Planning Commission - Regular Meeting

Good evening. On behalf of the City of Independence, I'd like to welcome you to this commission meeting for August 25th, 2026. Let's start our meeting by saying the Pledge of Allegiance. You'll have to forgive me. I'm not sure if we do the roll call now. Let's do the roll call. Why not?

Commissioner Nesbitt.

Here.

Commissioner Ferguson. Here. Commissioner O'Neill. Here. Commissioner Torres.

Here.

Commissioner Young. Here. And Vice Chairman Ashbaugh.

Here. For those of you who wish to speak tonight, please remember to address all comments and questions to the chair, me, and keep your comments brief and on point, please. If you're going to speak, either in favor or against, please keep your comments brief. And simply, if there's another point you would like to emphasize that somebody's already made, it'd be Kind of you just to say I agree with that point So to expedite tonight's meeting I want to ask all those who think they might speak You don't have to speak if you do this But if you might speak to please stand and raise your hand and be sworn in for tonight's meeting Okay Do you solemnly swear to tell the whole truth before this commission? If so, please answer I do.

I do.

Thank you very much. You may be seated. The first item on our agenda is a consent agenda. Yes.

I make a motion to approve the consent agenda. I second.

I have a second. Any discussion or objections? Okay. Let's have the vote, please.

Commissioner Nisbet. Yes. Commissioner Ferguson. Yes. Commissioner O'Neill. Yes. Commissioner Torres. Yes. Commissioner Young.

Yes.

Vice Chairman Ashbaugh.

Yes. The set agenda is moved. We also have a case that's to be continued tonight. Chair. I was going to say what the case was, but yes. Go ahead.

I make a motion we continue case 26-125-05, 934 East 23rd Street South. Second. Wait a minute, to September 15th, is that correct? Yes. Okay.

Okay.

Second.

Okay. Any discussion? All right. We're ready for the vote.

Commissioner Nesbitt. Yes. Commissioner Ferguson. Yes. Commissioner O'Neill. Yes. Commissioner Torres.

Yes.

Commissioner Young. Yes. And Vice Chairman Ashbaugh.

Yes. Case 26-125-05 rezoning PUD 934 East 23rd Street South 15th. 15th.

Thank you.

Our first case tonight is a

A continued case 26-204, special use permit for 1717 South Appleton Avenue. Could we have the report, please?

Absolutely. This is an application submitted by Ronald Ashley Emerson, the owner and operator of Unbound Tattoo and Art Studio for special use permit approval for a body art establishment in the Englewood Arts District. So this property is located at the northeast corner of Appleton Avenue and Winter Road. It's part of a shopping center that includes a restaurant, an art studio, massage parlor, among other uses. So again, you can see from the aerial imagery, this is one commercial space. It's highlighted in blue on the screen in front of you. It may be a little difficult to see on the aerial image, but it's the commercial tenant space along the frontage of Appleton Avenue, so the west portion of the parcel. Here's a picture of the front facade of the commercial space front in Appleton Avenue. And then looking north up Appleton Avenue, then south towards the intersection with Winter Road. In this case, city staff recommend approval of the special use permit application subject to all the use standards applicable to tattoo shops. That concludes my presentation. If you do have questions about the application, please feel free.

Thank you, Gabe. Are there any questions? from the commissioners chair. Yes.

Uh, so we're under what we allocate for tattoo and independence. That's correct.

That is correct.

Okay. What number are we at now?

I would have to confirm what number we're at. The city code permits one establishment per 15,000 residents. So a total of eight shops and an independence, um, So I believe we're at six or seven currently. So we're still below the cap.

Okay. Thank you. Anybody else have a question?

Yes, I have a question.

Yes.

Is this, in fact, located next to Englewood Cafe?

It is part of the same strip center that includes Englewood Cafe. Yes.

Any other questions, comments? Okay. Is the applicant here? Thank you, sir. Would you please state your name and address? Come up to the podium and state your name and address that you're currently residing.

Hello. My name is Ronald Ashley Emerson. My address is 133 North Davidson Avenue in Independence, Missouri, 64056.

Thank you, sir. Just let us know what you want us to know about your establishment that you're wanting to.

Uh, well I've been tattooing professionally for 17 years, 12 years here in Missouri. Um, I'm an award winning artist. I've both as a fine artist and a tattooer and nationally and internationally. Um, as a business person, I've already established my LLC and my S Corp eight years ago, so I'm very well established. I co-owned a tattoo shop in the Westport area for the past five years and decided it was time to come home and open a shop here in Independence. Our shop was always on the core tenets of giving back and altruism, so we always donated. We participated in sponsorships and charitable fundraisers. And we were also a very financially successful shop Doubling our return on our investment in less than five years My mission is to continue that The sense of altruism community engagement and involvement with the tattoo shop in the Englewood area as I'm already very heavily invested in the Englewood Arts District I volunteer with the West End Connection. I volunteered at the Englewood Community Garden. I've performed in theater productions for fundraisers with West End Connection and the Englewood Arts Center. I've donated artwork to the Englewood Art Gala. I practice Kung Fu at the Inclusion Center in Englewood every Tuesday at 6 o'clock, and I've developed a rapport with the Englewood Business Association, and I'm looking forward to joining as soon as I get into the building.

Okay. Thank you very much for that. Does anyone have questions of Ronald here?

Chair? Yes. Okay. So I know we approved a tattoo shop down the street there in Englewood. I don't know if that one's still going or not. I mean, I'm trying to figure out, it seems like we've had quite a few come into Independence, but they're not seem to be making it. Are you thinking your shop's going to be better or is there something you're doing different than other ones or?

Well, I've got an established clientele over the last 12 years, and most of them do live in eastern Jackson County. The focus groups that I've talked to as far as my client base, they've said that it would be better for me to be in Independence for them. So I don't think I'm going to have a problem as far as my client base coming to Independence. As a matter of fact, I think it will actually do a service to the Englewood District. to bring in more people from the Blue Springs and Lee Summit area to come see me and eat at the Englewood Cafe or Vivalor or travel around on a third Friday and see what all they can find.

Okay. Have you talked to the businesses around? They all approve of you? Absolutely.

I have.

Appreciate it. Thank you.

Thank you. Okay. Anyone else? Okay. Thank you very much. Thank you. I'm going to open up the... The floor for anybody that would like to speak in favor of this case. Remember to give us your name and your address, please.

Hello. My name is Torrence Kelly. My address is 7310 Sycamore Avenue, Kansas City, Missouri. My business address, which is Finnegan Tax and Accounting, I'm a managing partner there. It's 10618 East 18th Street South, so I'm right down the road there. I'm coming to you, too, as the president of the Englewood Business Association, which we are in strong support of Unbound Tattoo and Ash to open down there. Just really quick, I'd like to say that... One of the things that we want in Englewood from a business owner is not just to come in and open their doors, but actually be a part of the community. Ash has already shown that he's a part of the Englewood community and has supported the community there. So we are very excited to have someone like that, another business owner like that, come in and be that supportive. So the Englewood Business Association believes that Unbound Tattoo and Art Studios will be responsible and a positive addition to our district. We respectfully ask the Planning Commission to approve Ash Emerson's special use permit, and we look forward to welcoming him to the community.

Thank you. Would anybody else like to speak in support of this? Okay. All right. Name and address, please.

Hello, my name is Thad McCullough. I live at 1937 South Hardy Avenue in Independence, Missouri. I am coming to speak on Ash's character. He is one of the best human beings I know and genuinely cares. And if there is a definition of a cool guy, it would be a picture of Ash in the dictionary. So he's a really good person and an asset to the community.

Thank you. Is there anyone else who would like to speak in support of this case? Okay. Is there anyone here who would like to speak against this case? Okay. Seeing no one, rising to do that. I'll close the public hearing and ask if there's any more questions or comments from the commissioners.

Mr. Chair.

Yes.

I move that we approve case number 26-200-04 special use permit at 1717 South Appleton Avenue.

Second. Got a first and a second. Any more discussion or questions of staff?

I do just have one comment. So I went ahead and checked the city records, and there are six licensed tattoo establishments currently active. city permits one tattoo establishment per 15,000 residents, permitting a maximum cap of eight establishments citywide.

Thank you. Okay, if there's no more questions, comments, then I would say let's have the vote.

Commissioner Nesbitt? Yes. Commissioner Ferguson? Yes. Commissioner O'Neill?

Yes.

Commissioner Torres? Yes. Commissioner Young? Yes. Vice Chair Ashbaugh?

Yes. Case 26-204, special use permit for 1717 South Appleton Avenue has been approved. Good luck, sir. Moving on to our next case, which is case 26-100-09, rezoning of 17610 East Bolger Road. Could I have the staff report, please?

So this is a combined staff report. There's two applications associated with the request tonight. So one request being a rezoning of the property from high density residential classification to a general commercial zoning district classification. And the second request to part of this proposal is a special sign permit application. The property is located generally northwest of the I-70 and 291 interchange on the north side of 39th Street. It's part of the Bulger Square Shopping Center. So the current zoning district classifications of the subject site and the surrounding properties indicate that the site is zoned R-30. That classification was assigned to the site in 2023 upon approval of an application by the city council. So the property owner at that time had proposed a multifamily development of approximately 300 dwelling units. That proposal did not ever come to fruition. The site remains high density residential and vacant. So this site, again, is a part of the Bulger Square Shopping Center, developed in the mid-90s. The tract of land is approximately 10 acres in size, contains approximately 123,000 square feet of building area. Although it has no frontage along 39th Street, it is part of that same shopping center that has multiple drive entrances, including one signalized intersection. Here's a site plan provided by the applicant and a couple notable details that I'll bring to your attention tonight. So in the southwest corner of that tract of land is a fueling canopy that the applicant has indicated seven fuel dispensers for. And the second item you'll notice as part of the site plan is another driveway or drive-through along Cracker Neck Road on the west side of the site. That is intended for a drive-through pharmacy as part of this rezoning request, or excuse me, the proposed grocery store development. So both the fueling canopy and the drive-through are being proposed by the applicant as part of this rehabilitation of the site. Here's the current conditions of the site. So you can see the front facade from the rear or the back of the parking lot looking towards the building. And here is a picture along Cracker Neck Road looking at the west facade. The reason this picture is being shown to you is this would be the site of the drive-through pharmacy coming off of Cracker Neck Road. And here's some street level imagery along Cracker Neck Road looking north towards residential subdivisions on the northwest and Appletree Apartments, or condominiums rather, on the northeast and then looking back down south towards the intersection with 39th Street. That concludes my presentation for the rezoning case. Staff does recommend approval of the rezoning and I'm going to go ahead and continue on to the special sign permit a part of this request for tonight as well. So the approximate location of the proposed monument sign is at the signalized intersection for the shopping center on 39th Street. It's indicated by the star and the aerial image. It constitutes a monument sign with multiple tenant panels and is considered part of a unified sign plan as part of the shopping center and rehabilitation of the site. The sign does exceed the maximum height for monument signs permitted and independent. So the maximum height is typically eight feet and the applicant is proposing a monument sign 10 feet in height.

How many feet?

10 feet in height. And there is a photo rendering provided for the monument sign showing the what city code refers to as an electronic message center indicating or showing that the gas prices for their fuel canopy, as well as an additional two tenant panels. And again, that's located at that island in the divided entrance to the shopping center. Here's some street level imagery at that. Intersection there. So looking west towards Lee Summit Road and then further east towards 291 Highway. You can see in the street level imagery that the proposed monument sign wouldn't be out of character with signs along the corridor. So several monument signs, including an existing electronic message center for a gas station, is located along the north side of 39th Street. And that concludes the presentation for the special sign permit application. Staff does recommend approval of the application, subject to full compliance with the development ordinance.

Thanks, Gabe. I've been down that street several times, but could you remind us at that 10-foot monument sign how that intersection is lighted, streetlights?

That is a good question that is not part of tonight's report. I may have to confer with city staff on this one. Okay.

Yeah, I'm just wondering why that street light's there. I don't think there's another continuing road over there, is there? Or is it just a parking business?

Are you referring to the street level imagery shown on the left?

On the east. It looks like it's pointing south.

It's pointing across to the carpet place. So they can get out of the carpet place on the other side.

Okay.

That's what that's for.

Do you know how it's signaled?

Oh, yes.

It's by itself?

I apologize. I thought you were referring to like the street lights, the overhead street lights.

Oh, sorry.

The traffic signal traffic signal. Okay. Understood. Yeah. That is for the, um, a drive entrance to the shopping center. Um, so that's just, uh, because the, the significant traffic at that was at one time at the shopping center and, and likely, I mean, it can support any traffic as well for the proposed rehabilitation, um, So in the 90s when the shopping center was developed, that was designed as a signalized intersection because of the significant customers coming in and out of the shopping center. You have to think of that Target, JCPenney, and an additional commercial tenant. It used to be Dick's. Now it's Merchant Square. All occupied that shopping center. So that would be the reason for the signals specifically for that.

Are there other signals on 39th Street, or is that just a leftover one?

No, so it stops traffic at 39th Street going east and westbound and then directly in and out of that drive entrance.

It also goes to Big Bob's across the street.

Okay, so the one where they're leaving is signaled as well.

Yeah, you can make a left turn into that divided entrance there. It's sort of like a parkway entrance with a median going down and some landscape trees along the... that drive entrance for the shopping center, um, yeah, or exiting is as well. So going, uh, eastbound on 39th street, um, that, that gives you a left, a left turn signal as well.

Okay. All right. Thank you. Are there any other questions of staff? Okay. Um, you guys don't have anything else we can bring the applicant forward now?

Yet that concludes the presentation for tonight's proposal, yeah.

All right. Would the applicant please come forward? Name and address, please.

Good evening. My name is Bill Moore. I'm an attorney with Rouse-Fretz White Law Firm. Our address is 801 West 47th Street, located in Kansas City, Missouri. Here tonight to present to you what I think is a is a wonderful product that is going to be making an entry into the city of Independence. As you saw from the signs, it's going to be at Dillon's Grocery Store. With me tonight are representatives of Phillips Edison, who will be the applicant of this, and also representative from Pickering, if there are any civil engineering questions that might come up. So Gabe did a Wonderful job, as he always does, on the application presentation. I've got a few slides I would like to share with you. You're going to see some of the same things that you've already seen. Brief history. Again, I won't dwell on this, but This property had been zoned C2 for over 50 years. And then in 2023, an applicant came forward with an idea to repurpose the property. Not repurpose the building, repurpose the property. Their proposal was to tear it down and build a multifamily at that location. So it was an interesting idea, unfortunately didn't happen. So again, now we're here tonight to kind of put it back to what it had been for 50 years, back to the C2 designation, and then also requesting that special sign permit. So current conditions and some proposed elevations. I'm going to run through a couple of slides here just to give you a perspective. So this is the perspective from the front of the building, and you'll see up at the top the photo is the current condition of the property, and below is a proposed rendering of what the grocery store would look like when it's developed. Another site, this is in the back of the building, and so this is kind of looking, would be looking south. across from the apartments on the other side of the street, and you'll see the back of the building. Again, the current conditions down below is a rendering of what that back will look like. I will tell you that the trees that are located there, to the extent that those are good trees and doing well, those trees will remain. So now we're going to give you a shot of the property looking back to the west. So this is taken, the shot is taken kind of from the Target parking lot looking west, and below is going to be a rendering of what that building will look like when it's completed from this angle. There we go. And so this is going to be a shot, again, that Gabe showed one that was similar to this from the other side of the building. And again, you'll see this is generally a location where the drive for the pharmacy will come into play. And you'll see the elevation below showing what this would look like. Current conditions of the parking lot, if you've been out there recently, pretty bad shape. We actually had an individual at the neighborhood meeting who showed up and commented about the condition of the parking lot. And you'll see, I think, on the next slide the amount of pavement that the developer is going to be repairing. to make this a more inviting location for people who want to come and shop at the, not only at the grocery store, but the entire shopping center. This is the same site plan you saw earlier, so I'm not going to kind of dwell on that other than to show, than to say on the extreme north side, there's already an existing drive that comes off of Cracker Neck. That's where the cars will come for grocery pickup if they so desire to use that service for the grocery store. You'll see the new entrance kind of just below that, which is for the pharmacy access. Then again, Again, you'll see where the fuel stations will be located. Again, this is a fuel station. It's an accessory used to the grocery store. They provide a rewards program like a lot of the grocery stores have currently, and it would be something similar to that. What I wanted to point out also on this slide is you see kind of the darker gray? That's the area of the parking lot that... The developer will be improving. So you'll see it's going over into the merchant square property also. So they'll be improving that entire area and improving the entrance, the center entrance that we talked about where the special sign permit application is for. couple of photos of signs. So this is on the west side, so this is West Bolger. They're currently in negotiations to try and get their Dylans located on that pylon sign or large monument sign. They don't have that yet, but that's on the west side. That's where Genesis is located. I'm going to jump past this one for a second. So this is now on the east side, and this is where their sign will be allowed to be on, and that's that large monument sign where the Target store has their location. And this sign is on the kind of that extreme east-southeast corner of the entire shopping center. So I want to go back to maybe. There we go. Okay. So this is, again, now this is the sign that's going to go into the center drive that we talked about that Gabe was describing. You'll see, again, off to the right, there's a photo with a rendering of what that sign would look like. We're only asking for an additional two feet. Eight foot is the standard. But with the ability to put a couple of other tenants on this monument sign, in addition to the Dillon's logo and the advertising for the fuel pumps, they need that additional space. So now we're going to jump ahead to this slide. Now this is a slide that's going to show the site triangle. If you're interested in what that might look like for vehicular traffic moving either in or out of that center drive, that dark shaded triangle piece shows you what the site triangle would be for the location of this new monument sign at the in the center median And as you could see it would have no no impairment for either ingress or egress of traffic That that was into the property and So finally, I'm just going to conclude and let you ask questions. We're seeking your approval tonight to rezone this back to C2, what it had been for 50 years, and seeking approval for the special sign permit to allow for Dillon's Grocery Store to come into the community. With that, I'll close. If you have any questions for me, happy to answer to the extent I can. If I can't, I have two gentlemen here who I'm sure can.

Thank you, Bill. Appreciate it. Does anyone have questions?

Chair?

Yes.

Okay, so you guys, are they buying the property then, or are they leasing the property? purchasing it purchasing property okay my next question is going to be then i know you guys the traffic runs right through this entrance have you guys ever thought about moving the entrance to a different spot so that the traffic coming into it doesn't go into the front of the store where people walk in I know they have a lot of problems with, like, Target and all them other people because all the traffic's wanting to get in. And I think it backs up traffic. I know they did that same problem across the street there at the Walmart. I know you guys won't be as busy as them. And so I just see a problem with the traffic coming in. to the place and going into the front. That's one problem I see that I don't like is even when I went there, you always wait for people to get out of the way before you can go in and park. So I just don't know if anybody's ever thought about changing the entrance to bring it on down further so it's closer to the fuel place and then let people park that away instead of going through the front.

That's above my pay grade. I'm going to defer to... Tom, Gabe, Tim, are you the one?

Hi. Tom Barnes with Pickering Firm, civil engineer for the project, address 6363 Poplar Avenue in Memphis, Tennessee. So when the traffic consultant evaluated the site, I guess the intent was to keep keep the existing site condition. Um, they didn't see any issues with, with that drive and the proposed trip generation to the new development. Um, so it, it's in line with the existing, uh, entrance on the east side of the shopping center.

Yeah. But I'm just saying, I have seen problems with it. That's why I'm curious what... I know you guys, because you guys probably did traffic studies and stuff like that, but there hasn't been any traffic there for five years. And also, I'm going to complain about the center entrance, too, because that center entrance, hardly anybody ever uses that one. They either go to either the east or the west side to get in and out of the place. And that's not an eyesore. It's not used. I'm trying to get traffic to flow better in this area than what it was. So that's where my problem is. It's about the traffic flow in and out of this place. Because, like you say, there hasn't been any traffic for five years. I don't know if the city's ever noticed anything. Rick, has anybody ever complained about anything in the past? No.

Well, I would say the current condition obviously is such where we haven't had a lot of traffic there. We'd have to be kind of cautious. We do have some existing entrances on the west side. of cracker next. We'd want to make sure that we align those intersections. Um, again, you know, right now we're looking at a rezoning, so there will obviously be some engineering that'll have to be submitted. And, you know, I know the applicant can certainly consider, you know, flow through the actual parking lot itself. Um, I would guess the main entrance there, uh, that you're talking about there off of 39th street is probably not used just because of the nature of the condition of the existing square itself. But, um, You know, at one point, obviously, it was heavily utilized and there was a need for a traffic signal. You know, we wouldn't put a traffic signal. Yeah, we wouldn't have put a traffic signal there unless the actual warrants met that. That's the reason why you would see that, but obviously... UNDER ITS CURRENT CONDITION, WE DON'T PROBABLY SEE THE FULL TRAFFIC LOAD, BUT, YOU KNOW, IN TERMS OF THE ACTUAL INTERIOR FUNCTIONING AND HOW THAT WORKS, I MEAN, WE'RE GOING TO LOOK AT, AS FAR AS THE CITY, WE'RE GOING TO LOOK AT HOW IT IMPACTS THE RIDAWAY, THE STREETS, THE MAIN STREETS. AND, AGAIN, WHAT WE'VE SEEN SO FAR, THE TRAFFIC STUDY HASN'T SHOWN, LIKE, anything excessive that this site could not handle. But again, you know, that's part of that design.

I don't think there's nothing it can't handle because it's always handled. I mean, JCPenney's, I mean, but we're hoping, I'm thinking they're hoping Dillon's going to probably maybe be a little busier than JCPenney's was. So that's why I'm just curious about that. That's one of the traffic flows that I'm worried about and also Cracker Neck, but I don't think they have to do anything with Cracker Neck, but To my knowledge, Crack-A-Neck was supposed to be widened back there, and it never got widened. Whenever somebody did some type of development, and I can't remember who it was and when, but they were supposed to widen the road back there for back alley access that a lot of people use. It goes over railroad tracks, and it's narrow. It's barely wide enough for two cars, and most of the time people stop and let one car go by before they go to continue down. I think it's only like 20 feet wide, maybe 24. That's a different thing. I don't think that's on them. That's something we need to address on that aspect too.

One thing I would like to point out also on access, whether you're talking about the middle access or you're talking about either of the access points on Krakenick, this is a large shopping center with Target and everything, so there's cross-access easements. The ability to close or an existing access is very problematic because of that.

I see what you're talking about.

And frankly, and I think, Commissioner, you were kind of headed this direction too when you were mentioning about Dillon's maybe attracting more traffic than perhaps JCPenney did in its day. And I think I would echo that. I think, in fact, it will attract more traffic. I think you're going to see more cars using that middle entrance who are coming off of 39th Street, who may choose to drive to the middle, as opposed to coming in off of Cracker Neck. I mean, there's two points of entrance off of Cracker Neck. There's two points of entrance off of, what's that over on the other side? Is that Boulder? Off of Boulder. I think you're going to see more traffic, but I think, as Rick is saying, I think when the plans are submitted and under review, they'll take all that into consideration.

Okay. The double entrance or the entrance area, does it have a stop? I don't remember seeing any stop signs there. I can't remember if there's any there or not. Traveling east and west for when people come in. Do not stop and turn for the people coming in. I don't remember seeing stop signs there.

I don't think there's a stop sign up there. You're talking about coming in off of Cracker Neck?

Coming in off of 39th Street, that double one where the light is in the middle, going in. Can people keep on going left or right? We probably need to make sure that's addressed, too, because I would think you'd want people to come in first and have the other people stop before they come on, like all the other areas around there. I just want to make sure that gets addressed, too. Okay.

And that can certainly be something that we take into consideration when they do submit their engineering. Just looking at the Google Earth, it doesn't appear that there's like some kind of signage or anything when they come into that entrance. So that may be something we'll take into consideration.

Now, on the building itself, nothing's changed on the outside? It's all structurally sound and everything?

Again, above my pay grade. Hi, I'm Tim Goyette. I'm with Phillips Edison. We're located at 11501 North Lake Drive in Cincinnati, Ohio. Thank you. Speaking about the elevations, we're looking to repurpose most of it. It's structurally sound, although we are going to do a full evaluation on the existing structure and make sure any modifications we do will be brought up to code. For the most part, they're looking to paint some of the existing masonry And then at the main entrance, that's where they're going to, you know, have to pop out, put a vestibule. But that's where they're focusing most of the redesign. And then they're going to reuse the interior.

Backside all good. The semis coming in and out the back, food and everything.

Yeah, I mean, it's going to be, you know, renovated to meet their requirements. So if there's dock seals or dock doors that really aren't.

I don't remember paying attention because it's blocked pretty good. You can't see it on the back road. So I just didn't know because I see the yellow parts of the building. I never even saw the semis back in. I just want to make sure they were all good.

Yep, we're not proposing to change any of that.

Yeah, because it's got a good backside on it. It's really hiding stuff pretty good. I like that.

Yeah, it's in good shape.

Anyone else have questions? Okay. Thank you, sir. Rick, I do have a question. I mean, I'm real happy to see Someone like Dylan's come in here and looks like, you know, it's going to be a good store. Someone needs to use that building, of course. Bill had made a comment that if there was good trees there, that they were going to keep them, which I'm happy to hear. And the parking lot resurfacing, of course. My question would be, there's a lot of landscape islands in there that are You really need real landscaping. So is that something that will be a requirement for them to meet?

Yes, we do have landscape islands at the end of parking stalls that we'll have to take a look at when they do submit engineering. And I do believe some of those trees, even in the back of the building, probably have died since the original construction. site plan was approved for this, and so we'll be looking at that when they actually do submit plans for the project. We'll make sure that they're meeting our landscape code.

Okay, and you take into account that even though some of those ash trees out there may still have green leaves on them, that may be time for them to be replaced?

Yeah, we'll look at that. I mean, we do have an updated... planting tree that we allowed in the city that is different than what we had when this development came in. Ash trees is one of those.

I don't know if this is a requirement. It's not really a deal breaker, but I believe there was a sprinkler system in there at one time. Are they required to do anything with that or not?

I mean, there's not really a requirement, but I'm sure that they'll want to take a look at that. In most cases, in a lot of commercial properties, we'll see an irrigation system as well.

It's probably not in the greatest shape at all.

It may not be.

Part of the reason I ask this is because I know that Merchant Square is in there, but it doesn't look like they were required or just haven't done anything. to their parking areas into their, you know, their landscape Island.

So, uh, was that, is there a reason why it may have just been, they just went in as a tenant finish, which, um, wouldn't necessarily kick in all the new landscape requirements for that. So, yeah.

Yeah. Cause they're, they're probably just renting the spot.

Well, yeah. So, so, but the owner, would he be required to, if we pressed him?

Yeah. I mean, I think again, with, you know, again, we're working through the rezoning when they actually do submit plans, we'll go through our code and make sure that they're looking at rezoned as well.

Is that what you're telling?

Um, no, not necessarily. No, no. The only reason this is needing a rezoning is because this piece was our 30 from that, um, apartment complex parts still. Yeah. The middle part and the rest of it with the targets all still see too.

Okay.

So,

Well, it'd be nice if the whole place was redone. So anyway, thanks for answering those questions. Last call. Anybody else? Chair? Yes.

One more question. Yes. Bill, do you know, are they putting electric chargers in too or just gas?

I think we're uncertain about that. Yeah. The plan doesn't call for it right now. I think there's only seven fuel stations, so probably not, I believe.

Well, there's charging stations there. I didn't know because, I mean, that's a nice thing. You charge your car while they go in and shop for food and then come back out. That's why I didn't know if they were doing something like that or not.

Yeah. It's not showing on this plan, and I do know that there are the charging stations down there by Target.

Yeah, there's one by Target.

Right.

Okay. I was just wondering.

OK. Anyone else? All right. I'm going to open the floor up to public comments. Is there anyone here that would like to speak in support of this case? Yes. Just make sure you pull the microphone down a little bit for it. And just give us your name and address, please.

I'm Jo Reimel, 17800 Bolger Road. There are some of us here that are in the condos, and we are in favor of Dillon's. And we can walk to the grocery store or whatever, and we do a lot of walking around there. So we are definitely in favor of it. However, some of us would like to have some more stop signs going on to Cracker Neck, both from where Joanne's was and for this, because they come out of cases and sometimes don't like to stop.

Yeah. Okay. Well, I'm sure the folks here...

I know that isn't tonight's thing, but I thought I'd throw it in anyway.

Well, it never hurts. I agree. So they've heard you, and I'm sure they want to do something about that as well. Thank you. Well, thank you. Anybody else, would they like to speak in favor? Okay.

Hi, my name is Angie Lots. I live at 1326 South Kings Highway in Independence. I also think it's a great idea. I appreciate that you all want to come to our community. I think it's a great idea to have a grocery store here. I've grown up in this area, in the Kansas City area for years, and I always loved Independence, and so I moved my family here when I started to raise a family. And I just think it would be great to have that instead of an empty building in that area. I think that would really uplift our community. My only two concerns, but I do support this, is there's a Casey's right in front of it, but I appreciate the saver for fuel part of it. So I get the purpose of that. But when I'm looking at the map... I don't know about the traffic flow for the fuel area. I think more like the Costco off of 40 Highway, if there's a better way for people to go in and out of there. Just setting that up. Just wanted to mention that. That's all.

All right. Thank you. Not to interrupt the public portion, but do you guys want to speak to that, how the traffic flows through that fuel station? And just so you know, a lot of times when you go to Costco, it's very hard to get in there. So if you're going to be very popular, I didn't know if you had a plan on how to stack the traffic that's coming in there.

Yeah, so I know we did look at an alternative of rotating that fuel 90 degrees. It just, we were able to save some parking with this orientation. So as far as meeting the parking requirements for Dillon's, that's why we chose this layout. As far as the fuel truck coming and entering, he'll circle around the fuel canopy counterclockwise and the fuel pads located on the west side of the fuel canopy, he'll park there and fill those up. But as far as Stacking, concerned, it meets all Dylan's requirements.

So it's just, are there just pumps there? There's no, like, little convenience stores like some of these other places do?

It's just a kiosk. It will have an employee in it, but no kind of access for customers.

So it's like Sam's Club, a Costco, something like that?

Yeah, just a walk-up kiosk.

They both have long lines, so I don't know if Dylan's plans on that or not. So, I mean, that's something that needs to be definitely addressed, C. Okay, thank you.

All right, anybody else here that would like to speak in favor of this case? Okay, anyone here who is opposed to this case? Okay, I don't see anybody trying to gain access to the podium. So I'm going to go ahead and close the public portion of this hearing and would like to entertain motions or questions or whatever you got.

I make a motion we approve case 26100-09 rezoning 17610 East Bulger Road.

Okay, so we're going to do this one first. Do I have a second?

Second.

Thank you. Okay, so we'll take the vote on this, and then we'll vote on the sign.

Commissioner Nesbitt? Yes. Commissioner Ferguson?

Yes.

Commissioner O'Neill? Yes. Commissioner Torres? Yes. Commissioner Young? Yes. Vice Chair Ashbaugh?

Yes. Case 26-109, rezoning at 17610 East Boulder Road has been approved. Now we'll move to the special sign permit.

Chair?

Yes, sir.

I make a motion to approve case 26600-01, special sign permit 17610 East Bulger Road.

I second.

I got two seconds.

Okay, Chair. I got a couple questions here on this sign. Okay. You said the height is 10 feet?

That's correct.

What's Quick Trip and Casey's sign? They look taller than 8 to me, but I wasn't sure.

So they cannot be taller than 8 feet.

Okay, so they're 8 feet too?

I don't know the exact height. That is something we could look into. The proposed monument sign... The reason it's being brought forth tonight is not only a variance to its height, but also because it is part of the unified sign plan. So they have a whole sign package for this grocery store as well as the Boulder Square Shopping Center. So that is one aspect of the application. It's part of the unified sign plan. And I'm not quite certain of the exact heights of those gas station signs to the east and west. So that's something that we can look into, though.

Well, I mean, I don't want to be... mad about but okay so we got quick trip and we got casey's they're both on either side now oh yeah we're gonna let them put a little bit taller sign in so it over sees your sign i don't think that's quite right i know they want to put more people underneath of it but i just um i just don't think it's right on going a little bit higher i don't mind the sign being there i just don't think we i think it should be the same size even they have to do away with the next two below because I don't know what you're saying. Is this Dillon's sign or is it the shopping center's sign?

So I can let Dillon's respond to one part of your comments. My second point would be if there is a condition for approval that the Planning Commission would like to add tonight to the case, that can be made as a condition for approval. Okay. but I would like to give an opportunity to the applicant.

Okay, let's have the applicant come up and address that.

Thank you for your question. The sign is intended to be 10 feet because we need a couple of additional sign panels. That median is owned by Target and also Westmore Rentals, and as part of allowing to build this sign on their property, those two additional signs will likely be taken by them. And I will say that due to the topography...

It's definitely lower, yes. I know it's lower, yes. I saw that.

And in addition, there's the east sign and the west sign. And I don't have an exact height, but they're every bit of 20 to 30 feet for the existing center when it was originally built. So we're not looking to match those. That's the sign panel that we have rights to that's on the out parcel on the east side. East side? Is there one on the west? There's one on the west, but that's for the west property, and we're trying to get rights to be able to get signage on that.

Okay, I just don't remember the one on the east. I know the Casey signs. Is there one there too? I can't remember.

Yeah, there's one on each end, but the one on the west is for the west development. So the one associated with this property is the one on the east, which we're going to put a sign panel there. But that's the reasoning.

There's one on the east? I'm looking at pictures right now.

And just a clarification, Commissioner. So he's referring to, Tim is referring to the multi-tenant shopping center signs. So you've got the Boulder Square sign. Oh, okay. Yeah.

Where Joanne's is?

Yes, that's the one.

That sign there? Okay.

Yeah, that's really tall. And then the one on the other side matches it. and so we're not we're trying to mesh with what's there but one of the requirements is that we match the building materials so what the building is constructed of and then the color palette that we paint is what we would do there for a material standpoint so it's not a replica of those signs but it will match the Dillon's design and complement those two you know, larger signs.

Okay, then my question is going to be, you're wanting to put your Dillon sign in the west side sign, which really is for the property west of Crackernet, correct?

Correct.

Now, how's that going to work if somebody rents out Joanne's?

Yeah, typically what we would do is we would request for a smaller sign panel. It wouldn't be for the full size of the Joanne's. And it could be conditional if they get somebody in that it's something that goes away. But for the most part, we'd like a part of that sign. It doesn't necessarily have to be the full Joann's.

So you haven't got approval for that yet. No. But you do have approval for the east side. So you're going to get some of the merchant sign, I think is what it was, right? Yes. Yes. Okay. I don't see any problem with that other sign since you guys are fighting, because you guys are more really on the east side. And then if they will put the other people's signs down below. There is another sign that's there already. What about that one?

Is that in front of the car wash?

Yeah, it probably is the car wash sign. I mean, this picture shows it's vacant, right? It was In fact, I don't even see it now. Where'd it go? It shows it. Yeah, it's care now. How's it going to interfere with that one or anything?

No. We've had the line of sight looked at. So that was one of the example or one of the designs that we showed. But if you take that further out, it is the field of view is not hindered at all.

Not hindered at all. Okay. Yeah, because, I mean, that's just an empty spot there. Okay, no problem. Thank you. Yep, thanks.

You might have to get back up again because I brought up a question. That sign, you're putting that sign in. How does ownership of that sign go because it's on their property?

We would have to get a sign easement for it. Okay.

And then does everybody who owns a sign on there do they're responsible for their spot?

So we would design and build the sign, and we would give them rights to a sign panel, and they're responsible to have their artwork and their signage vendor put that on.

You guys, if they allow you to do that, you're basically managing the sign? We are, yes. Okay. Are you, and I'm not 100% clear on this, but a lot of times it seems like most times some type of landscaping is required around a sign. Rick, am I correct about that?

We do typically have some kind of landscaping around it.

I know there's some there now, but of course it's going to be demolished. So you're open to doing that as well, complying to that if it's a requirement, I'm assuming?

Yes, absolutely.

All right. Thank you very much. Anybody else have any questions or comments or motions?

We did? Yeah.

Well, that's right. We made that, and then you decided to drag it out. Okay. No, I appreciate those questions, but okay. I guess we're ready for the vote.

Commissioner Nesbitt? Yes. Commissioner Ferguson?

Yes.

Commissioner O'Neill? Yes. Commissioner Torres? Yes. Commissioner Young?

Yes.

Vice Chair Ashbaugh?

Yes. Case 26-600-01, special sign permit at 17610 East Bulger Road has been approved. Our next case to consider is Case 26-175-04, UDO Amendment No. 81, new evidence.

All right.

Thank you, guys.

So as always, we save the best for last. Ordinance updates. So what you have before you is ordinance number 81. Kind of proof positive that we do make a lot of changes to our ordinances over time. So this is to the new information only section of our ordinance. So the way we currently have things set up, we have, for example, like this rezoning case we just heard. This will come to Planning Commission. Planning Commission will make a Recommendation to counsel the public hearing is what we have here where the notifications go out we have members of the public and the applicant they speak when it gets to counsel. The only thing that we do at council is as it is right now in the code, um, we do introduce a case. If there's any new information, typically there's not sometimes it could be, we've had one case since I've been here. That's been that way. Uh, but what it does sometimes do is it leads people to believe that there's another, uh, public hearing at council. And we don't typically do that unless it's an ordinance change, but any rezonings, for example, It's only if there's new information. And so what this code is attempting to do is to help kind of clarify that. Basically what it would do is it would allow a case like this to go to council, and council can consider what the information is here that we've just heard. And so they'll make a decision based on the record of the planning commission. At that time, you know, they can ask staff if there's any questions, but it doesn't lead anybody to confusion to believe that there's another public hearing. The way we kind of set it up right now, it seems as if maybe there's another public hearing, but there's not. So this code attempts to update that, plus what we also update in here is what that new information is. Again, we do require new information to be submitted. We did add a couple of conditions here that kind of makes it more clear what that new information needs to be that would then potentially open up a full public hearing at a council meeting. For example, we do say now that the director and the legal staff have to determine whether or not that new information does lead to a need for a second public hearing at council. For example, that evidence has to be evidence that has to have been material that is issuable. That the council needs to know it can't merely be cumulative in other words It just can't be more information that the Planning Commission already considered just because maybe somebody didn't get an opportunity to speak and it's also Information that could not have been reasonably determined here at at this Planning Commission And so essentially that's really all it is, is just making sure that it's clear what the new information is that can open up a full public hearing at a council meeting. AND THEN THIS BASICALLY CLARIFIES THAT COUNCIL IS ESSENTIALLY REVIEWING THIS CASE BASED ON THE INFORMATION HEARD HERE AT PLANNING COMMISSION AND THEN THEREFORE MAKES IT MORE CLEAR TO PUBLIC THAT THERE ISN'T A SECOND PUBLIC HEARING AT A COUNCIL MEETING. REALLY THAT'S IT IN A NUTSHELL. AND I HAVE, YOU KNOW, STAFF DOES RECOMMEND THIS UPDATE AND I'M OPEN FOR ANY QUESTIONS YOU MAY HAVE.

Thank you, Rick. Any questions?

I would add this is something that city management wanted us to take a look at in order to make sure that we've had people, you know, obviously come here and then they go to a council meeting and they think it's another public hearing. Even though they can speak at a council meeting at the beginning on any topic they wish to, again, we don't typically open up another public hearing at a council meeting unless there's new information. And so this was really just an attempt as we look through a lot of our different codes to make sure that it's clear and concise and then the public is more aware of what we're actually doing.

Okay. Thank you. Makes sense to me. Nobody else has any questions or comments. I guess we're ready to vote.

Chair. Yes. I make a motion to approve case 26175-04 UDO amendment number 81.

Thank you. Second.

Chair. Yes. You got to open to the floor and close it to the floor.

Oh, really? Even though there's nobody out there.

Even though there's nobody out there.

Okay, but you're always a stickler for that. Okay. Is there anybody here that we can't see who would like to speak in favor of this case? Seeing none, is there anybody here opposed? Okay. Public hearing is closed. Add a motion. Do I have a second? Second. Got a second. Let's take the vote.

Commissioner Nesbitt.

Yes.

Commissioner Ferguson.

Yes.

Commissioner Young?

Yes.

Commissioner Torres?

Yes.

Commissioner O'Neill? Yes. And Vice Chair Eshbaugh? Yes.

You did that just to confuse me.

Thanks for that contribution. Case 26-17504, UDO amendment number 81, new evidence has been approved. Is there any discussion or whatever that we need to take home with us and mull over?

I don't have any information to provide you guys tonight.

Anybody want to share something or ask a question? Okay. Well, I'm going to close this meeting then at 7.09 p.m. Thank you. I did make one mistake.