December 9, 2025 — Meeting Transcript

that they have to be on. Yeah. All right. Good evening, everybody. It is, what is the date today? December 9th. We're here for our six o'clock session and happy to report. We're going to have a discussion with the CCF, our Clayton Community Foundation. Feel free to make your way up here. Claire, if you're interested at all in coming up to listen to and discuss, you're welcome. But if you want to stay there too, you're, You can stay there. It's totally up to you. Okay. Claire, in case anybody doesn't know, Claire is a part of our Mayor's Youth Advisory Council and she's also been helping CCF. And Luke jeans is in the back he's here to also part of a the mayor's youth advisory council, but I think here just to watch a meeting because members of the mayor's youth Advisory Council go to different commissions and committees throughout the city. Well, thank you so much, everybody, for being here. First off, I just want to thank all of you for all the time, effort and energy that you put in to CCF. I know that a lot of you spend a lot of time and, you know, every success that CCF has is a huge success for the city. So I just I do. I would just really appreciate all your efforts and You know, the partnership that the city has with CCF is a vital and important one. And we're just so grateful that all of you are willing to lend your expertise and efforts and time to helping the city of Clayton. I don't know if we want to go around. If you guys want to go around, we could go around and kind of introduce ourselves. If you want to tell us, you know, kind of what you do with CCF. And I also want to especially thank Alex, our executive director, and Colleen, our current president, because I know they both spend a lot of time. And I don't see Lisa here, but certainly want to acknowledge Lisa Kinsella for all the time and energy that she puts into CCF as well. Yeah. Um, I'll pick on you, Susan. Do you want to go first? Um, so if the mics, it looks like they're all green, but if, um, that way people, if there are people on zoom, they can hear. So if you just want to say if you're on a committee or, uh,

Susan Brown, a Clayton resident for about 13 years, I joined CCF within the last six, nine months. Uh, so a newer member, um, and not on a committee yet, I don't think, uh, but happy to be a part of the organization.

Hi, I'm Claire. I'm here as part of the Mayor's Youth Advisory Council, and I'm working with the Awareness Committee.

And you can probably, Claire, if you want to, because Robin, you've got the microphone in front of you. So Claire, if you just want to keep that microphone down by you. Great.

I'm Robin Frankel. I am on the Awareness Committee for the Clinton Community Foundation. I have been a Clayton resident since I was seven years old. I have two sons, one of whom lives in Clayton and his children are going to Merrimack School, which I went to.

Hi, good evening. Julie Tuggle Wynn. I have been with the Clayton Community Foundation for two years. Maybe three years, somewhere in there. The time goes really quick. I've been a resident of Clayton's for about five years. I have two daughters in school here at the high school and I am on the executive committee over governance.

Hi, I'm Colleen Waterman. I don't know how long I've been involved with CCF. I started on the major gifts committee and currently serve as the president, and have lived in Clayton for 20 years, I think, and we have a son at the high school.

Judy Goodman, Ward 1 resident, former Ward 1 alderman, and I've been with CCF since It was in the embryonic stage. And anyway, it's just a thrill to be here and continue partnering with the city.

Debbie Zimmerman. I've also been involved in CCF following Judy's lead almost since the inception, if not before lived in Clayton 34 years. And I am chairing the Y down committee.

Thank you. My name is Adrian Rice. I do not live in Clayton, but I work in Clayton. I work at BI Worldwide. I'm a business development director. My family actually lived in Clayton. My mom grew up here, my aunts, my grandmother, grandfather, great uncle, all on Bonham Avenue. So I have been a part of CCF for now one year, almost to the date, and I'm very excited to be here today.

Hi, Alex Elmsted, Executive Director. I think it has been six years now at CCF.

I'm Gary Feder. It's hard to say, but I've been in Clayton now for 60 years since I started as a freshman at Washington University in 1966. I'm in my fifth year as a Ward 3 council member, and I've been involved with CCF since 2009 when I think it was Judy and Michelle Harris who suggested I should join the board, which I did. I was on the board for a long time, and it's legal counsel for a and president of the board, I think from 2012 to 2014.

I'm Gary Fader. It's hard to say, but I've been in Clayton now for 60 years since I started as a freshman at Washington University in 1966. I'm in my fifth year as a Ward 3 council member, and I've been involved with CCF since 2009 when I think it was Judy and Michelle Harris who suggested I should join the board, which I did. I was on the board for a long time, and it's legal counsel for a and president of the board, I think from 2012 to 2014.

I gather we're doing introductions and I apologize for my tardy arrival. Traffic is bare out there. My name is Becky Patel. I actually like CCF was a big part of my introduction to Clayton when I moved here. 15 years ago, worked with Judy on the party of the century, joined the board and served as president of the board before I got elected to be here and stepped down. So I'm really excited to meet those of you that I don't know and hear what talk about what we're up to.

Susan Buse, and I totally enjoyed and found worthwhile my time as liaison with CCF. And it's good to see a lot of you who I used to know pretty well and haven't seen for a while. What am I supposed to say? I've been in Clayton almost 30 years. So thanks for your work.

I'll just, I'll introduce, Anna Krane's our planning director and June Frazier is our city clerk. I'm not sure they wanted to introduce themselves, so... Bridget McAndrew. I was a Ward 3 elder person for seven years before becoming mayor in April. We've been here for about 16 years. When I first came on the board, I was a liaison to CCF and it was great to get to know the organization. I remember the retreat we had so well because I think it was very early on in my tenure or so, but it was a great kind of two-day intensive on what CCF was, but it was great.

I'll just, I'll introduce, Anna Crane's our planning director and June Frazier is our city clerk. I'm not sure they wanted to introduce themselves, so... Bridget McAndrew. I was a Ward 3 elder person for seven years before becoming mayor in April. We've been here for about 16 years. When I first came on the board, I was a liaison to CCF and it was great to get to know the organization. I remember the retreat we had so well because I think it was very early on in my tenure or so, but it was a great kind of two-day intensive on what CCF was, but it was great.

David Gipson. I've been Clayton's city manager just about six years now.

David Gibson. I've been Clayton's city manager just about six years now.

Jeffrey Jeffery Yorg, about a year and a half, I think, on the board. He'll present Clayton since... 19 – no, 2019. So it would take five years or so. I've worked in Clayton since 2008 when I was a young whippersnapper lawyer working for Gary Feder and us. And I still work in Clayton. So I basically am five minutes away from home to the office every day. So when I said I've been here about a year and a half on the board for war two.

Jeffrey York, about a year and a half, I think, on the board. He'll present Clayton since... 19 – no, 2019. So it would take five years or so. I've worked in Clayton since 2008 when I was a young whippersnapper lawyer working for Gary Fader and us. And I still work in Clayton. So I basically am five minutes away from home to the office every day. So when I said I've been here about a year and a half on the board for war two.

All right, great. So I would love to, I mean, I think maybe us on the council, forgive us, we've changed from Board of Aldermen to City Council, so we're still getting used to it. But Colleen, I don't know if you kind of want to update us on some of, I know there are liaisons to CCF know a lot about it, but if you want to talk a little bit about some of the new committees you've formed and kind of, I don't

think i've been president for about six months alex um and ccf has been as we all know a very stable organization helping out the city when we can um we met the executive committee met and talked over the summer or pre-summer i should say spring about what priorities we might have um Because while everyone would like us to do everything for everyone, and we certainly would like to do that as well, I believe we're less effective that way. So we decided to come up with some committees to focus on priorities that our board voted on. These committees are not standing committees. They will not be around forever. They're purely project-based and that was from the advice of our liaisons from the council um and then we had a tornado i don't know if anybody really remembers that but so that might have switched some of our priorities a little bit um and then i couldn't sleep one night so i had another idea that um but the executive committee understands this We as a CCF Board of Directors sit around the table, we listen a lot, we try to know what's going on and how we can help. Many of our new board members and some of the ones who have been here a while said, how do you need my help? How can I be helpful? So I emailed Alex one morning and said, I need five minutes. So my personal goal as the president is to focus on engagement. And the way we are going to do that is through our committees. Now, you all have the committees in front of you. Everyone said what they're working on. But this is a way we would like our board to focus on. The work happens in the committees, as you guys all know. So let's have those committees meet. Let's get them more engaged. And let's not, my comment to every committee chair that I spoke with when I asked you to serve in that role is membership does not have to just be the CCF Board of Directors. members can come from the CCF or the Clayton community. So we are looking to engage more people because what that will help us do as an organization is I'll be very honest and I'm a fundraiser by trade, raise more money to help with bigger, you know, so we have more money to do projects with the city. And also learn about what we're doing and learn about what the city is doing. Because before I got involved with CCF, I had no idea. And that's just because I wasn't paying attention. So my goal is for us to share what we're doing with more people. there is a list of committees in front of everyone. All the committee chair, or the majority of the committee chairs are here. So if you guys would like to take a look, I really would like this to be a discussion, questions. But our goal is some of you like, I mean, Gary, Becky, we did a lot of things for a long time. We're probably not going to do them all the same way we used to do them because the world is different now. And so we're going to really zero in on what we can focus on and how we can help the city improve what we're doing in engagement with our community.

Thank you, Colleen. We're just trying to move. We're trying to recognize who might be on Zoom that we could move over. Marta is on Zoom. Cheryl. I don't know if you guys know Nancy. Is Nancy G? Oh. Okay. Oh,

yeah. Nancy's on for something else. Yep. But Marta is the co-chair of the awareness committee with Robin.

So I apologize. At the end of what you were saying, were you kind of talking about just maybe doing a little bit more of a discussion about the different committees? Great.

Yeah. I don't know if the chairs want to speak or if anyone has any questions from what you see in front of you. We can go either way.

Can I ask one quick question? Yeah. I know when I – I had a short stint on CCF as well before I joined the board. So just for my own sake, did the old committees go away or – and replaced by these? Because I'm thinking about wasn't there like an arts committee and a history committee? Like did those go away or are these just in addition to those traditional committees?

Some morphed into our current committees, but some went away too. Our former committee structure was based on the core competencies of CCF, history, sustainability, you know, so art, those sorts of things. So like art is folding into the Weidelman Committee. History a little bit is folding into the Hanley House Committee because it's a historical project.

Okay, that's helpful. That's what I figured, but I wanted to just clarify what I was looking at the list. Thank you.

Well, and so I will say fundraising was a standing committee. Fundraising is a part of every committee. So it doesn't make sense to have a committee doing this work and a fundraising committee doing that work. Let's all just work together.

Thank you.

Yeah, and I will say this is meant to be a discussion. So I think as people on the council have questions, if you guys have questions for us, I think that's great. So in terms of maybe we can just start at the top in terms of the Hanley House Committee discussion. Trying to think who, that's Alex Hendel, but I don't see him here. But if somebody wants to just talk about what, you know, what's going to happen with the Hanley House or the idea with the Hanley

Yeah, I can speak to that. So Alex Hendel is our chair of that committee. His background is in construction, which is pretty advantageous in terms of thinking about all the renovations and preservation that is required for that particular house. So Thinking through that, what that looks like, what's a big priority, working with parks, obviously the jurisdiction is parks, about how we can increase those efforts and that type of engagement, but also how we can re-engage Westmoreland neighbors, surrounding neighbors, University City, and all of the people that have also supported Hanley House over the years in reinvigorating that. Additionally, as folks know, there is a $100,000 match campaign by the descendant Susan Hanley and her brother John Hanley. So that campaign has been underway for a couple of years now. The great thing about the match campaign is that it's $100,000. So you're basically getting $200,000 should you match it. But really thinking about how we not only match that, but kind of exceed it past the needs of the entirety of the building and the structure because it's ongoing. It's a house built in 1855. So there's no lack of work to be done.

And then, Alex, I don't know if you want to, I think it's exciting that Susan Hanley is hopefully going to come visit St. Louis in April. So hopefully that will transpire into some, you know, an event or something that, you know, certainly would bolster, you know, fundraising, which would be really exciting.

Yeah, so that's slated for early April. And some of the things that we've work stopped is replanting of the black oak tree kind of having a ceremonial dedication to that in her honor and things like that this used to be one of the oldest trees in the state of Missouri. So, yeah. Using that time for her to be in town, not only to engage with kind of a public relations opportunities, but also with potential donors as well. And get her in front of those donors as we kind of see fit and strategize on it.

So Colleen and I also don't want it to be the Alex show, okay? So I want other board members to chime in. With these committees, what we've also set forth is strategic objectives for each one. So in front of you, you have kind of the basis of the mission, but there's also strategic objectives that are tied to our strategic plan. So I think the question was, what do you need from the city? Coordination, support, being in sync, making sure that we're not siloed in all these various different committees, I think is always going to be top for me in terms of just understanding, always talking and always communicating, which I believe we do really well. And I act as that type of liaison between it. But that would probably be my first priority. But I would also say, too, that oftentimes when I'm talking with donors, stakeholders or other people in the community, what they want to see is they want to know what the city is providing fiscal or budgetarily wise about these particular projects and understanding what those concrete numbers are. Um, is oftentimes really good, which is again for Hanley house. We have that in the budget for Y down. We have that In the budget and things like that.

Yeah. I mean, I think, uh, Rick to, uh, the Hanley house, for instance, there's a couple hundred thousand dollars budgeted in this fiscal year to do pretty much keep the water out. So there is, I think a contract out, um, To get some of that work done. like some roofing repairs, maybe some waterproofing from the basement. But that's some of the stuff that the city at least has budgeted for the next year, just, again, to try to just keep water out of the house.

I can ask a question on Alex or whoever wants to answer it. On the Hanley House, over the years, it sometimes comes up with the, you know, it's always ongoing. You have a very old property and there's always things to do. And, you know, how much of it is just to keep going through this year? and there's been discussions of should we look at what other communities have done to preserve and keep interactive with the community some type of historic place like the Hanley House, and whether it's a freestanding organization, an organization affiliated with the city, or does it stay part of CCF? Are you looking at structures like that for the long-term sustainability?

So we don't know yet. So really we... Gosh, this is December. In November, we kicked off these committees. So we need a little bit more time. And to answer your question, Rick, too, there is a city representative on each of these committees. So, we're building those plans. And if those plans will come back to the council for approval. You know, David is... David, the mayor... Alex, Judy and I met on Friday to talk about some of these things because there were questions. And so we needed some clarification and those conversations will be ongoing. So we don't have a lot of set. We're going to raise this amount of money. We're going do this. We're going that yet. That will all come hopefully in the next, I don't know how many months, but sooner rather than later, hopefully.

When I look at the list of the committees, two of them clearly are project-oriented awareness, maybe in a way as a project in and of itself. I think Rick and I have been liaisons since the beginning of the year, and I remember the world prior to May 16th. at which point I think the CCF meeting talked about the biggest priority was Hanley House. That was really where the emphasis should be for a lot of reasons. Then we had May 16th and, you know, things are a lot different. And so, you know, I, I think part of the question is as between Hanley House and Y down, which maybe should be expanded to be just essentially about trees, whether it's on Y down or, or throughout the city, although that might be a separate issue. You know, look how you look at those. I think it seems to me CCF and the city sort of need to maybe guide you. Is this a choice to be made? Is this something that you can really pursue both at the same time? I think that's kind of critical because... one seems to be more urgent than the other. On the other hand, I think Hanley House has a lot of potential appeal. It's just a question of what's your priority and do you have to pick between the two? And whatever you pick, I think will help awareness. So there you

go. To be honest, Alex sent me a list of potential donors for both projects. And I can say, I don't know yet because I haven't, didn't have a chance to look at the list, but a good

start though.

It is. And, and to be honest we would like to be donor centric. So we may think John Smith and his family and his company are we might think Y down is what appeals to them. And then to be donor centric, we get in there who, or whoever it is gets in there and it's not, you know, it's something else. So we will talk with them about what would they like to support? Um, rather than just saying you can support X or you can support Y we'll have the conversation with the donor of what's important to you. What impact would you like to make? Um, and see where that fits in so i don't know that we really need to make a choice because we believe and judy agrees but they're both very important to the city um and i would feel hesitant to take henley house off the list knowing we have this match opportunity and we have to take advantage of that So yeah,

I mean, we've been talking about working on Hanley for as long as I've known what it was. So I'd love to see progress made there. This is maybe just a general question. And I don't know if it's for Mayor David or somebody else to answer. But in the like, I understand things change. And that's great and we do have like agreements about how we work together and what we're doing and so i mean like in in the past what we've done is have like what we called an approved project list right And it was something that we collaborated on, like both entities would make suggestions of things that we want to do. But that in the end, like we're talking about things that the point I could try to make, I guess, is that CCF would not go out and fundraise for something that the city hasn't identified or like agreed as a priority or a project we'd be interested in pursuing. Right. Now, obviously, I don't think the nature of both of the specific projects that you have here are certainly priorities that we have. although they're not necessarily the why down, especially because we wouldn't have had that idea. Um, whenever we last considered that. So I'm a little bit curious about literally the mechanics, like what is governing the relationship and does anything need to be modified around that? And how are you all thinking about that? Um, I mean, it sounds like, um, These are like, are these the only things you're fundraising for? Like, I know there's a lot of questions in there.

So you're absolutely right. We need to have a project list and I know what's in the agreement. I don't have it with me there. It basically states that we need to have this mutually agreed upon project list. So I think this conversation helps us build that. And so the important thing here today within this hour is for both parties to try to understand what the priorities are in each of the groups. So the nice thing about it is we are pretty closely aligned. I don't think, you know, Hanley House has been something that we've talked about for a long time that CCF can certainly help us with. And then I think everybody views Y down as a priority. And I think we'll probably talk about Shell Park for a minute here today as well, which is going to be another effort that will come up, you know, during this fiscal year and during 2026. That's going to be a big one.

Right.

But we'll build the project list off of the conversation we have today.

Becky, if I may to answer some of the mechanics, I don't think any of that's going to change. You know, the approved projects are still steadfast and White Elm Boulevard might not be on there. So to put that one specifically on there in the language that says White Elm Boulevards probably would be advantageous because right now it probably is just public art. not necessarily public art on Y-Down, but Hanley House is already on there. And then to just answer the other piece of it too is I don't believe we would ever do anything outside of the scope of that partnership and agreement and the way this nonprofit works is through the mechanics of how it's set up.

So I don't really need to speak But I want to emphasize that when we do fundraising, you need to learn what that potential funder is interested in. And sometimes you do go in with one ask and then you find out, oh no, they're really interested in art and we're asking them about history. So I think it's possible to have these initiatives happening simultaneously. Colleen's guidance who to ask for what, but I think it's doable and I just want to reiterate that we would not adopt a project that has not been on the city list and is mutually approved.

So along those lines, I wonder what your awareness is of the Shaw Park Livable Communities Master Plan Project because I'm on the Parks and Rec Commission and we saw the latest conceptual plan for that. And one of the things that struck me upon looking at it is I think there's a lot of opportunities for like naming or bricks or like, oh, I mean, just like you name it. There's a lot of places that someone could have their name or an inscription put in or something for a donation. And so I'm interested in understanding if CCF has thought about that and whether you'd have the interest and capacity to do something like that should we agree that it's mutually beneficial.

So I will say that when we were developing our committees, Shaw Park was, this was last summer. So no, Shaw Park was not where it is today with the council. So, um, we knew it might come up. Gary informed us of that and we said, but we need to make decisions for our board now. Like we can't wait. So we made the decisions that we made. Um, Will there be an, could there be an opportunity? Yes. But we want to give our committee some time to do some work, you know, before we would take on any more. Because I think what the board has seen in the past, and Alex and Judy and Debbie, you've had the most seniority, so please, is we just take on projects before projects are finished. And all of a sudden we've got all these balls in the air and nothing's happening because we have too many balls in the air. So we would really like to try to focus. It doesn't mean conceptually we know something else is out there. And if we find the right person, we can bring that in. But we decided to be a little bit more focused with the work that we were doing rather than trying to be an answer to everyone.

Well, and I think Colleen, you've talked, I mean, when we've spoken to, it's hard to fundraise for something unless you, until you have plans. And, you know, so until we have, I think plans in place and until I think as a council, we decide to, you know, essentially maybe move forward on the project. Maybe that would be then when we will have a conversation about, can we, you know, Can we get a small band of people together to really start talking about this, talking to donors, whether it's residential donors, corporate donors?

Have you settled on a plan for Shaw Park?

No, I mean, you can say better because you're on the steering committee where we're at. The

steering committee continues to meet kind of the preliminary plans were presented to Parks and Rec on Monday. We plan to talk to the public in January, maybe late January. And then perhaps by February or March, there'll be, I mean, actual plans, you know, physical plans that you could probably, again, take to people that would be interested in naming rights and such. So.

It would be accurate to say that we budgeted for it in the budget this year.

We budgeted to carry out the entire design process all the way up to construction drawings, and we should definitely be able to get that done during this fiscal year. I would think by this summer, we're going to have something very concrete in hand that we could go out and start soliciting for major gifts.

And the Y-Down project doesn't interfere with your budgeting? No.

For that project. So we have a funding gap on that project. So the major gifts are going to be important to move it along at that pace. The big unknown force at this point is the FEMA reimbursement for the reimbursable expenses. So not necessarily all of the Y down work, but the streetlights and irrigation within the median. And then all of the streetlights that need to be repaired citywide and all the debris removal costs, all of that stuff. that doesn't look like it's going to be a fast process. This initial phase with FEMA as we've been building these projects and building our reimbursement plans and our projects, it's been really, really slow going. So, you know, we keep submitting information to them, but the processing side is taking some time. And we've heard from other communities that have had similar disasters and disaster reimbursement that have seen that reimbursement process take two to three years. So we're hoping that it's faster than that. We're hoping that the initial things that we've submitted for all the debris removal and some other things that we've already spent the money on, that we can see that money a little bit quicker. But for us, that was the big unforeseen thing. This project, the Shaw Park project could have moved forward probably a little bit faster had we had more money in the general fund balance that we didn't have to use on the tornado. But So our timing is impacted by that. So not Y down specifically, but just the tornado restoration

I think one distinction ought to be kept in mind is I think, although there may be overlap, I still think in many projects, there's the potential for large corporate gifts. And then on the other side, there's the one that's more focused on individual gifts. And probably you'll have some of both. I've also been on the subcommittee with the mayor and Shaw Park, I think, probably does lend itself to a lot of corporate giving opportunities. I mean, a lot of the design already has been thought about, you know, where do you put the sign that leads you into the site that would be for the one that's the largest giver, et cetera. I have thought that, for example, on Wydown or broader tree restoration, from what I've heard, you know, there's sort of a groundswell of enthusiasm among individuals who want to be part of that. And so I think you have to remember, you know, which one are you going to tap? Because I think Shaw Park is probably not as much geared toward individual giving. It's much more given to corporate. And so sort of making sure you have the right audience for the right project. Hanley House, I think, could be a much more of a hybrid. I could see where people might do both. But to me, the exciting part about Wydown or the whole tree restoration program is that there seems to be a lot of enthusiasm in the various neighborhoods for people who want to get involved. I don't know of any, and I've been around CCF for a long time. I don't know that we've ever had a potential project that was so much geared toward individual giving as that one. So I would kind of think about that as a focus for that particular project.

Well, and there are foundations too. I mean, the Botero was a foundation gift. So we don't want to limit the fundraising for Wydown just to individuals. And of course, When you're talking about an entry to Shaw Park and bricks, people love that.

I mean, I like not to disagree with my colleague who has vastly more fundraising experience than I do. But people love to buy a brick and it's going to be a highly visible space. It would be an amazing way for people to feel a part of that project and learn, build awareness of CCF. I mean, it'd be a huge lost opportunity not to do that. Yeah, I mean, I agree

between Shaw Park and Y-Down. I mean, we've always struggled with how does the community learn more about CCF? And hopefully through Y-Down and through Shaw Park, people will realize, oh, wait, so CCF is separate from the city? Yes, it's separate from the, you know. So hopefully there will, I mean, not to take the thunder from the Awareness Committee and Marta's online, which I think was, is Marta in charge of the Awareness Committee?

Robin is as well. Oh,

Robin is, I'm sorry. But, you know, I'm hoping that that will be a huge boon for people understanding and, you know, having just more people give. You know, I know that's been a huge goal of CCF for many years.

Yeah, I guess I have two points, I guess, to that. I agree. that everyone loves to give a brick, everyone loves to see their name, and that's a great individual giving opportunity. I kind of personally think that people feel a little burned by the Shaw Park project, that we keep seeing plans and it never comes to fruition. So I think it needs to be sort of strategic as far as when we ask for that. Because we need to make sure it's happening. And so I don't, I'm not really aware of like how far along we are in that process. So I think that's why we kind of shifted gears. And I almost want to call it the tree project. Because Gary pointed out, and I think Robin, you can speak on this because you're actually there. Um, but that we thought more about a community tree project because it wasn't only Y down that was affected. Um, you know, there were other parts like the Morelands and Davis place and things like that. So if people can feel like they're rebuilding their own neighborhood, then we can really reach out to individuals and kind of bring more awareness to CCF. And I'm not trying to discount the Shaw park project, but I want to make sure, you know, when we ask someone for a brick, like, when are they getting that brick?

Yeah, no, I think, Marta, I think that's a great point. I mean, like you said, I think we'll, we still as a council, even though we are very much, you know, building out construction plans, you know, for the Shaw Park project, we still have to ultimately decide whether we're going to fund, you know, a five or $6 million project in the end. So, so I think, I mean, I think it's great that you guys, at least for me, I think to have the Hanley house and the Y down really be a focus for the next six months to a year or however you guys determine, I think will be great. And I think, like you said, Marta, like being able to talk to so many different people and, you know, because I mean, I can't tell you how many emails I received in the months and still do from people saying, you know, how can I buy a tree? I'd love to buy a tree for my parents. So. tapping into that, I think would be wonderful. You know, and simple things like, I mean, those, I mean, yard signs are stupid, but man, they sure get people involved, you know, like some sort of like slogan, like, you know, build back Y down, help us help the city, whatever it is, whatever you guys come up with, because I'm not creative, but finding ways to really just like, you know do you want, you know, help us plant a tree? Cause that's what people say. They're like, we want to plant a tree, you know? So- I think it's, you know, again, hopefully we'll get out that awareness about CCF as well.

I'm sort of curious, how many trees are we talking about? And what's the average price of a tree?

I don't know if you want to be, I mean. I

gave some information to Alex and I don't know he got it out to everybody in time. It was just a few slides that I'd put together. I can give you a really quick rundown of why down and tree planting overall, if you'd like. I know we got 15 minutes left. I can do it in like three. But just to give you an idea of what we got. Yeah. I'll be quick here. All right, that's a great question. So you kind of know what the target is for tree replanting and for the white on project. So sorry, I've got this zoom stuff in the way here. Okay, so anyhow where we are right now we're putting together a big package for citywide tree replanting, so this is all of the trees, except for the white on median. that's nearly complete so we're going to put that out to bed, we are going to give priority to the areas that were most affected by the storm and i'll show how that breaks down in a second and, as I said. uh trees in the white on median are going to be included in a separate restoration project we have the concept plans up on engaged clayton and when we refer to the white on project that's what we're talking about um as far as city-wide tree replanting we have 595 600 trees let's call it that have to be replanted that were taken out during the storm that replanting is going to take place over a three-year period And so that's going to give contractors time to secure and grow the trees within this region. So we don't want to have trees brought in from other places. We want them to grow up in this particular climate. We want them be the right size where they can go on the ground, be adaptable, and grow up and be healthy. That gives us time to also maintain each tree. If you put in 600 at one time, it's really hard to prune them and make sure that they grow properly. So we need to stagger that as well. And then also allows us to get ahead of the tree planting with the stump grinding. So we have a ton of stumps all over town still that need to come out. So our crews are grinding those up as they have opportunities. You're going to see a lot of that take place over the winter when leaf collection stops, when we're done with that process. And then as far as the tree species themselves, our city forester is selecting those species. We want to make sure that we have a good overall diversity of trees going forward. For instance, Clayton Gardens, areas like that, you can see issues now where you had a ton of pen oaks. They're all affected by oak gall or in the past neighborhoods that were really heavy on ash trees. You get emerald ash borer and you have issues with it. So we want to avoid that going forward. What we've done is we've color coded all of the areas that had tree loss based on the severity of that tree loss. And so as an example, and let me get this out of the way so you can see it. We've got this color-coded system here, and this is just as an example. This is the moorlands here. This is Claverac. And the dark purple areas, when we go to replant trees, 50% of the trees that we replant in any given year are going to go to the dark purple areas. They had the heaviest losses of their tree canopy. 25% will be in the dark green sections of the city. 15% of the trees every year will go in the light purple, and 10% will go in the As I said at the beginning, we're going to go back and we're going to make sure that we hit the hardest hit areas first while still dispersing trees citywide over the three years. So that's what we have on a citywide basis. About 600 trees. You're looking at a three-year phased approach, about 200 trees a year. We estimate that this is going to take some time here. We're not going to be done until probably early 29 with this project. We are... Going to follow our standard practice, which is typically we take a stump out. It's about 12 months. Right now, if you lost a tree in front of your house, say there wasn't a tornado, it's typically 12 to 18 months before you see another tree come in. We've got to grind it, and then you've got to get to the next planting season for that tree. So it is going to take a little time. You may see some stuff come out of the ground now. Any stumps ground in 2025, those are going to be planted late 26, early 27, and again, three years total to get this done. So you're looking at 2029 before tree replanting is finished. The Y-Down Median Project, which is something totally separate than the overall city tree replanting, we put three concepts on engageclayton.com. We had about 250 responses, which was actually a really great sample set for that. We're going to have a conversation with the Board of Aldermen on Friday, the 19th of December. And so we're going to talk about the three concepts. We're going and try to get some direction on which of the concepts to go with i put concept one up as just an example uh what i will tell you is as far as the tree canopy itself between concepts one two and three there isn't really much change um so really pretty consistent in in tree coverage overall as far as costs on this uh just Using option one as an example, the non-reversible landscape cost that's in that plan, it's about $475,000. And that includes a lot of contingency. So design contingency, construction contingency, because we know plans might change, bid prices might fluctuate. So we've got some cushion built in there. But of that $475, 000 for landscape costs, which is some design, it is new soil being brought in. It's any kind of grading that you have to do. It's replanting the grass and everything underneath these trees. The trees themselves, you're looking at about $65,000 to $100,000 in order to put the trees back in the wide-own median. And when I say the wide-own medium, I'm talking about the median from University East to the city limit. And then as far as the overall citywide tree replanting, Our current bid that we have for trees that are going in the ground right at the end of fiscal 25 was $400 a tree. So if we were able to get that bid amount again on the 600 trees that are going into over three years, you're looking at $240,000 to put the trees back. I would imagine that price is probably gonna go up a little bit over that three year cycle, but it gives you some idea of what's out there. The reason we talk about the tree replanting as an opportunity For the community to kind of step up and help is it's not reimbursable. FEMA doesn't give us any money for that. FEMA will give us money in the wide on median, for instance, for streetlights that go back in, for the irrigation system that goes back in. All of that's reimbursable, so we really don't need any help from CCF or anybody else on those particular items because of that reimbursement. But the landscape costs, tree replanting citywide, those are all opportunities for you all to help as well as the rest of the community.

Do we want to talk about why down?

Yeah, Debbie, it looked like you had any questions or thoughts.

So I'll talk a little bit about the Y down committee. Rick is our city representative and very involved. So as Colleen said, what I've done since our November meeting is recruit community members for the committee and it'll be about 50-50. So looked for individuals that lived across the city, also looked to find people who might know different communities when we go to fundraising, right? It's good when people have no different people. I've asked Max Hillman to be on and co-chair with me, and I believe he's accepted. I got an email saying he'd help in any way. So I'm assuming that means a co-chair since that's what I asked him to do. And again, he's young. I'm old. Right. We know different people. And so I think it'll be a great compliment. So we are having our first meeting next week to be sort of. We haven't picked an exact date, but next week. And the way I see it is we're going to have to sort of do some things in parallel, finalizing a design while we work on fundraising. And while, yes, people want to give to something where they have a concrete vision, where we have it finalized, we also know that there are significant people in the community who are willing to give now for seed money. So, for instance, one of the things we're thinking of is in first quarter trying to find a small number of families that will give a significant donation as our foundation as we're working on the design. And really hit the ground running in the spring with a community-wide. Nothing set yet, but this is sort of the way we're thinking about it. Having some multiple subcommittees, you know, really working closely, obviously with the city, closely with our different neighborhoods and their different committees to increase awareness, raise money, and get feedback, quite honestly. So when you said, you know, what do we need from the city? I mean, Rick, we know we can count on him. He'll be vocal and he'll tell it. Tell us like it is. But it's one thing to have the approved projects, but we need to know, like, what is our cadence of meetings? What are their stage gates? Like, do we need to agree on something? And we'll just need to put that in place so that we're in lockstep as we're rolling this out. And David? You needed to ask for more money. That's not big enough, but anyway. I am very confident that the community is going to step up here and that we'll be able to have something really wonderful. It won't be 100-year-old trees, but I think it'll be something really wonderful. So I'm very excited.

Yes. I was staying away from that controversial comment.

I

do know from the survey that that's a little bit controversial, but I think as we think about art, I think we think about art for everything from utilizing the trunks of the trees that have been saved and maybe making some beautiful benches or sculptures or things from art or And engaging with potentially local artists around this concept of gates into our community. And also, we've seen some things that are also reminiscent of trees because we're not going to have 100-year-old trees. So maybe we can have some art that fulfills some of that. So we're definitely thinking beyond trees. And yeah, is that fair? Yeah.

No, I mean, Debbie, that sounds great. It sounds like you're off to a great start. So thank you for all that. And, you know, Rick, you have Rick, but, you know, my door's always open. So if you ever have questions or and obviously David's too. So because we do want to make sure that we're providing guidance. And like you said, we are in lockstep going forward so that because we don't want to still all be sitting here in two or three years, you know, like we want to we want to get this done. Like people

will no longer be chair of the committee if they're still sitting there in two or three weeks.

I think, you know, so that we're all on the same page. So please. Yeah. I

think there's a, we have to balance and might be hard for me is, you know, we all have a sense of urgency yet. We have to do it very thoughtfully and being coordinated and making sure that the community is involved to the extent they need to be involved in the cities involved and more involved. So I think there'll be a balance. Right. Yes. But I'm, I'm an impatient person. Okay.

So I'm going to, we are very thankful to have Tony, Rick and Gary coordinated with our committees. But I will throw out there, you are all city residents. So you are all invited to engage in a committee meeting. Or just come, you know, if you want to hear what's going on, please reach out to Alex or Lisa because they can tell you. Or if you meet residents who say, I want to get involved, please let us know because that will be the key to our successes.

I told Alex, I said, if anybody calls and offers,

our

committee will take them. Yeah, there's work for everybody. So yeah, don't turn anybody away.

I'll also mention very quickly, you know, I said that we've got the meeting coming up on the 19th with the board where we're going to talk about the White Island Restoration Project. We're also going to talk about the Shaw Park project at that meeting. So the design team is going to be there to talk about what they've done to date. So I think that's an important meeting for you all to see at some point. You don't have to attend or watch it when it's live, but when it's over, we do put all that stuff on YouTube. I'll at least send the link over to Alex so that he can get it out to CCF. And if you get an opportunity and you're curious about what we're doing in Shaw Park or want to just hear the White Island restoration talk, that's all going to be on the 19th.

We I mean it's almost seven o'clock, but I don't know if Colleen or Alex if you want to touch on and we've talked a little bit about. Awareness committee nominating committee, but I don' t know if you have any more thoughts to talk about or if there are any other final thoughts from up here or from any of you.

I mean, my one question I was going to ask is, so the $475,000 for the Wydown project and then the $240,000 for the 600 trees, is there coordination of how much is in the city budget versus how much needs to be raised through charitable gifts from the community? I guess, is that something

that... Yeah, that is, Rick, I will expect Rick on the

Yeah. And I think back to the fundraising point, to be able to go out and say to people in the community, $500 will plant a tree or whatever the number is. That's very tangible for people that they can get behind. And you mentioned that, Bridget. So I think there is something really to that once we get to that point to know where all the dollars need to come from.

Yeah. If I could just say really quickly, I mean, anything we do related to the tornado. We're really pulling from our general fund balance, or the city reserves basically our savings account. So when we have non-reimbursable expenses like planting expenses, the landscape portion of buy down all of that, if the community steps up or People end up donating money to offset that cost. That keeps that money in that account that we would then, before the tornado, we envisioned a lot of that money going towards something like the Shaw Park project. So it enables us to do other things. It also enables us to just keep that healthy fund balance that we've had in the past so that when things like this happen, we've got the money to deal with it. You know, having the reserves is what enabled us to go in and be aggressive with debris removal and other things because we knew the money was there and we can take care of those things as they arise. So that's the big thing is it keeps us on really solid footing financially.

Great. Well, I think it's just about seven o'clock. Um, thank you all so much for coming. You are more than welcome to stay, um, for the rest of the meeting, but of course you're excused. Um, I think, do we, do you want to take things? We'll have to take it. Well, I, we will actually have to take the tables apart, um, in case. Um, so, um, but thank you all so all right i think we will we've got the room back together so why don't we get going um

these are the frankles we

had

victor

thank you mr and mrs frankel um It is our 7 o'clock meeting. If the city clerk could call the roll.

Council Member Buse? Here. Council Member Patel? Here. Council member Gary Feder? Here. Council members Waldman? Here. Mayor McAndrew? Here. City Manager David Gipson? City Attorney O'Keefe? Here. Thank you.

Council Member Buse? Here. Council Member Patel? Here. Council member Fader? Here. Council members Waldman? Here. Mayor McAndrew? Here. City Manager Gibson? City Attorney O'Keefe? Here. Thank you.

The first part of our meeting is our open forum, and this is an opportunity for anyone to address us on a matter that's not on the agenda. I did receive one speaker card. Gina Mitten?

My name is Gina Mitten. I'm a former state representative serving not the Clayton area, but points or

Oh, thank you. Whoa, sorry. From 2013 to 2020. I already know some of you. I am running to become your next Missouri State Senator for Senate District 4, which is a city-county district. I am the only candidate in the race that has represented a city-countY district. My house district ran from Rock Hill to The Hill. So I'm the only person that has experience sort of navigating some of the ins and outs that differ between the city and the county. And I'm also the only candidate that has Any municipal experience at all. I served eight years on the city of Richmond Heights City Council before I was elected to the Missouri House back in 2012. I understand NIDS, SIDS, TIFs, eminent domain, all of that stuff. I've been through major redevelopments on behalf of my city. I actually met Council Member Gary Feder back in 2004 when we were exploring the possibility of merging the cities of Richmond Heights and Clayton. And I think we've just continued to share services and try and get the best bang for our dollar on behalf of the taxpayers since that point. So I have given you all cards. I know I owe you one. And I'll leave it at that. Feel free to reach out to me and talk to me about anything you'd like. And I'm going to leave it at that, thanks.

Oh, thank you. Whoa, sorry. From 2013 to 2020. I already know some of you. I am running to become your next Missouri State Senator for Senate District 4, which is a city-county district. I am the only candidate in the race that has represented a city-countY district. My house district ran from Rock Hill to The Hill. So I'm the only person that has experience sort of navigating some of the ins and outs that differ between the city and the county. And I'm also the only candidate that has Any municipal experience at all. I served eight years on the city of Richmond Heights City Council before I was elected to the Missouri House back in 2012. I understand NIDS, SIDS, TIFs, eminent domain, all of that stuff. I've been through major redevelopments on behalf of my city. I actually met Council Member Fader back in 2004 when we were exploring the possibility of merging the cities of Richmond Heights and Clayton. And I think we've just continued to share services and try and get the best bang for our dollar on behalf of the taxpayers since that point. So I have given you all cards. I know I owe you one. And I'll leave it at that. Feel free to reach out to me and talk to me about anything you'd like. And I'm going to leave it at that, thanks.

Great, thank you very much. Best wishes. All right, let's get started with our business. We've got a lock consolidation plan for 224 and 228 North Bemiston. I'm going to open the public hearing and request proof of publication.

Yes, this is a public hearing and subsequent ordinance to consider approval of a minor consolidation plat for the consolidation of two parcels located at 224 and 228th North Beamiston Avenue. The subject properties are located on the east side of Beamiston Avenue between Pershing Avenue and Kingsbury Boulevard. The properties have a zoning designation of R3, one and two family dwelling district. 224 North Beamiston Avenue is developed with a single family house. 228 North Beamiston Avenue was developed with a duplex. The consolidation would be accompanied by the demolition of the duplex located at 228 North Beamston Avenue. On October 5th, 2025, the city of Clayton received an application, a plat and supporting documents from Randy Lipton, the applicant and owner for the minor consolidation plat that would create one lot measuring 16,234 square feet. The proposed lot meets all of the zoning requirements. The plan commission considered this request at its meeting on December 1st and voted unanimously to recommend approval of the consolidation plat to the city council with five standard conditions. Staff recommends that the city council conduct a public hearing and approve the ordinance. It looks like we may have the applicant online if we can give them the ability to speak.

Edrick. I will. Thank you. I'll open the discussion. Laura Hedrick? Yes, can you hear me? Ms. Hedrick, are you on the... Can you hear us?

Yes.

Okay, that is...

Can

you

hear

me? Can you hear me at all?

We're fixing it, Laura.

Okay.

Can you hear me? Yep, we can hear you now. Okay. Yeah, go ahead. Would you like to address us or it sounds

like- I just wanted to let you know I'm here to represent Randy Lipton. Hi board, thanks for hearing our lot consolidation plat. My name is Laura Hedrick. I'm from Altia Land Surveying and I am the one here tonight to represent the lot consolidation plat. Basically, just to kind of let you know what's going on, because they answered a lot of it at the last meeting. But the address on 228, they're actually tearing down the home there and they're going to be building a garage on the area at 228. Okay. And in order to do this, they need us to consolidate the lots to be able to build the garage because you can't just sell a lot off with a garage only on it with no house. So that is why we're here and asking for the consolidation plot.

Thanks, Laura. I'm going to we'll just go around and we'll see if any of the council members have any questions for you.

Great. Thank you. Hi. This did come before the plan commission, and my understanding is that, again, this is looking at simply the lot consolidation, and it's pretty ministerial because it does meet the zoning requirements. The concern I raised, which, again, may not affect this, it may be a bigger picture, is that our comprehensive planning certainly has brought forth a community sentiment that we diversify our housing stock, and we have you know, duplexes, single family and all those sorts of things in our community. And the first lesson of all that is or the first tenant is keep what you have. And so in this particular proposal, the lots are being consolidated to tear down an existing duplex and make it into a larger single family housing, which is inconsistent with what these are comprehensive planning has been looking at. So I'm raising that concern. I understand that we they're There are ways that cities can try to protect things like that if we want to pursue that. It is not necessarily an issue for tonight, at least my understanding is, and David will correct me if I'm wrong, is that because this is simply the law of consolidation and the zoning requirements are met, this is something that is, again, ministerial for us to approve.

That is correct.

I just want to, I really appreciate your comments. And I feel similarly, that was exactly what I thought about when I reviewed this. So Yeah, I think it very much conflicts with what we heard in the comprehensive plan. And frankly, with the spirit of the zoning. I mean, if the point is not to just have a garage on a lot, but then you just combine two lots so that you can... In terms of character and feel of the community, we're not... achieving anything. And so I'm interested in understanding how we could address the larger picture in order to prevent this. And I wonder if it's something like actually having maximum lot sizes or like minimum density or something. I don't know what, but I think we need to really look at this before we I mean, I know this isn't the first project to do this kind of thing. And I think we can just expect it to increase. And so if we want to be consistent with what we heard from our residents and the broader community, we need to implement changes to our zoning code that will, that would not allow this. So.

I think this has already been addressed, but I'm assuming we have not seen a proposal for building a new single family house on this site as yet. So we don't really know what it's going to potentially look like. I mean, I would echo that. They're not

intending

to do that.

Yeah, I mean, I think it's just going to be a garage.

Just a garage. But there's going to be a single family house built or that it's just a garage that will be

accessory to the house

that's done, which is already there, right?

Okay. Can you guys hear me? Yes. Okay. So just to help you understand a little bit, they were worried about too much parking being on the street, which is why this has been brought up. So the garage that they're building is going to be about the same size as the house. actually a little bit larger. It's going to be a four car garage with storage. So just to kind of let you know, it's matching the house, you know, stone and siding next door. So it's going to look, you know, a lot nicer than, it's not just like a one car garage is basically what I'm trying to say. And it's going to be approximately like 60 by 40 feet in And the whole point of this was to eliminate off-street parking and not create more of a fire hazard situation. um problem now the other thing is we are going to be getting some green space they also wanted to have some yard um to be able to you know play baseball or you know have some soccer nets or whatever in the back and this was also allowing us to get more green space and have a little bit more um grass around us so

just as a follow-up so if i now understand the house is there the garage is not This facilitates the garage, but we haven't seen a plan for the garages yet, even though Laura is describing its dimensions. Is that right? We have not seen a garage

plan. Yes, the architect is currently working on it. But the garage is going to be connected to the house, just so you know. So it will be like a breezeway connecting to the house.

I guess my question is from a zoning perspective, when they come forward, what's the process for review of the garage and where it sits on the site?

Yeah, they'll go through our typical review process. So based on the size being described here, that would be site plan review and architecture review board. Once we actually have those plans, then we'll make sure that they do the appropriate review. But how our subdivision regulations are outlined, there is no requirement that that process happens at the same time. So they've submitted a plat that meets our subdivision regulations for consolidation.

So I guess my point is it's probably just hypothetical if when those plans come forward, the plan commission or ARB doesn't like the size of it, et cetera, or something about it, We've sort of let the horse out of the barn to some extent because at least the argument can be made, well, you allowed the property to be subdivided, and now you're objecting to what we're putting there. So I don't think that's a valid argument because this is really administrative, and so it is what it is. There's

no letting the cat out of the bag because – flat approval is not contingent on architecture v board approval or anything else as far as what they're going to construct it's just based on our subdivision regulations in this case they did need to obtain a variance for the home that is going to remain on 224 but the board of adjustment has already granted that variance so they they don't have there's no other contingencies related to approval of whatever garage they might want to propose

What was the variance? You said it's for the existing structure?

Yes. So our side yard setbacks are a percentage of the width of the lot. So when they consolidate these two lots, it increases the side yard setback that's required. The existing house on 224 that they plan to maintain conforms to the setbacks for the more narrow lot it sits on today, but it's over the side yard setbacks. when the lots are consolidated. So that's the variance that was granted by the Board of Adjustment, which reduces the side yard setback related to that, what would have become a non-conforming structure.

Council Member Gary Feder, do you have any other comments or

Council Member Fader, do you have any other comments or

questions?

Yes. Can you guys hear me?

So the existing Burke garage is going to be turned into storage.

No, we do not. And this is something we kind of mentioned at the plan commission as Councilwoman Buse alluded to. When we establish our zoning regulations the way they sit today, especially for our lower density districts, we've essentially set up minimum lot areas and minimum lot widths as a way to ensure that we are not exceeding a density that meets the character of that area. We haven't done anything under our current zoning regulations that does the opposite, prevent somebody from decreasing the density related to the character in the area. So that's why this consolidation plat is really just reviewed against our minimum regulations that are outlined in the code right now.

There's there's a few lots in this, in the old town neighborhood. Some of them have not been consolidated, but it is a house that owns a lot next door or there's a couple with a house that actually kind of spans lots. So we didn't do an analysis to compare the width of this neighborhood to the neighborhood average or any others, but there are a couple other examples. There are a significant number of homes in the old town neighborhood that have gone from a two family to a single family, or obviously a lot of lots that are zoned to allow for duplexes, but are only developed with a single family house.

both to get. I don't, I can't say that definitively because there's, there are other similar lots structures. I just, we didn't review whether or not they've been consolidated or not. So.

I think the applicant alluded to it having some maintenance issues. But I couldn't speak to that. I think there were tenants living

there up until recently. Oh, really? Yeah. Okay. Thank you. I mean, I certainly share the concern of members of the council. You know, we have a housing shortage throughout this area and county, and especially to lose a duplex is very disappointing. So are there any other comments or any other questions from... If not, I will close the public hearing. Council Member Buse.

Introduce Bill No. 7117, approving a law consolidation plan for 224 and 228 North Bemiston Avenue to be read for the first time by title only.

Second. Any discussion, Mr. City Attorney?

All those in favor?

Any opposed? The vote passes seven to zero. Council Member Buse.

I move that the board give unanimous consent to consideration for adoption of bill number 7117 on the day of its introduction.

Second. All those in favor?

Aye. Aye.

The opposed? Let the minutes reflect that the board has given unanimous consent.

Introduce bill number 7117, approving a law consolidation plan for 224 and 228 North Bemiston Avenue to be read for the second time by title only. Second. Any discussion? Mr. City

Attorney?

Buse? Aye. Council Member Patel? Aye. Council member Gary Feder? Aye. Council members Waldman? Aye. Mayor McAndrew? Aye. Thank you. The vote passes 7-0.

Buse? Aye. Council Member Patel? Aye. Council member Fader? Aye. Council members Waldman? Aye. Mayor McAndrew? Aye. Thank you. The vote passes 7-0.

The next matter on our agenda is a subdivision plat for 304 North Central Avenue. I'll open the public hearing and request proof of publication.

Yes, this is a public hearing and subsequent ordinance to consider approval of a minor subdivision plat for the subdivision of one parcel located at 304 North Central Subject property is located on the northeast corner of the intersection of North Central Avenue and Kingsbury Boulevard. The property is owned R3, one and two family dwelling district and is in the North Beamiston subdivision. The property is developed with a single family house. On July 7th, the city of Clayton received an application a plat and supporting documents from Nancy Georgian, applicant and owner of 304 North Central Avenue for a minor subdivision plat to subdivide an existing 15,096 square foot property into two individual lots. The project includes the demolition of the existing house, subdivision of the lot into two lots, and construction of a new single family house on the southern lot. The northern lot is not proposed to be developed at this time. The proposed lots meet all zoning requirements for the R3 district. The plan commission considered its request in its meeting on November 17th and voted unanimously to recommend approval of the minor subdivision plat to the city council with four standard conditions. Staff recommends that the city council conduct a public hearing and approve the ordinance.

Thank you. I'll open the discussion. Are there any questions or comments from the council?

This is a similar situation, I think. And again, this is looking at the division of the property into two plats. I think for another day, the There was discussion of what was being built there, which sounds absolutely beautiful. The one question was that the curb cuts and discussion of keeping a current concrete platform while also adding a new driveway because of parking on the streets. That's something I understand we looked at later as well. So that was the discussion at the plan commission. That's all I have.

Thanks. I mean, this strikes me as actually like the opposite of what we just did, right? So with the exception that there doesn't appear to be a plan for the other property, which I'm curious about. So Nancy, I'm guessing you're the applicant as referenced.

Yes, that's correct. Can you hear me? Yeah, thank

you.

Yes, I am. And that second lot will be developed. It will be the same builder. But until we have the subdivision, then that lot cannot be submitted. So effectively, we have to have this done. Then the builder will be coming to the plan commission with the second residence.

So you plan to follow quickly or wait to complete the first construction?

Our hope is that it's done quickly because we don't want to live next to the construction. My husband and I will be in the first house that's being built on the corner. and it will be the same builder jeff bernstein of jeffrey homes who also lives at 321 north central on that block will be the builder for the second residence he will own the subdivided lot

thank you very much

i think nancy comes to our war three coffees frequently so yeah but but leaving that aside this seems to me to be a very reasonable request so no other comments i have no questions

No issues. Well, thank you, Nancy. I don't think anybody else has any other questions up here. Do you have any other comments?

No, other than I think this is really going to be a wonderful thing for the neighborhood. We looked very hard at renovating the current house. It seems to be a neighborhood favorite, but it was beyond repair and we did not want the maintenance of that large of a lot. So I think the subdivision and the two new houses will be excellent for the neighborhood.

Thank you. If there's nothing else, I'll close the public hearing. Council Member Buse.

I introduce Bill No. 7118, approving a subdivision plat for 304 North Central Avenue to be read for the first time by title only. Second. Any discussion?

Mr. City Attorney?

All those in favor?

Opposed? The vote passes 7-0. Council Member Buse?

I move that the Board give unanimous consent to consideration for adoption of Bill number 7111 on the day of its introduction.

Second. All those in favor?

Aye.

Opposed? Let the minutes reflect that the board has given unanimous consent.

I introduce bill number 7118, approving a subdivision plan for 304 North Central Avenue to be read for the second time by title only.

Second. Any discussion? Mr. City Attorney.

Council Member Buse. Aye. Council Member Patel. Aye. Council member Gary Feder.

Council Member Buse. Aye. Council Member Patel. Aye. Council member Fader.

Councilmember Rick Hummell. Aye. Councilmember Jeffery Yorg. Councilmember Waldman. Aye. Mayor McAndrew. Aye. Thank you. Vote passes seven to zero.

Councilmember Hummel. Aye. Councilmember York. Councilmember Waldman. Aye. Mayor McAndrew. Aye. Thank you. Vote passes seven to zero.

Next item on our agenda is an amendment to Chapter 405. I will open the public hearing and request proof of publication.

Yes, this is a public hearing and a subsequent ordinance that would amend the City of Clayton zoning map and revise zoning regulations governing commercial zoning and overlay districts. We have this evening Anna Krane and Ryan Helle with our Department of Planning and Development Services, and I think Ryan has an overview of the proposed changes.

Yes, this is a public hearing and a subsequent ordinance that would amend the City of Clayton zoning map and revise zoning regulations governing commercial zoning and overlay districts. We have this evening Anna Crane and Ryan Helley with our Department of Planning and Development Services, and I think Ryan has an overview of the proposed changes.

Good evening, everyone. So today I'm just going to give you a brief summary again of the draft changes that we're proposing for the non-residential and mixed use zoning. I promise I won't subject you to as nearly as many PowerPoint slides as we have previously, but we'll give a brief summary and talk about some of the updates from our previous discussion.

Where'd it go?

Normally, I'm over there in that corner. It's a lot easier to see. All right. There it is. All righty. So this process of drafting these zoning changes came out of some objectives and key results of the comprehensive plan. As we started looking at various objectives and key results, we found that a lot of them were closely related and a lot of them had to do with our underlying zoning. So then rather than try to tackle these one-on-one, we kind of went back and said, let's take a look at some of our base zoning and see what kind of changes we can make in that area to really try to tackle more than one of these at a time. And as we started drafting some of these regulations, started researching what maybe the best practices would be to update our zoning, we decided to propose the direction of a unified development code. To clarify, so our current zoning code is largely in paragraph form. You are going to read in a paragraph, this building can be a maximum of X feet tall. It has to be this far from the street and creates a lot of words. Unified development code tends to consolidate things into charts. It's going to allow the comparison of more zoning districts at the same time, which is going to reduce repetition, it's going to reduce conflicts and opportunities for error. And to kind of give you an example of what this change is going to look like down at the bottom, you're going to see the difference in the existing and proposed amount of sections in our commercial zoning and the word count. We're not necessarily regulating less things because this is more of an evolution of the zoning code rather than just cutting regulation, but we're able to talk about the same number of things with less. So we're going from about 25 20,000 words of regulation to a little over 4,000 words largely discussing the same items. So really, this is an evolution of the existing zoning rather than a broad overhaul. So a lot of the things in the present zoning are going to continue, but there are a few items that have been updated. So we've updated names and descriptions of the zoning districts to reference the outcomes that the community wanted from the comprehensive plan. And we're updating some of the use references to reference some of the classification standards across North America. And then we're right-sizing our dimensions. So your dimensions are going to be things like your height, setbacks, floor area ratio. Right now our zoning code is a little more on the restrictive side in the sense that there's a lot of buildings that are existing which are not technically legal. If those buildings came down, you would not be able to rebuild them in the same way. So we've updated our dimensional standards to right-size our zoning. It's not going to make buildings bigger in any of these zoning districts. It's not gonna increase their intensity or impact on the surrounding area from the existing conditions, but it is going to legalize a lot of those structures. Additionally, we want to propose to allow residential-only unit developments in some locations in downtown. We recognize that to support a growing and thriving retail space in downtown, we need more residential units there. So we've said there's some places that are going to be really appropriate to sort of co-locate that retail, and there's going to be some places that are more appropriate to have a high density of residential units. Kind of coupled with that is the introduction of the consumer emphasis areas. Those are the areas where we wanna concentrate that retail and commercial activity. We've identified those areas, and those areas are gonna have to provide a certain percentage of retail and commercial space on the ground floor. We're also updating the architectural and site plan sections. So this is kind of a combination of various things. There are architectural and site plan section throughout all of these zoning districts. However, we have pulled successful things from a lot of the overlay and urban design districts. We've pulled items that have been talked about throughout various meetings with the Planning Commission Board of Aldermen, things that residents said they wanted from the comprehensive plan. What we're proposing in these sections is a little bit more content to give developers something to reference when they're designing their projects, give staff something to review against and give something for the plan commission to go off of as they review these projects. Additionally, similar to the architectural and site plan review, we're adding a sustainability section. Once again, some of this is pulled from other sections of our existing code, and then a lot of that is also pulled from things that residents said they wanted out of their comprehensive plan. Additionally, we're adding alternative compliance. That is something that the Planning Commission largely uses in the context of overlay and urban design districts. Our commercial zoning districts Since they're going to have certain architectural requirements that they're subjected to it within the code itself, we want to make sure that the Planning Commission has some flexibility to navigate maybe some unique circumstances that can often arise that are unique to commercial zoning districts. But overall, most of the elements such as you know, your uses or where these zoning districts are a lot of that is not changing. This is broadly an evolution of the zoning code rather than a complete rewrite. So with that open discussion, does anybody have any questions?

I had a question about alternative compliance and more flexibility. I'm trying to understand the difference between a project that comes before the plan commission this week as opposed to one in the future when these regulations have been adopted and you have this issue of alternative compliance. Are the kinds of issues that the plan commission could deal with in terms of more flexibility, how would those have been dealt with under our existing regulations? Are those ones that the plan commission would say, gee, you need a variance for that. So come back and do that before you come to us. I'm trying to understand exactly how this will be different than our current system.

Yeah. So I'll start by clarifying since you use the word variance. Variance is a word that we tend to use a lot in the world of zoning, but it has a very specific definition. That's something that you're only going to use in the circumstance of a hardship. So if there's a river running through the center of a property and that impacts where you can place a building. That is a hardship. Alternative and compliance is something that is more appropriately used when there's a more unique aspect to a lot, maybe in terms of the design of something. So I'll use the example of architecture. Right now we have an architecture section within the high density commercial zoning district. And it has a few things that it lists such as we don't want blank facades. We don't want just like a big flat wall or something up against the street. And so we've updated that architectural review section to have a lot more content in it for developers to reference. So if you're going to add a lot more of that, we want to make sure that the architectural review board has some sort of flexibility to navigate nuance that we may not be able to predict at this time. So for example, if there's a requirement to, okay, we don't want to have a big blank facade. There might be specific language in the architectural review section, such as, you know, ad bay windows had something interesting. Well, maybe an architect provides some sort of interest to a facade that we didn't specifically name in the code that the plan commission might decide meets the same intent of that line that says don't build a big blank facade. And so that section allows them to say, does this proposal meet the intent of this other section? And it allows them to proceed that way.

So architectural design, alternative compliance could be a plan commission consideration and could also be an ARB consideration, right? I mean, it could arise under either circumstance because we sort of separate those for hearing purposes. If the plan commission hears certain things, then the ARB hears certain things. So this is a concept that could apply to both of their considerations.

Correct. It depends on whether it's the plan commission hat or the architecture review board hat that those members are looking at. So, for example, in the site plan section, that's going to be your plan commission and those folks are going to have different items that they'll need to review.

Any other question right here? Do you have anything? I have a question. I want to be clear about what we're doing. So are we actually, in enacting this, also repealing the overlays?

Correct. The proposal is to... repeal all of those overlay districts. And then we're proposing this updated zoning to, it replaces our base zoning, but it includes a lot of those elements from the overlay districts. There's some of those elements of the overlay districts that were not successful, that either deterred development or drove them towards a PUD. And so we said, okay, here's the items that maybe were not successful, but let's take all those things that were successful. Instead of just having them in one specific location where we know they've worked, let's implement that across our commercial zoning districts.

And I think, I don't know if this is actually the most recent, but I think the most recent overlay we did was the Maryland Gateway overlay there on Maryland, right? Yeah.

There was. Yeah, there was a

modification. Thank you for clarifying. Yeah. But so that's going away. But it's there's this Maryland Gateway character area that specifies what we're like. We think we're the most important aspects of that overlay. Right.

Correct. So within our dimensional standards, we have a couple of call outs for character areas. And those are intended to protect some of those areas where the overlay districts had operated before.

Great, thank you very much. This is just phenomenal work. I am so impressed with how you took all of those OKRs from the comprehensive plan and came up with something so simple and elegant.

this applies to all of our commercial zoning districts which largely tends to fall around those downtown and some perimeter locations, but, for example, parts of. demand, those are also there's a believe right now it's see one designation that would become m one there's parts of Maryland that are see one see two that become m1 m2 I just saw clayton road like called out and

Clayton specifically because there's some there's some updates specific to that area

Correct. And those are proposed with a minimum unit density. So if you build a mixed-use structure, we're not going to tell you how many units you have to have in your building, but we're saying, okay, if there's a benefit to having a high density or a benefit of having residential-only structures, we want to make sure we're getting a good bang for our buck there and we're having a minimum unit density requirement. And

So we say that generally... I say that they're in specific locations. The way that it actually layers is that in downtown, it'd become the M3, the high-density commercial zoning to M3. The single-use residential is allowed, and we also have the consumer emphasis areas that kind of layers on top of that. And so if a property fronts a consumer emphasis street, they have to provide a certain percentage of retail on that frontage.

Okay. Thank you. Thank you, Ryan. A

couple more before. Oh,

sorry.

So, I take it part of this is to lessen the interest in the PUD because there's now more flexibility without going through the PUD process or is that not an accurate assumption.

So PUDs will still be available, but the outcome of the PUD process really has been projects that we shouldn't need a PUD to achieve. It's more that the existing zoning code is not really reflective of the modern realities of development. So for example, I always reference Bemis in place across the street. There's several elements of that project which technically don't meet our zoning code, so they had to go through a PUD. But broadly, we would acknowledge that that is a desirable development that we would like to have in downtown Clayton.

And my other one relates to the CUP process. I think I was sort of thinking about it right now. Some things never really just make it to the city council, you know, site plan review, architectural review, unless there's an appeal, which is very limited. Never. It never gets there. The PUDs have come to the former board. Now the council CUPs, I assume that that's not impacted. That will still be something where the plan commission makes a recommendation and then Any final decision on a CUP still goes to the city council. Is that. The conditional use permit process has not been altered as part of this. That's not impacted. Okay. And on your list of, in your charts of conditional versus permitted, I'm just wondering if there were a couple in there that I found a little bit strange and I wondered if that's just a carryover. Or were there decisions made in putting this chart together to change things that used to be permitted now are now conditional? Or is this just reiterating what's already in our code, but in a text, in a

table form? Most everything is a carryover. The things that have been altered are things that have gone from conditional to permitted. So, for example, a mixed-use structure that has commercial and residential, that's something that we've changed from conditional to permitted, but to clarify about conditional uses, conditional uses are uses that are considered desirable that are permitted, but they might have elements, externalities that you want to regulate. For example, if there's, you know, a grocery store that wants to come in, that's going to have large deliveries that might impact the flow of traffic. We might acknowledge that that is a use that is appropriate in a certain location. We just want to make sure that there is an extensive review and conditions to make sure that some of those externalities don't have negative impacts. Okay. Thank you.

Any other comments or questions up here? No. Ryan, thank you. And Ana, I know this was a lot of work. I think it's, I mean, just to call out, I think I mean, you talked about like an evolution, but I think like the consumer emphasis area. I mean, that's really great to kind of, you know, encourage our economic committees to just start thinking about those areas. So I think again, a great way to just think about bringing more retail and more just vibrancy to downtown. So thank you. And, um, I also think it's great that we can call out, you know, the successful architectural and site plan, um, City Council Chambers, examples and kind of pull them in to be able to show developers hey this is, you know this is what's work, this is what we want to see so hopefully we'll get projects that are desirable and don't necessarily have to go the pod route so. City Council Chambers , Thank you. City Council Chamber, Are there any other there's nobody in the audience in city hall is there anybody online that would like to speak. All right. If not, I will close the public hearing. Council Member Buse.

I'd like to introduce Bill No. 7109, approving an amendment to the Clayton Zoning Map and repealing and replacing Chapter 405, Articles 1920. No, I did that wrong. Articles, no, that's right, 1920, 21 and 22, Commercial and Service Zoning Districts in Chapter 410, Articles 510. 12A and 12B overlay in urban design districts to adopt a unified development code establishing definitions, regulations, and district boundaries for mixed-use zoning to be read for the first time by title only.

Second. Any discussion? Mr. City Attorney?

All those in favor?

Opposed? The vote passes 7-0.

Council Member Buse? I move that the Board give unanimous consent to consideration for adoption of Bill No. 7119 on the day of its introduction.

Second.

All those in favor?

Opposed? Let the minutes reflect that the Board has given unanimous consent.

I introduce Bill No. 7119, Approving an Amendment to the Clayton Zoning Map and Repealing and Replacing, Chapter 405, Articles 19, 20, 21, and 22, Commercial and Service Zoning Districts, and Chapter 410, Articles 5. 12A and 12B overlay in urban design districts to adopt a unified development code establishing definitions, regulations, and district boundaries for mixed use zoning to be read for the second time by title only. Second. Want to read it again, Susan?

No.

Really well done.

Thank you. Any discussion, Mr. City Attorney?

Council Member Buse. Aye. Council Member Patel. Aye. Council Members Gary Feder.

Council Member Buse. Aye. Council Member Patel. Aye. Council Members Fader.

Aye.

Council member Rick Hummell.

Council member Hummel.

Aye.

Council members Yorg.

Aye.

Councilmember Waldman. Aye. Mayor McAndrew. Aye. The vote passes seven to zero.

All right, the next item on our agenda is our consent agenda. I will open the discussion or is there any questions or comments from the audience or anybody from the board?

I don't know that. I think I can answer that. Oh, go ahead. I believe it's just a new owner for the restaurant area.

Council member abuse. I move that we approve the consent agenda. Second

discussion. Council Member Buse. Aye. Council Member Patel. Aye. Council member Gary Feder.

discussion. Council Member Buse. Aye. Council Member Patel. Aye. Council member Fader.

Councilmember Rick Hummell.

Councilmember Hummel.

Councilmember Jeffery Yorg. Aye. CouncilMember Waldman. Aye. Mayor McAndrew. Aye. Vote passes seven to zero.

Councilmember York. Aye. CouncilMember Waldman. Aye. Mayor McAndrew. Aye. Vote passes seven to zero.

All right, great. Moving on to some new business, contract for tree pruning services.

Yes, following the May 2025 tornado event that caused widespread tree damage across the east end of the city, staff developed the Tornado Tree Pruning Services Project to address storm-damaged trees located within the public right-of-way. The scope of work includes risk mitigation pruning, crown reduction, and restoration pruning of identified trees to promote long-term health, and public safety. Timberline Professional Tree Care was the only bidder that could comply with the city's requirement that all pruning work be performed by ISA-certified arborists. Based on a review of recent rates for similar work, staff estimated the project's cost to be approximately $225,000 to $250,000. The bid from Timberline Professional tree care came in at $187,450 we did add a contingency of ten thousand dollars that we recommend to address any additional issues that arise during the work staff will submit a proposed budget amendment to add these expenses to the fiscal year 2026 budget and these expenses are not reimbursable by fema we recommend that the city council approve the ordinance

thank you open discussion are there any questions or comments from the council

FEMA won't reimburse any tree-related or vegetation-related items other than trees that are completely uprooted when you get rid of that particular debris. So if it didn't hit the ground during the storm, they won't reimburse the money for it. So all that debris that was removed, that all counts. And then any tree roots that were completely pulled out of the ground, we can be reimbursed for that. But no pruning, no removal at this point, no replanting.

that why we're doing it? That is correct, because in addition to that, we're doing our regular pruning, the regular tree replanting, and then all of the stump grinding for the storm-related tree planting.

Do we have a sense of how many trees we're talking about? Yeah, there's a table in there. Yeah, there's an old table. I just

missed it. A lot of them. A lot of trees did. it's all listed by individual address i'm trying to scroll to the bottom side i i see it at the back 334

public works 334. there we go

thanks matt

right council member abuse yeah it's always i don't know it's a good thing to find your address on this chart but anyway um I introduce bill number 7120, approving the contract with Timberline Professional Tree Care for tornado tree pruning services to be read for the first time by title only.

Second.

Any

discussion? Mr. City Attorney.

All those in favor?

Aye.

Any opposed? Aye.

Council Member Buse. I move that the board give unanimous consent to consideration for adoption of bill number 7120 on the day of its introduction. Second.

All those in favor? Aye. Opposed? The vote passes 7-0. Let the minutes reflect that the board has given unanimous consent.

I introduce bill number 7120 approving the contract with Timberline Professional Tree Care for tornado tree pruning services to be read for the second time by title only.

Second. Any discussion? Mr. City Attorney.

Council Member Buse? Aye. Council Member Patel? Aye. Council member Gary Feder?

Council Member Buse? Aye. Council Member Patel? Aye. Council member Fader?

Aye.

Councilmember Rick Hummell?

Councilmember Hummel?

Aye.

Councilmember Jeffery Yorg? Aye. CouncilMember Waldman? Aye. Mayor McAndrew? Aye. The vote passes 7-0.

Councilmember York? Aye. CouncilMember Waldman? Aye. Mayor McAndrew? Aye. The vote passes 7-0.

Great. Next item is a new citizen finance committee.

Yes, this ordinance would establish a citizen finance committee to assist the city of Clayton in the development and communication of financial goals and strategies. The seven-member committee would consist of five residents and two council members. Resident members must have backgrounds or strong interests in areas such as public finance, taxation, banking, economics, or investment strategy. Initial terms will be staggered, followed by three-year terms with a limit of three consecutive full terms. Staff recommends that the City Council approve the attached ordinance, thereby establishing the Economic Development, or I'm sorry, the Citizen Finance Committee.

Oops.

We are.

Great. I'll open the discussion. Are there any questions or comments from the Council? Anybody up here? I'll just say that back in the day, a long, long time ago, I think Mayor Harris talked to me about a gentleman named Jeff Jeffery Yorg who suggested a citizen finance committee. So just here we are many, many years ago. So yeah. So but it's great to get this off the ground and then we'll start advertising for members and start another committee. I don't think there's is there anybody else online? Myron?

Great. I'll open the discussion. Are there any questions or comments from the Council? Anybody up here? I'll just say that back in the day, a long, long time ago, I think Mayor Harris talked to me about a gentleman named Jeff York who suggested a citizen finance committee. So just here we are many, many years ago. So yeah. So but it's great to get this off the ground and then we'll start advertising for members and start another committee. I don't think there's is there anybody else online? Myron?

iPad.

An iPad with no hands up. All right, Council Member Buse.

Appreciation to gentlemen, Jeff Jeffery Yorg. I introduce Bill No. 7121, Establishing a Citizen Finance Committee to be read for the first time by title only. Second. Any discussion? Mr. City Attorney.

Appreciation to gentlemen, Jeff York. I introduce Bill No. 7121, Establishing a Citizen Finance Committee to be read for the first time by title only. Second. Any discussion? Mr. City Attorney.

All those in favor?

The opposed? Council Member Buse. I move that the Board give unanimous consent to consideration for adoption of Bill Number 7-121 on the day of its introduction. Second.

All those in favor. Aye. The opposed. The vote passes seven to zero. Let the minutes reflect that the Board has given unanimous consent.

I introduce Bill Number 7-121, establishing a Citizen Finance Committee to be read for the second time by title only. Second. Any discussion? Mr.

City Attorney?

Council Member Buse? Aye. Council Member Patel? Aye. Council member Gary Feder?

Council Member Buse? Aye. Council Member Patel? Aye. Council member Fader?

Councilmember Rick Hummell?

Councilmember Hummel?

Councilmember Jeffery Yorg? Aye. Council Member Waldman. Aye. Mayor McAndrew. Aye. The vote passes 7-0. The

Councilmember York? Aye. Council Member Waldman. Aye. Mayor McAndrew. Aye. The vote passes 7-0. The

next item on our agenda is related to amending Section 215.765 related to generators.

Yes, so these final two items will be presented by Myron Burr Jr.

The City Council discussed generators on October 28, 2025. The City Council expressed a desire to control the noise emitted from generator use. The attached ordinance would establish a permitted decibel level for generator use and require noise attenuation measures for generators exceeding the 75 decibel limit. Staff recommends approval of the attached ordinance.

Thank you. I'll open the discussion. Are there any questions or comments from the council?

I think at least my neighbors will appreciate the board and staff paying attention to this. I don't really know decimal readings and all that. I assume that everything is done so that there's still accommodation of neighbors in times of emergency, yet with consideration for those around them. So I'm glad we're moving forward with this.

Yeah, thanks for bringing it to our attention. And seems like a good approach.

Council Member Gary Feder, any questions, comments?

Council Member Fader, any questions, comments?

I was just curious, to the extent it deals with things like snowblowers. I know we've had an ordinance in place. I'm just wondering, is this simply incorporating what we already have? Is this new in any respect?

Okay. This would deal specifically with generators, so it would be an addition to the noise control.

Otherwise, it's what we have already, but something added to what we have already as opposed to anything else. Yes, sir. Okay. Thank you.

Take that one. So when the county measures that they can't actually go on your property, just like we can't for any kind of inspection that we do. So they're going to have to take that from a public right-of-way. So that'll most likely be taken from the street. the county goes in to do it and if we take the reading ourselves we're going to take it from the street and that's the best we're going to be able to do

i wasn't here on the 28th so you guys may have covered some of this but um so when we say any generator we're talking about mounted or like the gas timber one And since they're going to be prohibited except for these two measures, how do we deal with things that Councilman Buse mentioned about people who need it for medical emergencies or other extenuating circumstances? Because it doesn't seem to really provide that as an option. And I don't know, maybe that's just standard in the way we do codes.

I mean, I think they'll still be available, but you just have to provide some sort of – so like especially the temporary generators that popped up during the tornado, now they'll just have to order like a cover on Amazon, like something that provides a little bit of a buffer because otherwise there's – you know, the temporary ones are so noisy and would exceed the decibel limit. But there's things that you can buy, this acoustic enclosure or the anti-vibration – mounts and rubber mats, which I know less about, but then there'll at least be measures that if you need your generator on, you know, during these emergency measures, there just has to be some, something to be able to kind of alleviate.

Which I like at the end of the day, I'm just, I'm just thinking through one of our neighbors, right. Who kind of led some part of this that was talking about how they needed it for medical. And like, I know none of us wants to stop people from having generators for medical. I just, given the way this was written, And probably maybe it's a good, but we can't like grant an exception because – and not enforce it because it's medical because that's not the way it's written. But if it's written as I think it is such a way that like that person could do that provided they have one of these two things in A and B, then I think that's a nice easy way to also get our law enforcement out of – and code enforcement out of trying to make those gray area decisions. That's correct.

And during a larger event when we, like this last, with the tornado, you know, we had the emergency order that basically waived certain ordinances and gave our officers a lot of discretion when they were going out and dealing with these matters. And so that was one where if they had a medical reason for having a generator, no matter how loud it was, we really let it go.

So what are the inexpensive generators that were causing the issues in the neighborhoods? What decibel level are they? I assume we're reducing it.

Yes, those are well over 75.

Well over 75. Okay. I was assuming that. Just thought I'd clarify it. Okay.

And maybe a dumb question, but because I just haven't done it, those portable generators, A or B can accommodate those? Like you can buy covers or things to separate ones? Yes. And again, you guys may have covered that back in the 20th. I just wasn't here. Thanks.

you, Kevin.

All right, if there's

nothing else, Council Member Buse. I introduce Bill No. 7122, Amending Section 215.765, Establishing Permitted Decibel Levels for Generators to be Read for the First Time by Title Only.

Second.

Any discussion, Mr. City

Attorney?

all those in favor aye

opposed council member abuse i move that the board give unanimous consent to consideration for adoption of bill number 7122 on the day of its introduction

second all those in favor

any opposed

the bill the vote passes seven to zero let the minutes reflect that the board has given unanimous consent

Council member views. I introduced bill number seven, one, two, two amending section two 15.765 establishing permitted, permitted decibel levels for generators to be read for the second time by title only. Second. Any

discussion? Mr. City attorney.

Council Member Buse. Aye. Council Member Patel. Aye. Council member Gary Feder.

Council Member Buse. Aye. Council Member Patel. Aye. Council member Fader.

Councilmember Rick Hummell.

Councilmember Hummel.

Councilmember Jeffery Yorg.

Councilmember York.

CouncilMember Waldman. Aye. Mayor McAndrew. Aye. Vote passes seven.

So we typically will put things in city views when that comes up quarterly. If we've got a change like this, it could impact people. We also put it in Clayton connection. So we'll have information in there. Those are typical ways of doing it, but on the website.

Yeah. And the other item is that because this will impact it, if we have for any reason, a generator that requires any sort of permit, any kind of permanent installation, something like that, then we'll have to make it known to that individual as well. However, those permanently installed units are almost always under that 75 number. Those are typically close to that 60 decibel or so that you'd mentioned before.

The last item on our agenda is a St. Louis County Police Station historic marker request.

The St. Louis County Police is requesting a sign to commemorate their headquarters in Clayton from 1955 to 1962. The county would like to install two commemorative signs on a light pole located at North Merrimack Avenue, north of Forsyth Boulevard at the Commerce Bank Forsyth Point building. They will be placed on the second pole west of the intersection of Forsyth Blvd and North Merrimack Ave. The signs would be on opposite sides of the same pole, so foot traffic on sidewalk may be able to see the sign from either direction as opposed to only one side. The signs would measure 12 inches wide and 18 inches high. Proposed language and photos of the site have been attached. The City of Clayton does not have an established process for the installation of honorary street signs. In this instance, the City could approve the sign installation with a motion and affirmative vote of the City Council if it is deemed appropriate.

Thank you, I will open the discussion I don't know if anybody has any immediate questions or comments about this.

I assume the county will cover all expenses maintenance going all that

yes

and do we have any concerns with other people wanting to put up signs or. Any concerns with it blocking vision or any concerns at all as far as just managing our streets?

I have lots of concerns.

No concerns with blocking vision. I don't think there are any functional issues with it at all.

Pretty

hot. Similar to like a no parking sign or something else. It's really do you want to open the door to other organizations putting signs up

in the city? Right. the functional side alone and the signs it's a 12 by 18 sign so about the same size as a normal no parking sign that would go up so from that perspective there's there's no concern just from the strict operational installation perspective

and one would think that they would have the option of putting a post on the property or something with a sign on it versus on our street sign

they no longer own the property but that could be an option yeah

But it's basically across the street from their current county police headquarters. So if they wanted to commemorate their history, they could do it there. I don't support this based on what we know. I don't know if there's anyone here to... I mean, I would be very interested in more information from an actual... applicant or advocate for this if such a person is present. But I'm not aware of us doing anything like this anywhere else in the city. This isn't like something I think we should open the door to. without a much more like intentional process for considering how we do it. I mean, what I should say is we do have a process for historical commemorations in the city of Clayton and this doesn't follow it. And so I do not support it. Council Member

Gary Feder.

Fader.

Well, I'm not sure I'd go as far as opposing it, but I must admit when I read this, I was thinking, really? I mean, it was kind of like... Doesn't seem to me like this isn't like the addict school. I mean, just sort of struck me as an odd place and two signs on top of that. Now, on the other hand, I suppose we're trying to be cooperative with St. Louis County, trying to be cooperative. The St. Louis County police. So I sort of get it. But I do agree that I wish I could find this a little more compelling. for us to do this. It just strikes me as sort of a non-event. I'm not quite sure why we have to have two signs to show that they had an office there 50 years ago. It's just, I just don't, I don't get it. So I really agree with Becky. In some ways, I'd like to have somebody from the police explain to us why this is that important and we should support it. So I have also some trepidation about it.

I tend to agree with Becky and others on this one. I don't necessarily have a problem with the signs. I do think there's something to be said for the commemoration of the first police department in St. Louis County. But I haven't thought enough about it to know whether or not this should have run through our historic marker process or not, but I feel like before we get to the stage of starting to commemorate anything, we need as a city to have either a process by which we can evaluate all them or a decision to be made that we're not going to do them. What I don't want to start doing is doing the one-off here for the same reason we didn't do the one-off county request and name some street after whatever we were naming it after. Especially considering they keep moving people out of this city and not moving them back in. But putting that aside, I... I think we need to have a relationship with the county, but I think this is a larger question of like how do we want to tackle commemorative street signs, commemorative signs at all. And maybe that is through the historic marker group. Maybe it's not. But I would want to have that discussion and it's not a high priority for me, but if we're going to be doing this and I'd like to go through that process first and have the framework on how we want to sign off on these.

Yeah, and I mean, I will just say I didn't hear from anybody from the county. I didn't, I mean, so I didn't get any information from, I mean, I, like everybody has said, I think it's important. I like the idea of people walking around our city and seeing historical information. I think that's great. You know, people walking around at street level, but there's, this to me doesn't provide a lot of historical information other than, you know, that a building was there. So it sounds like we need a little more information from the county and also maybe think about, you know, a process whereby we're, you know, talking about, you know commemorating streets or commemorating areas. That's not just our historical markers which I know are huge. So maybe thinking about going forward what that might look like. It

sounds like with the conversation, if it was just for the county to come and say, you give us more information on it, perhaps we would table it. But it sounds like because we want to talk about what a process is and how to handle requests like this, we just vote on this one.

I think it'd probably be best to postpone this. We'll do a little more research on it.

Did we just hear... Did an actual person reach out

to somebody? I have to get this. It

came from the county police department.

Like somebody employed at the county right now.

Yes, they have a group of retirees and other officers that are working on this. Yeah. I

mean, if you Google St. Louis County Police Department, a lot of content comes up. So there are people working on this online and stuff. But also, it's not like the oldest police department. I just want to be clear in the area. I mean, I don't believe we have reason to think that. Ours has been around. both since before 1955 so

the only the only other thing i would say as we talk about the process right is not just when we do it but also what it looks like like maybe we make a decision that the only historical markers they all need to look uniform and right now this wouldn't complete this wouldn't even from a visual standpoint match any of the other historical markers we have in the city even if we wanted to do it and i feel like All of that needs to be rolled together so that if somebody walked through the city and they want to look for the historical markers, they know what they look like and not just like a no parking sign that's attached to it like a light pole.

I mean, if we think back to the like the other like processes and systems that we've put in place for this kind of thing. Like we actually have a really robust, um, like guiding documents and stuff from the, um, mayor's commemorative task force work that happened. Um, and I think like I would be open to establishing a, um, potentially like a simpler process for something somewhat smaller, less expensive, whatever. But there's guiding information there that's important for us to consider as we think about what we honor and why and how. And this isn't consistent with any of that. One of

the distinctions is that the historical markers, as far as I know, everyone that's up is put up by the city. Whereas this would be county, but it's on our property. So I'm not disagreeing with you, but this is the only one I know that falls out of that mayor's task force.

Yeah, and that's where we maybe have to come up with a process whereby, you know, if there are external groups that would like to bring something to

us. Yeah, the only one that's out there that aware of is the marathon. There's a sign that talks about the Olympic marathon that's right up here on Forsyth. It's the only one I can think of that's within our right-of-way that wasn't put up by the city of

Clayton.

But we need to do, I'd like to do a

little

research on where those,

whether or not we have any other... I believe it was some association to Wash U a few years ago at that time with also the process they provided the signs and we install them usually anything that attaches to our polls will install but yeah that's the only other thing that comes close in this case it would be treated like a um historical marker basic sign it'd be a brown background with white letters is probably what we'd recommend to be consistent with national standards

yeah i mean and it's one of those where becky to your point like maybe we we look at those And decide we want to loosen them up to include more historical things than maybe it does before. Maybe we don't. But what I don't want to get into is where you go to like Chicago and some of these cities where like every other city is named after somebody, and I don't really understand any process. And I don't know if we'd get there, but I want to make sure we have the process ahead of time. So that we're not stuck in that situation where every street has like four signs because it's the one and then it's a three commemorative signs. And you're like, who are these people? You

can get a lot of money from that

though. And Chicago needs it. But yeah. Okay.

Well, I think the bottom line is that it sounds like David's going to get a little bit more information, maybe do a little bit more research and we will motion it to a date uncertain. Do I need to move to table?

I moved to table. The request for... for a St. Louis County police station or historical marker to allow for the county to provide additional information and for the board to consider the process and standards for historical markers in the city of Clayton.

Bravo.

All those in favor? Aye. Any opposed? All right. Well, we've come to the end of our agenda. Um, we haven't been together for about a month and we'll, we don't have a meeting again until mid January. So if we want to go around and just kind of, if there's any buddy that wants to highlight anything that they've been at in the last month, that would be great.

Yeah. I'll pick up with the, um, the landscape task force. It means it's fresh on my mind right now, but I'm a little bit tired of talking tonight. It seems like a lot of motions, um, with, uh, with the sustainability committee there's been talk a lot about an arboretum being established in oak knoll at some point similar to what's been done at washoe and other places with putting you know markers by the trees with the native american name as well as the other information and something has come up is do we tie into is there still a there's still a task force to do that with and also involving the perhaps the equity commission and that as well but um I don't think currently we've figured out where that task force is going, and it kind of falls into the discussion we just had that we need standards about what we want to do and how we're going to handle that. I had the pleasure this week of going to the Ritz tree lighting and watching our mayor's magic as she took a magic wand and did this, and the tree light, it was absolutely amazing, something that she didn't even campaign on. So that little magical touch there.

Well, I had some help from the Sugar Plum Fairy.

You did have help from the Sugar Flum Fairy. The only other thing is the plan commission meeting we had, and I think you've heard a lot about that with a lot of consolidations and separations. And the other issue with the lot that's being divided with eventually another house being built there is some neighbors came to be – that we stay aware of water, of – With rain and everything else as they change that landscape there and there seemed to be that that was going to be addressed and again today was just looking at the division of the of the plats. And. I've got.

Thank you. The Equity Commission is meeting this Thursday. We're going to be talking about accessibility. And we found out that we actually have a report, an ADA report from I think 17, 2017. We'll be able to look at and think about how Clayton is accessible to folks with different abilities and make sure that we are doing what we can. So I'm looking forward to that discussion and that focus by the group. And Parks and Rec, a couple interesting topics we've had lately is the approval of a creation of a youth sports advisory committee. which I think that's what it's called, which is intended to, I think, support our staff in like running the youth sports leagues, but also really looking to increase, I think, like leadership and accountability for standards of behavior and And things as it relates to youth sports. So it's been a little while. I mean, not that long, but it passes quickly since my daughter was in rec sports and her teams were never competitive. But I just thought it was really cool that there seemed to be a good number of parents actually interested in doing this and trying to make it better. So I thought that was pretty cool. And then we talked about the Shaw Park project, which we'll all get a look at and talk about together. It is a really exciting project. I asked the... design team to come back with alternatives to artificial turf because a fair amount of surface is covered with artificial turf. And especially since it isn't actually for playing sports, I think we should consider other surfaces that are not plastic. So I asked them to do that. So I'm looking forward to seeing what comes of that. And then I think, I don't think we've met since that East-West Gateway luncheon, have we? A few of us were at that. I thought the most, well, the part that was of interest was all the different county executives who are part of that board, which includes the mayor of St. Louis due to her role. and its status as a county. So there was a lot of talk about collaboration and regionalization and breaking down silos, but I didn't really hear anything concrete. And I don't, I mean, I would love to be proven wrong and see something happen there. And if you're ever aware of ways, I'm looking at the mayor and David's But if anyone else, like ways that we can actually meaningfully be a part of that, I'm really interested in it. But I guess I'm eternally hopeful that action will actually follow intention. So thank you. Oh, and I would ask if you could address either now or later, David, the plans for lights on Whiteout with maybe Ameren and Verizon.

We'll have the latest on that. We're close.

Matt's going to go out and install them tomorrow.

I'll get my hopes

up yeah I received a call from the field technician doing they call it a design but I think it's more of a work order expect to be complete this week and then it's a seven today seven to ten day window for installation which that would put the end of that real close to Christmas so hopefully right before Christmas two will be installed at university and then I've phone tag with Verizon's field technician for the lights at Hartford, excuse me, Dartford and DeMunn on Wydown. On those locations, there are the Verizon small cell poles that remain through the storm, and we're just going to be able to tie our lights into their panel.

Do you think the timeline on that could be similar?

Since I haven't connected with Verizon, I can't say for sure. I would think so. Okay. But I'm just not, can't say for certain on that.

That's really wonderful. Thank you for continuing to follow up on this and identify options. I can't wait to see it. Thanks.

The Shaw Park Committee is going to meet again on Monday, I think, to talk not only about comments that came out of the Parks and Rec review, but also to sort of prep this for the discussion on the 19th. So I think that'll be an interesting discussion. My wife and I've toured Merrimack school because that was one of the things the school district offered. I did not make it to Glenridge. Um, it's the school is, uh, considering my daughters went there and now they are very adults. Um, it needs a lot of work. And so I'm very intrigued what the school district's going to do in the next month or so in terms of what their plans are. Um, I just thought I would mention, just to appreciate our staff, the area on Gay, between Gay Field and Maryland, of course, has been a subject of constant discussion for years. When the Mandlin projects were built and then many discussions about signage and about speed. And one of our residents who constantly was in communication with Bridget and me, and now with Kami and me, was still talking about the signs and the speeding. So we thought the best thing to do was to see if we could get Matt to visit with us. So we did have an on-site visit today. We appreciate that he came out. And I think he, I think recognized there probably is a need for another sign that isn't there right now and continue to view the to review the speeding situation on the street. So anyway, that was, that was very helpful. Just as a, as an interesting item, just because I've talked about it before we have dealt on in Davis place and then ward three with a five 15 South central, the building that looks like hell and has for many, many years now. And, And finally, the Wicked Witch is dead. The house has now been demolished as of yesterday. It's now a pile of bricks and lumber. And so I'm not entirely sure what's going there because we have a plan for the house that was approved. But I still don't think we know if the owner is actually going to live there, try to sell it, what that will do with the plans. But so anyway, that will be an interesting turnaround. And finally, because it's the only chance I have to say it, I want to note my appreciation and connection with the Economic Development Committee that the effort the mayor made to really reach out to all of us to really get our input. Because it was a uniquely high number of residents who applied and business people who applied. And so to come up with a final list, there was a lot of input from everybody. And so I appreciate it. And I think it's a good composition, but a lot of work, I think, on the mayor's part to try to get all of us to comment on the various applicants. That's it for me. Great.

Center looks busy. It's good. It's great.

It's always great to follow Rick because he and I serve on all the same committees, so I don't have a ton to report, whether it be pensions or whether it be CRWC or others. So I really don't have much other than – I will take the moment to give the shout-out to the Manhattan Cafe who now also runs the Donut Drive-In in the morning along with the Perk Avenue Coffee. It is basically – I would hope it would eventually become a sort of kind of replacement for the Starbucks. It looks like it's not coming back, but yeah, you can go in and get your park Avenue coffee and get your donut driving donuts and sitting there just like you would any coffee shop. So I went in the other day and three or four people are there with their computer laptops popped up. So I'm like seven to 10 in the morning, seven days a week. So.

I mean, it's such a great idea. Whoever came up with it.

Well, the guy who bought Manhattan Cafe had already bought Donut Drive-In. He's one of these local St. Louis guys who kind of like buys up these institutions and just basically operates them like they've always done. And I know the Manhattan Cafe, the guy was looking to sell, so I think that's kind of how he

Well, and I learned about that. If everybody's not getting the Thursday St. Louis Magazine newsletter about Clayton, make sure you subscribe to it because he really – I mean, Mike does a nice job of talking about things that I don't always know about. That's

really all I got because, honestly, Rick covers everything I normally do. So I appreciate that, by the way.

Thanks for the info, though. I didn't know anything about that.

Pick them up and take them to the office like I did earlier this week or you can go in and sit inside.

big donut guy. Yeah,

I can just add a little bit to that on cool cities. That's pretty exciting because residential and commercial is required to be EV ready. And so one of the questions was, what was the reaction to that? And apparently it was grumbling when they were talking about doing it and then it was just fine. And yeah, and they've got, Richmond Heights has developed the most, has adopted the most recent codes and I think we're right behind them. And then someone from the county was talking about how they're taking They're working very hard with many, many committees, section by section, to eventually get there to do it. A meeting for every section. Yeah, they're 2014. And we're all up in 2024. We're 2021. The only

thing I forgot to add was we did have a word to coffee. It was Susan and I, and I think June and the chief was on. I think we had one person that attended. Great conversation. We had one person that came on. Now, part of the challenge was we were going to have it at Glen Ridge School outside the school, which was going to be nice, until it was either expecting rain or snow that day, and it was like 40 degrees. So we moved it online, which may or may not have affected it. We don't tend to get as much as Ward 1 and Ward 3 do, but we continue to have them, and there was one guy who came on and asked a couple questions, so...

We'll have a cafe menat.

Yeah. Donuts

for everybody. You know what? Hey, look, I like the idea. But

yeah,

well, I wanted to acknowledge we had it and we will continue to have them. And I like to think that Susan and I are doing such a good job. Nobody has anything to say. No one else to do.

The happiest word.

Well, I'll just add a couple things that everybody hasn't already talked about. I presented with a lawyer from the ACLU. We went to a Clayton High School meeting. I mean, I don't know, government class. I think it was just American government class and talked about just local government. So that was fun. The kids were very engaging and thoughtful. Good questions. And David and I tag teamed at the CCBA. David talked all about finance and I talked a little bit about development and kind of what we're doing committees and And then I'll just mention, because I think I mentioned to everybody, David and I did have a Zoom call with the county related to Hanley and Wydown and some of those East-West Gateway grants that are available. I will say it was not the best meeting in the sense that it was hard to kind of problem solve. some what we could do there. I think there's a lot of infrastructure problems like for Kami and Gary, who I know here from Polo Residence, a lot about that intersection. The resident that lives at the southwest corner, you know, There would, I mean, ultimately in order to improve kind of that side or maybe adding another pedestrian crosswalk on the other side would entail, it would be very expensive because you'd have to move sewer inlets. You'd have to move signals. You'd have take down the monument probably on both sides. So it's not all is not lost. I think I think Matt's going to think of something. No, I'm not trying to. But but I will say I just I will say I appreciate that Lisa Clancy was very responsive about like trying to get something together. So we'll see. It just was it was less productive than I hoped it would be. So they also judge, I think, danger differently than. I do. They pointed to statistics about how it's not really in their top 10% of problem areas because nobody's been injured or killed there in the last five or six years. I can't remember what, so they have a lot of really serious problem areas throughout the county and that one really doesn't get up there. So we'll see. I mean, it's just was, I know I mentioned it to a lot of you at our lunches in the last week. So I just thought I'd tell you about it. So

Can I add to Mr. O'Keefe's partner, Ken Hines is retiring as city attorney for the city of Richmond Heights. I actually don't know if he's retiring entirely or in just that position, but he was nice enough to invite Robin and me to attend the event next Monday. And that's, that's important because we were both in the same law school class. And I believe that, um, that his wife gave birth during our property law exam. And so it's a little factual thing that Ken and I have always talked about. Ken has been here occasionally subbing, but he's a wonderful real estate lawyer, wonderful local lawyer. And they did say that I could give a few remarks, but they said it was limited to three minutes. Thank

you. They

did

honor him at the. And I

don't know, they may have to borrow that thing from.

Yeah.

In any event, he's a terrific guy and he's been a he's literally been, I think, the city attorney for Richmond Heights for at least 40 years. I mean, as long as I've been around, Ken Hines was always the city attorney. I don't know anybody who's had longevity like he's had. So just an incredible thing.

They honored him. The Municipal League meeting was at the Heights, and they honored him there as well, which was nice. Great. David, anything?

I just want to thank... Anna and Ryan for the work they did on the unified development code. I know you all see the finished product when it's here, but to get that out of a municipal planning department with as small a staff as we have, you really don't see that anywhere. That is incredibly high level planning work that if you paid a consultant, they would have charged you hundreds of thousands of dollars to put something like that together. And, you know, not only did they do it in house, but they did it while they were still doing all of their other work, all the other site plan reviews, looking at stormwater, looking at all these other things. So just incredibly impressed by the staff we have down in planning and development services. So thank you. Yeah.

Well, you know,

also you talked about keeping it in house versus the consultant, which is more typical and it shows in the work, you know, you know, our cities, not only are you all both such professionals, but you know, our city so well and where we're trying to go. So it's really great. Great. I move we adjourn. Second. All those in favor? Aye.