Item Coversheet
City of Independence
BILL NO. 18-0021st R

Agenda Title:

18-002 - 1R. An ordinance amending the Zoning District Map as to a tract of ground located at 15441 E. US 24 Highway from District R-6 (Single-Family Residential) and District C-2 (General Commercial) to District C-2 (General Commercial) in Independence, Jackson County, Missouri.

Commissioner Read made a motion to recommend approval of the application.  A second to the motion was made by Commissioner Ferguson. The Independence Planning Commission voted as follows:


Commissioner Goldesberry



Commissioner McClain



Commissioner Ashbaugh



Commissioner Preston



Commissioner Boley



Commissioner Read



Commissioner Ferguson







The motion passed and such application is forwarded to the City Council for its consideration. Staff recommends approval of this application.

Executive Summary:

Raymond E. Moore, owner of a 0.21 acre sliver of land (part of Lot 2 of the China Grove addition), intends to rezone the tract from C-2 (General Commercial) and R-6 (Single-Family Residential) to C-2 (General Commercial).  The bulk of Lot 2 is already zoned C-2.  Decades ago, 200-foot wide strips of commercial zoning were established on both sides of US 24 Highway whose extent was defined by their distances from the rights-of-way.  Essentially, 90 percent of the property is zoned C-2 and roughly 10 percent is zoned R-6.  In the future, building permits cannot be issued for this property unless the entire tract has one zoning designation.


The vacant lot abuts a historic cemetery near the southwest corner of E. US 24 Highway and E. Salisbury Road.  That cemetery is on its own parcel, and has separate ownership.

All Public Utilities are available for this property.

Review Criteria: Recommendations and decisions on rezoning applications must be based on consideration of all of the following criteria:


1.      Conformance of the requested zoning with the Comprehensive Plan – The Comprehensive Plan envisions Commercial and Low-Medium Density Residential uses for this parcel;

2.      Conformance of the requested zoning with any adopted neighborhood or sub-area plans in which the property is located or abuts – There are no adopted neighborhood or sub-area plans for these parcels;

3.      The compatibility of the proposed zoning with the zoning and use of nearby property, including any overlay zoning –– Adjacent to the south and across the streets to the north and west are construction contracting, automobile repair and restaurant uses zoned C-2.  The residential zoned lots, to the southeast and east, contain single-family residences;

4.      The compatibility of the proposed zoning and allowed uses with the character of the neighborhood – Again, adjacent to the south and across the streets to the north and west are construction contracting, automobile repair and restaurant uses zoned C-2;

5.      The suitability of the subject property for the uses to which it has been restricted under the existing zoning regulations – The narrow sliver of R-6 zoned area at the southeast corner of the property is not useable for residential purposes;

6.      The length of time the subject property has remained vacant as zoned – The property has been vacant for many decades;

7.      The extent to which approving the rezoning will detrimentally affect nearby properties – The rezoning would be compatible with surrounding zonings and uses to the north, south and west;

8.      The gain, if any, to the public health, safety and welfare due to denial of the application, as compared to the hardship imposed upon the landowner, if any, as a result of denial of the application – If the zoning was denied it would have a negative financial effect on the owner, for a building permit cannot be approved unless there is one zoning classification for the entire lot.

Planning Commission Action:  At its December 12, 2017 Planning Commission meeting, the motion for approval passed 6 to 0, after consideration of the following facts:

  1. That, the rezoning is consistent with the review criteria listed in Section 14-701-02 of the City Code.
  2. That, a public hearing was held pursuant to a notice duly published according to law, at which time all interested parties were given the full opportunity to be heard.
  3. That, rezoning this tract entirely to C-2 would permit most office, service, retail and religious uses; District R-6 permits religious, educational, residential and some other uses.
  4. That, building permits cannot be issued for this property unless the entire tract has one zoning designation.
  5. That, at the Planning Commission hearing, no one spoke against the application.
  6. That, at the hearing, no petition protesting this application was presented.



Draft Planning Commission minutes are attached to this Council agenda item.

Department:          Community DevelopmentContact Person:          Tom Scannell

Community Development DepartmentApproved
Community Development DepartmentApproved
Finance DepartmentApproved
Finance DepartmentApproved
Law DepartmentApproved
City Managers OfficeApproved
City Clerk DepartmentApproved

Council Action:          Council Action:          Accepted

AppBackup Material
Draft OrdinanceOrdinance
Letter from applicantBackup Material
NarrativeBackup Material
Property Owner NotificationBackup Material
Rezoning platBackup Material
Draft PC SummaryBackup Material
Staff ReportBackup Material