Independence City Council reviews Historic Square (HSQ) zoning overlay to implement master plan

Independence City Council study-session attendees on Aug. 11 heard a staff presentation on a proposed Historic Square (HSQ) zoning overlay meant to implement the Independence Square master plan and streamline redevelopment around the city’s historic square.

The proposal would replace the existing HSQ language in the city's Unified Development Ordinance (UDO) Section 14901 with a new, master-plan‑aligned overlay that consolidates allowed uses, adds design standards for residential, mixed-use and nonresidential buildings, and creates three subdistricts — Historic Square, Downtown Transition and Downtown Neighborhood — intended to reflect and preserve local building patterns and encourage reinvestment.

Tom Scannell, the city’s community development director, told the council the HSQ draft sets design standards by building and block frontage type, addresses alley activation and open-space frontage, and includes rules on materials, transparency and streetscape elements. Scannell said the district would allow accessory dwelling units with size and life-safety limits, and would use a parking-maximum approach and shared/public parking so “we're using [land] to the highest and best use.” He said the current UDO section for HSQ dates to 2009 but was never applied to specific properties and does not align with the master plan adopted in late 2024.

Key details and clarifications discussed during the session: - Subdistricts and uses: The overlay groups allowed uses into a single table that marks uses as allowed, allowed with conditions, or prohibited in each subdistrict. The Historic Square subdistrict is intended to preserve the traditional development pattern directly around the square; the Downtown Transition subdistrict allows a higher-density mix of commercial and residential uses; the Downtown Neighborhood subdistrict is intended to preserve smaller-scale housing types such as detached houses, duplexes, fourplexes and row houses. - Lot and building standards: The HSQ establishes lot-area, setback and maximum-height standards by building type (detached house, townhome, two-unit, etc.) and includes façade, massing and articulation standards tailored to the historic context. - Accessory dwelling units (ADUs): The HSQ would permit ADUs with limits on number per lot and size, and with life-safety compliance requirements. - Parking: The proposal reduces the threshold at which new development must provide additional off-street parking from 10,000 square feet to 4,000 square feet and includes a parking maximum to discourage over-parking. Scannell said no off-street parking would be required for nonresidential uses under the 4,000-square-foot threshold. - Administration: The HSQ would authorize the community development director to review and approve applications that meet the district’s standards; Scannell said that authority would rest with the community development director (he identified himself as the director in the presentation).

Council members asked for clarifications during the discussion. One councilmember asked Scannell to define “compact homes”; Scannell said those are smaller homes on smaller lots typical of the square, noting many lots were platted in the 1800s at about 20 to 40 feet wide versus the city's more recent 60-to-70-foot standards. A councilmember asked whether the design standards in transitional areas apply to existing buildings as well as new construction; Scannell said the district spells out which standards apply to tenant finishes, retrofits and new builds. Council members also raised concerns about alley activation blocking circulation and about losing on-street parking with streetscape work; staff noted shared and rear parking and several public lots serve the square.

Procedural status: Scannell said the planning commission reviewed the draft on July 29 and recommended in favor. The city manager noted the ordinance will be scheduled for first reading on Sept. 2 and a public hearing and second reading on Sept. 15.

No formal council vote was taken at the Aug. 11 study session; staff were asked to provide additional parking-ratio details to the city manager for distribution to the full council prior to the hearings.