[0:00] Everyone stand for the pledge of

[0:02] allegiance, please. I pledge algiance to

[0:05] the flag of the United States of America

[0:07] [clears throat]

[0:08] and to the republic for it stands one

[0:11] nation under God, indivisible with

[0:14] liberty and justice for all.

[0:21] Yeah. Day late, right?

[0:23] >> Yeah.

[0:27] Two days late.

[0:32] » Roll call members, please. Sherperson

[0:34] Roth

[0:36] >> here.

[0:37] >> Commissioner Kinsky

[0:38] >> here.

[0:39] >> Uh, Commissioner Euing

[0:42] >> here.

[0:44] >> Commissioner Donovan

[0:44] >> here.

[0:46] >> Uh, Commissioner Bowman.

[0:49] Commissioner [clears throat] Grass

[0:50] >> here.

[0:51] >> Our new uh Commissioner Latrell

[0:54] >> here.

[0:56] >> Uh and Alderman Leison Prince

[0:58] >> here.

[1:00] >> And we have a quum.

[1:02] >> Approval of the agenda for September

[1:04] 3rd, 2026.

[1:08] » Motion to approve.

[1:09] >> Second.

[1:10] >> I have a motion and a second. All in

[1:11] favor?

[1:12] >> Opposed? I

[1:14] >> motion carries.

[1:18] Approval of the minutes of from May 7th,

[1:21] 2026.

[1:32] » Motion to approve.

[1:34] >> Second.

[1:35] >> I have a motion. I have a second. All in

[1:37] favor?

[1:38] >> I

[1:39] >> opposed.

[1:40] Motion carried. Introduction of

[1:43] evidence.

[1:46] Uh, Mr. Chairman, I'd like to uh

[1:48] introduce into evidence the St. Genevie

[1:50] Municipal Code, the St. Genevie

[1:52] Comprehensive Plan, and my staff reports

[1:55] and supporting documents uh for the

[1:57] cases before the commission this

[1:59] evening.

[2:01] >> Motion to accept the evidence as

[2:04] presented.

[2:06] >> Second.

[2:06] >> I have a motion and a second.

[2:09] All in favor?

[2:11] >> I

[2:11] >> oppose. Motion carries.

[2:16] Uh, citizen input. Everybody's here in

[2:19] regards to the agenda items. Correct.

[2:22] Old business.

[2:24] None.

[2:26] New business.

[2:28] Can we uh

[2:33] You can just reference the case number

[2:34] if you want,

[2:35] >> but can we just do this one first so she

[2:39] can be out of here and go back?

[2:40] >> You want to do that? You want to alter

[2:42] it?

[2:42] >> Do the

[2:43] >> Sure. guest lodging first. You bet.

[2:45] >> Okie do. We're going to go to uh

[2:49] SUP00004-26

[2:52] to operate a guest lodging establishment

[2:54] Airbnb at 6 Herszog Lane, a single

[2:58] family residential structure.

[3:03] Okay.

[3:06] As the chairman said, um there's been a

[3:09] request for an Airbnb

[3:12] uh at a single family residence located

[3:15] at 6 Herszog Lane. And in your packet,

[3:18] you will find the application. you'll

[3:20] find my report and some additional uh

[3:24] photographs, an aerial photograph of the

[3:26] property and uh current photographs of the house and kind of the parking

[3:33] area yard area there as well. Um

[3:40] so currently the property is located in

[3:42] an R1 single family uh residential

[3:45] zoning district. Um the property uh does

[3:49] meet all the requirements

[3:51] um that we have for uh guest lodging

[3:55] including parking. Uh I have spoke uh

[3:58] it's a blank document in your packet but

[4:01] I've spoke with the fire chief and the

[4:03] police chief on on this item and they

[4:06] have no issues or concerns with it being

[4:09] an Airbnb. Um, the applicant is present

[4:13] tonight. If you have any questions uh

[4:16] for her, but um if you got any questions

[4:19] for me, I'll be glad to take them. But

[4:21] it meets all the requirements per our

[4:23] municipal code.

[4:31] As you can see in the picture there,

[4:32] there's plenty of plenty of parking to

[4:34] be be there. And

[4:36] >> well that [clears throat]

[4:37] you know about off streetet parking I

[4:39] don't know how I mean if it really plays

[4:42] any factor into that but horizontal lane

[4:44] is not a city street so I don't know how

[4:47] that falls in

[4:49] >> as far as requirement of off streetet

[4:51] parking well so if you go down to the

[4:54] end of their lane and look in one of

[4:55] those pictures that shows the garage

[4:58] there's

[4:59] >> more than ample parking so it's you know

[5:01] not that we want them parking on

[5:03] >> what appears to be City Street, right?

[5:06] >> But I doubt they will. If they're going

[5:07] to access the home, they're going to

[5:09] want to park down at the end by the

[5:11] building. Anyway,

[5:13] >> anybody questions, comments? Lee, do you

[5:15] want to say anything?

[5:18] If anybody has any questions, I'll be

[5:20] happy to try to answer them. I'm not

[5:23] being uh disrespectful, but I'm getting

[5:26] over like a good tour. So,

[5:29] >> understandable.

[5:30] >> The swimmer in me is struggling to

[5:33] breathe the water.

[5:34] Anyway, I'm getting better.

[5:37] >> Okay. Can you hear me?

[5:38] >> Yeah.

[5:40] >> Okay. Does anybody have any questions?

[5:44] » Are you planning on having like a

[5:46] mixeduse like it's going to be

[5:47] somebody's residence part of the year

[5:50] and then an Airbnb the remaining part or

[5:53] is it fulltime in Airbnb?

[5:56] >> Uh what kind? Okay. It's going to be,

[5:58] you know, my sister Lynn and my brother

[6:01] Mike

[6:02] >> and I we the three of us own the we kept

[6:04] it the house after mom and dad passed.

[6:07] And so we pro the last 15 years or so

[6:10] we've just been renovating it and and we

[6:13] use it predominantly now just for family

[6:15] functions like a herthod Christmas

[6:18] party. But those of you that that grew

[6:21] up here, you know, that house was always

[6:23] one that was very open and everybody

[6:26] came and ice skated and, you know,

[6:29] always ate and D. So, we thought, you

[6:31] know, it would be really good if we

[6:33] could, you know, offer it as an Airbnb

[6:36] just once or twice a month, very

[6:39] minimal. Uh because we still we still

[6:41] use it. Uh but that's kind of you know

[6:45] our theory or what we want to get out of

[6:48] this is uh and if you guys get up that

[6:51] way you should really come by especially

[6:53] of you that grew up here because it

[6:54] really does look good a lot of the time

[6:57] and energy mostly my brother Mike and

[7:00] Lyn did. Uh but anyway, yeah. So, not

[7:04] anything major, not a lot of vehicles. I

[7:07] try to drive up there a couple times a

[7:09] week and I know Mike's in and out of

[7:10] there and but does that answer your

[7:13] question?

[7:14] >> Yeah.

[7:15] >> Was there anything from any of the

[7:16] neighbors?

[7:17] >> No. No.

[7:19] >> Nobody has responded.

[7:23] » There's no other questions from the

[7:25] board. I would like to make a motion to

[7:27] approve with the conditions listed in

[7:29] the staff report.

[7:31] Second.

[7:32] >> I [clears throat] have a motion in the

[7:33] second. Do a roll call, please.

[7:37] >> Okay.

[7:39] Um, Chairman Roth,

[7:41] >> yes.

[7:42] >> Commissioner Kinsky,

[7:43] >> yes.

[7:44] >> Commissioner Euing,

[7:46] >> yes.

[7:47] >> Commissioner Donovan,

[7:49] >> yes.

[7:49] >> Commissioner Grass,

[7:50] >> yes.

[7:51] >> Commissioner,

[7:53] >> yes.

[7:53] >> And Alderman Prince,

[7:55] >> yes.

[7:57] >> Oh, thank you.

[7:58] >> Congratulations. appreciate

[8:02] >> and that goes to window.

[8:03] >> Now, am I excused? Oh, I do. I

[8:06] >> You can go. Yes.

[8:08] >> I'm going to go watch Missouri's first

[8:10] meeting.

[8:11] >> So, that that'll go uh to the first

[8:14] reading.

[8:15] >> Uh [clears throat] on the 24th, I think

[8:18] 24th.

[8:19] >> 24th is the correct date.

[8:21] >> All right. Good to see all of you.

[8:23] >> Thank you. Good luck.

[8:26] >> [laughter]

[8:26] >> We'll go to SUB 005-26.

[8:33] » Okay, this is our subdivision U progress

[8:38] point. Um,

[8:42] so [clears throat] this is is really the

[8:43] final plat. Um,

[8:46] exempted out of this plat really is the

[8:50] infrastructure plans. So the

[8:51] [clears throat] infrastructure plans are

[8:53] I'd say probably

[8:56] at 90% I think is a comfortable number

[8:59] there. Uh Mary, if you want to say

[9:02] whether that's about the right number or

[9:04] not, I don't know, but we're we're

[9:05] there. We're right there.

[9:07] >> Um but all of the utility settings and

[9:11] everything are on this plat. They'll be

[9:13] recorded with this plat. Um it wasn't

[9:17] too long ago that the city owned the

[9:19] property. We divided uh the property up

[9:22] as as part of a plat that that was

[9:24] previously before the commission. And

[9:27] this is taking that plat and

[9:30] incorporating it in and dividing

[9:33] everything up into 137 home lots plus

[9:36] the common ground. [clears throat]

[9:38] This also includes

[9:41] um some all the infrastructure that's

[9:43] going to be the cities to uh maintain

[9:46] and use and then also uh trails and the

[9:52] um playground as well.

[9:58] And so the folded up version that was in

[10:00] your packet was the packet or was the

[10:03] one that I printed off earlier this

[10:05] morning. And uh then we had uh a

[10:08] revision uh due to some factors. There

[10:11] was some um correction of of spelling on

[10:16] items and um dealing with getting the

[10:20] assignments correct. Nothing to do with

[10:24] what is regulations from the city

[10:27] standpoint. It's more of making it

[10:29] correct to get it recorded.

[10:32] That be a fair statement, Mary?

[10:33] >> Yeah, that's correct. We're constantly

[10:35] just looking over the past to make

[10:37] revisions or anything put together just

[10:39] correct things.

[10:41] >> So none none of those items were issues

[10:44] that uh were concerns of the cities and

[10:47] it not meeting uh the requirements

[10:50] before we brought it to you. Uh, but I

[10:52] just want to let you know the ones

[10:54] laying flat is the latest greatest copy

[10:56] that we'll take uh before

[11:00] the board of alderman and then from

[11:02] there uh if it's all approved then we'll

[11:04] have it recorded at that point.

[11:09] » So they were able to add 10 building

[11:12] lots I guess from the last time cuz I

[11:14] thought it was at 127. So it's always

[11:16] been at 137.

[11:18] >> I think it was higher than that before.

[11:20] It was almost 200 was 173 at one point.

[11:23] >> Yeah.

[11:24] >> And a lot of that's happened because of

[11:28] um the air vents and property going away

[11:31] from that and uh any of the sinkhole

[11:34] properties out there. We got to maintain

[11:36] a distance away from those. So that's

[11:38] what they've come up with to reduce it

[11:40] down. It's been 137 since really since

[11:42] I've been on board.

[11:49] Is there still a storm water management

[11:51] plan that come forward?

[11:53] >> Yeah, there there there is a SWIP plan

[11:55] that's in the the documents with the

[11:58] infrastructure drawings

[12:04] and it

[12:06] I don't think we have any outstanding

[12:08] items whatsoever on the SW plan cuz it's

[12:10] in place right now. Uh they they

[12:13] currently have a land disturbance permit

[12:16] and we're using that swip plan which is

[12:18] approved by the city to do that land

[12:21] disturbance

[12:23] >> and then that will just carry on.

[12:24] >> The storm water management plan was

[12:26] coming before us yet.

[12:29] >> It's part of the whole infrastructure

[12:32] package. So what you're looking at

[12:34] tonight is just the approval of

[12:36] >> So we get to look at that yet before

[12:42] Okay.

[12:43] >> Yeah.

[12:43] >> Well, no. In the meeting with

[12:46] >> the first meeting we had with this Happy

[12:48] said that the storm water management

[12:51] plan had to come before us yet.

[12:55] >> I don't remember what he said, but yes,

[12:58] the So, you've got water, sewer, swift,

[13:02] [clears throat] um, all that sidewalks

[13:04] and streets that Robert mentioned

[13:07] earlier is about 90%. The SW plan though

[13:09] is done. Yeah, Swift fans complete.

[13:11] Yeah, we're operating off of it right

[13:13] now. And essentially, it's more related

[13:16] to operational of while the

[13:20] subdivision's being developed of how all

[13:23] that storm water is managed, how we

[13:25] don't prevent, you know, how we're

[13:26] preventing runoff, not allowing it out

[13:28] onto the streets or into any um

[13:32] waterways that are coming in and around

[13:34] the property and materials not getting

[13:36] off site.

[13:39] You have it.

[13:41] >> It shows up on the progress point plate

[13:43] two. It says storm water management.

[13:45] We're looking at

[13:49] here.

[13:51] >> Well, is there an actual storm water

[13:53] management plan?

[13:54] >> Here it is.

[13:55] >> That's so

[14:02] right here. We got it.

[14:04] >> And at the top of the page, you

[14:06] >> happy said that that would come before

[14:08] us because I questioned storm water

[14:10] management when we wanted approval on

[14:14] the subdivision in the beginning and

[14:18] he said that the storm water management

[14:20] plan would have to come before us.

[14:21] >> Juny, what page is that?

[14:23] >> But it's at the bottom right hand

[14:26] corner.

[14:29] >> Sheet three of seven.

[14:33] It can, but not unlike the water and

[14:35] sewer

[14:36] >> management going down the slope and

[14:41] » on the other side of parks common ground

[14:44] and then is a little further in.

[14:46] >> Yeah. So that storm water uh management

[14:49] reserve area, that's what you're talking

[14:50] about.

[14:51] >> Yes.

[14:52] >> Yeah. Yeah. So that's that's those are

[14:54] like the detention type areas. Um that

[14:58] that's when it's all said and done. and

[15:00] the thing is developed, those will be in

[15:03] place for all the storm water to go to

[15:05] those and be managed from that point.

[15:08] And the develop or not the developer,

[15:10] the um

[15:13] subdivision organization

[15:16] uh has and that's that information is on

[15:18] the very first page. They will maintain

[15:20] those and be responsible for those. Now,

[15:24] we do have access rights through this to

[15:26] access that as a city to make sure they

[15:28] are maintaining it. And that's part of

[15:30] uh my department's job to make sure that

[15:32] they're doing that. And we have access

[15:34] to be able to make sure that they're

[15:36] maintaining all those. And all those are

[15:38] designed to not let any more water off

[15:41] of the property than prior to

[15:43] development.

[15:50] But the actual SWIP plan that we're

[15:53] operating off of doesn't really take

[15:56] into account at this point in time for

[15:59] what we're doing out there now. Doesn't

[16:01] take into account those detention bases

[16:06] because they're not they're not in

[16:07] operation until we build them.

[16:13] But I most certainly can I mean I can go

[16:15] get the swip land right now. It's in a

[16:16] great big roll in there. But

[16:19] >> yeah, if you want to. It's right there

[16:20] in my mind.

[16:21] >> I'm not sure what happened or even I

[16:24] said at one point, but those plans all

[16:26] have to go through Cochran and Robert's

[16:30] office to be approved per code.

[16:32] >> What you're approving is the layout.

[16:35] >> My question is when we had that first

[16:38] meeting

[16:40] on this subdivision, there was an

[16:42] engineer here and I don't know who all

[16:44] and I questioned storm water management.

[16:46] [clears throat] Happy said that that all

[16:48] comes to us later.

[16:51] The storm water management

[16:52] >> take a look at it. But it would have to

[16:53] go through Robert's approval and

[16:55] Cochran's approval. What you're

[16:56] approving is the plat.

[17:00] >> So D saying we have authority to approve

[17:03] or disapprove of the storm

[17:04] >> of the storm water plan or the water

[17:07] plan or the sewer plan.

[17:09] >> So that's beyond our review.

[17:12] >> Yeah.

[17:14] >> You want to add to that? I'll go grab

[17:16] it.

[17:17] >> Yeah, I mean it's uh you know those are I mean obviously I'm I'm not

[17:22] an engineer but that's why we have

[17:24] Cochran as a secondary uh to review

[17:28] those between them and myself. Um

[17:31] you know I'm I'm a flood plane manager

[17:34] so I deal with flooding a lot which is

[17:36] caused a lot by storm water.

[17:37] >> I ran public works for years.

[17:40] >> Sure.

[17:41] This property where this is going on a 4

[17:44] inch rain.

[17:46] >> This whole thing was underwater and

[17:48] crossing Parkwood Drive. Taller than a

[17:51] fire hydrant.

[17:52] >> Yes.

[17:54] >> Because of so much water that comes off

[17:56] of this side of Progress Parkway.

[17:58] >> Gotcha. Is this the

[18:03] I was one of the big ones that was open,

[18:05] I think. But

[18:11] » question did much of that common ground

[18:14] that 10 acres along progress was that

[18:17] unusable because of the terrain.

[18:23] Yeah. So that's where where it drops off

[18:25] progress. that drops steep off and then

[18:27] there's just a small section that's flat

[18:28] before you hit that

[18:31] uh

[18:33] I'm going to call it a creek channel cuz

[18:35] that's actually that's actually how it's

[18:37] shown on the storm water uh improvements

[18:41] is um not storm water improvements but

[18:44] it's it's shown as a as a creek

[18:59] Sure.

[19:12] So here is the beginning page of it.

[19:18] So this is one page one of their SWIP.

[19:21] So with their SWIP, it deals with

[19:23] everything from um like I said, keeping

[19:27] runoff and keeping material from going

[19:29] out onto the streets. So they'll have a

[19:32] gravel entry area. They have what they

[19:34] call a wash down station. Um they'll

[19:38] have uh facil toilet facilities, trash.

[19:42] They'll have a uh concrete lined uh

[19:45] container. So, we're not going to dump

[19:48] concrete spoils out along the

[19:50] properties. They'll be dumped in a in a

[19:52] managed containment system, so there

[19:54] won't be uh concrete water even washed

[19:57] out onto the ground. Um they will have

[20:01] uh temporary detention basins in place

[20:05] that then will become permanent

[20:07] detention basins at that point. So

[20:09] you've got the big one to the north. So

[20:11] it's going to catch all that water from

[20:14] uh if we're essentially looking at at

[20:17] your maps there uh a long lot maybe like

[20:22] 76 and 62 if you can see the lot numbers

[20:25] on your on your plans there. Mhm.

[20:28] >> So from there up is all going to drain

[20:31] to the northeast corner of the property

[20:35] and there will be a big detention basin

[20:37] there and then that uh will hold the

[20:40] water and let it out at no faster rate

[20:43] than it was coming across that area

[20:45] prior to development.

[20:48] And then also these sink holes that are

[20:51] shown on here also take on uh some storm

[20:56] water drainage as well from the west

[20:58] side of the property.

[21:03] So the very next page is those lots that

[21:05] I just mentioned south. So there's a

[21:08] large detention basin that you can see

[21:10] on on and that's the one that you

[21:13] mentioned earlier that was on that page.

[21:16] um that'll that'll be a sediment basin

[21:19] as well. And again, it dumps all the

[21:22] water gets directed down that way and

[21:25] gets dumped off. And then it all of that

[21:27] will then that rate that's not supposed

[21:30] to be any more than prior to development

[21:33] will come all the way south of the

[21:35] property

[21:36] and filter out just as it does now.

[21:40] >> It goes this way now.

[21:41] >> Mhm. cuz here's where it comes under

[21:44] Progress Parkway and it goes to a

[21:46] sinkhole up here.

[21:49] So the the difference from elevation

[21:52] from here to here is tremendous. So I

[21:55] don't know how it's getting to a

[21:56] sinkhole that's up here

[21:58] unless it's underground

[22:01] cuz this goes uphill like that to the

[22:04] north as you come from south.

[22:06] >> Okay. Then it comes around here and goes

[22:08] >> Yes. It it it kind of comes around this

[22:10] direction. drain in this direction is

[22:11] drain in that correct direction. Yeah.

[22:13] This all goes from the property you were

[22:14] talking about on this side of of

[22:16] Progress Parkway comes through here.

[22:19] Yes. All the all the corn stuff on this

[22:20] side comes around and wraps and goes in

[22:22] between here and the arch dascese

[22:25] property.

[22:27] >> Okay. I do want to reiterate you have

[22:31] [clears throat] perview approval over

[22:34] easements and access and layout all

[22:37] those things just not over the

[22:40] engineering specs involved. Does that

[22:43] make sense? Okay.

[22:46] >> But that well okay we'll just go with

[22:48] that. All right.

[22:54] But I can I can I can copy these and

[22:58] send these uh I'm more than happy to

[23:00] send these to you all so you can you can

[23:02] take a look and so you can see what's

[23:03] going on there and what's going to be in

[23:05] place. That's not a problem.

[23:08] Obviously, they won't be this big, but

[23:11] you can zoom in and and look at all of

[23:13] them for sure.

[23:20] Okay, back to where we were.

[23:24] If there's no further questions, I would

[23:26] make a motion to approve.

[23:30] I have a motion.

[23:32] >> I'll second.

[23:32] >> I have a second. Roll call, please.

[23:36] >> Cher Ross.

[23:38] >> Yes.

[23:40] >> Commissioner Kinsky.

[23:41] >> Yes.

[23:43] >> Commissioner Yuing.

[23:45] >> Yes.

[23:47] >> Commissioner Donovan.

[23:48] >> Yes.

[23:48] >> Commissioner Grass.

[23:50] >> Yes.

[23:52] >> Commissioner Latrell. Yes.

[23:53] >> And Alderman Lison on Prince.

[23:55] >> Yes.

[23:58] » And that passes unanimously.

[24:05] » Okie do.

[24:08] Brings us to general discussion of

[24:10] possible additions andor amendments to

[24:14] the land use section of the St. Genevie

[24:16] Municipal Code. So, I have I have a few

[24:19] items here. Uh, but I'm going to cut it

[24:21] a little shorter and kind of split it

[24:23] up. Um,

[24:25] basically what I want to talk to you all

[24:27] about is, you know, I've been here uh

[24:29] roughly 5 monthsish now, and there's

[24:33] several things that that that come up

[24:35] and keep showing showing up. So, these

[24:37] are items that [snorts]

[24:38] uh with your all's permission, I'd like

[24:40] to put together a list uh of these items

[24:45] and send them to you and let you look at

[24:48] them and review them so that at our next

[24:50] meeting, we can go over those items and

[24:52] you can kind of look around in your

[24:54] areas or around town to see that you're

[24:56] seeing what I'm seeing. And to give you

[24:58] a good example, I included a photo, an

[25:00] aerial photo at the very end of your

[25:02] packet

[25:04] that's not from here.

[25:06] And I'm not going to tell you where it's

[25:08] from, but obviously you can see what

[25:09] county it's in.

[25:11] >> So, if you look down at the lower left

[25:13] hand side, uh, where it says 460,

[25:16] that is a single family dwelling. So,

[25:19] you can see how much of the lot that takes up. And you can see how much

[25:23] grass there is in that lot. And you can

[25:26] kind of see a theme that's starting to

[25:28] pick up. The house to the north at 462

[25:31] is kind of starting to do the same

[25:32] thing. And if we jump across the

[25:35] alleyway there at 383, it's kind of

[25:39] starting to do the same thing. [snorts]

[25:40] So,

[25:41] >> [clears throat]

[25:41] >> um, those are kind of things that are

[25:43] cropping up here as well. So, we're getting too much lot coverage. Um,

[25:49] >> don't we have a code on percentage?

[25:51] >> Yeah, we do on rear yard only, not on

[25:55] the entire lot.

[25:56] >> Oh, okay. So, I thought it was the whole

[25:59] lot.

[25:59] >> Yeah. It's 30% of your rear yard.

[26:02] There's not a whole lot coverage amount

[26:04] unfortunately. At least not that I've

[26:06] been able to find anywhere.

[26:08] >> So was included in that table.

[26:09] >> Do what?

[26:10] >> I thought it was included in that table

[26:12] that's at the front of the chapter.

[26:13] >> There's not it's not a it's not a whole

[26:14] lot coverage.

[26:17] Um, so the other part of of all of that

[26:21] is um

[26:24] when you have these accessory buildings

[26:25] like a garage, a shed, and you start

[26:29] putting them close to the house, we got

[26:31] a regulation. It says if they get within

[26:33] 10 ft, less than 10 ft of the house, so

[26:35] if it's 9 ft 6 in away from the house,

[26:38] it's considered part of the house for

[26:40] zoning purposes. So that means it has to

[26:42] meet the setbacks the same as the house.

[26:46] And we we've got a lot of structures

[26:48] that that aren't that way. We're also

[26:51] getting structures that are put on

[26:53] vacant lots that are right next to

[26:58] the lot with the house on it. And you

[27:00] can't have an accessory structure like a

[27:02] garage on a vacant lot without a main

[27:04] house. So to do that, you can still do

[27:07] that. There's a couple different ways.

[27:08] one you build across the lot line that

[27:10] connects them together zoning wise or

[27:13] you get them officially that lot line

[27:14] gotten rid of and then you can put the

[27:16] garage there. So it's going to be things

[27:19] similar to that. So I'll make a list and

[27:23] let you guys go over it and then at the

[27:25] next meeting we can kind of kind of go

[27:27] through those. Um

[27:30] the the big one uh really um is and it's a topic that probably most people

[27:38] uh either you like it or you don't like

[27:40] it. Um all the cities I think are

[27:42] dealing with it and it's something that

[27:44] we're going to start [snorts] going to

[27:45] need to get a handle on before somebody

[27:48] does ask about it. We need to start

[27:50] looking at uh developing regulations for

[27:52] data centers.

[27:54] We need to get ahead of the game so that

[27:56] if somebody comes and wants to do one

[27:58] because right now a data center here is

[28:00] not defined. So literally somebody could

[28:03] fill this building that we're in right

[28:04] now with servers and really that's a

[28:06] data center.

[28:07] >> Mhm. [clears throat]

[28:08] >> And it's going to take a lot of cooling

[28:10] even though it's the building of our

[28:11] size. So you know if you have a house

[28:14] that's right next door to all that you

[28:15] might not want to hear that right. So,

[28:17] we want to make sure that we have the

[28:19] appropriate things in place so that if

[28:22] somebody is looking at doing that, they

[28:23] can look at our rules and regulations

[28:26] and go, "Oh, I come there, this is what

[28:28] I'm going to have to do." They know what

[28:30] to expect

[28:31] >> as soon as possible.

[28:32] >> Yeah.

[28:33] >> Well, have you looked at the Perryville

[28:35] regulation?

[28:36] >> Yes.

[28:37] >> Okay.

[28:37] >> Yep.

[28:38] >> Cuz I mean, what Pville did was they saw

[28:42] this as an issue.

[28:44] >> Yep. and they enacted a regulation

[28:48] kind of on a hurry up basis. Yes.

[28:50] >> And then they said, "Well, we need to

[28:52] tighten it." Not necessarily because

[28:56] there was some developer out there, but

[28:57] just because they realized that they

[28:59] needed to tighten it.

[29:01] >> And then they have tightened it again.

[29:04] >> Right.

[29:04] >> And I uh

[29:07] >> I think time is of the essence.

[29:10] >> Yeah. And and so even and so even if

[29:14] >> you know our regulation was not perfect,

[29:17] it's better than nothing. Yes.

[29:19] >> At least initially and we could do what

[29:21] Perryville's do doing. And I think

[29:24] Perryville's

[29:26] regulation

[29:27] has got a lot to commend itself for in

[29:31] particular with regard to noise because

[29:35] through a fortunate

[29:38] happen stance, the city attorney

[29:43] was in the Navy and was an expert on

[29:45] sonics and so basically wrote the

[29:49] regulation so that it regulates both

[29:52] noise and tonality. And tonality is

[29:54] basically the spikes. No, noise is the

[29:57] average decibels and tonality focuses on

[30:01] the spikes. And as I'm sure you can

[30:03] imagine, you can have a generally low

[30:06] level. But if there's a sudden loud

[30:08] piercing sound, it's quite annoying no

[30:12] matter how generally low the level might

[30:15] be. So I I think we need to move on

[30:20] this.

[30:21] >> So the the administrator and I have

[30:24] attended uh some meetings and and

[30:26] classes hearing kind of from both sides

[30:28] of of of the deal and like you said,

[30:30] we've gotten Perryville's uh ordinance.

[30:33] So, um what I'd like basically to tell

[30:37] you all that that we're gathering those

[30:40] items to make rules and regulations and

[30:42] I kind of like to do the same thing as

[30:45] what I just described before. We'll put

[30:47] some stuff together. Are you going to

[30:49] put down put together a proposed

[30:51] regulation? Okay.

[30:53] >> Yep. So that way we can you guys can

[30:55] take that and and view it and we can put

[30:58] things in, put things out and and come

[31:00] up with something that gets to something

[31:03] we feel comfortable with at this stage

[31:06] and then like you said if there's

[31:07] something we need to change we can

[31:08] always change it.

[31:10] >> Wasn't Perry County also looking at that

[31:13] so it doesn't move out in the county?

[31:14] >> No. the problem. Perry County,

[31:17] so I've been up to a lot of the

[31:19] meetings. Perry County is taking the

[31:22] position that there is nothing that the

[31:24] county can do. They there are other

[31:27] counties in Missouri that have done

[31:30] moratoriums, 6-month, one-year

[31:32] moratoriums. They have not been

[31:34] challenged in the court yet as to the

[31:36] validity of the moratoriums.

[31:38] The Perry County Commission doesn't

[31:40] believe it has the authority to do the

[31:42] moratoriums.

[31:44] There are other things that counties can

[31:46] do, but right now the legislature hasn't

[31:50] spelled them out. Like you may recall

[31:52] anything,

[31:53] >> pardon?

[31:53] >> Has our county looked at it yet?

[31:55] >> To my knowledge, no. But it's somewhat

[31:58] similar to when the uh silica sand mine

[32:02] was proposed out towards Han and Wine

[32:06] Garden. And there are things that a

[32:09] county can do, but they would be

[32:11] primarily focused on public health. So

[32:14] the silica sand mine was delayed and

[32:17] ultimately the developers decided to

[32:19] walk away from the project, but it was

[32:21] delayed based on a health department

[32:24] regulation

[32:25] that was combined with a county

[32:28] commission ordinance. They were

[32:30] basically identical, but the health

[32:31] department had the power to make the

[32:33] regulation and the ordinance basically

[32:36] imposed a penalty should one violate the

[32:39] regulation. So there are things I I

[32:44] think frankly Perry Countyy's a little

[32:46] bit wrong. I think there are things that

[32:48] steps a county could take. Now there is

[32:51] hope that when the legislature resumes

[32:55] they will spell out what counties can

[32:58] do. I'm not aware of our county doing

[33:00] anything at the present time. The other

[33:03] thing that Perry C Perryville said was

[33:08] they would be keen Pville would be keen

[33:12] on annexing a county property. So, if a

[33:15] farmer on a property just outside the

[33:17] county or the city boundaries wanted to

[33:21] sell his property to a data center, but

[33:24] wanted the data center to be subject to

[33:26] some level of regulation, the city of

[33:29] Pville, or at least the city

[33:32] administrator said he would be in favor

[33:36] of an of that sort of annexation. I

[33:39] don't even know if that would possibly

[33:41] apply, but you know, our great my great

[33:44] fear is right now, for all I know, a

[33:47] farmer is being offered

[33:49] >> Yes.

[33:50] >> you know, $100,000 an acre for property

[33:54] in the county that abuts the city.

[33:59] » So, I think

[34:01] those are issues we need to move

[34:04] quickly.

[34:04] >> Yeah, definitely. I think, you know, cuz

[34:05] if if somebody wants to do something

[34:08] like that, they're going to want to know

[34:11] upfront what's expected of them.

[34:13] >> Mhm.

[34:13] >> And we want to we want to ensure

[34:17] ourselves and citiz the rest of our

[34:19] citizenry that we're we're doing what's

[34:22] best for them. Even if we end up with a

[34:25] data center or somebody, whatever

[34:28] community it is, that all the things are

[34:30] in place to to be able to

[34:35] Well,

[34:36] >> sorry. I'm going to back in here.

[34:38] >> I would really

[34:40] commend looking at the Perryville

[34:43] regulation, the latest incarnation of

[34:45] the Perryville regulation cuz that

[34:48] >> some of the provisions may be challenged

[34:50] in the law and you know, a developer can

[34:52] do that, but at least that they're

[34:54] there. They basically have a provision

[34:57] that says there will be no

[34:58] non-disclosure agreements.

[35:01] >> Yep.

[35:01] >> In connection with the development.

[35:03] Yeah,

[35:03] >> we also have a provision that says if

[35:06] the developer abandons the project,

[35:08] they've got to restore the property back

[35:10] to its original value or sell it to the

[35:13] city for a buck if the city wanted it

[35:16] back for a buck. So, I [clears throat]

[35:18] mean I think that that I think I don't

[35:21] believe in reinventing the wheel. So,

[35:24] there may be there may be tinkering on

[35:26] it. For instance, Pville believes that

[35:29] the only possible location for a data

[35:33] center of any sort of magnitude would be

[35:35] in Pville's industrial park. There may

[35:38] be locations that we have in our city

[35:41] that would be suitable for a large scale

[35:46] if not a hypers scale data center that

[35:48] are not in the Pville Industrial Park.

[35:51] And so we may want to look at

[35:53] >> yes

[35:53] >> some different approaches, but at this

[35:56] >> well that that goes back to my example

[35:57] of having it in a in a building like

[36:00] this. If we have a a building a

[36:02] warehouse building that's available but

[36:04] it's not in the industrial park,

[36:06] >> right?

[36:06] >> Then we want to have something there

[36:08] that

[36:10] >> regulates that or doesn't allow it at

[36:12] all or whatever we determine that's

[36:14] going to be.

[36:16] >> Okay. But that's that's what I'm looking

[36:18] at is is uh getting your your guys'

[36:21] input and we'll present something uh

[36:24] Dave and I will work on on this and

[36:25] we'll pre present something to you guys

[36:27] and that way we can get it moved from

[36:29] here up to council or up to the board of

[36:32] alderman and go on from there.

[36:35] >> Well, but just to be clear, we have not

[36:38] received or been contacted at all about

[36:40] any data center

[36:42] >> proactive

[36:42] >> anything. It's all a proactive approach.

[36:45] Yeah,

[36:45] >> I wouldn't be opposed to a special

[36:47] meeting if you have the regulation.

[36:49] Yeah. Okay.

[36:50] >> Do we ever address container homes?

[36:55] >> Do you think there's a need to? Well, so

[36:58] they would have to meet the building

[36:59] code regulation and uh the a container

[37:04] home is not um it would have to have uh

[37:09] some unique ch it would really have to

[37:11] be designed by an architect with the

[37:14] license from the state of Missouri to be

[37:16] allowed because it it's not able to be

[37:19] constructed under the residential

[37:22] building code. So it it would be unique

[37:25] in that

[37:27] >> because it doesn't fit the model code,

[37:30] then it has to be engineered. So not

[37:32] that there wouldn't be uh requirements

[37:34] for that. It would it would still have

[37:36] to meet your minimum building code

[37:37] requirements, but as far as supports and

[37:40] things like that, that'll be the

[37:42] engineered side of it.

[37:44] >> But uh sizewise, um it it might even it

[37:49] depends on what size container you got.

[37:51] If you got one of the large the 40ft

[37:52] containers, it's bigger than what a tiny

[37:54] home would be and actually would meet

[37:58] the spacing requirements for a a home.

[38:00] >> Well, I mean, just seen some of them on

[38:02] TV. They stack them and cut them and you

[38:04] know that.

[38:05] >> Yeah. All that would have

[38:06] >> cool stuff out of them.

[38:07] >> Yep. Yep. I've seen them stuck in the

[38:09] ground sideways. So, um you know, at

[38:12] angles. So, but all that would be

[38:14] engineered and if somebody wants to do

[38:15] that, we're we're more than glad to take

[38:17] a look at that.

[38:20] Going back to the buildings, um, we're

[38:23] already, if y'all will consider like the

[38:25] historic homes where

[38:27] things are too close, but your insurance

[38:29] says that's not part of your house. You

[38:32] got a shed in the back that's maybe 5 ft

[38:34] away, living on Main Street in his home,

[38:38] and my insurance company says that is

[38:40] not the house. I have to separately,

[38:43] >> so I can't see the city telling me it's

[38:46] part of the house. Well, it's just for

[38:48] zoning only, not building regulations.

[38:51] So, per for per zoning requirements,

[38:54] it's for setback purposes. That's what

[38:56] it's there for. It's not to regulate

[38:58] construction or anything like that. It's

[39:01] simply

[39:02] >> that makes sense, but you can tell me

[39:03] more about it later.

[39:04] >> Okay.

[39:05] >> Yeah. It's kind of one of those things

[39:07] like um uh Commissioner Kinsky

[39:10] mentioned. Um most of these if you look

[39:12] at planning zoning regulations through

[39:15] out cities in Missouri it's uh St.

[39:18] Genevie didn't reinvent the wheel when

[39:20] they made that requirement. Most

[39:23] [snorts] of the cities around here have

[39:24] that exact same requirement. U not that

[39:27] that's right or wrong but they they have

[39:29] that same requirement. So um we're

[39:32] looking at tweaking those whether it's

[39:35] one way or the other. That's why I'm

[39:36] bringing it to you guys to be able to

[39:39] make those decisions.

[39:46] And that's all I've got. All

[39:48] >> other than two pages of notes, that was

[39:50] it.

[39:51] >> Yeah, cuz I I really don't want to get

[39:53] fully into the rest of them. We'll be

[39:54] here a while. So, I can I can put them

[39:56] all on that sheet and and you guys can

[39:58] look at them.

[40:00] >> Excellent.

[40:03] Motion to adjurnn. Second.

[40:07] >> We got a motion and a second. All in

[40:09] favor?

[40:10] >> I

[40:11] >> opposed.

[40:13] Motion carry. Thank you.

Ste. Genevieve, (Mo, USA ) Planning and Zoning Commission, September 3, 2026

Transcript