Planning & Zoning Commission - Regular Meeting

Good evening, and welcome to everybody who has come here to either participate or to observe in the City's Planning and Zoning Commission meeting tonight. On tonight's agenda, we have two public hearings, two letters of recommendation, two correspondence items, and one preliminary re-approval. I'd like to also welcome tonight a new member of our commission, Dan Gettinger, who is our newest member, and he is with us tonight via Zoom as he is out of town. So welcome, Dan. And if... We could have a roll call. Let's check for a quorum.

Commissioner Bourne. Commissioner Helfrey. Commissioner Gettinger. Commissioner Clayton. Commissioner Depler.

Here.

Commissioner Jackson. Yes. Sorry, here. Thank you, Mr. Jackson. Thanks for being here. And Commissioner Arubas. Chair. Council Member Marshall.

Present.

And Mayor Garitano.

Here. And I believe Commissioner Genninger did unmute. And just for awareness, whenever we do a roll call, if you're participating over Zoom, you do have to turn your video on in addition to verbally responding.

Okay.

Okay. Can I have a motion for the approval of the minutes from the last meeting? I'll make a motion to approve the minutes as drafted. Commissioner Clayton and second by Commissioner Marshall. Does the Department of Planning have any opening remarks?

Which I don't, but before we do that, can we have a vote on the minutes?

Oh, yeah. Okay.

All in favor of retaining the minutes as is, say aye. Aye. Anybody opposed? Anybody abstained? Okay. Motion passes.

Thank you, Mr. Chair.

Mr. Chair and members of the Commission, first of all, thank you for being here tonight. As you know, during the course of today, we were kind of pestering all of you just to make sure that we would have a minimum of six Commission members in attendance. We have seven. So thank you all very much. I know it's the summer season and things come up, but we do appreciate your attendance tonight. It allows us to do our business. And for those that are petitioners tonight, I know they are appreciative as well. Before we move on to the first item on the agenda, I'd first like to thank Officer Fisher with the St. Louis County Police Department for his attendance tonight. We always appreciate police and their presence at our meetings. We do have water and coffee as you came into the council chambers tonight. Those are for the commission members as well as anyone in attendance. I do want to thank Ms. Wheeler, Who's our acting city attorney tonight? Well, Mr. Young is not available. And then finally, the Department of Planning would like to welcome Mr. Gettinger to the commission and wish you very much success as part of our team. So thank you. Mr. Chair, that's all I have tonight. And we'll move into public comment session. And again, just as a reminder, this particular comment session is for everything else on the agenda tonight, minus the two public hearings. Thank you.

Okay, we'll go to the public comment session, Travis. Mr. Chair, we have one speaker card for Mr. Nance.

Good evening, Commissioner, Mayor. Doug Nance with Lombardo Homes for Research Park, St. Charles, Missouri. Here to speak on Mia Bella. Last month, there were some comments in regards to the green space and how it was laid out and where were people going to walk their dogs. We went back and took a look at that. So the revised plans you'll see tonight that's in your packet. We moved the parking from the center to the outside to the west. Lost a few parking spaces. I think we lost nine when we moved that. But we added a walkway. to the pond parking lot as well for some auxiliary parking if needed. In addition, we added some sidewalks in the middle, some landscaping to give it a better streetscape when you came into the site. In addition to the east, next to the parking lot, we added a dog park. So there'll be a fence, some dog stations there. People can go walk their dogs or let them play. So again, if you have any questions tonight, I'll be here. Thank you very much. Thank you.

Okay, that takes us to the public hearing. In the City of Wildwood, public hearings are truly intended to accept comments and questions concerning the posted items. Since these requests are being presented at a public hearing, no action is planned on these items tonight, and consideration of them will be taken no earlier than the July 2026 Planning and Zoning Commission meeting. This approach ensures the members of the Commission will hear all opinions and before taking any action. The City's Department of Planning will address the comments, questions and concerns that are raised tonight and include them as part of its formal recommendation to the Planning and Zoning Commission. Anyone in attendance at City Hall tonight wanting to speak should fill out a speaker's card and leave it with Mr. Blueberry at the table in the front. Those in attendance via the Zoom webinar platform should use the raise hand feature to indicate that you wish to speak during this hearing. A team member will add you to the list of speakers, which will then be communicated to me as chair, and I will invite you to speak when it is your turn. The public hearing process is outlined in the public hearing guidelines pamphlet, which can be found on the table at the entry area to the council chambers. The commission will allow all parties adequate time to present their positions. As outlined in the public hearing guideline pamphlet, those individuals representing themselves will be allocated three minutes to speak. Speakers who are designated as group speakers representing a group of more than five individuals will be allotted five minutes to speak. In addition, information on these items can be found on the City's website at www.cityofwildwood.com. The Commission would like to thank you for your cooperation and participation in tonight's hearing.

Thank you, Mr. Chair. The first public hearing tonight is PZ0-26 Rockwood School District, Care of Pyro Science Incorporated, 1818 Old State Road, Unit M, Barnhart, Missouri 63012. A request for a conditional use permit, CUP, in the NU non-urban resident district for a 51.2-acre tract of land that is located at the southeast corner of the intersection of State Route 109 and Clayton Road, Lafayette High School. Street Address 17050 Clayton Road, St. Louis County Locator Number 22V. The proposed use is a permanent electronic message center, EMC, to be operated in association with the existing secondary school with accessory uses. This particular property is located in Ward 5. And for the benefit of everyone, electronic message center is the term we use in the zoning ordinance. It's electronic message board. I think more people are used to hearing that. Thank you. thank you and mr chair before mr newberry comes forward and presents the slides i do want to mention that we did receive several comments over the course of the weekend and today we did provide those comments to you in the form of paper copies at your chairs as well as forwarded them to all the commission members thank you

Okay.

Mr. Newberry, do we have any speaker cards?

If you don't mind, Mr. Chair, the department will give just a brief presentation and then... Oh, okay. That's all right with you. So just a brief presentation on the location. Everybody I'm sure is familiar with the location of Lafayette High School. This is an aerial view of it. The yellow star that you see on this image is the location of the existing changeable copy sign that's located on the property. The intent is to remove and replace the sign with the electronic message board that you'll see in the later slides. So just a few photographs of the existing sign and its location. This is looking to the east. This is looking towards the west, towards the intersection of Clayton Road and State Route 109. And then these are a few views standing at the sign. This is looking to the west. This is looking across the street, vacant property. And then to the east, the entrance of the school. And then just another, just wanted to show you another monument sign that exists on the property that's been recently constructed at the corner of State Route 109 and Clayton Road. And then the next slide is an image of the proposed electronic message board, again, replacing the first changeable copy sign that you saw. And with that concludes the department's presentation. Mr. Chair, the department's not sure if there's a representative from the school or the sign company here. We weren't contacted before the meetings in the council chambers here. So if they are, now would be an appropriate time for them to prepare a presentation or provide a presentation. And then thereafter, we can request a speaker.

Is there anyone here representing either the high school or Rockwood School District that would like to speak? Seeing none, Travis, there are speakers.

We have no speaker cards for this book hearing.

Mr. Boonick?

Thank you, Mr. Chair, and I'll be brief. As you know, this was a process to create our regulations to accommodate electronic message centers in the city of Wildwood. Just a couple of facts. First and foremost, we have a set of regulations that are cooked into the zoning ordinance as underlying requirements or regulations. We also would note that this particular property is in lighting zone two. Lighting Zone 2 does allow a increase in illumination in terms of Kelvin, again, within the parameters of reasonableness. The reason this is part of Lighting Zone 2 is that the property is east of State Route 109. And there is existing lighting, outdoor lighting in the vicinity that is inclusive of the streetlights, parking lot lighting, and then just the density of housing units with the associated lighting found on most of them. So again, lighting zone two, which accommodates a little brighter scenario. But again, all of the underlying requirements that are set forth in the electronic message center's regulations are applicable here. And it is the intent of the department to prepare a recommendation, if favorable, that reflects all of those. Thank you. If there are any questions of the department, we'd be glad to answer them at this time.

Mayor, yes, thank you. And, you know, this is. This type of feature electronic message boards is something that's new to our city. So 1 of the obvious things that I have a question about is this. What we're looking at the screen that is provided by the sign company. um i would like to just confirm because i believe we are allowing only kind of like a text form of message board and this shows video or a graphic could you uh just clarify to make sure that maybe when i'm seeing this that um maybe the sign companies be aware of what's allowed and what's not

Yes, you're absolutely correct, Mr. Mayor. Ours is text only, and even the transition associated with text is on a very extended period of time. In some instances, no greater than 60 minutes between the transition of text. And the transition has to be a very, can't be a slow fade. It's just a change. So video in this particular instance, although it may be nice and it would be certainly something I think the high school would like to accommodate, it's not accommodated by our regulations.

Okay, thanks for that clarification. And I also know and saw one of the feedback comments concerned about it being on at night, but I know under the regulations that we have reviewed, we do have a cutoff so that wouldn't be on at night, right?

That's correct. The underlying regulations of the electronic message centers section of the zoning ordinance says no later than 1030 p.m. The conditional use permit can even be more restrictive if the commission should choose.

Okay, great. That's what I wanted to double check there. And do you know if the top you had, what time is it allowed on in the morning?

That'll be set per the conditional use permit. And we didn't put a front end, so to speak, on the timeframe, but we certainly knew we didn't want it on at midnight when there's nobody on the road to see it.

Okay. So then that means when we will, as part of the recommendation, provide when it's allowed. Okay. Yes. Very much so. Thank you.

Before I call for a motion to end the public hearing, I'll give everybody another opportunity. Anybody want to speak via Zoom? Yes, ma'am. Okay, you got a speaker card. Thank you.

I live on Westland Farms, and the area is very residential.

And I feel like the- Your name?

Oh, my name is Carol Cronin. I'm a trustee of Babler Park Estates. And I really like the stone sign that says Lafayette High School. I think that really is in keeping with the residential atmosphere. I think an electronic sign is gonna be a distraction. There's a lot going on with 109. and clayton road there with lafayette high school already um you know pulling out from west glenn farms to clayton road can be you know difficult to get a left turn when kids are going to lafayette i just think it's another distraction you know marquette high school has one But Clarkson Road has a long view that you can see the sign. That area, 109 is right there. So, you know, what are people going to be looking at from 109? You know, on Clayton, when you turn from West Glen Farms, there's not that much period of time to view the sign. I just think it changes the residential kind of atmosphere that, you know, people moved out to Wildwood and appreciate. You know, Marquette is on Clarkson where there's a lot more commercial businesses, and that's not the case where Lafayette High School is.

Thank you.

Okay.

All right.

You can make a comment, Mr. Martin.

I'd just like to make a comment that both the sign in Ellisville and one at Marquette are very, very different from what this is going to be. It changes once an hour. So there's no flashing lights, no changing lights, which is going to be very different. So I don't know that the distraction, you can't use those as comparisons because I don't think the sign will be anything close to that.

well as the commission is aware we engaged a lighting consultant to assist us with the study of electronic bus stage centers and then once a decision was made to proceed forward to create that model set of requirements and so from that perspective We feel comfortable that we've used an individual that was engaged by the National Park Service to light the arch. And so he's very good at what he does. At least I think he is. And I think he bore out to you all his ability to understand the impacts of lighting, particularly in the city of Wildwood. And I do need to correct myself, Mr. Mayor. In the underlying regulations relative to electronic message centers, it's actually a 10 p.m. cutoff. and it has to be off till 6 a.m. Again, we can be more restrictive than the underlying regulation. So if you wanted 7 a.m. or 8 a.m., that's an option under the conditional use permit, if it is granted by the commission.

Okay. Well, thank you for that clarification. But I will echo that, you know, as the city was exploring whether to entertain electronic message signs, The whole point was not to build or allow signs that you see like Clarkson or even if you go down Clayton Road, there's two churches right across each other. You think you're walking through the casino, you know, I mean, you know, just the way they're flashing in the video. And I think there are ways to control it. So I think look at this as more as automation of the text that you already see today. And in fact, the city put down that we're only going to allow it to change once every hour. So it's not flashing. It's not, you know, constantly changing. But it's no different than a gas station when you're driving by and you see the price, something like that, just stagnant. So it's automating the text. primarily to address those concerns so that they don't want to go out there and have to manually physically change the lettering. But the time restrictions, I think, will help tremendously too. And plus, they're supposed to dim as it gets darker. So they're blending in more into the evening. So a lot of those concerns were taken into account to purposely make sure that we weren't going to have anything flashy or anything. It's going to pretty much be a stagnant sign like you see today.

Thank you, Mr. Mayor. Good explanation.

Okay, at this time, I'll entertain a motion to close the public hearing. Commissioner Marshall and seconded by Commissioner Clayton. All in favor, say aye. Aye. Any abstentions? Public meeting is closed. Now we go to our second meeting. Uh, city of Wildwood and the zoning commission, Travis.

Excuse me, PZ9-26, City of Wildwood Planning and Zoning Commission, Care of Department of Planning, City Hall, 16860 Main Street, Wildwood, Missouri, 63040. A request for the review and consideration of the final draft of the Wildwood Historic Preservation Plan. This public hearing is being held to collect input on the final draft of the city's Historic Preservation Plan, which can be found at www.cityofwildwood.com forward slash historicpreservationplan.org. along with the listing of relevant dates of future meetings that have been scheduled to complete the plan's adoption process. This plan will serve to better integrate the city's historic preservation program into the city's master planning efforts related government processes and community initiatives. It will provide milestones and a timeline for preservation goals, as well as determine the status of commercial and residential historic properties. This material was produced with assistance from the Historic Preservation Fund, administered by the National Park Service, Department of the Interior, the United States Government, and Missouri Department of Natural Resources, State Historic Preservation Office. Any opinions, findings, and conclusions or recommendations expressed in this material are those of the authors and do not necessarily reflect the views of the Department of Interior or Department of Natural Resources, State Historic Preservation Office, nor does the mention of trade names or commercial products constitute endorsement or recommendation. All wards.

Mr. Chair, thank you.

Mr. Chair and members of the Planning and Zoning Commission, tonight the Department of Planning is presenting to you the final draft of the Historic Preservation Plan that's been under development for all intents and purposes since the latter part of twenty twenty four the plan itself began in earnest in january of twenty twenty five now almost eighteen months ago but as the commission members are aware the process of obtaining a grant funding from the State Historic Preservation Office with the Department of Natural Resources here in the state of Missouri, and then the engagement of a consultant to assist in the planned development, all required months and months of time prior to the actual kickoff of the process, which was the due diligence I mentioned in January of 2025. This is the first plan of its type in the city of Wildwood. Up to this time, we have depended on the master plan to kind of carry us forward in terms of the city's historic preservation efforts. I would note that the original master plan in 1996 did address the identification of the properties that were either on the National Register or what St. Louis County at that time believed could be on the National Register. It also had a policy relating to historic properties and the need to protect and preserve whenever possible. Shortly thereafter, an advisory commission was formed by the city council to assist in the historic preservation commission efforts, so to speak, here in the city of Wildwood. And then ultimately, a standing commission was established by city council in 1999. and since that time the historic preservation commission has been administering the ordinance that was adopted that formed them as well as set the parameters for this particular effort in the city of wildwood I would note the key date, 2001. The city became a certified local government under the auspices of the National Park Service and our State Historic Preservation Office. There have been successes over the course of that period of time from 1999 on. But quite frankly, more so in the last few years, we have gained substantial momentum in terms of engaging our owners of historic assets in the city. cooperating with other entities that have historic preservation as a priority, particularly the Wildwood Historical Society here in Wildwood, the not-for-profit And in many ways, having events now that have focuses not only on recreation, but also historic preservation. So a lot has been accomplished over the last few years, building on the successes of the first 20 plus years of time. Tonight, the department has provided you a primer That kind of goes through the key components associated with the planning process and a summary of the goals and action strategies and their interrelationships. I think a key element of the plan is that it looks at historic preservation, not only as protecting those assets, but taking advantage of those assets to do economic development, heritage, tourism, and things that would benefit not only the property owners, but the community as a whole. Tonight, we are fortunate to have Miss Keefe with us. She has been kind of shepherding the process over the past 18 months. And one of the key elements I wanted her to explain to you was the public engagement process. I think that's critical with any planning process itself. And in this particular instance, many facets were developed to engage a broad range of interest in this particular plan. So with the permission of the chair, I'm going to yield the podium. Ms. Keepe has a very, I think, focused PowerPoint presentation to explain the public participation. I'll have a few concluding remarks after that presentation. And then the team will be available for any questions or comments from the commission. And then obviously public comment from those in attendance. Thank you.

All right. Good evening, Mr. Chair, members of the Commission. I believe I know most of you from various groups around the city, probably the citizen oversight group of the master plan update. But if I don't know you, I'm Robin Keefe, and I'm the primary liaison to the Historic Preservation Commission. I think Joe did a pretty nice introduction to what I'm about to dive into this evening. I did want to say that we are fortunate throughout this process to have Marsha Boyle with MIG, Maura Iacofano-Goltzman as the plan's project manager through the consultant team. She has both national experience and expertise with historic preservation planning, but she is also originally a resident of the city of Wildwood. So she has that unique localized perspective as well. This past Thursday, the Historic Preservation Commission also held a public hearing on this final draft of the plan. So we're looking forward to receiving feedback tonight. That feedback was very positive from last Thursday. So without any further introduction, I'm just going to dive right in to some of the public engagement efforts. There we go. All right. So public engagement for this plan started last spring of 2025. And it started with a historic preservation survey that resulted in over 200 responses and pretty detailed responses as well. There were some open-ended questions. And so we got to hear some pretty nice lengthy thoughts from various residents. Also, the Historic Preservation Commission was present at many of the city's Music on Main concerts through the History Tent and MIG provided us with some board activities to engage residents that way as well. In this picture to the right, We have one of our youth commissioners who unfortunately just left us or fortunately because she graduated and going to a wonderful university. But anyway, she is leading this activity, which has a map of the city of Wildwood and residents were asked to put stickers on various historic places, landmarks. and sites that they wish to celebrate, that they thought were at risk or endangered, or that they recognized had been lost, but they still wanted to be recognized through the planning effort. So we were able to engage in June 2025, we were able to engage 30 to 50 people through that activity. And again, we were actually at multiple Music on Main concerts doing these types of activities and engagement. Probably the biggest event we had was in July 2025. We had a large open house. We had 40 to 50 attendees and a presentation from Marsha Boyle of MIG. We also had several activity boards collecting input from residents. We also had the usual city history displays. So it was a great night for history at the city. Following that, we had five focus group discussions. We engaged with regional stakeholders and stakeholders across the state. We also had an African American and indigenous heritage group that was probably our most well attended focus group and very substantive discussion. We also had a focus group on Route 66 revitalization efforts, and that was a very thoughtful discussion as well. We had a focus group focused on our Wildwood Historical Society and how we could further leverage that partnership in the city and make that a sustainable means of historic preservation throughout the years as well. And then finally, we had a catch-all group for anyone who couldn't make the previous groups, and that largely focused on indigenous heritage because that just happened to be who showed up. So they were very interesting discussions, and we got a lot of feedback that further shaped our efforts as time went on. Also at our back to school party, which is a little bit different than our other Music on Main events because it's more targeted towards kids and their families. We had some great engagement there as well. We had 87 responses as to what activities would interest participants most in history. and what we heard over and over again was one people wanted to see more heritage themed events in the city and two people just love zombie road that was that was the top takeaway is they wanted a haunted tour of zombie road and that was that really seemed to engage folks so we are certainly capitalizing on that as we move forward For Celebrate Wildwood, we continue to get that feedback. Citizens wanted to see more heritage themed events and also the natural preservation of Wildwood was emphasized. People wanted legacy tree programs and to preserve Wildwood's unique natural features as well as its buildings and other unique sites. Once we had a full draft plan to review, we came back and invited stakeholders to a virtual open house. So this was with a full plan to review. Again, Marsha Boyle gave a presentation and we had a wonderful discussion following it. We had about 40 participants. And because it was virtual, we were able to record it. So we also put it out via YouTube. And I went and revisited it before this meeting and saw another 30 views that way. So we continue to engage online following the open house. So that summarizes where we've been with engagement. And again, we also had a public hearing at Historic Preservation Commission last Thursday with the final draft plan. But now I want to dive into the overall structure of it and strategic framework. So the visualization you see before you kind of shows how the plan is structured. First, there are five vision elements. that are essentially the core values of this plan. And I'll dive into that in a second. Under those core values that are guiding the rest of the goals and strategic actions, we have our eight goals. So these are our primary key opportunities and priorities that the historic preservation wants to pursue over the next 10 years. Underneath those goals, in order to make those goals happen, we have 73 strategic actions. And these actions are divided into short-term, medium-term, long-term, and ongoing actions. So our short-term actions are the actions we want to complete in the first five years of the plan. Medium-term actions are years six to 10. Long-term actions are actually the actions that may extend beyond that 10-year period. And then the ongoing actions are the ones that we want to keep in mind year after year because they're ongoing activities. So the key vision elements of this plan is one, we want the historic preservation plan to be accessible to the Wildwood community. That means we want to reach people through various methods, programs, and activities. We want to reach people of all ages, abilities, backgrounds, cultures, etc. We want this to be a very inclusive document. uh secondly uh this plan is based on advocacy we're advocating for our historic landmarks and places in the city of wildwood we're also advocating for uh some of our more untold stories those that we haven't yet um that we haven't yet told that story for um in the fabric of the city um so so advocacy is a vision element Civic engagement and collaboration. We can't do this work in isolation, and that's one thing we've learned over and over again with historic preservation, is we need lots of community partners, we need lots of engagement, you know, throughout internally, throughout the city, through various boards and commissions, and also just statewide, nationwide, in order to get our programs done and recognized, we need partnership. The fourth vision was actually added to the plan. It was originally a goal, but we determined that intergenerational participation in Wildwood's historic preservation program is actually more of a vision element. It's a core value. And so this commission has made an effort over the last decade I don't know, four years or so to really engage youth, including middle school and high school students. We had a Route 66 student task force. We have two youth members now as part of the Historic Preservation Commission makeup. And our goal is to engage people of all ages working together towards these common efforts. And then finally, transparency and unity. We want an accurate and whole representation of the city's historic preservation because that's what brings community members together. That unifies us. We have this shared heritage all by living in Wildwood. And so that's the goal of our historic preservation program is to bring everyone together. So as I said, we have eight goals. Goal one is to enhance the visitor experience along the Route 66 corridor. And again, that is just critical to the historic preservation efforts towards economic development, heritage tourism, and also just celebrating a key point of identity in our city. The historic Route 66 corridor cuts right through Central Wildwood. It goes through our town center. It is parallel to our downtown. And so by getting people excited about it, we bring people to Wildwood to discover what else we have to offer here. So that's goal number one. Goal number two, implement regulatory tools and designations to protect threatened or endangered resources. That's what historic preservation is all about. We want to save the assets in Wildwood that give it its unique character and identity. And so this goal is about utilizing our existing programs and regulatory tools and building on those to make that happen. And this year, in fact, we were adding numerous new landmarks and historic sites to our Wildwood Historic Register Program. So we're already working on this goal. Goal number three, preserve sites that tell the stories of indigenous and African American communities in Wildwood. The Historic Preservation Commission has been working on this one too for many years now through a historic marker for the United States Colored Troops, through designations to the National Underground Railroad Network to Freedom. and our future aspiration to develop an African-American heritage trail in northern Wildwood along the Monarch Chesterfield levee trail. Goal number four, expand heritage tourism opportunities. This is very much linked to goal number one. However, it has a broader focus. Because again, we have Zombie Road and historic Glencoe. We have our Northern Wildwood history, which includes historic Babler Park, which was one of our most celebrated landmarks that people identified in our engagement efforts. So we have a lot of heritage throughout our city, a lot of different areas that can potentially drive heritage tourism if we built that awareness and let people know what was here. Number five, expand engagement methods to optimize community involvement with historic preservation. Again, I think that's this commission's strength is we're constantly looking to engage and engage with new partners and amplify our efforts to get the word out. Goal number six is to build staff and historic preservation commission capacity to do all this work. um and that can be done through additional training through engaging new partnerships through just strengthening processes throughout the city so that's goal number six goal number seven is to refine the historic preservation ordinance standards and processes again this ordinance has been in place since 1998 And there's always opportunities to improve upon what we're already doing. And so there's been some recommendations through our consultant team based on their national perspective of what else we might consider going forward that would strengthen our program. and then finally goal eight is to optimize the information available through the city's website currently we're using our website pretty heavily to communicate our efforts but they've identified several strategic areas to to leverage that platform and connect it better connect it to throughout the city's information network and frameworks so So all of those goals combined represent our roadmap for preservation going forward over the next 10 years. This graphic you see before you is part of the plan's new brochure. This is supposed to be the public-facing document for the plan that we can hand out. to businesses, to partners, at community events, and really explain to people what our direction is, what our goals are, and what we're hoping to achieve. And hopefully this will also facilitate some of those partnerships and engagement we are talking about. So that concludes my presentation. And at this time, I'd like to open it up for questions of the department, including, oh, well, and Director Boonich has some closing remarks.

Mr. Chair and members of the Commission, as you can see, it's been a very extensive effort to capture Much of the successes the city has had in the last 30 years in this particular area of planning, historic preservation, as well as set ourselves up for the next 10 years to have, what I would hope, more successes. I would note that one of the key components of our current ordinance is that placing a asset on the register is voluntary. We do not have a mandatory requirement That was intentional back in the late 1990s. As you know, the city of Wildwood incorporated and immediately set forth a number of land use regulations that to many were considered onerous. And when the discussion about historic preservation came forward, the mayor and then at that time city council thought maybe this was just a step too far. In 2014, when we updated the ordinance, the historic preservation and restoration code and ordinance, that was the first question that was asked of the commission members. Is the voluntary approach still the best approach? And it was a resounding yes at that time. So certainly that's a key component because some of the items that have been identified kind of trend toward making a more concerted effort in terms of protecting some of the assets that are identified as irreplaceable or one of kind here in the community. And so those are the things that the department will explore. I want to emphasize the department was engaged in this planning process from its inception, long before the consultant was engaged and brought on board to assist. But it is also a process where the department felt it's important to hear from the public, the residents, the property owners, and others, and not necessarily have a preconceived approach to what the plan should contain. In its draft form, I think it does a very good job of addressing the public input that was received through all of those components that Ms. Keefe provided to you tonight with explanations. However, I do think there are a few things that the department recognizes that are difficult and would be contrary to the direction that we received from the leadership of the city, that being previous mayors, city council members and now current mayor and city council members. And so that'll be the process that we'll present to you over the course of the next couple of months, trying to balance what we know we can do and what the plan says we should do. And with that, the department will conclude its presentation. I'd like to extend my thanks to Ms. Keefe for participating tonight and those graphics provided. And Travis, Robin, and I are available for any questions or comments.

Commission members? Anybody, speaker cards?

Mr. Chair, we've not received any speaker cards in the council chambers, and we do have a few on Zoom, none with their hand raised at the moment.

Okay. I'll entertain a motion to close this here. Mr.

Chair, just a couple of things by me. As Ms. Keefe mentioned, the Historic Preservation Commission held a public hearing this past Thursday, I believe May 28th, The department would like that particular process concluded before the Planning and Zoning Commission completes its review and action. The reason being a state statute relative to planning and zoning specifies that ultimately the Planning and Zoning Commission is the adopting body of long-range plans for the City of Wildwood. So I'll assure you that you'll have all the information from the Historic Preservation Commission relative to its review and its public hearing process before we ask you to take a final action. After the Planning and Zoning Commission has acted, it does go to City Council. There'll be another public hearing, and the intent there is to receive endorsement and ratification, and then the process is complete. Thank you.

Okay. Yeah. Mr. Marshall is in motion. Mr. Clayton? All in favor, say aye. Aye. All opposed? Any abstentions? This hearing is closed. Okay. Next is the letters of recommendation. We have two to consider tonight. And I understand, Travis.

Yes, sir.

You will be performing the narrations.

Yes, sir, thank you. Easy to. Z two and two a dash twenty six of Doug Nance Lombardo homes of St Louis LLC for research park circle suite one three zero St Charles Missouri six three three zero four requests for a change in zoning district designations of four properties that are currently identified in the new non urban residents district town center neighborhood edge and neighborhood general districts to the six a four thousand square foot residents district with a plan residential development overlay district. d two a all being in association with the tract of land that is ten point four three acres in size and located on the north side of manchester road west of its intersection with state route one o nine street addresses one seven one one five one seven one one nine one seven one two seven and one seven one three five manchester road St. Louis County locator numbers 24V430086, 24V430121, 24V430064, and 24V430112. Proposed use, 74 attached single-family drones in clusters of four and five units with associated street and pedestrian networks, along with public rights of way, dedications and improvements, stormwater management facilities, and required public spaces, Ward 1.

Thank you, Mr. Chair. Mr. Chair, members of the Planning and Zoning Commission, at the last meeting of this body, The Department of Planning presented its information report with recommendation relative to the tandem rezoning request that is before you tonight. That recommendation was favorable relative to the site being authorized for up to 62 attached units that would be developed by Lombardo Homes. As part of that discussion, there were a number of comments from the Commission members relating to green space, the availability of additional parking beyond what is provided in the garages and driveway apron for each of the units, and several others. Ultimately, the Department of Planning met with Lombardo Homes and those items that were identified by the commission along with some concerns from Lombardo Homes were discussed. I think the department would like to just go over a few key items relative to those questions, comments from the commission and the subsequent discussion between the petitioner and the city. Mr. Nance described a couple of them in the public comment session of tonight's meeting. The department believed that the commission was concerned about the parking being placed in the center of the site next to the units. Lombardo Homes came prepared to our meeting and said that they had already considered altering that design. And so the parking, The off-street available parking, so to speak, has been pushed to either side, that being the east portion of the property and the west portion of the same. The rationale for that and the support that the department has is relative to the service. around the land use. First and foremost, the reserve is under development to the west. Some of that area where additional parking is placed does border onto new lots, but it also borders onto a stormwater management facility. And we believe that the impact there is minimized by the budding use. To the east is a vacant parcel ground that under our town center regulating plan is intended to be commercial under the workplace district designation. Also, there were concerns about the off-street parking, so to speak. And so additional spaces have been reallocated, or I should say spaces have been reallocated. And with the provision of additional parking for Old Pond School on this site, The department and Lombardo Homes agreed that's a prime place for that additional off-street parking. And so a pedestrian connection was provided, thereby opening up quite a few spaces for availability. I think the center green space now creates a nice view as you enter into the site. And certainly, the department believes is an improvement to the overall design. The department would also note that there was a correction that needed to be made relative to the amount of public space dedicated as part of this project. That was an error on the part of the department, and there is a correction in attachment B. As well as the porches, the depth of porches, and the usability of the porches, the department did add some additional information there as well. with those modifications to the plan by lombardo homes and the corrections the department made to attachment b the draft letter of recommendation now is in appropriate form for final action at tonight's meeting after a motion and second the department will be available for any questions or comments and thank you mr mayor yeah thank you very much i i do want to commend the uh

Updates that we see here tonight, moving the parking. Away from the middle and off to the side is a big improvement because. It provides that green space down the middle as people drive into the neighborhood makes it really nice. I also like the landscaping that you've put on the plan. along the entrance and along the basins there. And I assume that you're still going to try to put where you have them contain water with fountains, which I think will help with the aesthetic beauty of that site. So it's a big change from where it was a lot better getting the cars off metal and just having nice entrance for people to enjoy. And the parking, putting the path into the Parking space parking area there. I think that's a good idea for. Some over a blow parking if folks have guests. There, but it looks like you've got it covered. The dog park is a good addition as well. So that's feedback. I think it's. Changed quite a bit since and what we've seen.

Yes, Mr. Mayor, as you know, this was before our Development and Zoning Review Committee did get a favorable assessment, but certainly there were some items that were identified through the process, often the process being criticized. I think ultimately the plan before you tonight is really a very nice plan. And I think from an aesthetic standpoint, it will be a nice addition to Town Center. And certainly the additional parking for Pond School, I think will actually open that up to greater use than it's ever seen since 2006, when the park was open for public use.

Mr. Marshall. Mr. Voon, just a couple of questions.

Oops, sorry.

Could you make that go away?

No.

So my question is that on the northern side, the buffer, the front of those homes will be looking out. And I understand that most of that greenery will be kept there. How much, what would be the distance then from the property line to where the new homes are being built over in the other subdivision? The buffer on this side, is it 30 feet?

The actual setback is 30 feet. Within that setback, there is a system of retaining walls. The new dwellings in the reserve at Wildwood will be at a lower elevation than these. So part of that is the retention of the existing vegetation on this site, which we couldn't replicate in terms of height or density. We also have a pretty robust planting plan for that retaining wall system in the reserve. I'm thinking that... In most instances, other than the winter months where we are supplementing with the plantings in the reserve of Wildwood, there'll be some visibility. But again, I'd like to think that we've tried to do our best here to the principles of new urbanism, which is serving the serving garages off the alley or in this case, the public street.

I think that's fine. I just think that those people that will be looking that way, and then as much as the people are buying the new homes in the other subdivision, as you know, over the years, we have this constant battle about how wide the lots match up. And there's enough of a break there. I don't think that's a problem, but it has improved a lot. So thank you.

And one other thing, Council Member Marshall, is that... Certainly, when we have an existing residential setting and we're introducing a change, a new development, it's more difficult. Here, we have two projects. One's obviously ahead of the other, but certainly we'll be able to... offset some of that that change through just the process of construction and certainly we'll be glad to offer any input to people that call that may be interested in the lots at the reserve and advise them we have a plan here's the plan please we'll be glad to provide it thank you is there anybody on zoom

There'll be no more. Still need a motion, don't we?

Yes. The department will respectfully request a motion to approve the draft letter of recommendation.

Make a motion to approve the document as drafted.

Just Mr. Marshall seconds it. We have a roll call vote.

Excuse me. Commissioner Deppler?

Yes. Mr. Deppler votes yes.

Commissioner Jackson?

Yes.

Commissioner Gettinger?

Yes.

Commissioner Clayton?

Yes.

Chair Rubis? Yes. Councilmember Marshall.

Yes.

And mayor Tano.

Yeah.

Thank you.

Okay.

The motion passes and Mr. Well, Mr. Newberry, I think is going to read this into the record for me.

Yes, sir. Easy five dash 26 city of Wildwood planning and zoning commission care of department of planning one six eight six zero main street Wildwood, Missouri six three zero four zero. Of course, for the consideration of amendments to certain existing requirements being set forth in chapter four, fifteen zero three zero definitions chapter four, fifteen point four zero zero sign regulations, general chapter four, fifteen point four one zero sign regulations for the and you and all our districts. In Chapter 415.420, sign regulations all C and M districts, which would remove window signs or clings from their current exemption status, and thereby require these representations to be reviewed and authorized under a set of new rules to ensure compatibility with the city's dark sky efforts, town center neighborhood design standards, and architectural guidelines, and its outdoor lighting requirements of the zoning ordinance, Chapter 415.450. All awards. Mr. Rubin.

Mr chair members of the planning and zoning Commission at the last meeting of this body, the Department of planning presented its information report with recommendation regarding this particular matter that has just been read into the record by Mister Newberry as is noted in the. Advertisement currently window signs are considered an exemption under the city sign regulations. um relative to those types that exemption for many years was not problematic but of late what we are seeing is the advent of leds like emitting diodes and neon and the number of window signs have increased as well In many instances, they're becoming more of a dark sky concern as well as a nuisance than some of the other more larger monument and wall type signs that we've regulated since the inception of the city. The draft letter of recommendation reflects the support of the Planning and Zoning Commission, removing these types of designs from the exemption category and placing reasonable rules relative to them to ensure that they are compatible with the existing businesses and development area where they will be placed and ultimately ensure that our dark sky efforts aren't thwarted by them as well. So tonight, the draft letter of recommendation is in appropriate form for final consideration by the planning and zoning commissions. After a motion and second, Department of Planning will be available for any comments or questions regarding this particular matter. Thank you.

Thank you. Any discussion?

Okay, I entertain a motion. Make a motion to approve as drafted.

Second by Commissioner Marshall. And we need a roll call vote on this. Any discussion before we vote?

Mr. Marshall. So, Mr. Voonage, now that once this will get passed, I guess, at Council in Quebec, how are you planning to communicate it to the businesses?

Well, certainly that can be a very sensitive issue. Many of our businesses have over the years explained that our sign regulations are some of the more restrictive they've found. Obviously, our sign regulations were tailored to town center and new urbanism and the architectural character that we've prioritized for any building or structure within this special area of the city. i think from the perspective of mr lee our city administrator and the department of planning first and foremost we want to work with the businesses and advise them of the new regulations it isn't a warning notice the first day that they're in place and work toward what i would probably consider some type of informal amaranization schedule so we allow them to slowly kind of go toward what sudden what now will be allowed and remove those that aren't

Any other questions? Okay, we have a motion on the floor and it's seconded. Do we need a roll call vote? Yes, sir. Okay, Travis, roll call vote, please.

Commissioner Gettinger?

Yes, aye. Commissioner Clayton? Yes.

Commissioner Dupler?

Yes.

Commissioner Jackson?

Yes.

Chair Rubis? Yes. Council Member Marshall?

Yes.

And Mayor Garitano?

Yes. Thank you. Okay, motion passes. Next item, Joe.

The next item is new business correspondence item. a recommendation report of the planning and zoning commission to city council regarding p z eleven dash twenty monarch fire protection district care of f g m architects inc one metropolitan square sweet nineteen forty five saint louis missouri six three one zero two Conditional use permit in the NU non-urban resident district for a three-acre tract of land that is utilized for a fire station, which identifies a request from the abutting property owner to the south of the facility that is seeking the deletion of the required gate that was to be installed across the private drive to control unauthorized access. This particular property is located in Ward 1. Thank you.

Thank you. Any questions?

Mr.

Chair, I'll give a brief presentation.

Thank you. Mr. Chair, as was just described into the record, this is regarding the conditional use permit that governs the new Monarch Fire Protection District station on Wild Horse Creek Road. As part of that conditional use permit process, it was identified by the neighbors to the south that they had concerns that Uh, vehicles would accidentally use their private drive, thinking that they were accessing the fire station. Um, and so a requirement was placed into the conditional use permit that the fire district, um, install a gate for the private drive, accessing the residents to the South. Um, the agenda item tonight is a response to a contact from the property owner along with the fire district. that after the station has been occupied and in use for some time now, that concern has not come to fruition. There have not been vehicles using the private drive on accident thinking they were going into the fire station. And so the request is to amend the conditional use permit to remove the provision that the gate be installed. um and again both parties are in agreement um assistant chief cruz is here tonight um and they're just requesting that they not be required to do the gate in agreement with the the property owners and so the department is presenting a recommendation to the planning and zoning commission night that the conditional use permit be amended to delete that section um and with that that includes the department's presentation if you have any questions we're available to answer them okay any questions

Okay. I'll entertain a motion.

I would like to make that motion.

Okay. Mr. Marshall makes the motion to approve the recommendation.

I'll second that.

Mr. Clayton is going to second it. Okay. Motion. All in favor. Do we need a roll call or can we do this by voice?

A roll call would be okay. Commissioner Clayton?

Yes.

Commissioner Depler?

Yes.

Commissioner Jackson.

Yes.

Commissioner Gettinger. Yes. Chair Rubis. Yes. Council Member Marshall. Yes. And Mayor Garitano. Thank you.

Okay. Next item. Travis.

A response to request from a telecommunication provider that seeks an allowance to replace a set of existing antennas with new types on the telecommunications tower and facility authorized by PZ25-97 Sprint Spectrum LP Marianist Retreat Center. Conditional use permits CUP in the NU9 Urban Residence District, east side of State Route 109, south of Old State Road, which would allow the exterior rays to extend over seven feet in lieu of the required 18 inches from the tower structure itself, Ward 6. Mr. Vonage.

Thank you, Mr. Chair. Mr. Chair and members of the Planning and Zoning Commission, as you'll recall, since approximately 1998, there has been a 110-foot-tall telecommunications tower on the Marinist retreat site. Key to authorizing that particular telecommunications facility in 1998 was a set of conditions to ensure that the tower itself was as disguised as much as possible, and that was achieved by the coloration of the tower, the height of the tower, and the placement of the antenna on the tower itself. Over the years, there have been a number of providers that have taken advantage of that location and co-located on the tower. In keeping with the governing conditional use permit, the exterior antennas, along with the cabling that serves the antennas themselves, have been flush mounted or in this particular instance, most recently up to 18 inches off the tower surface itself. Recently, the Department of Planning received an application from a telecommunications provider that would that sought the authorization to basically place antenna on the top location of the tower, some 84 inches off the structure face of the tower itself. in reviewing the application the department considered the regulations relative to the telecommunication tower and support structures and would note that those regulations were updated recently based both based upon federal changes to the laws as well as the state in those regulations it speaks to the fact that antenna need to basically extend from the power itself the distance where the the diameter so to speak of the tower where the antenna are to be placed or if the modification would defeat previously imposed requirements of camouflaging or concealment the department believes that two of the requirements are exceeded by this particular application and is tonight respectfully requesting authorization to post this matter for public hearing so if the conditional use permit can be considered in a more open setting so to speak So tonight, the department is respectfully requesting a motion and second to post this matter for public hearing at the next available meeting of the Planning and Zoning Commission. If there are any questions or comments after a motion and second, the Department of Planning along with the city attorney are available to answer them. Thank you.

Do you have any questions? Okay, we'll entertain a motion.

make a motion to authorize uh public hearing the next available meeting thank you yes the mayor seconds that okay we have a motion um sure depler yes commissioner jackson yes

Commissioner Gettinger?

Yes.

Commissioner Clayton?

Yes.

Chair Rubis? Yes. Council Member Marshall?

Yes.

And Mayor Garitano?

Yes.

Thank you. Okay, and that completes the new business, and we have a site development plan. Joe, you want to?

Yes, Mr. Chair, thank you. The last item on tonight's agenda is a recommendation of the Department of Planning to the Planning and Zoning Commission for the reapproval of a revised preliminary plan, Post Hollow Estate Subdivision, for this large lot single-family subdivision that is being proposed on an approximately 31-acre tract of land located at the northwest corner of Pond Road and State Route 100. street addresses eighteen fifty five and eighteen seventy one pond road and twenty zero five linda jane lane st louis county locator numbers twenty three w sixty one zero one zero one twenty three w sixty one zero one one zero and twenty three w fifty two zero zero eight six The property has its only district designation of the NU non-urban resident district. Proposed use, a total of eight lots are planned as part of a residential subdivision, along with stormwater management improvements, public space items, and infrastructure additions for access purposes. This particular property is located in Ward 1. Thank you.

OK. Travis.

Thank you, Mr. Chair. Mr. Chair and members of the Planning and Zoning Commission, before you tonight is a revised preliminary plat regarding the item that Mr. Boonish just read into the record. As you may recall, earlier this year, the Planning and Zoning Commission reviewed this proposed eight-lot, large-lot subdivision and approved the preliminary plat on that preliminary plat was reflected certain conditions that were put into place with the waiver of the wastewater treatment component which included the future connection to a plant if a ninth lot were to be considered and added to the subdivision so if a ninth lot were to be added to the subdivision in the future all nine lots would need to connect to a centralized wastewater treatment facility Thereafter, the petitioner advised the department that the possibility of a ninth lot to the north, to the property to the north, was almost uncertain given the changes in ownership and other information that they had. And they requested that those requirements that contemplated a ninth lot be removed. that request to amend the initial waiver to the wastewater treatment plant requirement was considered by the planning and zoning commission in the spring early spring and the planning and zoning commission did grant that amended waiver followed by the city council adopting amended resolution which removed some of those provisions regarding again the possibility of a ninth lot which would then lead to the need for a centralized wastewater treatment facility So what's before you tonight is the revised preliminary plat that reflects the change to the waiver. The preliminary plat remains substantially the same as what was reviewed and approved in the beginning of 2026. Just to highlight a few of the changes that, again, were related to the amended waiver, there was an access easement that had previously been shown to access the property to the north from the private street. That has been removed on this revised preliminary plat. And then some of the utility easements that were shown on the preliminary plot that would have accommodated the future connection to a centralized wastewater treatment facility for all of the eight homes and then a potential ninth new home, those have been eliminated again because the possibility of a ninth lot has been, will almost certainly not occur here. So with these changes, excuse me, also want to note that there is a note that has been added on to the onto the preliminary plot that will be reflected as part of the owner certification on the record plot if it's approved that very clearly states that it is intended to have only eight lots with the subdivision and emphasizes the importance of the waiver that had been granted by the planning and zoning commission and city council so that's an important change as well um so that's reflected on this revised um preliminary plat And with those changes, the department is just seeking the commission's action on this revised preliminary class to be forwarded to city council. And then thereafter the petitioner could begin the work on the record plan.

With the removal of that 9th property, did any other homes gain any. Land.

No, the tract of land remains the same size, the 31 acres of the parent tract. But the ninth lot was potentially to the north on some vacant property, which is no longer. The case and access has been, potential future access has been removed from the parliamentary plot.

Mr. Chair, if I may, lot four, which is the lot in the northwestern most corner of the property, That is where the egress easement, Mr. Newberry mentioned, was located. That egress easement required not only a dedication of area for the easement, but a 50-foot setback from it. Now with its removal, there's a 30-foot setback. So that lot actually got more protection and I think a better layout for the dwelling.

Yes, Mr. Clayton. I'll make a motion that we re-approve the revised preliminary for that.

OK. And I will second that. OK. Travis.

Commissioner Jackson.

Yes. Commissioner Jackson votes yes. Thank you. Commissioner Gettinger?

Yes.

Commissioner Clayton?

Yes.

Commissioner Depler?

Yes.

Chair Rubis? Yes. Council Member Marshall? Yes. Mayor Garitano? Thank you.

Okay, that concludes tonight's business. I'll entertain a motion to adjourn. Mr. Marshall and seconded by Mr. Clayton. All in favor say aye. Aye. Say nay. Any abstentions? Motion passes. We are adjourned.