City Plan Commission - Regular Meeting

Good afternoon. We will call the

May 5 happy Cinco de Mayo Day,

neighborhood planning development committee meeting to order. I'm chair, mayor pro tem Rainer Park Shaul. My colleagues will introduce themselves.

Eric Bunch, vice chair, 4th District. Nathan Willett, Northland councilman.

And staff?

WS, city clerk's office. Diane Binkley, city manager's office. Sarah Baxter, law department.

Travis Kieford, Casey Water.

Kyle O'Lea, Casey Planning.

Alright. So we have a couple of holds. I want to clarify mainly because one of our colleagues asked me the question, and so I just wanna just state openly. So if there is a ordinance or a piece of legislation that we we hold off the docket, what is the process that they would need to go to to bring it back onto the docket? Well, assuming there's not additional advertising, so I don't know what particular ordinance you're referring to.

But if it's a typical ordinance, the chair can simply notify the clerk with within twenty four hours to add it to the agenda, or the committee can pass a motion to have it added to the next agenda. Okay. Alright. I just wanted to double check that, and then we can make a recommendation to hold it off the docket here in the committee Uh-huh. In it or just in in essence, we'll hold it at this place, or does it go full to the full council to hold it off the docket first? If you so if you hold it off docket and committee, it it will just appear on your semiannual docket

Mhmm. Yes.

Okay. Six months from

now. Alright.

I just wanted to double check. Alright. So with that, we have had a request for a hold of 260376 hold for two weeks. 260376 hold for two weeks. I've had a request to hold 2 50997, again, for one month. So let's clarify what that date is because I think we're out most of June. So to hold for one month on today, I don't know that we'll be when we'll be in session next. It appears June 9 as June 2 would be one month, but you're not in. So June 9 would be the next time. Alright.

So we'll hold 250997 for one month. 260378, hold for one week. 250876. We've had a request from the sponsor to or I'm sorry. Request to hold it off the docket. That's 250876. And I'm I'm pausing because I'm that's was one that councilman Willett was supportive of. I'm just

wanna make sure he's good. Still yeah. I'm still supportive, but it I don't wanna put it back on until we've actually made

Okay. Our change

we did.

Okay. So we will hold two five zero eight seven six off the docket, and then

Is there a motion needed for holding it off docket or as long as there's

Unless there's no objection.

Okay.

Right. Is there any objection to that? Okay. 260408. I'll I'll that's mine. I I will hold that for one week at the request of staff, and I'm supportive of their and then, also, I have 260142. And at this point, I'm gonna hold that one off the docket so I don't have to keep coming back until we get something final. So 260142 unless there's an objection to that. Okay. Alright. Any questions? Anything else? Was that a hold off, doctor, on the last time? Yeah. So hold off 260142.

Okay. Yep. Okay. Okay. Any other holds or we'll start start with with next

And And then we'll the generally located Southeast Corner of Northwestern And 4th Street and North Liberty Street, creating 58 lots at two tracks for the purpose of a residential development accepting various easements, establishing grades on public ways, authorizing the director of city planning and development, the director of water service to execute and or accept certain agreements and directing the city clerk to facilitate the recordation of this ordinance and attach documents.

Alright. Do you have a statement? Yep. Items are

in accordance with state statutes and codes. We recommend approval.

Thank you. Is there any public testimony?

There's no written testimony submitted to the city clerk's office for December '67. What

it It's a plat.

Plat of already previously approved neighborhood residential. Okay. There's another thing that was potentially going on 104th Street that might be problematic. I just wanted to verify that that is not in relation to this. Who is the do we have a the previously approved? Okay.

Yes.

Thank you. Alright. Yes. So double checking because I do not wanna vote on on on this other item, and you'll find out why here pretty soon.

Take your

time to do what you need to do, councilman.

Okay. One person appears by Zoom.

Oh, and we have a let's go ahead and take our Zoom person, and we'll Okay. You you wanna provide testimony?

No. I'm just a staff planner for this final plan.

Yeah. So you're there to answer questions?

Yes.

Okay. I just I wanted to make sure. Okay. Let's take our person on Zoom, please.

Okay. Can you hear me now?

Yes. We can hear you.

Okay. Great. My name is Karen O'Lanhout, and I was looking at the plan for this development, and I noticed that, you know, there's a requirement that at least some residential developments provide some land for parks and outdoor space. And in and if they wish to actually not provide that space, they can they can pay some money instead of that. And I noticed that the the fee for the fee for a for a payment in lieu of the actual land is 10 thou about $10,000 an acre, which is based on 2,006 real estate prices.

And I'm thinking that surely the cost of land has increased in the last twenty years. I did, of course, consult one of my artificial intelligence sources that tells me that real estate prices in Kansas City North currently are roughly between 15,000 and 25,000 an acre. So that that means that at the current going price offered by the city, people can actually save they they can pay between 5 and $15,000 less than the going market price. I I think this is really not fair to taxpayers that we are just basically sort of giving a a really great deal to developers who don't comply with city regulations. And this this seems like kind of a common theme to me.

I think the same thing happens with the tree protection ordinance. Developers are allowed to go ahead and mow down trees and to pay a very low price for the privilege of doing that. I I really I object to developers being given the right to being being given really what I think are a lot of very special privileges, you know, when they wanna put up housing in our city. They they should be required to comply with city ordinances and and, you know, not giving up big breaks as I think is happening in this case.

Thank you. The council member had a question in terms of whether or not there was any just wanted to clarify that this was the correct ordinance. Did you have still have questions for staff,

council member? Cadence, that's located by of

Directors the

It's nine phases. The applicant Board might be able to speak on that. This particular plot is closest to Northland Christian School. It is just to the west of that side.

Okay. Because okay. Perfect. Thank you.

Alright. Thank you. Is there any additional public testimony? Alright. I'll entertain a motion, please.

Thank you, madam mayor pro tem. I move that ordinance number two six zero three six seven be reported on the committee's recommendation to advance any passing place on the consent agenda. Second.

Thank you. It's been moved and properly seconded. All in favor, please say aye. Aye. Any opposed? Okay. That motion carries. Thank you.

I appear to have been logged out.

Oh, okay. Just give her a sec. They need help getting logged back in.

Okay. We're on 377. Resolution number 377 approving an amendment to the heart of the city area plan to include a neighborhood plan for the South Round Top neighborhood. What's that person as well?

Okay. Good afternoon, everyone. Good afternoon. Mayor pro tem and council members of the committee. My name is Morgan Pemberton, and I'm a Planning Supervisor in the City Planning and Development Department.

Sam Fessner, City Planning.

We're here today to present on the South Round Top Neighborhood Plan for your consideration. The South Round Top Neighborhood is located just about two miles southeast of downtown. It is bounded by 27th Street to the North, Lynnwood Boulevard to the South, I-seventy and Jackson Avenue to the East, also commonly known as the Jackson Curve of I-seventy, and Indiana Avenue to the West. We are here presenting a neighborhood plan that we created in coordination with the neighborhood leadership and the residents of South Round Top. Our planning process to create a neighborhood plan generally follows these four steps: there's preplanning work, the neighborhood engagement portion, the writing of the plan and then the plan adoption process.

The preplanning work is primarily done by city staff and it includes things like researching the neighborhood, interviewing the neighborhood leadership, walking the neighborhood, taking photos, aerial map analysis by staff, identifying the community assets and reviewing any other plans that might be associated with this particular neighborhood that we're working in. In this case, there is a South Round Top plan that was completed by Hoxie Collective and UMKC Center for Neighborhoods that we did read thoroughly, and we have adopted or absorbed some of the recommendations that were in that plan into the South Round Top Plan.

And so here are five engagement meetings we hosted over the last year to essentially gather their concerns and get a collection of what their top priorities are in the neighborhood. So this doesn't replace three eleven requests, but it certainly has a lot of crossover and helps get the neighborhood around talking and getting a kind of a collection of recommendations together that we can then identify. And through our engagement activity, we mostly relied on our mapping activities. So this allowed for our neighborhood residents to simply put pins or sticky notes where on the map within the neighborhood their biggest issues and concerns are.

And I would like to give out a shout out to a couple of planners in these photos. Will Mansfield, who was previously part of the neighborhood planning team, did help with this project. Also Jonathan Feverson, who is the third

to

we're we're we're sure

that we're and also from our own observations, make either on the ground or through aerial map analysis, and we create a list of recommendations that are related to city services that the neighborhood would like to prioritize. We vet these recommendations through the responsible departments, such as public works, parks and just make sure that we're not recommending anything that would be out of line with their processes or established city policy. And we also give the residents a chance to provide some final feedback on that final plan. And at the end of this process, we will be providing the neighborhood leadership with a packet of resources to help with implementation of the recommended items in the plan as well as important contact information at the city to help address some of the issues that they brought up. So the plan itself, there's like five main sections to it.

There's a general overview of the process that we go through. There's an overview of the related planning documents, in this case, that neighborhood plan that was done with Hoxie Collective in U. K. C. We provide a summary of the process that we go through to engage the residents and collect information.

We have our plan recommendations, which is the majority of the plan's content, just a very long, basically a to do list of things that they would like to progress in made the long list of specific recommendations for it because it might be slightly out of our purview, but just something to maybe keep an eye on or pursue into the future. And the plan gets adopted as an addendum to the applicable area plan. In this case, South Round Top is within the heart of the city area plan. It is approved by resolution, so it is considered policy guidance for the city. And basically, it serves as that multiyear to do list.

So the neighborhood leadership can consolidate around PIAC requests sure to

so we're the opportunity do

prioritization. So we have a few icons we established. So if it's on the high injury network, essentially where our most dangerous streets are, we put that logo on there. Then if it's near a school, community center, senior living, we had an icon for that, so our more vulnerable citizens and then near a park. And here are the collection of recommendations.

So our majority of our recommendations essentially came out from our pedestrian safety and sidewalks. So those are majority of where neighborhood residents want to see painted and or raised crosswalks, where they should be placed and then where the majority of the sidewalks are having issues. So whether there's repairs needed or if there are certain spots where there were no sidewalks at all.

And I'm just going to go through the three special focus areas quickly here. The first one was Central Park. This is the largest public park that is adjacent to the South Round Top neighborhood. There are quite a few amenities already here, but the residents did express a need for additional programming and additional amenities. Some of the amenities they requested were already a opportunity

to

we're the do

seeing

a lot request from the neighborhood about of what they would like to see to enhance Central Park. Another special focus area is very particular to this certain neighborhood. There is an ongoing legal case related to a previously placed leaking petroleum tank that was underground near the intersection of 31st Street and Mersington Avenue. This is an ongoing issue with the Missouri Department of Natural Resources. There is a website actually on their site that is dedicated to this issue and ongoing legal battles that are going on.

For about twenty years, this has been going on and off. Basically, there was an underground tank that was leaking. It was an old tank that was replaced, but unfortunately, a lot of contamination still remained in the soil. And then through some cracked sewer lines, previously, residents were smelling fumes coming up into their homes. So it did cause some issues with residents needing to leave their homes and vacate the area because of the fumes.

There is, like I said, a case that is still going forward. The Missouri DNR is still pursuing to find to see if they can find the owner that they believe to be responsible, legally responsible for the cleanup. But this is an ongoing issue, and Councilwoman Patterson Hasley is keeping an eye on this one, and we do have some staff there in some conversations about how to find some answers and address this issue. And then finally, I'm sure as you've all seen, there's a lot of work happening on I-seventy all the way up and down the Kansas City boundaries. In this particular location, MoDOT is actually making some pretty significant changes to the Jackson Curve.

As you can see on the screen, the red Xs identify where the off ramp that originally exited onto Myrtle Avenue in the neighborhood as well as the eastbound lanes of I-seventy. Both of those are being removed. I believe the off ramp has already been removed, and they're going to be moving those eastbound lanes a little bit closer to the westbound lanes. That's going to create a considerable amount of excess right of way that's under MoDOT's control. Through some e mails with the project engineer, they did say that they're still figuring out what they're going to do with all of that excess space.

A lot of it will probably be used for stormwater retention, but they are open to conversations about how that could maybe be transferred to a different ownership or something down the future, maybe opening up some of this area for additional residential lots or something like that. At the City Plan Commission meeting two weeks ago, they did recommend approval without conditions. And at this point, we're made. Pleased pleased

And

Thank you, mayor Pro Tem, and thank you, Morgan, and Sam. Right? Okay. Because I always say Will, the last person on your team, but Sam. So they did an excellent job with this most recent neighborhood plan, and I will say one of the biggest benefits of having the plan is, seeing the types of infrastructure needs that the neighborhood needs, you know, proactively.

And so I know the PIAC requests are pretty cumbersome, and there's just a big old binder of, you know, hundreds and hundreds of requests. But with this particular neighborhood plan and and something that I think, all as council members should look into is I could just go through their list of needs and just kinda in bulk, do a lot of them without and so we're gonna meet quarterly and start going back through all the neighborhood plans and just trying to pull out projects as we go along. And I can also find out, okay. They needed a number of sidewalks in South South Round Top. So rather than me doing a memo to pay for all the sidewalks, now that's a chance to contact Public Works and say, what's the schedule and where can I fill in?

Because, you know, those they can't do a 100% of any neighborhood sidewalks. And so if I know the schedule of when they're gonna do it, then I can add to it. And so with this particular one, we did all the crosswalks. So I put that in my in, the 3rd District's pie at request or in our list of projects, and so it's like 17 crosswalks that they'll get done. So that just makes it easier for me to kinda see what people need, and try to chip now we obviously can't afford to do it all.

But as you go east in my district, it's neighborhoods that you can tell we haven't been around. So, so that's why I'm trying to ask Morgan and her team to just keep going further east because you can just tell that it's really been neglected for a long time, and it makes me sad when I go see it. So that's how I've been using the neighborhood plans. And I know that, she is Morgan and her team, they're gonna come up with a more solid kind of criteria of how to pick neighborhoods, how to prioritize them. And now that they kinda know how to do them, then they can do more of them more efficiently.

And, you know, because there's some criteria like and we wanted to be equitable, you know. So like I said, the further east you go in my district, the less and less resources people have been able to get because they're not as well organized. And so I don't want anybody to be excluded, but I do want that to be a part of the thought process of you haven't had any sidewalks style since you were a child, you know, and you inherited the house from your parents. And now you're 70 and you haven't had any sidewalks. It's kinda ridiculous.

And so trying to find out a process to to help people. So I like it. I think it's working. I would like to see her team a little bit bigger because I know there are a lot of neighborhoods that don't have the organization necessary and don't have $250,000 to pay a consultant. Consultant Yeah. Like, that's a very much a cost barrier. So I would like to see your team get bigger if anybody's listening so that you can do more neighborhoods that need help, that don't have the capacity to organize their needs in a document so that elected officials can figure out how to help them more proactively. So great job. Thank you very much. You're helping me do my job better.

So appreciate you. Councilwoman?

Thank you for that. Yeah. I agree with you as well in terms of the the need. I know there's some similar neighborhoods in the 5th District as well that you can tell just where we haven't had the investment and which is why I have found my neighborhood walking tour so beneficial in being able to take staff out to see Yep. How some of the the neighborhoods have just been just neglected so many years.

I must I must say, I'm little not a little. I'm a lot disappointed with the petroleum tank storage tank contamination. And so I I had to pull it up to look at the look at the staff report. So because I just didn't believe I heard you correctly when you said they've been trying to figure it out for twenty years who's at fault. And to me, it just seems like whoever who owned the who owned the property We can speak to that. Yeah. Thank you. So I'll start.

So that's another benefit of this neighborhood plan is it brought it back to light, and it's a lot of trauma and just history with the neighbors that have been trying to deal with this on their own. So there was a lawsuit that was granted, and many neighbors, got compensated. And another organization got compensated as well, and they were supposed to do some development of apartments and things of that nature. And so this is two decades ago. And then, the Department of Natural Resources as well is involved.

The EPA is involved. And I think the agencies from when when I came back to our attention, I just immediately pulled up the news stories and got DNR and EPA back at the table. Mhmm. And so they very much are still trying to solve it, but I think the agencies thought since the lawsuits happened that they had solved it. And so the neighbors are saying that the films and whatnot are still there.

And so, I mean, it's been a lot of this person no longer works here, so let me go and pull up the archives and then the neighbors finding their law documents and we sent that to the law department. The law department looked at all the so, yes, it's an ongoing battle. In fact, I'm hosting a neighborhood meeting at the library for all of them to come and try to get back reengaged on the tanks. Mhmm.

So not that I'm trying to, you know, scare anybody, but you you if the neighbors if they are smelling fumes, I mean, is are there any air quality control issues that still need to be addressed? Did anybody address that or has

that So what they will do is come and test the groundwater, and they'll look for leaks. And right now, they have not said that there is an active leak, but that's different than when you live in the house twenty four seven, you know, seven days a week rather than somebody just come and test. And so there's a new owner of this. It just it just needs to all get picked back up and probably just start again Mhmm. In terms of go ahead. Tracking down who's responsible. Responsible.

Yeah. So Missouri DNR, there was a lawsuit that they filed against the property owner that they believed it was the responsible party. The ownership at the time that the report started coming into DNR that there was a gas leak smell happening. It was a previous owner that that owned the lot when the leaky tank was installed. Whether it was initially leaky or it just became leaky over time, this would have been back in like the '70s and '80s, I believe, maybe the '90s. So it had changed hands since then. They identified the leak. The leaky tank was removed. A lot of soil was removed, but unfortunately, contamination remained. There are testing wells, I believe there still are a couple on-site from the Missouri DNR.

I don't know how recently they have checked those to see if they're catching anything that is still in the soil. But the Missouri DNR is planning to strategy a little bit. They said that they are planning to continue to pursue legal options to hold them financially responsible for continued cleanup. But as a planner, one thing I just kind of see visually in this aerial map, you can see all of the lots directly adjacent to the suspect lot are vacant. I can't I mean, I'm not I can't say for sure, but I have to feel like it might be a little bit related to the ongoing contamination issues be be We're do that.

We're We're

that. Think now when a gas station closed, they are responsible to for the cleanup. I think that's a relatively new law. But twenty years ago, you could just pack up and leave and leave everything underground. That's why we have so many of them in the 3rd District. Or and in the 5th too, you have some where they just they pack up and then somebody comes along and there's four tanks underground and sometimes they deteriorate. Yeah. So it's a big it's a big problem with the old laws and not getting ahead of the contamination.

We're all familiar with the complications around property ownership in brownfields and finding the responsible party, so it's related to those issues. And I

guess I'll just say, you know, I I because I don't wanna make any assumptions that if there there's any policy or laws that we need to put in place as a city to make sure that we can protect our residents, then we need to be looking at that as well. So alright. Well, thank you very much. Sounds like you guys have have been very thorough in your work and engage in the public. Thank you for that, and thank you to councilman for your leadership on this too. Thank you. Alright. Is there any public testimony?

There's no written testimony submitted to the city clerk's office for December '77. Alright.

I'll entertain a motion.

Yes, ma'am. Mayor part time, I move that resolution number two six zero three seven seven be reported out of committee with the recommendation of advance and do pass.

Second.

It's been moved improperly seconded. All in favor, please say aye. Aye. Any opposed? Okay. That motion carries. Thank you.

Much, everyone.

Strong a one, And we And

section foundation fifty

six five four eight to create minimum standards

for for the securing and mothballing of vacant buildings to prevent deterioration, protect public safety, and reduce negative neighborhood impacts. Ordinance number two six zero four hundred, amending chapter 56 of the court of code ordinances, article five dangerous buildings or structures by repealing and replacing section fifty six five three nine permits to require to to require historic

have we

and

closing properties and enacting a new new article of like number subject matter, including a new section $56.05 86 semiannual fee for chronically vacant nuisance property to expand vacant property, registration to unimprove vacant land and require disclosure of plans or intent for a vacant property, establish procedures for investigating and identifying properties with a residential structure, multiple dwelling units that have been vacant for at least six months and have had multiple housing code violations, and assess a $200 fee for each semiannual period in which the city has investigated and made this determination, establishing policy for disclosure of access permission by Kansas City Police Department and the Office of Unhoused Solutions, triage team, and directing the city manager to implement a citywide registration outreach campaign.

Good afternoon. Good afternoon, mayor pro tem, members of the committee and staff. My name is Catherine Nace, and I'm here with the office of mayor Lucas. And today, I'm going to be talking about ordinances two six zero three nine nine four zero zero and four zero one. So just kind of a high level of what today's presentation is going to be focused on really continuing to build we've the

we've

the

And

obviously, right now, and then we're we're very looking pleased forward to an upcoming business session to share the final report on that. So these are really kind of pulling from that and the ongoing conversations and just trying to get into some of the legislative action phase. So I'll just be sharing kind of high level the policy vision. We really wanted to just get these into the public record and give an opportunity for public testimony given how much outreach we've gotten to our office, understanding that we've gotten the request from city staff and see that there to able that. And

our

that. Vacant property registry, And expanding that, different ways to implement increased enforcement, that was the ordinance two six zero four zero one. Going to the next goal of thinking about how we're securing our buildings, so looking at our board up and mothballing policies, which have been ongoing conversations I know with some folks, here to testify today and and their outreach to the city along with city staff and direct comments we've gotten in the mayor's office. That's specifically ordinance two six zero three nine nine. And then looking at the the maintenance piece, so avoiding demolition by neglect, specifically with historic structures, and that's ordinance two six zero four zero zero.

So just a few quick comments about the goals on each of these again. And I've reached out to each of you committee members to, make myself available for one on one meetings to learn get more feedback from you all and any, ideas or concerns you have with the the proposed legislation. But for that first step when we're thinking about registration, this is really just how are we including unapproved vacant land as a part of the registry, giving opportunity for owners to disclose, so how that kind of can help, the city know how to engage with them, thinking about a fee structure for the chronically vacant, specifically nuisance properties. And then also thinking about consent mechanisms for KCPD and unhoused outreach solutions here at the city to enter the properties, given that that's an issue that we've heard from our city staff with current vacant properties. The second one, looking at that kind of middle policy goal, securing the properties, looking specifically to set some baseline minimum standards, how are we securing openings, how are we having clean exteriors, how are making sure that they're prepared for weather, do that.

And And

to looking at specifically some of those

and then we can be collaborative there, And but really trying to move this along knowing the ongoing conversations with this specifically. And then the fourth one or the third one, apologies, is the historic demolition review, specifically thinking about how we're avoiding demolition by neglect. So right now, we see that some property owners will not maintain their properties just so it will get into disrepair, be deemed as dangerous building. And so then they're able to bypass the historic preservation review. So just kind of looking closer at what that process does, making sure that we're really trying to support owners in maintaining their properties and not having them get to a point of of dangerous buildings.

And this also is kind of complementary to some of councilman Patterson Hasley's work, thinking about how we're trying to avoid getting to the demolition point and how we can try to be a little bit more preventative in that in that manner. So kind of today, again, just trying to get these out into the public record. We've had a lot of outreach on these topics over the last year since the initiative started along with ongoing conversations. So we really wanted to give an opportunity for public testimony as we keep on having these conversations. In the next few weeks, I will have a few multiple meetings with, all the different departments this touches, law, neighborhoods, among housing amongst many others.

And then we'll have more concrete detailed committee substitutes in the coming weeks for a vote on committee. And I know mayor Lucas shared with mayor pro tem that we're asking for a hold today, but we did wanna give the opportunity for public testimony.

Thank you. Do you all have any questions?

Go

ahead.

Yes. I heard from people concerned about how the vacant lots community gardens and community farms with the registration process. Can you talk about that?

Yeah. Yeah. We I also got that outreach with from a lot of young Henry. We have a meeting planned for next week to think about that specifically, and it was a great catch. Obviously, we're not trying to penalize, you know, responsible property owners, and we're not trying to prevent penalize urban ag. We actually want to incentivize urban ag. So yes, great question. And we'll work on creating a delineation to make sure that those folks it would maybe just be a yes, we'd have to figure that, but it's definitely on our radar.

Would add that in there as whether it be within it that that is a concern?

Sorry. What was that?

Can we add that within this language?

Yeah. Yeah. We could add it in as far as having, like, an explicit exemption or making it sure it's clear of how that's a part of registration process. Because if it is in productive use, then we I wouldn't deem that as a vacant property. So I think it's just making sure that that's clear is, when we say unimproved land, we're thinking about the the land that has no no structure and maybe no use. And those are really going be our target properties, not necessarily unimproved property that is still in productive use. So that's going to be a part of the things we'll have to figure out with the registration mechanism.

Okay. And also, in regards to that, not just for existing urban gardens, but also what do you want to make it difficult for potential new ones as

well? Yeah. Absolutely. Yep. Thank you,

we we'll be able we

sure Good afternoon.

Have something that will be helpful. The Board

of

over

of of Directors The city has has been been part and call them blighted or dangerous in order to ask for help or incentives from the city to demolish them to fix the self inflicted wound. Examples of the vacant lots and rundown houses exist right now in our Plaza Westport Neighborhood Association area as a result of the developers' shoddy practices. Many are historic buildings or belong to historically significant portions of our neighborhood. These three ordinances would help emanate this situation. We would ask also that the neighborhood's concerns be heard.

It has been plagued by developers acquiring existing and then often occupied residential structures that provide affordable housing, then vacating them, allowing them to deteriorate, tearing them down, and then stockpiling the ground for a period of years. This pattern removes affordable housing without replacing it. Yet the developers often are granted incentives for building and they don't even then do it. I've handed you a chart of the properties in just our Plaza Westport neighborhood from 43rd To 47th, Madison to Mill Creek Park. You'll note that all of the single family homes that have been demolished, their demolition permit, and this goes to the point that eight of these properties have been granted as of December 2024 by Port KC incentives and still no building permits have been issued.

This is a significant problem, and I'm glad that the city is now addressing it.

Thank you. Next, we have Brian Darby.

Good afternoon, Brienne Darby, ED of Cultivate KC, but I'm here today as a representative of the Greater KC Food Policy Coalition. I won't take much of your time. I appreciate Councilman Willett bringing up the concerns about unimproved properties and how that might have unintended consequences for food production in our city. So I'll just keep it short and say that Greater pleased

the we're And

And

pleased

Good afternoon, Marquita Taylor, president of Santa Fe Area Council, and thank you for an opportunity to speak on this. These three ordinances are something that we, in Santa Fe and a lot of other neighborhoods, are are really anxious and excited about any opportunities to make some changes to the policies that are in effect right now. The specifically in 02/2001 where it speaks to code violations for those who continue to have homes that they're not taking care of and the fee that's being accessed. This is something that I wanna make sure that I hopefully, you all are looking at, certainly to have a fee. But if that fee does not carry forward to their taxes, then they'll continue to have fees accumulate each year because right now, there are ways the city has fees when they have to board up these houses, and they continue to stay on the record, but it doesn't affect it doesn't bother them or affect them when they get ready to pay their taxes, which is how abandoned housing act can go into play.

So it it it defeats that purpose if those fees are not assessed when they go to pay their taxes. If there's some way that those those fees can be assessed at that point, then we wouldn't have large sums as we do. And another area is I happen to have witnessed the city and the police department on a house in 27th Street where neither one could act. The police were waiting to get something official to say that they could go in the property. The city was trying to provide something for them to be able to go in.

The end result was there was never something that the city could provide to the police department that was doable for them to actually act and move the people out of the houses. So there's a disconnect here, and I think you're somewhat speaking to that about the police department and the office of unhealthy solutions and others. That has to be a part of this, which will give them the opportunity to do the work they need to do. Thank you.

Thank you.

EZ Craig.

Hello. Sorry. I'm as president I'm I'm Evie Craig, and as president of the Paseo West Neighborhood Association, thank you for this opportunity to express our strong support for all three proposed ordinances. We were one of the signatories to the letter of support submitted by Northeast Neighborhood Coalition last week. Well, as others' testimonies indicates, there are some significant details that need to be worked out in the implementation, not surprising as vacant buildings present a complex set of challenges to the city. It's imperative Julia,

back up. Sorry. Back up.

Okay. Sorry. Are they hearing me, like, throughout the building? It

was a Yes.

I am so sorry about that.

We love your passion. But

But how is this better? Yeah. I think so. At least I'm not singing, councilwoman. But I don't want that taken out of my time. Alright. I'm I'm almost done.

Yeah. Please at

least sing it for us.

Really? All right. Not surprising, it's a complex set of challenges that vacancies provide for us. And since I'm looking at you, Councilwoman, want thank you for your leadership on this issue and hope I'm still at a good distance from the mic. Anyways, it's imperative for our our public safety and economic development that we move forward on these on these important ordinances.

I'm not actually having problems seeing it from this far away. Right? To long no long overdue action on malignant vacancies that fester in our neighborhoods caused by and I'm gonna have to do this. And just in involves long problem safety issues like fires and bringing about many things that we've heard, drain on our community resources caused by abandoned and or neglected buildings that once housed our residents and businesses, contributing to neighborhoods ecosystems. While absentee and negligent landlords are rewarded for their plundering of some of our most historic and vulnerable neighborhoods, residents have looked to the city for relief in action to no avail.

Paradoxically, perhaps, one of the worst outcomes of the event is the eventual demolition of what once were community assets. It's the hope of our neighborhoods that successful passages of these ordinance, coupled with a robust collaboration with neighborhoods in their implementation, will lead to a safer and more financially sound Kansas City. Thank you.

Thank you. I will say I requested a week couple weeks ago that they turn the speakers up because we had complaints from people in the back that said they couldn't hear. Mhmm. So I think thank you to whoever turned them up. We can hear it now. Alright. So Ethan Starr.

Good afternoon. My name is Ethan Starr. I represent Historic Kansas City. We are a historic preservation advocacy and education organization and we're big fans of the three ordinances here. I will address each one individually, but try to do so as quickly as possible.

I'll begin with 260,401, the vacant property registration monitoring regime. This was one thing that is even expanded beyond what was recommended out of the council resolution and the resulting city manager staff report. It is really something that can help us get a hold on the issue of demolition by neglect, though. What are we talking about when we say demolition by neglect? Prolonged vacancy, deferred maintenance, absence of oversight.

Vacant buildings, those left in unsecured and unmonitored condition are the most visible indicators of this pattern. They're often at the point where deterioration is accelerating. Requirements for registration, disclosure of ownership intent, ongoing oversight introduce a level of accountability that we have not previously seen as part of the monitoring enforcement procedure for cases involving city buildings. It will be a real upgrade to what is currently at the behest of city staff at their disposal, and it would help resolve a lot of the issues we consistently face with problem property owners and vacant properties. We recognize that this ordinance is broader in scope than historic preservation alone.

Its provisions apply to vacant and underutilized parcels, not just buildings themselves, but it empowers, again, city staff to do a lot more and prompts the owner to formulate a development plan, consider disposing the property to another party, and that's a posture the city should be taking. This ordinance has great potential for addressing prolonged vacancy and deferred maintenance. Just want to note that it will require sustained engagement and manpower engaged on the part of city staff. Moving on, sorry, to the mothballing ordinance. This was one key topic in which our organization engaged with city staff.

It was at the top of the city manager's report released toward the beginning of this year, and we're very supportive of strengthening requirements for mothballing, meaning securing the building envelope against further deterioration. These are basic steps preventing water intrusion, that kind of thing. There are more recommendations from that city manager's report that are worth considering if you've seen that in the process of these ordinances coming forth. It also talked about establishing training programs and working with the EDC to help property owners get access to historic preservation incentives. Those are state and federal incentives so that could bring in dollars from outside into our community.

Always a great thing. Okay, moving on to the 260,400 ordinance here. Throughout the process of our engagement with City Hall and our issues we encountered with property owners, particularly in downtown and midtown areas in recent years, is one issue has remained central: reforming the city's dangerous building designation process because of this demolition loophole that is wide open as If

you finish up, please.

If you'll

finish up, please. Wait. You're over your time, but go

I I'm aware. I'm sorry.

Finish it up, and I would recommend that you send that document to county.

And we did, and it it's it's already in your folders. I I just wanna state that the the first order issue for historic Kansas City in approaching this trio of ordinances is to ensure that the demolition loophole represented by the dangerous buildings list is closed because presently a locally listed protected building on the local historic register can be demolished if only it satisfies, say, a handful of some criteria for being called dangerous. Changing that threshold to the emergency dangerous designation is a prudent thing, and it's what we ought to do. Thanks so much.

Thank you. Anyone else in the in the chamber? Okay. Let's move to online testimony. That's Sarah Legg.

Thomas has been promoted. Oh, can you hear me?

Yes. We can.

Okay. Hi. Thank you for this opportunity. As a former member of the Historic Preservation Commission, I'm very excited that this is being considered. I love that oh, sorry.

Start my

video. I love that they are listening to the people that have been asking for the dangerous buildings loophole to be closed. Also, as somebody who works in real estate, I'd like to say that I think there is some opportunity for some affordable housing by preventing out of state landlords and owners who are sitting on property either as a financial tool or just because they don't have, I guess, the motivation to do anything with it. I think there's definitely some opportunity for some more affordable housing. I'd like to echo what Ethan said with providing incentives and help in finding those incentives, whether it's grant money, whether it's tax incentives to restore some of these buildings that also goes past the historic preservation piece of it.

I'd like to see, you know, with a lot of our vacant housing stock that has been sitting for years and years and years, it'd be great to have some sort of incentive for the owners to actually get those back online and get people housed in them. And that's also you know, we have our bad actors, but there's also people that inherit homes, like mentioned before with the sidewalks. Just giving them kind of a leg up to get those things taken care of would be great. And I think that's all. Thank you. Thank you.

Go ahead.

You're you're on mute. We can't hear you, sir. I can't see the name.

Thomas. Thomas.

Thomas? Okay. Yes.

Okay. Now we can hear you. Go ahead.

Okay. Mayor Pro Tem, city council members, thank you for the opportunity to speak. I am the former owner of the buildings that were demolished at 31st And Main. Historic Kansas City has utilized that as their case study by which they are driving their concerns here, and I would like to speak to that. I am concerned in a broader context of what I consider to be a fatal flaw in the existing ordinances and also with the new proposed ordinances.

The key to this is creating a situation where the owner of the building is denied the right to demolish the buildings, but is under the control of the government in terms of what they can spend their money on and how they can spend their money. I think that is a situation where one entity wants something and they are now in a position to force another entity to purchase it for them. And I don't think that's lawful. I don't think it's constitutional. I want to encourage the committee, and I want to encourage the mayor's office to examine the current code as to whether it is constitutional or not.

I don't believe it is. I have lawyers who also believe it's not, and I think that needs to be fixed. So if you're going to deny demolition, then you are going you cannot dictate how the person spends their money. That is a recipe for legal action. It is a recipe for financial ruin.

The other objection that I have here is that in this situation, an individual wanted to demolish the buildings. Union Hill neighborhood became very active and historic KC became very active. A historic overlay was placed and the condition that I just described was in place. During that period of time, the Union Hill Neighborhood Association, Historic KC, and the city of KCMO gave themselves three years to find the money to purchase the buildings, the money to restore the buildings, the developer and contractors to perform the restoration, and in my opinion, assumed the responsibility to maintain the buildings in the meantime. If you control the buildings, then you own the buildings.

And you take on the responsibility and liability.

Okay.

Alright. Thank you. Alright. Any other testimony? Alright. So it's back to committee. As was stated, the mayor had requested to just for us to hear the information. They still had some other work that they were trying to to to resolve in these three pieces of legislation. So we will hold these for one week, two weeks. Hold these for two weeks at which is what date? Somebody

May 19.

May 19. Thank you. So we will hold these until May 19. Thank you. Alright. Next item. You.

Ordinance number 260352, locating approximately 35,000 square feet of right of way in District M 1 Dash 5 generally located North Of Olive Street between Rochester Avenue Avenue and directing the city clerk to record certain documents.

Good afternoon.

Good afternoon.

Let's refresh our memories on this on this ordinance. We had quite a bit of discussion at the last time, but ended up holding it, and I can't remember exactly why we were holding it. I think we were pursuing more information, but if you'll provide us with a a brief summary and update.

Yes, of course. Good afternoon, Mayor Pro Tem and fellow council members. Justin Smith, City Planning and Development. So the subject site is located in the 4th District within the boundaries of the Riverfront industrial area plan. And then a closer look at the site, the yellow highlighted portion is the proposed street to be vacated.

It's roughly 35,000 square feet. There is public facilities and private facilities within the right of way. There's a sewer and water And the And we're opportunity applicant in September of twenty twenty to three. The main intent of this vacation is to resurface Olive Street. As you can see in the picture here, city planning and development recommended a maintenance agreement with public works.

Public works did not agree with that recommendation, so the applicant proceeded with the vacation of right of way. There is the reason we had to do the portion of 20 we have a significant The highlighted area is under the same ownership. So the consent, it will be owned and maintained all by the same owner here. And then, again, just some pictures of North Olive Street. And with that, the city plan commission did recommend approval subject to conditions, and I can answer any questions.

Yes. Don't necessarily have questions, but if you pull up to Slide nine, I went out here and toured it myself. So the craters actually look a lot worse than what they are in these pictures. I did get to see where they do have ownership of the road south of that that ends up to a dead end, that there's absolutely nothing. So South Of Rochester goes into a dead end.

There's nothing there besides a couple properties that have property violations of a lot of junk and stuff in them. I feel, after going out there and seeing it firsthand, fully supportive of CPC's recommendation on this and talked with a couple of folks representing some of the users within the area, including Missouri Soybean Association, which provided a letter of support for this. Folks may not know that Cargill has about 13 plants throughout the country. This is the number one plant in terms of production. You have about 400 trips a day on Nicholas Avenue.

You have about 160 trips on North Olive Street. And I was out there, there's I

important that's point.

Think that's to make this into concrete And for long term. The Nicholas I will say this, Nicholson Ave does look like it's in good shape, which the city still maintains. But from seeing the amount of damage there's done to trucks, I full on support this, especially with looking on what's on off street. You're talking about total junkyards. And I know Cargill has made several offers to some of those property owners around there without any kind of return of communication.

And it's just but people are still going to be able to access by going left on Nicholson Ave. And this is something where it's actually pretty dangerous for folks to be on considering the amount of trips of massive trucks and the current shape of the road. So this will definitely improve our city and help one of the main economic drivers in the region. So full and supported, and I'm gonna be added as a cosponsor.

Alright. Thank you, councilman. So what I passed out is a recommended recommended language for committee substitutes. The the heading still reads the same, but there's two recommended changes. It's in section four subsection one to strike the word dedicate.

So it says the applicant shall retain water main and sewer main easements for the existing assets located within the right of way. So just striking the word dedicate and putting in the word retain. And then on section six or let's see. Sub section four, subsection six, the change the recommended changes, the applicant shall provide an access easement to the properties identified as Lots 36 Through 47 on vacation exhibit B, which is attached. And then in and then let me just read.

I'm sorry. Which is attached hereto and incorporated herein by reference. So that's changing the language in section two section six. Sorry. Subsection six. And which I'll pass out to the committee members. And so those are the only changes. Correct? Yep. In this committee sub, I just wanted to make sure since we didn't read it into as we got started. Are there does anybody have any objections to those those recommendations?

I do not have any concerns with those changes. Okay.

Alright. So we took public testimony the last time, but I'll open it. Is there any public testimony for this ordinance?

There's no public oh.

I like it.

Okay. Just state state your name and

My name is Vernon Jensen. I'm the site leader for the Cargill facility that is affected by this. I just want to take a minute to say that it's absolutely critical to our customer and our customer service metrics that we get this done. It's been years that our customers are unable to make make sure sure to able that best thing overall. A lot of the potential concerns around commuting and traffic, there is no civilian traffic on that street.

There's hundreds of trucks that go through there every day. So the businesses to the west are reached from the North or the South or the West. We're landlocked right there on the east side with the river, so it's just not used at all. And I'm again, timeliness is also the with

And

the point to make the motion because I'm still going to be present or no on this. And I just want to comment and say that just because I think that this policy approach is the wrong one doesn't mean that I'm anti Cargill. It doesn't mean that I'm anti so you being far away doesn't mean that I'm anti that I'm against the investment that this company has made. I just think that there's a different approach that was left out. And I think by our own admission, this does not qualify under the statutory requirements for vacations, one of those being that it doesn't provide no longer provides a public purpose.

And we've stated that there needs to be an easement. The original draft of this said that there needed to be a public access easement on the entire thing, which then just completely undermines this I think going forward, I'm not going to fight this. I think that there's plenty of reason to move forward here. But in the future, my preference would be when we have a situation like this where there's like a clear, like we know kind of what's causing this problem and if there's an adjacent property owner who wants to help us maintain it, then I think a maintenance agreement would be a more prudent approach rather than a permanent solution. So, I'm just going to leave it at that and say that I'm just essentially a protest of this policy approach.

And I'm going to continue to harp on that as these types of projects or these types of organs come forward. So I'll leave it at

Just definitely hear your comments and concerns, but I think this was an issue for several years, for many years, and I think it's a great opportunity and the city needs to take action. So with that, then I'll entertain a motion.

Yeah. Thank you, mayor pro tem. I move that or committee sub for ordinance number two six zero three five two to be reported on a committee with the recommendation of bans and new pass.

Second. It's been moved improperly. Seconded. All in favor, please say aye. Aye. Aye. Any opposed? No. K. The motion carries. This will be heard on Thursday. Thank you. Is there any additional business to come before the

I do wanna say one other comment after I don't wanna stop before the cell, but councilman Bunch not reached out to originally on this. And so if he probably if he was a couple years ago, maybe the public works agreement could have gotten done.

Would have gotten done. Yeah. Yeah. Thank you for the alright. Any additional business? No. Nope? Okay. We are adjourned.