Planning & Community Design Commission - Regular Meeting

All right. Let's call to order the September 17th, 2026 meeting of the Olivet Plain and Community Design Commission. Madam Secretary, will you please call the roll?

Yes. Clark Hickman. Here. Felicia Ford. Here. Tim Spiegelglass.

Here.

Jenna Natt.

Let's see.

Here.

There we go.

Petrie Powell is absent. Sam Wallach?

Present.

And I'm Laura Ragsdale.

Perfect. Thank you. We also have Carlos Trejo, Director, and Don Doty, Senior Planner, is here as well, as well as our City Council is on. Okay. Nobody's here present in the room. Is anybody online that...

I do have one person that is online, Paula Hubbert. If there's something that you would like to talk to the commission about, that's not an agenda item. If you can just show your hand. All right. Okay. So it looks like she does. Okay. Okay.

All right. All right. And now we've got at least one person here, so I'll go through it. Okay. We follow an agenda. There's copies in the back of the room. Okay. If there are comments related to an item not otherwise on the agenda, there will be a public comment section right after we're done with announcements. We ask that comments be kept to three minutes or less. If you are online and you have comments you want to make, we ask that you click the raise hand button. Carlos will move you over to be a panelist and make sure your camera is on. We ask that anybody providing comments state your name and your address for the record. Okay, Carlos, did I miss anything? Okay, any other announcements?

Just a couple of things to update the commission regarding recent council actions regarding land use items. The council at their last meeting on September 8th approved the special permit for SSM Pediatrics at 9375 Dillman Industrial Boulevard. They did submit a revised landscape plan and some additional information at the council's request. Special permit was approved for Ames Indoor Field Hockey at 1220 North Price Road. And there, and then the tax amendment to our subdivision code regarding condominiums for non residential properties was also approved by the council. Then they had their 1st reading on the tax rate. The next city council meeting is scheduled for October, excuse me, September 22nd when we don't have any land use items scheduled on that agenda. Price and Olive intersection, it should be open hopefully by Monday. We're just waiting for the concrete to cure. It should be a great addition, adding the additional right turn lane to go on Olive. And then again, we are kind of reviewing and we'll bring to the commission a draft stormwater management plan that was coordinated by our public works department for the commission review probably within the next couple of weeks.

All right, fantastic. Um, great. Then we will move on to public comments. These are comments not related to other agenda items.

All right. Miss Herbert, I'm going to transfer you over to.

Yeah, she's here for the P. Okay.

All right. Well, since nobody else is here, we'll move on to, well, Old Business 3A. I think we're going to defer that item because the petitioners are not present. Is that right, Carlos?

Correct. And I haven't had an opportunity to have a discussion with them regarding the last commission review.

Okay. And we're just moving right along. Number four, we don't have any new business. So we'll go to number five, overview of the Olivet Gateway Plaza, PDD.

Carlos? All right, Chairman. So we had several new members. Also with the council, I was going to provide kind of an overview of what will be proposed at our next meeting regarding the Olive Crossing development, which initially started as the Olivet Gateway Plaza. So I'm going to give you a little bit of history, talk about our 2006 comprehensive plan, how that led to the creation of our mixed-use district, which allows for planned development districts, the issuance of an RFP in 2016, and the difference between a redevelopment plan and a master development plan, and then the PDD that we created for Olive Crossing called the Olivet Gateway PDD. And then what you will be seeing at your next meeting, which initiates a series of steps of other development reviews that you'll do on behalf of the petitioner. So just a real quick overview. So if you go back to our 1969 comprehensive plan, The city has always anticipated a redevelopment of plus or minus 14 acres here at the corner of I-170 and Olive in there. And you can see the heavy squared areas were in there. And that area had seen a lot of activity, for those of you that recall way before. Way back before 2000, there used to be an Office Max or Office Depot on the site. Air Masters was on the site. And I think those were the two primary buildings. But there were at least five commercial properties. Again, two of them developed and several residents on a street that was called Locust Lane in there. In between that, before we started a comprehensive plan, we had a series of various developments. On this slide, Olive Boulevard is going up and down, so east to west is here, and then north to south is actually left to right. But we had two, I know there was an extended Knights Hotel that was proposed at one time, another hotel that was proposed behind the OfficeMax, and then a blueprinting facility that was proposed behind the OfficeMax. So there's been a series of various developments that were kind of nestled in between those commercial properties that were throughout that site in there. When we initiated the 2006 comprehensive plan. We wanted to try to look at this with Olive being here, I-170 here, to create a coordinated redevelopment at that corner. Something that had some density, something that had some public spaces, something that had pedestrian connectivity that furthered where our goal was to create this dynamic sense of place in there. And And that was the kind of the city's vision for redevelopment along that southern area. As soon as the comprehensive plan was completed, the city issued a request for proposals, and we got a couple of proposals right away in there. One was a sandstone redevelopment. that included a large retailer. And then somebody that was just looking at a portion of the site that had a couple of outlets towards the front with some small retail and a drive-through in the back. Fortunately, the recession happened, which was probably one of the better things, because at the same time, we were working on trying to create the ordinances and regulations that would help further trying to create this vision in the comprehensive plan. So in 2008, we hit the recession. Both of these kind of fizzled in that process. In 2011... we had another development uh that was anchored by a quick trip uh that was going to be up in the front with olive being here 170 being here and then a mixture of uses along with a hotel towards the back So that kind of expedited of creating our MU Mixed Use District to try to get a more cohesive development type that was more consistent with the vision of the strategic plan. And we created what we call the MU Mixed Use District. This district allowed Olivet for the first time to create plan developments. which are like little entities or redevelopment entities that can have their own code to help further and be a little bit flexible with redevelopment of larger properties and things of that nature. The goals of the MU district or the objectives were to create a mixed land use destination to kind of limit retail from dominating retail. the development, to encourage higher density, to coordinate the street system, to provide flexibility in the development process, to be consistent with the comprehensive plan, to create a safe and attractive pedestrian environment, and to protect and preserve the values of properties along the Olive Boulevard corridor. That district is still in place today. The references to the comprehensive plan, since we've adopted the 2024, have changed, so have the overall visions and goals. of that is when we look at this. And then in 2016, we issued a request for proposals. The city decided to be, I think at that time we were working with the developer, but to kind of lead the process in issuing a request for proposals to redevelop that area with an emphasis that the project should be creating and inviting common areas and public spaces. Again, trying to further the vision of the 2006 comprehensive plan in that process. And the development that the city selected was the Olivet Gateway Plaza PDD, which essentially became Olive Crossing. And it was a retail entertainment type of development with several restaurants and box retail along there with the hope of anchoring a grocery store towards the back here. And there so there was a 32,000 square foot grocer 30 to 35,000 a retail space 17 to 22 square feet of dining entertainment space and then it talks about the parking through that we continue to work and trying to Supplement the district and working with the developer that we created the first redevelopment plan and that was in 2018 and this is part of what was part of the the the the developer's agreement. This development received a tax increment financing through the city and when you do that, the council has to also approve a redevelopment plan in there. And this is the redevelopment plan that was adopted in 2018. That plan included Retailer along this area office building hotel and then similar to what we've seen in subsequent plans in there that was the when you do a TIF and You're required to do an analysis and to do that analysis, the developer has to submit a redevelopment plan. It's not going to be an exact, it's going to be a very strong concept of what's being proposed so they can do the analysis and determine the feasibility of the development and then the matching interest that the city would be participating in that process. With that, we created the first planned development district, which we called Olivet Gateway Plaza PDD, and that's using that MU zoning designation, creating that district based on the redevelopment plan that we saw, and I'll go back in just a second, because this redevelopment plan then becomes the master development plan in the PDD. So you have the council overseeing a redevelopment plan that was part of the developer's agreement and the TIF, but for the commission, for our zoning purposes, we have a PDD and in that PDD, you need a master development plan. They're gonna mimic each other very closely, but they are two different elements that are part of different ordinances and different criteria in there. This is what we used for the PDD. And again, it resembled the, The redevelopment plan in there, and then this was the diagram that is used in our PD. So, this is the PD area, roughly 14 plus or minus acres in there had the hotel. If I start from the, from the right hand side and go north the hotel. structured parking with an office, drive-through user, some retail, double retail, another drive-through user, and then an office building with some structured parking in there. So that was the master development plan. So when the developer came in to present, you know, the request to be a PDD. This is one of their old slides that they provided back in February 21st, 2019. And this is, they recognized the pedestrian connectivity, provided the city with a concept of how, you know, it was consistent with the goals and objectives of this PDD or the MU district, which goes back to the comprehensive plan. They talked about the focus areas, which were the public spaces in there. So there's the water element near the interchange, a little park area right by a corner here by a retailer office building, and then the corner here at Price in there. And then there's more as we extend it into the GRG Green Trail in there. And then that was the master development plan that was reflected there. Then came an amendment to the redevelopment plan in which the retail or office component that was in this area was converted or requested to be redesignated to a multifamily apartment building called the Clover. So that redevelopment plan had to go back. The council had to approve that. And with those changes, then the commission had to amend the PDD to adopt a new master development plan that reflected both the Clover and at that time, there was interest in consolidating the two lots that were up on Olive here on the northwest side with the potential that a grocer would be interested. In this case, it would have been the Aldi development. So we amended the master development plan shortly after the council had approved the redevelopment plan that was associated with the developer's agreement. And again, the level of detail It gets more refined as it gets to the master development plan where the council is looking at it, something very broadly, very conceptually. They're looking more at the uses and how they're integrated, where the commission is looking more at the building orientations, the footprints, the places that are to be created. And then there's a next phase when each one of these gets redeveloped. you have what they call a design review and that you get into the site specifics of the plantings, the landscaping, the parking, the sidewalks, and all these. So where we are today is that the council has approved another amendment to the redevelopment plan, a 2026 amendment is what I'll call it, where the former office building and structured parking that were going to be located on the east side of the development area would be split into two lots. And those two lots would create the potential for two retailers or restaurant uses or small office. And I'm gonna get a little closer so you can see, this is the best diagram I have. Ours is gonna be a little bit better, but this is part of the redevelopment plan. So the council's kind of authorized that they would consider what was known as lot five, which had the office building and structured parking for that to be subdivided and to have two different tenants on those two sites. So the next step is, since the council is already authorized in the redevelopment plan, it goes to the commission to amend the master development plan. The commission is kind of beholden to the council's agreement with the developer. But remember, the council is looking at it from a very high altitude. The Commission is going to look at this more closely in terms of how specifically is it subdivided, how these spaces work, how are they interconnected with the development, the surrounding development within itself, and then within those two properties or so. And these are the two lots that you would be looking at, kind of highlighted. That area that will be coming to you at your next meeting on October 1st in there. And that's what that discussion process will will kind of overlap and. Let's see what I have here. So, in summary. And I'll go back to questions in just a 2nd, you know, the city council has approved an amended redevelopment plan and that's under ordinance 2815. I believe that was adopted this year. being that the council has amended the redevelopment plan, the PDD master plan has to be amended to reflect what the council has authorized. That is reviewed by the plan commission and your action is a recommendation to the city council. The council has the final approval in there. In addition to that, the commission has to approve a preliminary subdivision plan. That's what you'll see pretty much right here already. as part of the master plan amendment. That plat approval is solely the role of the plan commission in there. Once those two are acted upon, item number two and item number three, the next step is for the developer to submit a final subdivision plat And that is just a legal document that gets recorded in St. Louis County. It won't show any buildings. It may not show any parking stalls, any roadways or anything. It's just what are the two entity lots that are being created. That has to be reviewed by the commission and then approved by the council. And then after those lots are created, then the commission or the developer can seek approval of one of the users or tenant spaces on there. Now, at the same time, these things can overlap. We just can't issue permits or get final approvals until the council approves the PDD amendment and the council approves the final plan. And then the review, when you see specifically what is being developed in one of these spaces, that is solely the role of the plant commission. And what will be coming before you is, and I think everybody knows by now, is a Texas roadhouse. And bear with me, I'm going to just get a little bit closer and you can kind of see the footprint area or the identification of who the tenant will be in there. The commission is going to review this just like it reviews the site improvement plan or site plan review. We will be looking at how is it connected With its surroundings, how does it connect to the public space? How does pedestrian movement move throughout the site? Is there enough parking? How is parking integrated? Where are the open spaces? Where are the landscape plans, the details for the dumpster enclosures and orientation and aspects of that? So I will go and reinforce, you know, the objectives of the, all of the gateway PDD, which we kind of talked about earlier is to further the comprehensive plan and plan vision. Now that plan vision has kind of changed. It changed from this, uh, identity dynamic sense of place to now with more emphasis about, uh, you know, uh, community, uh, pedestrian safety, uh, olive Boulevard, uh, streetscape, the sustainability. stormwater and takes those to account. I think a lot of those were part of the larger process to ensure that it reinforces the MU district objectives. And again, that was regarding density, pedestrian movement, value, Olive Boulevard, that enhances the Olive Boulevard streetscape. develops pedestrian connections, designates public spaces, and then reinforce what we call our Chapter 428 standards, where we look at building orientation, landscaping, exterior lighting, and signage. And a lot of that we'll get into when you do the individual lot reviews of, let's say, whether it's the roadhouse or whatever happens to lot B. So that's kind of hopefully an overview of the process to help you go through as we start into this. This is one of our major developments, it's a big development. And so I want to make sure that the commission is well prepared. In your agenda, you should have access to... Make sure our online users can see. On the city's website and through the agenda, you should be linked to our development projects, specifically the Olivet Gateway proposal, which is the Olive Crossing development. And you should have access to all the information I went over, the full list of ordinances, and we're adding on as we go through here. We will have those up for you in there, the various amendments and resolutions. So what I've tried to do is These are the ones important to me because these are zoning and planning specific. And then these documents here are all those that have gone through council description of the various lots and what's going on with those and the authorization to subdivide lot five. And then you have information of what's been submitted. This you'll be seeing soon. Okay. It is what you have here, the one somewhat similar to what we just looked at. in there and then the information that is being submitted and still going through a review for the proposed roadhouse. So you'll have, you know, when you do your design review of the individual lot, you'll have a landscape plan, you'll have more detailed plans in there, you'll have elevations and such, you'll have lighting. information and things of that nature that you'll take a look at it. So there's different tiers. Remember, you'll have the master development plan that you'll look at more conceptually, but at a lower altitude than what the council has. And then you'll have the design review plan where you look at the individual lot and do the assessment of the architecture, character, landscaping, and things of that nature in there. I thought it was important to kind of go over that with the commission to give you some background, talk about process and how, you know, why this, why we're here and where we're going with that and be glad to answer any specific questions. We do have the developer here. If there's any questions on his end, but on October 1st, we'll have before you to initiate reviews will be the amendment to the master development plan that amends the PDD. and also kick off the initial review of Lot 5A, which will be the Roadhouse property.

That'll be the design review for the Roadhouse then? Okay. That's what I was wondering. Anybody have any questions? Carlos?

I have a question. I was curious about why, where the Texas Roadhouse comes from, if it was a request or need coming from people of all of that, is there, was there funding? discussion or a survey of any kind that suggests that Olivet is needing or wanting more big box restaurants, less local? Was there a driver for it? I'm just curious where it came from.

I would answer it, and it's a difficult question to answer in there because it is a market-driven approach. From our most recent comprehensive plan, there was a lot of interest of providing more dining options. Now, I will note that a lot of people noted that they wanted more curated pop type of stores and things of that nature. But a franchisee or so is not prohibited, nor was there anything, I believe, within the discussions from the comprehensive plan that said no franchises allowed. I strongly believe our comprehensive plan does not want to reflect what goes on the east side of 170 nor will it in there, but it does allow for a mixture of franchises and those things that are oriented you know, locally and all that. But I think, you know, the developer can probably address the risk aspect of it and what's in the market in there. And this has been a pretty good development in terms of where there's been a variety of different franchisees and local type of developments in there. I know like in law three, you know, all, you know, from Tropical Smoothie to Paris Baguette to the Brass Tap are franchisee developments, but two of those are their first interest in the region. A third one does have a couple locations and they're out of Columbia. But that addresses it from my perspective. I think it's a good question that the developer can probably better address what they saw in the market. I'd be glad to answer if that gets you at least what you're looking for from my part. And then I'm not going to put, I'm going to put the council liaison on the spot, but I don't know if you were here for that amendment for, yeah, so I don't know, I mean, if the council had any direct, any discussions regarding that and what input was given to them.

Yeah, when... We did not necessarily have the discussion about the particular business of Texas Roadhouse, but a discussion more around splitting that lot into two different lots and recognizing the potential to have two additional restaurants instead of having what was originally planned was the office building and parking garage. And so the opportunity to split those lots split the lot into two separate so that we could potentially have two restaurants um and you know not necessarily speaking on behalf of the entire council there was certainly some some on the council who had reservations about a big box store um and there were others on there a big box restaurant um there were others on the council who were happy to have a sit down restaurant because we had heard from members of the community through the comprehensive plan update the desire to have more sit down, dine in restaurants than fast food options. But as to this, my understanding was that as to the specific tenant, it wasn't really the council's decision about the specific tenant. It was more whether those lots could be split for a use that was different than what the original stated use was.

I'll add my two cents in it too as well. From a financial aspect is there's very little independent restaurants that can afford to build what Texas Roadhouse or a franchise or is going to build there. That's just a simple finances. That's a big, expensive building to build. And somebody with deep pockets has to build it. That's why you can't attract the local small restaurant here to come in here.

All right. Anybody else have any other questions for Carlos? Otherwise, we can talk with the developer.

Good evening. Greg Yawitz, 9200 Olive, developer of Olive Crossing. Thanks. Oh, excuse me. It's so crowded here tonight. um so i want to cover a few topics that i think will address the questions and some other uh things so one as you all can tell i've been at this a little while and part of the challenge with this project aside from the immense amount of site work was this little thing that happened to us in 2020 known as the great pandemic Which changed the world, not just costs and inflation, but changed how business is done, which is what brought us to the request to split the lot back in. When did I do that? Was it last? It was earlier this year, last year, whenever, because the prospects of a new office building in St. Louis are almost zero, almost anywhere in town. The costs are too exorbitant and people aren't working in offices like they used to. So the evolution, as you saw from Carlos's explanation, started in. Me thinking, oh, this will be simple. It'll be about 35,000 feet of retail space. We'll throw a couple of drive-thrus in, and we'll throw a little grocer in if I can get one. And it'll be kind of Sons, Target, and Dearburgs, and Costco, kind of what they have in New City. Not that there's anything wrong with that. But in Olivet, we like things that are different. And so the message that I received starting back in 2015 from a number of former council people was there's two big things on our agenda besides the development of the project. One is whatever you do, you got to get us a grocer. Olivet wants a grocer. So that took years. The other thing that Missy Waldman used to always say to me was we really need a sit down restaurant. Not that there's anything wrong with Fallon's. They're one of my tenants. There's nothing wrong with Chevy's. But there is no medium to upper level restaurant in Olivette. and really not one in close proximity. We're gonna go out for a steak dinner, where are you going to go? So we set about looking for restaurants for the site. And as Tim pointed out, economics are a big driver and challenge in this economy, and they were before. We were approached by Texas Roadhouse. Texas Roadhouse has an amazing reputation. In the lingo of using the term franchise, they are, if you will, a franchise type concept. But understand, Texas Roadhouse National U.S., the New York Stock Exchange traded company is our tenant. And so we're not dealing with, you know, somebody. That said, as it goes to the question of locality and local restaurants, I do want to point out that not only are Paris Baguette and Brass Tap the first of their kind in Missouri, they are owned by local couples. So the Fongs who own Paris Baguette live in Ladue School District. The Patels who own Brass Tap live in St. Charles. And so It's a national brand operated by a local family. So it's, I won't say it's, you know, it's not like Balkan Treat House in any way, shape or form, but it's local in its operational sense. And so as we've been looking for alternatives to an office building, we were approached by Texas Roadhouse. We know their reputation. A friend of mine actually runs one of them in St. Charles. And so we set about trying to see if we could make a deal. We have. I'm looking forward to the conversations with you all for the development review on the 1st. And I'll just ask Carlos, the conceptual use change I'm thinking about for 5B, where does that play in? Do we do this again or do we meld that into this?

No, it will be done again. I'm fine moving on with 5A simultaneously with that process, but that initial amendment process should happen first.

Okay, I was just curious.

In this case, the way it was brought to me- and I don't have the control was that these two had to move, you know, Yes. Yeah.

I mean, it's more of just a question because the other thing just showed up recently. And so it's new. So, yeah. So we're looking to amend the, what we're looking at that you'll consider not tonight is amending the master development plan to reflect two independent buildings, one on five a and one on five B. And I'm happy to answer any questions.

Do you have something in mind on 5G?

We do. Is there any reason you don't want me to?

I don't have anything. I mean, you just put it part of the record. That's fine.

We are in negotiations with a high end, what would be a small two story medical use. Very, very well done. So we're flushing through that right now. So I may be keeping you all very busy for the next three months or two months or however long it takes. And hopefully you like what we're going to bring in. It's sort of a meld between the, and I'll just tell you my thoughts because I think you all know I'm pretty transparent. The second restaurant starts to be concerning from a standpoint of it's so far off the road. We're looking, we've been still looking for another one, but we were approached completely out of the blue. It may be four weeks ago. And I think this actually might work. I think it works financially within the TIF, not that that's your purview or problem or concern, but that's sort of important for the city. I know who wants it and I respect them. And so I think it'd be a good addition. It sort of brings some office space back into play. It also, at least from my perspective, is good from a synergistic use perspective because that building will essentially be closed at night. And so it works, interplays well with the hotel. They actually like the fact that the hotel will be there. So that's where I'm going. So you won't have to be surprised when I get there.

Can I ask a question? Then you mentioned the hotel. Do we know when we're going to start building that?

And trust me, I'm trying to get this thing going as fast as I can. I just don't have full control of the process. But I'm pushing because the medical facility user wants the hotel built as soon as possible to take advantage of it. So I think that's going to help me get this figured out.

Because we did those plans.

In November.

Okay.

I know. I'm with you. Okay. I didn't win the lottery yesterday or had I, this would be going even faster. But yes, I am, I am anxiously awaiting getting that going as well. I'm getting the rest of the roads built and all of that. So things may get real busy, real fast. My goal is to finish this out in under the next two years and have everything built and done. So, and Tim knows what I like. He knows it's an aggressive goal because he knows how long the buildings take.

Okay.

Any other questions for me? Paul is on. So just so you know who Paul is, because Paul or some of her team will be on. They work for the engineering firm that's handling the architectural design, landscaping, everything on behalf of Roadhouse. And just to give you the mechanics of how this works is we're leasing them the land. I will be building the roads and doing the parking lot. And then Texas Roadhouse will build their own building. And so it's a coordinated effort between me and them. I'll work on the site work stuff. They will work on the physical structure. And so as you'll see, which I think it's all online, the landscape's up. There's the plan I'm doing. There's the curb in plan that they're doing. There's the site work. There's the elevations for them. There's the lighting. And so it's all a big team that work together. So I asked Paula to be on tonight in case you all had any questions specifically for them. I didn't know if you would, but I didn't want to assume.

So just in case you guys wonder what he was saying, curb in. So basically everything that's inside the curb of the building, Texas Roadhouse would do, and Greg would be responsible for the rest of it. Everything outside that curb line is what it's called, where that blue line is basically around there a little bit. But that's what.

Yeah, so I'll give you an example. My landscape architect drew this landscape plan. Their landscape architect did this landscape plan. So we had to segment them and submit them as two separate pages because it's two different scopes of work. So yeah, happy to answer any other questions.

Anybody got anything else? We'll see you next time.

I'll see you in two weeks. Chairman, if there is again, because this is part, this is the important part, because when we go through both the master development plan, we're furthering the objectives of the MU district. And I think, you know, overall, the development and the 14 acres has proven to be a mixture of variety of uses that's not solely reliant on just a retailer or boxes in there. But And then the separation of Lot 5 is not bordered to Olive Boulevard. Olive Boulevard, pretty much what you see is what is in place in there. But as we go into the interior portion, especially with Lot 5, and I expressed this back in April to the The inquiries for the people that were doing inquiries for the, for the user is the pedestrian connections are important. We want, I want the commission to really look into that connectivity. That was part of the initial district adopted in 2020 2011. And then it was part of the RFP and then was part of the redevelopment agreement and it was part of the PDD in there. So the city has been consistent about ensuring that we have strong pedestrian connections, ample pedestrian room to move about. uh, in that process. The other aspect is the designate the public spaces while we don't anticipate another public space within those, but they should have a public space for the gathering as people before they go in and that that space should be connected to, you know, you shouldn't have to walk across the field of parking to get to that space in there if you're out along those perimeters in there. So those public spaces will be important. And the things that help amplify those are the building orientation, the landscaping, the exterior signage and lighting. That will be another thing we'll talk about with this is the lighting. The original lighting was, again, they were not granted a variance because they create their own code. But we authorized or allowed them to exceed our traditional height, not by a little, but by a lot, with the anticipation that there was going to be bigger buildings to buffer the adjacent residential subdivisions. Those buildings are no longer there. So now you just have an eight-foot wall. I don't see a need for, you know, I believe these were 24-foot high poles in there. And I think that, you know, as I look at, There's not enough information in the photometric study to give me what are these pole heights now that they're proposed and they're visible in there. And again, we're looking at the building orientation, what's best for all of that. We want to create space. space within the development itself, not with I-170. So we're looking at where are those doors, where are those people gathering, how accessible is it to the fountain area, how accessible is it to the apartments, how accessible is it to the GRG trail, and all that. We want them to be able to freely move and get to that space. Landscaping the city and the current comprehensive plan furthers the use of native plantings. We've had that discussion. You know, we're putting it out now because it hasn't changed is that we're looking for more native plantings being provided. So we haven't gone over the species lists on each one of these, but it is an expectation. And then signage in there. I think the signage has been consistent with code in there. And I think it has been pretty much everyone As long as it's compliant with what the code already allows. There was nothing changed or uniformed. I don't want to say uniformed, but no specific type of sign only required in there. So those will be the things we'll talk about and start taking a look at, and then we'll start focusing in within the site itself and how that orientation fits.

Yeah, and to your point about the lighting, so we used, at this point, we used the pole height we have throughout the rest of the development for two reasons. One was consistency because we thought they should all match. But number two, the... taller the poles are, and they're all shielded so we don't put light on our neighbors. That's especially easy to do now with LED. But the higher the poles, the fewer we need. So it's just an inverse, you know, it's a math function, right? So the higher they go, you need fewer of them on the ground. So At the time we sought the variance or the change or the approval in our PDD for the height of the light poles, that was part of the equation was lower equals more. And is more better or are fewer taller ones better at the time the decision was made that Fewer taller ones were better, but at the end of the day, it's all math to me. So if you're like, Hey, we don't want you to have eight tall ones. We'd rather there's 16 shorter ones. It's just math and lighting. Like it's not, it's not a huge deal. Like you guys tell us what you want. So we know we made a proposal based on what we've done in the past and we'll have a conversation about what you want it to look like.

I think that at that time, the context was different. And I think there was a valid, uh, address in terms that you know these buildings I mean we still have the hotel but now in terms of having four six stories between lot three and the hotel you know it's just true

i mean again it's you guys tell us you know we're not we made a proposal based we followed the plan if you guys want to amend the plan as it relates to lighting height okay again it's it's fine doesn't matter right we're trying to use a the plan just you know we're using the exact same fixture heads roadhouse has their own preferred fixture and my proposal then was hey we already have a whole bunch of these lining our streets and in lot three and on the grocer and at the clover i think it makes sense to have a uniform look and so they paula and her team ran that up the flagpole which they agreed to so but again if you're all hey we want to try something different let's talk about what it needs to be don't we do i think the biggest concern of mine would be the impact of lighting on those residents that back up there and if there isn't a building buffering the lighting those taller poles

depending on how the houses sit, you know.

So shielding is fully, yeah, shielding works very well. And we would have used those poles along that Western road in between the office building and the property line to light the road. So we would have had them anyway, in between the tall building and the residence. But we can shield them. I mean, I can get you all the specs on it to show you that even though they're there, they're called hoods and shields. And the light will not hit them. And even if it does, we can then adjust it afterwards. But Tim can tell you about how that stuff works.

He has to show us what's it called? Photometric. Photometric show to see where that light solutions off of it. So that would take care of it. I would suggest that all of us drive by all that and look at the lights now and see the heights and look at what they look like and be prepared for the next meeting because they're up.

Again, if you if you will prefer something different and say, hey, we want to go with more poles at a lower height. OK, I'm cool.

Carlos, I'm curious, too, just I really appreciate the history that you presented for this development. I'm curious kind of at what point did the public spaces drop off? Because it certainly seemed like the earlier development proposals before this one had a lot more green space built into it. And I also noticed on one of the earlier proposals that you put up, there was one that even had two like pond areas, one where the retention basin is on the corner and then another one kind of back behind the hotel. And I was just curious about the process, I guess, the steps along the way that reduced the public spaces to kind of just a little bit more than a little extra turf alongside a sidewalk, and then dropped that green space or retention basin that was to the south of the hotel.

So there was never a basin south of the hotel.

Yeah, I think what you saw, it was the- It may have been.

Oh, yeah. Well, that's with 30, 40,000 feet of building, not over a quarter of a million square feet of building. So that was more of a vision without any MSD. We actually, in the beginning, we thought the front corner would actually be wet all the time, but that MSD wasn't going to go for that. Like I was looking for like a pond, like a literal pond. It wasn't allowed. And the one in the back, that was a, oh, this might be cool. But now that there's a hotel back there, that's just dead space in the back. I mean, it's green space, but it's not. These were our very early, now 10-year-old visions of what might be possible. But as you can see, we also had two or three drive-thrus on there, which now we have none.

Is that one retention basin on the corner, is that built to take in the stormwater from the entire development, assuming that you know about 99% of the development area is impervious surface?

Yes. And actually, there are two underground detention basins that you can't see. About half or more of the parking lot of Lot 3, so just south of Paris Baguette, under the pavement, there is a subterranean detention basin system, as is there a large one under the parking lot of... Yeah, you see that it's actually drawn in. So...

Get to that detention basin.

Pipes. So they pipe from inlets in the parking lots, go through that, and it's actually a biofiltration system. It's a company called Storm Tech. If you ever drove past the site and saw a whole bunch of yellow humps that were stacked up for a while a couple years ago, That's what that stuff is. And so the water flows through from the stormwater collection, the inlets, and there's a whole series of pipes throughout this development that take it through. Part of it gets filtered in Basin 1 underground, part of it gets filled in Basin 2. Then there's this thing called a watershed break line. The watershed break line, that means the water from some part of the development can't go north, it has to go south. That break line is about, I think, halfway through what will be, if approved, the new lot 5B. And so MSD mandates that that water go a different direction. So, oh yeah, millions of dollars worth of sewer pipes in the ground.

The other thing in terms of addressing the question, so they become trade-offs. And there, as the hotel was refined, it started to infringe in that back corner. I know that it was colored blue, but I don't believe that we ever envisioned that it was going to be a pond area. And they're given the elevations, it would be more like a, it would be like a reservoir dam, because the properties behind it dropped. quickly. So what they are is a basin and then in the bottom of the basin is a collector. So some water will hold there, but it's quickly drained once the storm kind of passes by. Same thing that we ended up having here at Olive and I-170. There are always neat features that start in the beginning, but as they get refined, they become difficult or they're not authorized or permitted by MSD or so. For For this basin here, it was a trade-off in terms of controlling the footprint of the clover. And instead of creating a rectangular building, it became more of an E-shaped building to push more of the front towards Olive as opposed to infringing to the Stoney Tower properties in the back. So it created opportunities where the units were across from each other as opposed to facing completely There's still units and windows that face south, but it was minimizing those in there. So that was one of the changes, and I think that was in one of the redevelopment agreement aspects that that would happen. This one evolved as just the monument sign in the landscape setting and the fencing when Audiu went through. The signage is something we worked with the developer to create that node that's on hilltop in there. In a real world, it would have been probably a flat sign. He was willing to do something more three-dimensional in terms of the cube in there, and then we had him rotate, and we arm-wrestled about that one. We did.

And you won.

And it just kind of creates some differentiality along the quarter as compared to what our neighbors did with the big... podium type of the signs in there. This has evolved because I believe this basin also is MSD, excuse me, MoDOT also utilizes?

Yeah, so a couple things about the basin. So the basin is, we use that and there is some quantity, small quantity of water runoff that comes off of the off ramps and the MSD property, MSD, MoDOT property into that basin. I have, we are very close. Finally, we had some major issues with fountain fixtures and design. The seal coat is going on the fountain starting Monday. As soon as that dries, they're coming in to do the flat work and the large open space right there. So on the, yeah, well, that's the old plan.

Yeah. Oh, I want to. Oh, yeah. Yeah. And that's why we kind of deviate from that.

But the big public space that's going to be right by brass. So there's brass taps patio. And right now it's sort of dead ends in a dirt. There's a, the whole fountain's nearly complete. Finally, it's only nine months behind schedule. And they're, I think, scheduling flat work to start in another week or so. So that whole area will be open. We're putting in bike racks. We're going to get some seating. There's a stone cap coming for the fountain. It's meant to actually be, you could sit on it because it's only about, 24 inches high or maybe 18 inches high. And so we're looking for that to create a gathering space. We've got six water jets that I'll adjust the heights on to really make that a focal point. And I, as I've told the tenants, I envision us trying to figure out a way to do maybe some public concerts or something there, right? Like, I don't know what it looks like yet, but like, that's a feature for us where we want people to in our list of why you would want to go to Olivet, this is one of the whys. And that's that sort of central focal point. And, you know, over by the apartments, we have seating and the sort of switchback ramp where some of our tenants, I see our tenants in the apartment building sitting outside chatting with their neighbors on the benches and all the dogs getting walked. And so.

As a lot of these kind of all the water features, I, as a planner, love them. They work great. I think they're awesome. But I think I'm the only one in the city that is a strong supporter of these. And I think I understand why, but there are liability issues, there are maintenance issues and all that. That is in the public right-of-way area. And I think over time, the city's kind of strayed away from, I think the last one that was built was the one at Walgreens. And we seem to know.

That hasn't been turned on in years.

Years. Well, I think it still does operate. Does it? Yeah.

It's tough in this climate, too, because, you know, I mean, I've had hella time with the fountain in front of Fallon's for 20 years.

When we did Firestone, that was something beyond me preferred not to pursue. Same thing with easy storage.

Yeah, for me, it's less about the water feature. I'm kind of like... Six one half dozen the other. It's more about having the public space, the green space, the gathering space, something to offset all of the pavement and impervious services.

And I think, too, there is something as a planner. You know the when you have these green spaces I use, for example, like what was done with firestone so that creates it's a green space, but really. Over 50% is hard space and it's easy to maintain it's easy to to collect people it's easy to interact as such as to creating just a purely green space, there are purposes and good areas. For that, but I you know if you have a good hard space area, you can really create a very nice public. space where people can collaborate and connect. And there's a I hope that answers your. context.

Any other questions.

comments. Carlos, anything else you had? No, sir.

I'll let you get to other people waiting to talk to you behind me.

I appreciate it. Okay. Unless there's anything else on that agenda item?

Just not on this agenda item.

Okay. Then we'll move on to number six, 2024 comprehensive plan update.

A couple of things kind of taking a pivot from trying to do the the neighborhood districts. Some of the things too that we're kind of been wrestling with with the adoption of the recent comprehensive plan and the residential redevelopment design guidelines is I think you know the there needs to be a because of some of the questions that have come about maybe adding I'm going to call it the ninth design principle. There are, I think, 12 of them, but some of those aren't applicable to new construction. But adding a new design principle regarding sustainability in there. And remember, these are guidelines that hopefully everyone's aware on these guidelines. These are not law. The city put these together with the intent to provide that flexibility that they're not required. but we really push both the applicant to design in conformance with this, and if not, to explain the rationale why. in that process. So we're looking at, and I would encourage any input, but adding a principle regarding the applicant, you know, talking about sustainability, you know, looking at the building orientation, looking at EV-ready garages, native landscapings, rain gardens, you know, start asking them, you know, what beyond the code are you providing that's addressing, you know, one of our community values? And again, this doesn't set up rules and regulations that you have to, that might be coming in the next step. But this starts pushing the designer, the developer, or the property owner that's looking to do an addition, you know, to consider or have that mindset of looking at long-term sustainability value to the property. I'm not looking for any actions, but I do want to get that discussion. I think, you know, throwing out the first four bullet points, but would welcome any input that we could provide in there. Now, these guidelines are really quick and short. They just identify city preferences and provide some type of illustrative example in there. And then when they apply and when Don and I go through the reviews, we ask them those questions or make sure that they're prepared to answer those questions, whether they've been addressed or not.

Very good. Any questions about that? I think it's a great idea to add it to our design principles.

The next one is when we do our new home reviews, there is a requirement that they submit what we call a project report. And there are four simple questions that we ask the petitioners to answer. One deals with mass size and bulk. How is it They should provide you some context of how they feel it's compatible with the surroundings to talk about. height, how their height is compatible with their surroundings or what they integrated in their design features to make it compatible with their surroundings. To explain the architectural features that reflect the characteristics of the neighborhood and to explain the efforts of, oh, I'm sorry, I cut off part of it. This deals with more with stormwater aspects of the site. What did they incorporate it? So you always will get a copy of their project report in your packet. A lot of the times we don't reference it and many of them are starting to become like it was you said the same thing at the last one in there so we'll we'll be highlighting those a little bit more because I think I would like to start pushing the petitioners to kind of justify what they've done in that as opposed to us. just providing that overview for the commission in there. The other thing is these have been in place since we adopted them in 2006. We did an amendment in 2012, but we didn't change these questions. So looking at, as part of this project report, have them talk about the mass and bulk, have them talk about the height and not just the height of the surrounding homes, but what did they do in the building to minimize how they were not overshadowing the adjacent structure or property in there. What architectural features they have that are consistent with the neighborhood, talk about the stormwater, and then add a question regarding sustainability. Again, these are throwing the information out there, but to explain what features are incorporated beyond those required by code that make the home design and construction more sustainable in there and start pushing that that product out more and more. Who typically actually prepares that report? The petitioner prepares the report. We provide them the questions, but the petitioner, a lot of the times I would say 50% it comes from the architect. Okay.

All right. I'm wondering on the sustainability question about maybe being More specific in the question to say, like, we're not looking for a general statement about, well, building materials are just more sustainable than they were, you know, 20 years ago. And that's how we're being sustainable. You know, I think when we're asking about sustainability, we're looking for more things like solar panels and, you know, those sorts of things. Maybe you've already got that.

No, I understand. And we want to make sure that it's clear for them to be able to address it.

I've read a lot of these and it seems like they say the same thing over and over again is what, is what I see. Like, you know, the same developer will write the same exact thing over and over. Cause I tend to look at them and I don't see any value right now of what they're putting down. That's for sure.

And some of it from, from the staff perspective is to push back. But again, that does increase the length of time of the review and your meetings, but to make sure that they're prepared that, you know, they're going to be, you know, like, these questions may be asked and that they should be able to justify. Now, some of these, the mass and bulk, the height, architectural features, stormwater, you may notice right away, or you may notice that the house has solar panels. So it's like, okay, I don't need, it doesn't need to be redundant in there. But I think we want to make sure that we're pushing this more and more or pushing the justification to it back to the developer, the petitioner, as opposed to staff trying to do it on your part.

Yeah. Related to that, and I think even more specific questions might actually make it shorter, which is to say, we don't want you to filibuster again with like sort of a general statement that you can reuse. Rather, we'd want to just answer the question, like, if you're not going to have any solar panels or you're not going to have EV charge or anything, like just say that rather than, you know, a general response.

No problem.

Yeah, because I think it'd be interesting, and I'll be honest, I haven't read these parts. I don't know if we've had a new home since I've been on, but I think it'd be interesting to say, what are specific examples on this house that demonstrate appropriate mass and bulk, or specific features on this

development that that show this rather than just explaining you know i think the general explanation is going to lead you to a general answer um yeah it's good to know that we asked this though yes carlos have we ever done um any kind of report card of such you know there's point systems um i know you cities done this other municipalities um It comes up often in a lot of the planning efforts and renovation projects I work on where the evaluating group has a point system on a report card that are sort of checkboxes, but they provide different levels of points. So, yes, you might be able to check off driveway, for example, very quick example. But that's maybe only worth five points. But then, you know, your sustainability might get you 15 points. Have we ever talked about something like that?

Not as a commission, but staff wise, yes. And we were getting closer to trying to implement something similar. So about two years ago, our report started having the checkbox that you're referring to. And we would provide that in our presentation showing, at least in staff's opinion, these have been addressed. I'll go back to the design guidelines. So we had a checkbox for each of these guidelines. And then we were working in the process to assign them some type of weighted numerical value. with the ultimate goal that if somebody met all the, you know, scored high, that the commission would be comfortable that we could go through this just administratively in there. Because there's no need to bring you a house that scored very high in a process that the commission developed. Now, of course, the commission wants to be comfortable that the process and that we're applying the process correctly. But we were looking, we are looking into that. in there. And I think it's much more efficient in the process, depending on how that number system too, it could be much more consistent as these reviews go through. So long answer, yes, we're looking into that. All right. The next item was in, uh, at our last meeting, we talked about the, the, the size of the, of the home and trying to, you know, look at, you know, you know, uh, the, the value of lot and, uh, and the size of the value of the, of the house. As there were some comments that, well, maybe we should look at the, the square footages. And, and so, and when, when, uh, I think back in 2008, uh, we updated our single family residential district and broke it up in tiers to try to control home sizes. We also did a long study of, you know, what are applicable footprints, um, in there, what are applicable masses in there to get to narrow numbers to control the volume and size of houses. And these were, again, back from 2008. It could be an exercise that we can go through again and kind of give you different numbers on individual lots in there. But for somebody building a new house that's on a 6,000-foot lot, I mean, they... they could build up to 40 percent of their value excuse me uh in there which would be a little bit over 2 500 square foot of footprint or pretty close to 50 excuse me to the 40 percent there but we'll look at those numbers and then give you some examples it is it is rare that we get a house that comes in that gets to a far extreme or over or you know gets to the to the max um Excuse me. We do have that happen with the 5,000 square foot lots, but it is a difficult aspect to try to control. Then we can look if the commission wants to consider some type of cap, because again, for somebody that has a 20,000 square foot lot, they can go up to 20% or 5,000 square feet, whichever is greater. So imagine if you had a 40,000 square foot lot, you could do, I believe it would come out to like a 10,000 square foot house. Nobody's ever gone to that extent, but You know, it may be that we need to put a cap on some of these places. And then also we control the second level through floor area ratio. And then we apply the same principles that based on your lot, the bigger house you can put in there. But there's also control of what the max could be. So we'll be working on those and getting those to the commission.

Okay, great.

And Chairman, I believe that all is that I have new on the comprehensive plan.

Okay, fantastic. All right, then we'll move on to other business. I don't think we have any meeting minutes today. So then we'll move on to reports, Carlos.

Okay, just a couple of things kind of gave you some highlights at the beginning of the meeting. The big thing again is the price all of intersection work. Hopefully we'll be done next week. The city did get a grant and I think our liaison had indicated at our last meeting to start work for the replacement of the curbs and roadway on price between Del Mar and Old Bonham. And then they'll be applying for a second grant to go from Old Bonham to Olive. And there is no design in place. We were able to get matching funds, I believe, to do the design and then ultimately the construction. So that's still a process that has to go through. And Mercy has applied for their building permits at 9320 Olive to 9315 Olive. So those are going through the review. We did meet with representatives of AIM infield hockey to help try to expedite the permits. We're waiting for them to get their response back. The biggest thing in a building that old is accessibility. And that's something they're going to have to try to figure out to make sure that they meet ADA standards on that site. Don's put a list of calendar events there on the left and be glad to answer any specific questions on any activity on all of her. So anybody have any questions for Carlos?

Okay, great. Kate?

There's not too much. Very boring update is that the AC went out on our fire truck, and that's going to cost $25,000 to replace. So city government. But other than that, the other updates are ones that I guess maybe that was more interesting than I thought. Carlos really went over all the other things that were on the council's agenda and hopefully we'll see some of you at trivia night at Five Oaks on Friday which is tomorrow oh and the fire department won the battle of the badges blood drive by one vote wow barn burner all right

Thank you. Anybody got anything else? No. That being the case, I will call the meeting to close at 9.16. Thanks, Jenna.

We'll see you.

Bye. Thank you. Excuse me. Is it 8.16?

Let me correct that.