dense housing, you usually are going to have three fiber providers. That's where it makes sense to actually install it. Um, but overall that doesn't limit it. It could be five, six until

that entire easement or rightway is filled up. They could keep coming back. So, I know that might not be something we can, you know, speak on at, you know, for this meeting. But, it is something that we're taking pretty seriously and what we have done is beefed up our rightway permit process. uh what is required from that contractor, but really looking at this as a how can we get our legislative consultant and also the Missouri Municipal League and our state representatives to start speaking on behalf of local residents because it is a very intrusive process and just speaking with some of these residents that go through it. They appreciate it the first time because it's fiber internet running to their home, but you know, the second time they they love the idea of the competition. and they're definitely supportive of the market, but they just went through it and that is we're going through it right now. So, I think it's a little bit more raw, but just wanted to bring that up to everyone's attention. U some folks are getting way too many options with fiber, which is pretty pretty good in one sense, but during the process is very very time consuming and and can cause a lot of stress for residents. No. Um, what about a simple revision, one word revision that says instead of services should be improved, we should say services should be finalized. Did everyone hear that? In terms of goal three, instead of improving internet, we basically finalized the extension of internet. We're nearing the end of our time. We have a few concluding things to do, but I do we will get to

I didn't mean to get us off track. Sorry. So, we got to three of the goals. Don't have time to properly complete the community services. I'm gonna draw a line here and come back next meeting. Teresa, you had a comment. Did you want me to go ahead and just I wanted you to know we'll get to that. Oh, okay. Um, yeah, because I did talk with Captain Mandelle. He gave me

a good one bookmark it for you. So that you don't think we that we're rapidly running but the finalize I had a comment about finaliz but what does that how does that work if we you know it's always evolving the what's going to be final you know how the technology is changing all the time would finalize be the word you want to use or what if uh if you don't mind chair

sure what if We we instead of we say finalize but then we add in by having a a strong definition of the internet service itself by saying one uh meeting FCC guidelines which do change u by saying 100 megabits per second uh download and then 25 megabits per second upload or just meeting FCC guidelines for internet serviceability change. Right. Yeah. Yeah. FCC guidelines in SA change week. Sounds good. Everybody like that? Okay, let's draw a line for that. Do we have any outside comments?

Um, if anybody's on Zoom tonight with us, um, if you just use the raise hand feature, uh, we can let you in to make a comment. Not seeing any any hints. Is there anything we can finalize on these three community service? Yeah. Can we vote on those three? Those three so that we don't get to or we can we can finish them all and vote on four things. We we can we can take a vote on the three or we can let's take a vote on it and then close that door. I'm fine. I'd like to make a motion that the three items under goals in Texas and policies of community service element. I'll

second in favor. I have your hand up again, Tom. Yes. Uh if you don't mind, chair.

Sure. I just wanted to kind of give everyone some food for thought given the the last action was just taken about internet and this was something I think that we kind of started scratching at the surface. It's mentioned briefly in the memorandum but um just over the the course of the time where we're about to get into the next meeting. I would just uh encourage everyone to start thinking, you know, now that everyone we're getting to a point where the maj vast majority of residents have access to highspeed internet. Uh I think the idea from at least the department's perspective is going to be really focusing in on how can we leverage that internet connectivity to better inform our residents and what tools are out there especially with the emergence of some some newer tools um that are coming to hand to be able to better inform our residents and have active participation both way whether it be through the use of forms or interactive um different reporting mechanisms that we're exploring right now. Thank you. sir, is what you have is are we going to hold that till next meeting?

I'm whatever you you and Mr. Ver, are you okay with that? I'm okay with it. Okay. Want it? No, I'm okay with either way. No, we'll just we'll make it a point that we talk. Okay. Next meeting. Joe, you put some dates out there. And if I recall, our next meeting is October 28th. Yes. Everybody got that? What's that? Next meeting October 28th.

And to all of you that responded to the emails, I much appreciate it. We will have four based upon the responses for the next two meetings. Did you stop the rocket? Well, I'm still blocked. So, Travis can Yeah, Travis is trying to unwind that that thread for me. But so, yes, thank you. Thank you everybody for their passionate discussion. Thank Mr. Hman and Mr. By for your comments as well. Really appreciate it. Yes, sir. Thank Teresa for the pineapple upside down cake. Absolutely.

I'm going to use it for dessert. Are you ready for a motion? Sure are. To adjourn. Motion to adjurnn. Second. Motion to see. All in favor? I. I. I. Thanks.