Planning Commission - Regular Meeting

Good. Good evening. This is the Planning Commission. Would you please stand and join me for the Pledge of Allegiance?

I pledge allegiance to the flag of the United States of America.

All right, good evening. And on behalf of the City of Independence, welcome to the Planning Commission for July the 14th, 2026. Just a few comments before we get started tonight. For those that do wish to speak tonight, I am going to ask that you remain always civil. We've seemed to have gotten away from that in some of the meetings. I will gavel you if we have discourteous, if we have crude, or if we have very loud shouting. And at that point, the very nice police officers may escort you out. So just keep that in mind. We want everyone to speak, have an opportunity to share your thoughts and feelings, but we'd like it to remain very civil and productive. Also at this time, We will limit speaking time to five minutes per person. All right. For those that do speak, you're going to want to introduce yourself and your home address and address all your comments to me, the chair. Any questions or any comments about somebody else will not be accepted. And no names of anyone will be accepted either. So at this point, if you do believe you would like to speak tonight, I'm going to go ahead and ask you to stand and take an oath. Anyone who thinks they'll speak? All right. Raise your right hand, please. I I solemnly swear to tell the truth to this commission. I if so say I will. Alright, thank you so much. Alrighty staff, I'm ready for roll call.

Commissioner Nesbitt here. Commissioner Ferguson here. Commissioner Ashbaugh present Commissioner O'Neill present Commissioner Torres here. Commissioner Young here and Chairman Wiley.

Here.

Thank you.

All right. Chair. Yes. I make a motion we approve the consent agenda.

All right. I have a motion. Do I have a second?

Second.

I have a first and a second. Thank you very much. Any comments about, or would anybody like to pull an item off the consent agenda? All right. Seeing none, I will call for the vote.

Commissioner Nesbitt. Yes. Commissioner Ferguson. Yes. Commissioner Ashbaugh. Yes. Commissioner Torres. Yes. Commissioner Young. Yes. And Chairperson Wiley.

Yes. And the motion. You missed me.

Commissioner O'Neill. Yes.

All right. Now a little bit more about why you're

Your church needs the association and community of the board without having the official written notification giving them a granted time period to do so.

Commissioner, I am the HOA co-chairperson, and I am responsible for community. And we have a wonderful community made up majority of senior citizens. And we're very protective of the surrounding area. They walk dogs. They're home alone. And we want to make sure that they're safe. And we have a really good community. And we granted that for a temporary situation, nothing permanent. And the noise complaints, we had several complaints. And it's not that we're trying to, we want her to prosper in everything she does. But in our community, we want it to be a family community. We want to know what's going on with our families. We want to be of resources to our families throughout the community. And that's why we're against having a short-term rental. Thank you.

Excuse me. Thank you. Anyone else present that would like to speak in opposition? All right.

I apologize. I did not.

Okay. Go ahead. Come forward. Raise your right hand. Do you swear to tell the truth? And if so, say I will.

Yes, I will.

Okay. Your name and your address, please.

My name is Valerie Martin and I live at 4738 South Union Avenue there in Voorheesville and Independence.

Okay. What would you like us to know?

As a resident there in the community, the reason that I chose to purchase there and so forth was based on a lot of the information in the bylaws that has already been mentioned as far as not having short-term rentals and so And like before, the residents there, and as residents, I want to make sure that our community stays safe. You know, the residents there, we don't have many problems, and we're family. And so a lot of us, the reason we purchased there was because of the bylaws, and we abide by those.

Anything else?

No.

All right. Thank you very much. Anyone else who'd like to speak in opposition? Yes, ma'am. I'm sorry. You have to come back up to the mic if you want to speak again. Yes, ma'am. And just state your name and address again.

Janita Gray. We have some of our residents here, and they came in support of us because, like I said, we're our family, so they're not all going to get up and speak, but we're representing our community as a whole.

Okay. Thank you very much.

Thank you.

Anyone else would like to speak in opposition? Anyone else? OK. I'm going to invite the applicant forward again. You can address anything that they raised as a concern.

Hello. Hi. Should I say my name again? You're fine. OK. Yeah. So we have consistent noise monitoring in the unit. And obviously, like the other occupants on the other side of the duplex, they do have my contact information. And I am in pretty consistent contact with them. So this is the first time I'm hearing of any noise complaints. And I do wish that these things were, I mean obviously the planning commission has been known for a while. I do wish these things were directed to me. Everyone has my email and my phone number and if there was contestants to have known before this meeting.

Can you tell me about your noise monitor and how does it alert you and what do you do about it?

Yeah, of course. So we have, it's also through Airbnb. It was recommended from the city of Independence from, I believe it's pronounced Minuit. Yeah. There are different restrictions. It also allows to make sure there are no parties, no smoking, anything of that manner. And it gives notifications for any spikes in the noise, as well as we're able to track to see just general talking, things like that. So when guests do arrive, we're able to see that as well.

Excuse me. Anything else you'd like to address that you heard? No, I think that's it. Okay. Any additional questions for the applicant commissioners?

Chair.

Yes, Commissioner Nesbitt.

Ma'am, it was brought up about the bylaws. Do you know about that?

I did, yes. I did receive verbal confirmation, but I did not realize it was just for the short term being the two months rather than the whole year as we were applying for the year, and then it was changed to the two months.

Okay, so basically you got approval for two months through the board, but then you didn't go back. I mean, because it sounds like to me the bylaw says you're not supposed to rent that area out. Is that correct?

I... The HOA bylaws that you're not supposed to... Yeah, so I guess my confusion came from we were having a changing HOA board and that I was being pretty consistent in contact with. So I had... I was told verbally it would be all right as long as we complied with the city ordinance and all of the rules given. And I think that That is about where I stand with.

So that's where you stand as that you thought. The thing is, did you get a copy of the bylaws when you bought the property so you know exactly what they all said or anything?

Yes, that's correct.

So in my understanding that you're really not supposed to have rental property in there after you buy something. That's what it looks like, sounds like to me. Is that correct?

Um. I think it is correct in the sense of the bylaws are still changing, and I was under the assumption that it could be still under development, and this was one of the things. But, yes, you're correct.

Okay. That's just that. Okay. That answered it. Thank you.

All right. Any additional questions? All right. Thank you. Yes, Commissioner.

So based on what you've heard today, Do you wish to withdraw your application and maybe come back at a different time after you've talked to the board? Or do you want us to go ahead and proceed? I don't mean to put you on the spot.

I guess I was not aware. Sorry. Excuse me. Sorry.

You know what, I think, let me stop you for a moment and let's get some direction from staff. Rick, I'd like to ask you, would you kind of address our decision and role tonight versus the homeowners association?

Sure, yes. So understand that, you know, this body doesn't enforce the HOA covenants. Those are private between this particular applicant and the HOA. That being said, I mean, obviously this board can consider whatever evidence that they choose to consider, but we don't really enforce those HOA covenants. It really is incumbent upon the applicant to make sure that they are in compliance with whatever the regulations may be with their HOA. We don't make those legal interpretations in whether or not they're in compliance or not. So hopefully that helps a little bit with that.

Could you also clarify... for the laws of the state of Missouri is a short-term rental small business and what that, is that not allowed in homes?

Well, you know, the state of Missouri does allow businesses to operate out of homes, for example. So, like I said, it really depends on how the HOA covenants are written. We can't really, we're not here to be able to interpret that. But, you know, State as well as a city does allow home-based businesses. And so that's kind of where this would fall under But again, it's really incumbent upon the applicant to make sure that they're in compliance with whatever HOA covenants that they may have signed on to when they purchase the property Okay, that helps just I think some context go ahead and Commissioner you had another question for So

if we take a vote and it's approved or denied, if it's denied, and something's able to work out later on, there's no reason why she couldn't reapply, correct?

That is correct.

Okay, but, okay, so do you understand? You can go forward and we can approve or deny it, but you're still going to have to deal with the board. So I'm asking with you, you want to just withdraw it for now and then just talk to the board and then come back at a later time?

Yeah, no, I apologize. Well, you're fine.

I understand why you probably didn't know. So it's OK.

I think withdrawing for now would be a good idea. And I'm glad. Oh my gosh, sorry. Yeah, I'm glad to. I mean, I've lived at the property since 2023. So I'm quite aware about the family. There is But um, yeah like knowing now Like how the residents feel about it. It's definitely opened my eyes and my perspective person Wiley.

Yes one of the things that I would I would recommend is to have her not withdraw the application I would much rather have the item be postponed indefinitely. That way, as she goes through the HOA board and decides to bring it back forward, there isn't that reapplication fee or application fee. We can just bring it back at a much quicker pace, assuming that she clears all the hurdles that she wants to clear.

Okay.

Ma'am, do you understand what he was saying?

Yes, I do. Thank you very much. The experience of going through all of the licensing and the business opportunities were great for me to learn. Yeah, thank you very much for your time. Yeah, thank you.

Madam Chair. All right.

Yes.

I'd like to move that we postpone this item indefinitely.

Okay. I have a motion to postpone and a second from Commissioner O'Neill.

Chair, can we put case number 26478 on there?

Yes. Would you please amend that motion?

I would like to amend my motion by stating that we would like to postpone indefinitely case number 26400-78 short-term rental at 123 808 East 47th Terrace Court South.

All right. All right. I have a first and a second to the amended motion. All right. Any additional conversation? All right. We're going to go ahead and close the public hearing. And I will call for the vote.

Commissioner Nesbitt?

Yes.

Commissioner Ferguson?

Yes.

Commissioner Ashbaugh? Yes. Commissioner O'Neill? Yes. Commissioner Torres? Yes. Commissioner Young? Yes. Chairperson Wiley?

Yes. And the motion does pass to postpone indefinitely 7 to 0. And I've also got to look up the number.

Case number 26478. Thank you.

All right, our second public hearing, excuse me, our second other business is case number 26480, short-term rental, 1215 East South Avenue.

Yes, the applicant for this case is Jose Mejia. and that located at the address of 1215 East South Avenue. So if you look at the vicinity map, it's basically an area that's three or four blocks northwest of where Lee Summit Road crosses 23rd Street. And so here is the notification map showing all the properties that receive notification notice. So this is in an area zoned R12, but is dominated by single-family residences. So as far as the property characteristics go, some of the highlights are that the living area of this property is 1,056 square feet. They've constructed a new two-car driveway. They can accommodate up to four vehicles, and they do have room for one parking on the street. What should be noted, and this picture will show it momentarily, The house has been extensively rehabbed. So as you can see, that is the same location there, as you can tell by the garage off to the left there. Okay. Here's the floor plan showing living room and bedroom up front and bedroom toward the rear, kitchen area, and master bedroom with its own bath there up at the northwest. And then you can see the parking plan here. As far as nearby short-term rentals, this is distant from any others. There's one to the northeast, not too far. The others are south of 23rd Street and over toward Nolan Road a little more. So staff recommends approval of this short-term rental with stated conditions. Of note here is that it would be limited to eight adults in total for the four bedrooms provided. And I'm ready to take any questions you may have.

All right. Thank you very much, Brian. Any questions for staff? OK. All right. Thank you very much. I will call the applicant forward. Is the applicant present? All right. I will go ahead and see if anyone's present who would like to speak in favor of this case. Anyone to speak in favor? Okay, is there anyone who'd like to speak in opposition? Anyone to speak in opposition? All right, seeing none, any questions for staff?

Chair.

Yes, Commissioner.

Okay, Brian, they're not here, so how are they working with?

I mean, I have had difficulty getting in contact with them in the last couple weeks.

They were informed by email with staff report and agenda of the meeting. Okay, but have they applied? I mean, when they applied, have they did everything appropriately for everything to go ahead and go through? Yes. So they've been good applicants? Yes. Okay, thanks.

All right. Any additional questions? All right. I'm going to go ahead and close the public hearing.

Chair.

Yes, Commissioner.

I make a motion to approve case 26480, short-term rental, 1215 East South Avenue.

Okay. I have a first. I second. And I have a second from Commissioner Ferguson. All right. I will call for the vote.

Commissioner Nesbitt? Yes. Commissioner Ferguson? Yes. Commissioner Ashbaugh? No. Commissioner O'Neill?

Yes.

Commissioner Torres? Yes. Commissioner Young?

Yes.

And Chairperson Wiley?

No. And the case passes 5-2. That was case number 26480. All right. That leaves us to our other business, Case 3. It's Case 2617503. And we welcome and thank you, Tom, for leading us.

Good evening, Planning Commission and Chair. I'm going to get this closer to me. Tonight we're presenting UDO Amendment Number 80, which establishes regulations related to data processing and hosting facilities, also known as data centers, as well as battery energy storage systems, or BESS, not to be confused with Bess Truman. So I apologize for the dad joke there. The purpose for this amendment is to establish modern use specific standards related to data centers and to battery energy storage systems. We want to provide clear expectations to applicants while providing protections to surrounding neighborhoods, infrastructure, and public safety. Lastly, we also want to provide a predictable framework that protects the public health, safety, and welfare while supporting economic development. As you've heard in the news, data centers can bring significant investment, but they can also create unique land use considerations related to their size and to their use. Best facilities are important for grid reliability as well as renewable energy, but with that comes safety considerations, so we have to ensure that any of those items are addressed so that they are safe in the community. The proposed amendment creates clear use specific standards that are not currently addressed within the UDL. So this amendment, we create three categories of data processing uses. We have the Accessory facilities, think of those as serving a hospital, a school, a campus, or a small facility which is no larger than 2.5 megawatts. And what that relates to as far as building size is about 20,000 square feet in floor area. And then major facilities, which is more than two and a half megawatts. And so this tiered approach ensures that we have tailored the regulations to the size and scale as well as to the potential impacts. This amendment also creates the new article that addresses the battery energy storage systems. So kind of going through this one by one, starting with the accessory data centers. As I mentioned, this supports the primary use, schools, universities, hospitals, large campuses. They cannot operate as a standalone data center, nor can they serve as providing data hosting to third parties, so they cannot sell their services. They must be located entirely in an enclosed building, and they must comply with all adopted building, fire, electrical, mechanical, all the codes that the city has. Moving up one level to the small data processing facilities, again, this is less than 2.5 megawatts. These small facilities are located in the C2, C3, BP, and I1 facilities. zoning districts provided that they comply with all of the requirements spelled out in section 14-429. Some of those include the setbacks based on the underlying zoning district, there is some flexibility where if the small data processing facility locates in existing buildings where There's no exterior improvements that the existing building, those setbacks would comply. But it also includes screening requirements for mechanical equipment as well as generators. We also have parking that is based on employees, not necessarily the building size. Um, centers generally have few employees and don't receive, generally don't receive visitors. So it's based, so parking is based on employees. Uh, they do have some performance standards where they have to comply with, uh, the noise regulations that the city already has in place. The lighting regulations city has in place. It does require, uh, the cooling efficiency of a closed loop system or if in the future, whatever, um, efficient cooling system is at that time. We also have in there the small data centers have to comply with the generator testing requirements. In the ordinance, it outlines the hours that those can be tested and puts parameters around how frequently and how long that testing can occur. Lastly, the small data centers have to submit annual compliance reports, and they also have to abide by the decommissioning requirements that are laid out in the proposed ordinance. Jumping to the major data center, these are facilities that require 2.5 megawatts or more. This is only allowed in the I-1 district. That is the industrial district. with a special use permit. So a special use permit puts that public notification out there and invites the public to the Planning Commission as well as the City Council. Within that section for major data centers, some of the important standards that are proposed is a minimum 100 foot setbacks for equipment ancillary equipment keep in mind this is significantly more than what our current i-1 district has and also keep in mind within that section there's there's a host of other performance standards that they must meet again it's going to be noise lighting host of other things that even though 100 feet doesn't seem like much, in order to comply with some of the other regulations, the setbacks are going to be more than that requirement. Major data centers must have a 500-foot separation from residential uses and other uses such as parks, schools, daycares, hospitals, et cetera. That is similar to how we treat some of the other land uses, and that measurement is measured property line to property line. So if you have a large property and, say, the data center is built kind of in the middle so that it can comply with the performance standards, that 500 foot is measured from the property line to the nearest property line. We also are proposing a 100-foot buffer. This, if you are aware, you know, we generally have a requirement for 20-foot buffers between incompatible uses, so like single family and commercial or industrial. They have to provide a 20-foot buffer. We are proposing a 100-foot buffer for which again is significantly more than what we currently require. And then on top of that, increase the landscape requirements by 25%. So again, we're getting significant buffer to separate these two uses. I mentioned before... Did you have...

pictures to go with your explanation or are you supposed to be scrolling through stuff or not no i don't have a okay so people can't see what you're you just gotta listen what you're talking about okay that's why i'm sorry i should have mentioned this sooner but i'm sitting there i'm going quite all right that's what i'm saying well we usually have pictures they usually go through these as they're doing it but i just want to make sure okay thanks uh jump me back in so uh i mentioned

about with the small data centers, they have the generator testing requirements. Again, it's the same for the major must comply with the noise ordinance. There's limits on when they can test, how long they can test, all those things. There's information or there's requirements in there that In certain circumstances, they may have to add noise attenuation to meet the noise requirements. Major data centers must comply with the closed loop or other equivalent low-water cooling systems. Major data centers have to have a neighborhood meeting before they submit their special use permit application. This neighborhood meeting, they would notify all the property owners within one mile of the notice. So pretty substantial community involvement when you're dealing with a major data center. Along with that, they would have the posting of the public notice sign. We do have those larger public notice signs for larger developments, and those could be used as well. major data centers again if they are seeking economic development incentives they would have to submit a community benefit agreement to the city again that's only if they are asking for financial incentives that does not state that the city will grant that incentives but what that does is that increases the transparency of that application. Going along, major data centers have to have a decommissioning plan as well as financial assurance as part of that to ensure that if they decommission that, that there are the funds available to make sure that it gets done in accordance with the proposed amendment. So that's the three different types of data centers moving to the battery energy storage systems. So this is the second portion of the amendment and establishes entirely new regulations for utility scale battery storage facility. Currently, the UDO doesn't have any standards that govern these facilities. Um, this proposed amendment applies again to the utility scale. So this is anything larger than 600 kilowatts per hour. And you're asking why are under 600 kilowatt hours exempt from this? Those are not considered utility scale, uh, uh, battery energy and fall under the international fire code chapter 12 energy storage systems. Anything above that would fall under the NFPA 855, which falls under the International Fire Code and regulates large-scale energy storage systems. So best facilities would have to have 100-foot setback from all property lines, as well from parks, schools, daycares, hospitals, and other similar types of uses. The buffer yard, again, so whenever you have the incompatible uses, the UDO, as it applies to normal development, is a 20-foot buffer. This, for the battery energy storage systems, it's a 50-foot buffer with that high-impact landscaping required. They have to have a mandatory 7-foot solid wall. with security and screening around the entire facility.

Visibly more than what we've done before from a setback and some of the other things. In your opinion, is that the right amount and is it required based on the concerns?

So, like you said, it is a balancing act to strike that balance between economic development.

My voice is to my fellow commissioners and say, we need more info. We don't know. I'm a landscaper. I don't know about this stuff. But I can read, and I think we're a little bit lacking on stuff, and we need to be as prepared as we can. So I'm going to be a denier.

Okay. Anyone else? All right. I will call for the vote.

Commissioner Ferguson. No. Commissioner Nesbitt. No. Commissioner O'Neill.

Yes.

Commissioner Torres. No. No. Chair Wiley.

Now, the motion does fail. Six to one. I was thinking, yes, that adds up to seven. And I would just add, I always like to add my comment. With that, we do just... I don't think any of us disagree that a UDO is needed. Just use the moratorium time to really bring forth just a great document that can be a little more forward thinking. But I know you guys, I personally know how hard you have worked to create a balanced UDO with the information we've known. So I truly do thank you for your time and effort. I hope you can breathe easier knowing you have a few months to work on it, hopefully. um obviously we're just recommending so we'll see what the city council says so all right any final comments all right i want to thank everybody for your thoughtful and civil participation and have a great night this meeting is adjourned you okay no are you okay Thank you for voting yes, because I think it shows we are very thoughtful and nice.

Alana, nice to meet you in person.