Webster Groves plan commission approves draft comprehensive plan, sends comments to city council

The Webster Groves Plan Commission voted to approve the draft comprehensive plan prepared by the Lakota Group and forward it to the City Council for review, with commissioners urging staff to formalize how commission and council comments will be consolidated before the council adoption process.

The plan, developed by the Lakota Group over roughly 16 months, lays out goals, strategies and implementation actions for the city. Josh Bloom of the Lakota Group told the commission the work began in March 2024 and said, “we have essentially used the entire budget at this point to develop the plan.” Commissioners expressed concerns about staff turnover during the project, a lack of a consolidated adjudication of plan-commission comments, and several mapping and jurisdictional issues that some called “errors.”

Commissioners said the document matters because the comprehensive plan will guide future land-use recommendations and inform zoning decisions. Commissioner Grace asked that the process for filtering and adjudicating commission and council comments be improved, saying she would “like to request we look at the process for how we filter things through all of the approving bodies into the future to ensure we don't miss any steps.”

During discussion, Lakota summarized the project timeline: an initial “state of the city” research and engagement product delivered in August 2024, a goals-and-strategies draft in February 2025, and the full draft submitted in March 2025. Bloom and staff told the commission that many plan-commission comments had been incorporated, others were not, and that documenting every comment-and-response would likely produce a separate, lengthy memo. Bloom said substantive additional edits would require further meetings and resources because the consultant team had expended the contracted budget.

Several commissioners said they wished the commission had seen an adjudication document showing which comments were accepted or declined; they said that absence made it difficult to know whether suggested changes were already addressed. Commissioners also asked that stakeholder groups named in the implementation actions (for example, the Arts Commission and the Historic Preservation Board) be given a clearer opportunity to review implementation-level items before they are prioritized and attached to time frames and suggested budgets.

Planning staff and the commission clarified that the plan’s future-land-use maps are guidance, not a rezoning, but that consistency with the comprehensive plan is a factor in later rezoning and staff recommendations. City council review deadlines and schedule were discussed: council comments are due August 11, the council planned to discuss the plan August 19, and a council vote was scheduled for Sept. 2, according to the liaison.

The commission made a motion to approve the draft comprehensive plan as presented by the Lakota Group; the motion passed on a voice vote. Several commissioners said they would forward their written comments to staff so those comments could be consolidated for the council stage. The commission asked planning staff to develop a formalized process for adjudicating and consolidating commission and council comments; Planning & Development Director Elliot Liebson agreed staff would bring back ideas at the commission's next meeting.

The Plan Commission’s recommendation now moves to the City Council, which will hold its own public hearing and take the final adoption vote. The commission’s next regular meeting was announced for Aug. 4, 2025.