The 2,007-square foot stone and tan, two-story house with four bedrooms for an occupancy of 10 people. According to Jackson County records, this house was constructed within the past year.
Characteristics of the Area:
The surrounding single-family neighborhood, of similar new homes, was mostly constructed during two-time periods; before the 2008 financial crisis, and within the last five years. The subdivision plat east of Jackson Drive is nearly complete, with just a couple of lots left.
Parking:
The property has a two-car driveway leading to a two-car garage. Four cars can park off-street on the lot: two in the driveway and two in the garage. Additionally, a car could park on the street out front, but the guest rule book states that there will be no parking on the street overnight.
Unruly Guests/Security:
The property will be listed on the VRBO and Airbnb sites. The property manager indicates that she lives 9-minutes from the property. The manager intends to provide:
1. Guests with the rules to abide by, that must be signed before the stay;
2. Neighbors with the property manager’s number;
3. Guests with one warning (if problems continue, they will be removed from the property);
4. A noise monitoring system installed and activated prior to approval of the business license.
Parties will not be allowed on the property. Renters will sign a statement that additional guests, beyond the 8 to 10 people, will not be allowed. There will only be one warning given before their removal.
Trash Service:
Trash service will be provided by AAA trash service.
Inspections:
The property has been inspected by the Fire Inspector and passed the Initial Short-Term Rental Safety Inspection. The following items will be provided to guest:
1. A map identifying escape routes shall be provided to each guest and posted in each guest room;
2. Carbon Monoxide detection as required by code;
3. Child-proofed electrical outlets;
4. Emergency contact information for the owner or manager shall be provided to each guest and posted in each guest room;
5. Fire extinguishers as required by code;
6. Smoke detectors as required by code.
There are no other Short-Term rentals in the immediate vicinity, therefore this application follows the density limitations of the City Code.
Draft Planning Commission minutes:
"Case 22-400-15 – Short-Term Rental – 2316 S. Hanover Avenue
Staff Presentation
Brian Harker presented the case. Mr. Harker presented the Commission with a vicinity map, noting the area and surrounding zoning. He presented the Commission with an aerial map indicating the project area and explained the surrounding land uses. Mr. Harker outlined the following conditions:
1. The Short-Term Rentals shall obtain a business license in accordance with the City Code and comply with Article 3, Chapter 5 of the City Code. The occupation license number shall be listed on all advertisements and online platforms.
2. The business must comply with all safety and other standards established by the Short-Term Rental Section of the UDO.
3. The maximum occupancy of the premises shall be limited to 8-adults (10-total).
Applicant Comments
Misty Kearney, 25550 E. Bundschu Road, stated she’s abiding by every requirement and City Code that the City is requesting. She noted if the neighbors feel their documents are enforceable, they are able to contact an attorney to take them to civil court. Ms. Kearney said when they purchased the home, they were not given any information that a short-term rental would not be allowed. She said she understands they don’t want rentals, but even if it doesn’t become a short-term rental, it will become a long-term rental. Ms. Kearney said if it was so important to the neighbors, to keep the CID/HOA documents valid, then they should have kept paying their dues so they could protect what can go into their community. She stated she’s done everything that has been asked of her, but the neighbors are still laughing at her in the courtroom. Ms. Kearney said she’s already furnished this home in preparation for it to become a short-term rental. She noted she is also a life-long Independence resident and believes she should also have rights as a property owner.
In response to Commissioner Nesbitt’s question, Ms. Kearney said she does request the name of everyone that would be staying at the short-term rental, so she can vet them all. She noted with a long-term rental, she would only vet those signing the lease, but they can have visitors and she would have no control over that. Once a long-term renter is in the house, she doesn’t have rights to enter the home or control over what they do at the property. Ms. Kearney said with a short-term rental she can enter that property at any time with no notice and can terminate their stay immediately if there are issues.
Commissioner Preston told Ms. Kearney that he sympathizes with her and noted that every case is evaluated on its own merit. He said the CID/HOA issue is not why the first case was denied. He said it’s about preserving the integrity of the neighborhood that so many of the neighbors came out to talk about. Commissioner Preston advised Ms. Kearney that she can appeal the decision to the City Council. Mr. Harker noted the applicant has five days to appeal a decision, so it can go to the City Council for review. Mr. Borders reviewed the appeal process and noted the City Council does not hear new testimony.
Chairwoman McClain said it’s obvious that Ms. Kearney has put her heart and soul into this and sympathizes with her. She said she frequently stays at VRBOs and that on some, hosts do require the name of every person that will be staying on the property.
Public Comments
William L. Hoots, 2318 S. Hartland Court, stated he’s about a block away from this property and believes some long-term renters do take care of their properties. He noted he’s also against this application for the same reasons he stated in the previous case’s public hearing. Mr. Hoots also expressed concern over parking.
Mr. Harker stated there would be two spaces available in the garage and two spaces available in the driveway.
Shelley Lee, 2400 S. Glenview Avenue, stated this is not a personal vendetta. She said Ms. Kearney is a member of the CID because she pays dues. Ms. Lee stated she doesn’t believe the developer did their due diligence if they did not tell Ms. Kearney that a Short-Term Rental would not be allowed in this neighborhood.
Commissioner Preston stated he wanted to make it clear that the Planning Commission has nothing to do with the CID or the HOA.
Tamara Atkinson, 2320 S. Hanover Avenue, said she’s a live-long Independence residence. She said she’s had good discussions with Ms. Kearney about the differences between short-term rentals and long-term rentals. Ms. Atkinson said her main concern is that she wants to know her neighbor and doesn’t want different people coming into the property each week/month. She stated she was told when she purchased her home that there would not be rentals allowed.
Sonia Barnhard, 2317 S. Heartland Court, stated she’s lived in her house for 14 years. She said the developer made a lot of promises about this neighborhood and she knows a lot about disappointment. Ms. Barnhard said she’s always felt safe in their neighborhood, but recently her son’s vehicle was broken into. She stated she concerned about the safety of the neighbors with a short-term rental going into this location.
Linda Finger, 2323 S. Hanover Avenue, stated her home is her dream home and she hopes to retire in this home. She said she doesn’t want to see a short-term rental in her neighborhood. Ms. Finger said she’s concerned about property values with rentals going in.
Motion
Commissioner Nesbitt made a motion to approve Case 22-400-15 – Short-Term Rental – 2316 S. Hanover Avenue, with conditions as outlined by staff, and adding a condition that requires a noise monitoring device. Commissioner Preston seconded the motion. The motion failed with zero affirmative votes.
Chairwoman McClain stated she lives in an area with four Short-Term Rentals and has never had one issue. She noted she also lives in a historic district where people want to visit for the historic sites. Chairwoman McClain said at first, she had the same reservations that neighbors have expressed tonight. She stated that the Prairie Landing neighborhood is surrounded with residential, and she understands that neighbors want to protect that. Chairwoman McClain stated she sympathizes with Ms. Kearney because she also understands her desire to run a successful business and to bring visitors to Independence."
The Planning Commission also heard Case 22-400-12 where testimony was presented that referenced both cases. The draft Planning Commission minutes for that case are below:
"Case 22-400-14 – Short-Term Rental – 20013 E. 24th Terrace Court S.
Staff Presentation
Brian Harker presented the case. Mr. Harker presented the Commission with a vicinity map, noting the area and surrounding zoning. He presented the Commission with an aerial map indicating the project area and explained the surrounding land uses. Mr. Harker outlined the following conditions:
1. The Short-Term Rentals shall obtain a business license in accordance with the City Code and comply with Article 3, Chapter 5 of the City Code. The occupation license number shall be listed on all advertisements and online platforms.
2. The business must comply with all safety and other standards established by the Short-Term Rental Section of the UDO.
3. The maximum occupancy of the premises shall be limited to 8-adults (10-total).
Applicant Comments
Misty Kearney, 25550 E. Bundschu Road, stated she bought this property as an investment property. She said by managing it herself, she will ensure the property and lawn stays in good condition. Ms. Kearney stated she understands there are neighbors concerned but believes this is a better option than a long-term rental. She said in an effort to vet each guest, possible tenants have to request to rent the home and cannot book without her approving the stay. Ms. Kearney stated in her other rentals, she sees a lot of baseball and softball families that come to Kansas City for tournaments. She said she’s given neighbors her phone number and they can contact her if they have any issues.
In response to Commissioner Nesbitt’s question, Ms. Kearney stated the house is brand new.
In response to Commissioner Michell’s question, Ms. Kearney said they plan to add a noise monitoring device and cameras to the property, if approved. Commissioner Michell requested this requirement be added to the conditions required.
Clinton Kearney, 25550 E. Bundschu Road, stated his wife, Ms. Kearney, does a good job at vetting any possible tenants. He stated she looks them up on all social media accounts and she won’t approve their booking if it looks like they won’t be a good tenant.
Public Comments
Billie Brooks, 20004 E. 24th Terrace Court S, stated she and other neighbors signed protest petitions. She said it was her understanding they could be turned in before the meeting and requested they be taken into consideration.
Assistant City Attorney John Mautino advised the City Code stipulates that they must be turned in 24-hours in advance of the meeting.
Ms. Brooks stated she opposes this short-term rental application. She advised she purchased her property 13-years ago because the area was safe, quiet, and secluded. Ms. Brooks said she does not want strangers coming into the neighborhood and the extra noise and traffic. She noted only the person renting the property would be vetted, not all the occupants planning to stay at the home. Ms. Brooks stated Prairie Landing is in a Community Improvement District (CID) and provided the Planning Commission with a handout. The document provided is a First Amended and Restated Declarations of Covenants, Conditions and Restrictions for the Prairie Landing CID. Ms. Brooks stated short-term rentals are prohibited in Prairie Landing according to this document. She outlined several sections of this document where it states that this type of activity should not be allowed.
Commissioner Michell asked if the Planning Commission should consider this document when making their decision. Mr. Mautino advised this document has no bearing on this application because it’s a private document and unrelated to the present use application before the Planning Commission. He further clarified if there is a document deals with real property, and it’s still enforced, all of which we don’t know with respect to this particular document, then it could give rise to others interested, but don’t relate to land use applications such as the one before the Planning Commission.
Commissioner Michell stated this document is not relative to the decision tonight but doesn’t mean that the neighbors cannot lean on the enforcement if the document is in effect. Commissioner Michell then asked if it’s relevant information to know how many people signed the protest petition, even if it’s not valid. Mr. Mautino advised if someone went around to get signatures, they could testify before the commission, although hearsay, that they spoke to however many neighbors and that could be taken into consideration.
Shelley Lee, 2400 S. Glenview Avenue, stated the CID is active and the document provided by Ms. Brooks is valid. She stated she does not want businesses run in their neighborhood.
Tom Carlson, 20000 E. 24th Terrace Court S, said he doesn’t understand why this document wouldn’t be taken into consideration when he pays into the CID. He said he’s against this application and agrees with Ms. Brooks. Mr. Carlson stated this subdivision was supposed to be owner occupied single-family houses and now many are buying the properties as investments.
Linda Finger, 2323 S. Hanover Avenue, stated they just bought their house last year and are long-time Independence residents. Ms. Finger said they bought this house because it was in a safe, quiet neighborhood and she doesn’t believe this is a good location for a short-term rental.
Williams Hoots, 19805 E. 24th Terrace Court S, stated he was given the covenants for his house from the developer. He said he believes the Planning Commission should take the covenants into account before making their decision.
William L. Hoots, 2318 S. Hartland Court, stated he moved to Prairie Landing because it was going to be a single-family residential area. He was promised that no short-term rentals would be allowed in the neighborhood. He stated he’s also concerned that if these are approved, investors will purchase other properties in their subdivision that have been vacant for some time and try to turn them into short-term rentals as well.
Ms. Kearney stated this home will be a rental, whether it be short-term rental or long-term rental. She said she prefers it to be a short-term rental because it gives them more control over who stays at the home. Ms. Kearney said when she purchased this home, she was advised that the HOA is not active.
In response to Commissioner Nesbitt’s question, Ms. Lee stated there is an active CID for the properties in the neighborhood and clarified that the HOA is not currently active. She said the HOA would be under the CID document.
Mr. Kearney said if the CID has an issue with having a Short-Term Rental in the neighborhood, the CID would need to bring their complaint to the Planning Commission.
Commissioner Comments
Commissioner Preston stated the Assistant City Attorney has advised that the Commission should only look at the issue in front of them, and that the legitimacy or legality of the documents provided by neighbors is not something they can take into consideration. Commissioner Preston said he’s typically in favor Short-Term Rentals; however, due to the number of neighbors that would be negatively affected, he doesn’t feel this is a good fit for the neighborhood.
Commissioner Michell said he agrees with Commissioner Preston.
Commissioner L. Wiley stated until there are better regulations in place, she will be against this Short-Term Rental.
Commissioner Nesbitt said the neighbors have spoken and they want this to remain a single-family residential neighborhood.
Motion
Commissioner Preston made a motion to approve Case 22-400-14 – Short-Term Rental – 20013 E. 24th Terrace Court S., with conditions as outlined by staff, with the additional requirement of having a noise monitoring device. Commissioner Nesbitt seconded the motion. The motion failed with zero affirmative votes.
Commissioner Michell asked if there’s a way to streamline the next case since it’s very similar to the case that was just heard. Chairwoman McClain stated each case needs to be heard on its own merit."