Best + Most Sustainable Uses of Vacant Properties

BEST + MOST SUSTAINABLE USES OF VACANT PROPERTIES

Vacant Lot Task Force Recommendations for the Environmental Management Commission City of Kansas City, Missouri December 17, 2014

TABLE OF CONTENTS

EXECUTIVE SUMMARY.......................................................................................................3 I. INTRODUCTION...............................................................................................................7

Scope of the Problem........................................................................................................ 7 Definition of Vacancy......................................................................................................... 8 Understanding the Problem - Underlying Causes............................................................ 9 Vacancy is an Expensive Problem................................................................................... 10 Reframing Challenges as Opportunities........................................................................ 11

II. PREVENTION............................................................................................................... 12 Urban Growth Boundaries + Management...........................................................................12 Revised Demolition Policy....................................................................................................... 14 Preservation + Neighborhood Conservation......................................................................... 17 Economic Incentives for Revitalization.................................................................................. 17 Existing Incentives............................................................................................................ 17 Realign Tax System to Deter Unproductive Use............................................................. 21 Recommendations for Economic Incentives..........................................................................22

III. ANALYSIS + STABILIZATION..................................................................................... 23 Importance of Collecting + Using Good Data........................................................................23 Data Wish List + Where to Find the Data.............................................................................. 24

The Case for Creating a Vacancy Database..........................................................................26 A Successful Data Program + Coordinator............................................................................ 27 Using Data to Inform Community Planning: A Local Case Study.........................................28 Lot Triage Process + Decision-Making Matrix.......................................................................30 Lot Stabilization for Future Development..............................................................................30

IV. REPURPOSING + REUSE.......................................................................................... 32 Recommendations for Repurposing + Reuse.........................................................................33 Equitable Development: Addressing a Local Issue...............................................................34

GREEN INFRASTRUCTURE......................................................................................................36 What is Green Infrastructure?.........................................................................................36 Why Green Infrastructure?..............................................................................................36 Drivers of Green Infrastructure Investment................................................................... 37 Identifying Lots for Green Infrastructure........................................................................38 Challenges to be Addressed with Green Infrastructure................................................39 Recommendations for Implementing Green Infrastructure.................................................40

URBAN AGRICULTURE............................................................................................................. 41 What is Urban Agriculture?............................................................................................. 41 Benefits of Using Vacant Lots for Urban Agriculture..................................................... 41 Identifying Best Lots for Urban Agriculture....................................................................42 Recommendations for Implementing Urban Agriculture......................................................43 INFILL DEVELOPMENT + SUSTAINABLE REUSE....................................................................44 What are Infill Development + Sustainable Reuse?......................................................44 Benefits of Infill Development + Sustainable Reuse.....................................................44 Community Engagement: A Local Case Study......................................................................45 The Impact of Sustainable, Equitable Building Practices............................................. 47 Identifying Best Lots for Infill + Sustainable Reuse....................................................... 47 Challenges for Infill Development + Sustainable Reuse............................................... 47 Recommendations for Infill Development + Sustainable Reuse.........................................48 Resources and Opportunities for Repurposing + Reuse..............................................49

V. CONCLUSION.............................................................................................................. 51 VI. APPENDIX.................................................................................................................. 52 Appendix I: Data Wish List......................................................................................................52

Appendix II: Developer Questionnaire....................................................................................56 Appendix III: Bibliography.......................................................................................................60 Appendix IV: Vacant Lot Task Force Members + Contributors.............................................62

EXECUTIVE SUMMARY

During the past 25 years, the amount of vacant lots and structures have increased significantly in Kansas City, Mo. Indeed, the City is faced with the challenge of managing these vacant properties and, more importantly, actively transitioning them back into productive use. The issue is complex because thousands of properties are privately owned. Solutions for the best use of vacant properties will require creativity and significant financial investment. However, Kansas City, Mo. has an opportunity to transform these vacant properties into assets that can be used to advance established policies of environmental sustainability, economic innovation, and social equity.

At the most basic level, vacant properties, including both lots and buildings, result in a loss of tax revenue and increased public service expenses. Additionally, in neighborhoods with the highest concentrations of vacant property, residents are negatively affected by many of the additional effects that accompany disinvestment, such as overgrown weeds, illegal dumping, a lack of maintained sidewalks and curbs, lower property values, loss of residents and increased crime.

From the time that structures are abandoned, to the point where they are demolished, neighborhoods are left to deal with the negative effects of dilapidated buildings. Once dangerous buildings are demolished, thus creating more vacant lots, the City of Kansas City, Mo. inherits the maintenance of vacant land. The financial costs to the City, including mowing and clean-up of illegal dumping, are steep. Kansas City, Mo. estimates spending $1 million annually just in mowing costs for Land Bank of Kansas City properties. The City also spends considerable funds in response to code violations -- mowing

and cleaning up privately owned vacant properties. Further, the City incurs the often unrecoverable cost of demolishing unsafe structures and disposing of demolition debris.

Perhaps more difficult to quantify are the significant social costs, the health and wellbeing, of residents living among the indignities of disinvestment. With abandoned properties comes social fragmentation, resulting in a weakened community as a whole. Vacancy creates a larger landscape of disinvestment and a negative image of our city.

Given these impacts and costs, it is crucial that Kansas City Mo. find solutions and pursue strategies that can transform vacant properties from liabilities into opportunities while also preventing the increase in additional abandoned structures and vacant lots. Kansas City, Mo. is a city of entrepreneurs, artists, committed community leaders and organizers. This city benefits from a diverse population and boasts a history of innovation -this city is primed to tackle the complex challenge of vacancy.

Non-profit organizations, neighborhood associations and other community groups have been working for years to transform and utilize vacant properties. While their efforts have been meaningful, they cannot solve the problem alone.

Kansas City, Mo. and its business community must take a sustained and systemic approach to deal with vacant lots and vacant structures. We must develop practical strategies for turning vacancies into assets that attract and spur future development. Development could take many forms, including master planned residential communities, sustainable infill developments, maintained public green spaces, and new, transit-oriented developments.

Vacant Lot Task Force | 3

The Vacant Lot Task Force Process In August 2013, a group of stakeholders from across disciplines began to meet to discuss the challenges and burdens that vacant properties present to Kansas City, Mo. and its neighborhoods as well as the opportunities vacant land and structures present for the future. The Kansas City Environmental Management Commission (EMC) convened a Vacant Lot Task Force to solicit input and discover the most sustainable uses for vacant properties from key stakeholders.

The Task Force was comprised of urban agriculture experts, neighborhood leaders, city planners, architects, water engineers, non-profit program managers, university faculty, staff from the City and a variety of governmental organizations.

The Task Force met monthly to examine underlying causes of vacancy, to review ongoing efforts in Kansas City, Mo. and different approaches used in other cities. The Task Force created this document to summarize our policy recommendations with an emphasis on sustainability and community-driven solutions.

The Scattered Sites Guidebook for Infill Lot Improvement Strategies was created for the Neighborhoods and Housing Services Department of the City of Kansas City, Mo. in 2012 to begin to recommend ways to transition vacant lots into community amenities. The guidebook has been referenced for this report. Additionally, the Department of Architecture, Urban Planning and Design (AUPD) at the University of Missouri–Kansas City (UMKC) conducted an Urban Planning and Design studio class led by Daniel Dermitzel and Jacob A. Wagner. Several members of the Vacant Lot Task Force

4

| Best + Most Sustainable Uses of Vacant Properties

participated in a community panel that shared feedback and guidance for the students’ research. Several City staff members including David Park, Michael Patillo, Forest Decker and Stuart Bullington also assisted the students’ work. The work of the students and their advisors helped to guide new thinking about the problem and opportunity of vacancy and some of the graphics from their work are included in this report.

Over the past months, the Vacant Lot Task Force made a number of key findings: ■■ The City of Kansas City, Mo. spends an excessive amount of money to manage vacant properties.

■■ As long as Kansas City, Mo. lacks comprehensive growth management efforts in Missouri and in the region to curb suburban sprawl, population loss and the problem of inner-city vacancy will continue to grow.

■■ The current stock of vacant houses will become the vacant lots of the future. Addressing the growing supply of vacant structures is a critical strategy to reduce the City’s vacant lot problem.

■■ In some neighborhoods over the next 10-15 years, there will be a loss of significant population of elderly residents who are “aging in place.” Kansas City, Mo. needs a strategic approach to repopulate neighborhoods in order to prevent significant increases in the number of vacant houses in these neighborhoods.

■■ The City of Kansas City, Mo. would benefit greatly from a Vacant Lot Coordinator to implement policy responses across various City departments and regularly engage community stakeholders in decision making processes.

■■ Different properties offer different opportunities and are not all the same in terms of their potential. In order to minimize the complexity of analyzing large volumes of vacant properties and identifying the most appropriate reuse, a decision-matrix or triage process based on data and citizen engagement is essential.

■■ Vacant lots that are not likely to be redeveloped in the near future, or that may never be appropriate for redevelopment, should be identified as potential long-term resources for environmental conservation.

Properties near major sources of air pollution or in floodplains should be considered for re-zoning as conservation areas.

■■ Given the concentration of vacancy in areas with higher levels of poverty and a history of economic disinvestment, addressing vacant land and buildings is an issue that requires attention to equity planning and provides an opportunity for residents to engage with and benefit from vacant land management. There are ample opportunities for work force development through green infrastructure and deconstruction.

■■ Successful vacant land management strategies require a new approach to redevelopment in urban neighborhoods. Social capital, economic investment and environmental assets must be combined for success and sustainability.

■■ Current efforts to reuse vacant properties in neighborhoods should be analyzed as part of an ongoing policy research agenda to support City planning and housing efforts. For example, the Neighborhoods and Housing Services Department’s target areas would benefit from documentation of both obstacles to vacant land re-use as well as effective strategies. Successful efforts need to be documented and replicated for other neighborhoods to employ in their efforts.

Vacant Lot Task Force | 5

Figure 1. Vacancy Concentration Map: Vacant Lots located within the City of Kansas City, Mo.’s Area Plans.

Source: UMKC’s Department of Architecture, Urban Planning and Design

6

| Best + Most Sustainable Uses of Vacant Properties

INTRODUCTION

Vacancy in cities is a complex urban land use challenge.

It cannot be credited to any one cause, but rather includes a convergence of factors. The abandonment of land, housing and other buildings is an uneven process that impacts neighborhoods disproportionately. Vacant properties are not evenly distributed across the city; rather they are specifically concentrated in neighborhoods that were hardest hit by the recent economic downturn.

Figure 1 provided by UMKC, shows the concentration of vacant parcels based on Kansas City, Mo.’s land use data.

The red, orange and yellow areas show concentrations of vacant parcels in the Third District of the City Council and within the Heart of the City Area Plan boundaries. This “vacancy concentration map” of indicates the uneven distribution of vacant land.

Vacancy is one part of an inter-related process of neighborhood change and is the result of contemporary and historical causes. Some of these causes include systematic patterns of economic disinvestment, racially biased real estate and mortgage lending practices, incentives for new suburban development at the expense of reinvestment in existing neighborhoods, and the more recent economic crisis linked to mortgage foreclosures that has resulted in rapid neighborhood destabilization (Bowman & Pagano 2004; Immergluck 2009).

Another factor leading to a high volume of vacant parcels is the current demolition policy in Kansas City, Mo., which leaves vacant land in its wake. In fact, the more effective the City is in its efforts to demolish vacant housing units, the

greater the problem of vacant land. As a result, addressing the growing supply of vacant houses before they are too far gone, must become a critical component of the strategy to reduce the City’s vacant lots.

As a result of uneven development, many neighborhoods struggle with a vacancy crisis while new neighborhoods continue to be developed in suburban areas. Other areas see a disproportionate amount of new investment often subsidized through public programs. Given this situation, it is impossible to address vacancy without addressing issues of equitable development and growth management.

Scope of the Problem

Within its boundaries, Kansas City, Mo. has approximately 5,000 publicly controlled vacant lots and dangerous buildings.

The Land Bank of Kansas City and the Kansas City, Mo. Homesteading Authority own approximately 4,000 of these.

Many of these vacant properties were transferred to the Land Bank of Kansas City through tax foreclosure after previous owners abandoned them, and the Homesteading Authority obtained some tax-foreclosed properties before the Land Bank of Kansas City was created. The average size of these vacant lots is 8,000 square feet. Land and structures that have fallen through the private market into public ownership are by definition unwanted by private owners and thus require public stewardship. In a sense, the Land Bank of Kansas City is only an “owner of last resort.”

In addition to these publicly owned and managed properties, the number of privately owned vacant lots and

Vacant Lot Task Force | 7

structures is significantly larger. According to the Kansas City, Mo. Planning GIS system, there are more than 18,000 parcels south of the river that are identified as Vacant (coded 9500).

Because this land use code is assigned to all parcels without a clear alternative land use or existing structure, it includes vacant land that is not a problem -- such as a side lot that is used and maintained by an adjacent land owner. However still, when one takes into account both the publicly held vacant properties, as well as the privately owned neglected lots and abandoned structures, the comprehensive vacancy number is easily two to three times greater than the 5,000 properties in public control alone.

UMKC’s Department of Architecture, Urban Planning and Design (AUPD) recently completed an Urban Planning and Design Studio focused on Kansas City, Mo. vacancy south of the Missouri River. In their semester-long study, the team of AUPD students found that a majority of the vacant parcels (GIS) are located within the Third City Council District and are heavily concentrated in economically distressed neighborhoods. For instance, there are 996 vacant lots within the Washington Wheatley Neighborhood Improvement Association.

The students also found that vacant lots are more pervasive within close range to major highways. Interestingly, they concluded that 62 percent of vacant lots in Kansas City, Mo. are within half of a mile of two major highway corridors including U.S. Highway 71 and U.S. Interstate 70. Recognizing patterns of vacancy is important to inform efforts and to develop appropriate responses.

8

| Best + Most Sustainable Uses of Vacant Properties

Definition of Vacancy

The National Vacant Properties Campaign has developed a definition that defines vacant properties as: “vacant residential, commercial, and industrial buildings and vacant lots that pose a threat to public safety or that exhibit traits of neglect on the behalf of the property owner.” The U.S. Census Bureau tracks vacancy for housing units only and the U.S. Department of Housing and Urban Development (HUD) refers to these unproductive properties as “vacant and abandoned” properties. Throughout this report, vacant properties refer to those that are not maintained and remain abandoned or underutilized. Vacant properties may or may not have a structure and they may be owned publicly or privately.

Throughout this report, vacant properties refer to those that are not maintained and under utilized.

They may or may not have a structure and they may be owned publicly or privately.

The U.S. Department of Housing and Urban Development (HUD) argues in Evidence Matters (Winter 2014) that these “properties are more than just a symptom of larger economic forces at work in the community; their association with crime, increased risk to health and welfare, plunging property values and escalating municipal costs make them problems in and of themselves, contributing to overall community decline and disinvestment.”

Understanding the Problem – Underlying Causes In order to develop appropriate policy solutions to any issue of concern, it is important to understand the underlying causes. The problem of vacant properties is complex because they are not caused by any single factor, and most of the time, vacancy is the result of a convergence of regional, block-level and site-specific trends.

One of the most simple and direct ways to understand vacancy is to study the loss of population. The changing demographics of Kansas City. Mo. and the metropolitan region over the past 30 years shows the depopulation of urban areas that has resulted from an aging urban population, suburban sprawl and white flight. Sprawl creates depopulation of the urban core and is compounded by a loss of jobs and households as they move to the suburbs (Freilich 1997; Benner & Pastor 2012).

Suburban sprawl in Kansas City, Mo. is compounded by the fact that the city includes areas of suburban sprawl within its own municipal boundaries in multiple counties. Further, the City created policies that support the contradictory goals of revitalizing urban neighborhoods, while also encouraging suburban development adopted as part of its FOCUS Comprehensive Plan. Thus the areas with the greatest amount of vacant property must compete against suburban neighborhoods within the municipal boundaries as well as those in other cities and across the state line. This pattern of suburban sprawl is a challenge for all major metropolitan areas in the U.S. As Dr. Robert Freilich pointed out in his study of Kansas City (1997):

Sprawl has engendered six major crises for America’s major metropolitan regions. These crises are: (1) central city and first- and second-ring suburban distress; (2) environmental degradation through loss of wetlands, sensitive lands, air and water quality degradation; (3) massive gasoline energy over utilization; (4) fiscal insolvency, transportation congestion, infrastructure deficiencies and taxpayer revolts; (5) massive agricultural land conversion; and (6) housing inaffordability.

The geography of the metropolitan region adds to these challenges because Kansas City, Mo. is located on a state line surrounded by over one hundred separate municipalities.

These neighboring municipalities exacerbate sprawl and economic competition for population and jobs.

Other root causes are no less challenging in that we have little control. For example, the long-term decline of manufacturing jobs, stagnant income growth, increasing income inequality (PERE and Policy Link, Equity Profile for KC Region 2013), and lack of opportunities has created additional pressures on urban core families and neighborhoods.

Exacerbating these trends, the 2008 recession and housing crisis further fueled vacancies, as many urban core neighborhoods were susceptible to subprime and predatory mortgage lending, speculation in housing by out-of-state and even international investors, followed by a cycle of disinvestment and abandonment (Legal Aid of Western Missouri).

Vacant Lot Task Force | 9

Vacancy is an Expensive Problem

Kansas City, Mo. bears many financial burdens for the basic maintenance of vacant properties. Expenditures to pay contractors for mowing and cleaning have risen from $939,431 in 2009 to $1,952,082 in 2013. A total of $6,875,924 has been spent during this five year period and does not include staff costs and other expenses related to the maintenance (City of Kansas City, Mo.).

When property owners fail to mow or maintain a property in compliance with City code, Kansas City, Mo. pays a contractor to perform the needed mowing and then attempts to recover these costs from the property owner.

In the 2013 growing season, the City placed liens against 1,071 privately owned vacant lots in an attempt to recover the costs of mowing. However, these liens often go unpaid by the property owner. Furthermore, due to limited available funds, these properties may be mowed only once per growing season, which leads to overgrown, weed-infested lots that are targets for illegal dumping, which ultimately creates additional costs to the City for clean-up.

Beyond these clear financial expenditures, vacant properties are a lost source of tax revenues. Owners of vacant properties often fail to pay the real estate taxes. After four years of unpaid taxes and liens, the properties go through tax-foreclosure and if they are not sold at the auction, are transferred to the Land Bank of Kansas City.

It is important to remember that the impact of vacancy extends well beyond clear financial costs of maintenance or lost revenues; there are high costs to community health and quality

10 | Best + Most Sustainable Uses of Vacant Properties

of life. Residents in close proximity to vacant and neglected properties experience diminished property values, leading to stress and damage to mental and physical health. Among those hurt most by this loss of property value and well-being are longtime homeowners, many of them senior citizens. In addition, abandoned properties are more likely to be sites for criminal activity and fires, both accidental and deliberate.

National research on vacant and abandoned properties has begun to highlight a number of key negative impacts from vacancies in cities across the country. In its publication Evidence Matters: Winter 2014, HUD notes the links between vacant and abandoned properties and reduced property values, increased crime, arson and property damage, as well as increased costs to cities for maintenance, administration and clean-up of vacant or abandoned properties.

Over $6.8 million has been paid to contractors for mowing and cleaning vacant properties during the past five years and does not include staff costs and other expenses related to maintenance.

Reframing Challenges as Opportunities Neighborhood groups have worked hard to create community spaces; schools have taken over sites to grow demonstration gardens; non-profits plant community orchards, and individuals take it upon themselves to mow and maintain the lots in their neighborhoods. There is positive movement working to address these vacant properties; however, these efforts will only continue to scratch at the surface and offer isolated impact.

The City of Kansas City, Mo. is presented with a unique moment to use the opportunity of vacancy to re-envision a greener, more equitable city. As a means to achieve both City and regional long-term development objectives, vacant properties present numerous ways to combat climate change and prioritize sustainability, promote transit and walkability, improve regional air quality and community health, encourage urban reinvestment and increase density all while engaging an underemployed local population.

It is the view of this Task Force that efforts addressing vacancy need to become systematic and sustained. Kansas City, Mo. leaders must address the underlying causes that create high levels of vacant properties and be the drivers of effective policy change. This is an opportunity to do something positive and ground-breaking, not only to transform these properties into assets but to create a new paradigm for a healthy, vibrant and equitable city.

The following sections of this report provide a three-part strategy to address vacancy in Kansas City, Mo. These strategies include:

PREVENTION ANALYSIS + STABILIZATION REPURPOSING + REUSE

Vacant Lot Task Force | 11

PREVENTION

There are a number of approaches that should be used to reduce the number of private vacant properties falling into abandonment and decline while contributing to Kansas City, Mo.’s vacancy crisis. Failure to address the underlying causes of vacancy through local, state and federal policy changes will only lead to continued growth of the City’s vacancy problem.

Kansas City, Mo. must initiate a comprehensive vacancy prevention strategy by addressing these three areas: 1. Growth Management: Examine and consider basic growth management techniques.

2. Code Enforcement: Make changes to improve the code enforcement response and public engagement on vacant properties. Develop an “early warning system” to preserve existing structures.

3. Economic Incentives: Strengthen economic incentives to promote productive use while pursuing disincentives to deter unproductive use of vacant land.

URBAN GROWTH BOUNDARIES + MANAGEMENT

Kansas City, Mo. needs a comprehensive growth management effort for the City and region to curb suburban sprawl or the problem of inner-city vacancy will only continue to grow. The current stock of vacant houses will become the vacant lots of the future unless there is a significant shift in

12 | Best + Most Sustainable Uses of Vacant Properties

public policy and population growth. Kansas City, Mo. must work aggressively to stop the loss of population in urban neighborhoods while also attracting new residents to move into these neighborhoods.

Kansas City, Mo. must seriously consider basic growth management techniques at two scales, one within the municipality and one at the level of the bi-state region with our suburban neighbors. An urban growth boundary, or other forms of growth management, provides the means to reduce sprawl and the subsequent decline of urban populations.

Towards that end, the Task Force suggests the City work together with Mid-America Regional Council (MARC) and other partners to convene a Task Force to study urban growth boundaries and report to Kansas City Council as to whether some form of an urban growth boundary is desirable and how it could work.

The Task Force suggests the City work together with MARC and other partners to convene a Task Force to study growth management and a regional urban growth boundary.

The Mid-America Regional Council’s population growth projections for the Kansas City region, as shown in figure 2 on the following page, over the next three decades is projected to grow in the suburban areas outside of the Interstate 435 loop.

If this trend proves to be true, vacancy and population loss will go hand-in-hand in the central city.

Figure 2. 2040 Growth Projections Source: Mid-America Regional Council, The 2040 Forecast is an estimate of the land-use change most likely to occur in the Greater Kansas City area by 2040 given past trends, known demographic and economic shifts, and expected changes in federal, state and local government policy.

Vacant Lot Task Force draft 3.0 in production | 13

Unchecked suburban growth in the Kansas City region remains one of the underlying causes of vacancy in Kansas City, Mo. Further, new suburban development within Kansas City, Mo.’s municipal boundaries also reduces resources available to address vacancy as well as the population density needed to maintain infrastructure for urban neighborhoods.

Kansas City, Mo. simply cannot afford to ignore suburban sprawl and must become an active leader in growth management efforts that prioritize urban redevelopment and development of existing neighborhoods. As figure 2 shows, MARC predicts that the decline of population in the region will largely be concentrated in Jackson County and areas of the City already experiencing high concentrations of vacancy.

To address sprawl, Kansas City, Mo. will need to develop a regional approach by working with regional partner municipalities in the Mid-America Regional Council (MARC) and the States of Missouri and Kansas. Fortunately, the Greater Kansas City Chamber of Commerce’s Urban Neighborhood Initiative (UNI), the Creating Sustainable Places (CSP) initiative of MARC, as well as the Kansas City Regional Equity Network all provide forums for these issues to be addressed.

In addition to creating regional growth planning, Kansas City, Mo. must develop internal growth management strategies that can incentivize the reuse of existing neighborhoods before new areas are developed. Within Kansas City, Mo. there are opportunities to re-focus City policy on existing neighborhoods and to encourage neighborhood stabilization and repopulation.

A clear ally in this effort is Jackson County, Mo. It is critical that the City and County work together to reduce population loss

14 | Best + Most Sustainable Uses of Vacant Properties

and increase neighborhood stabilization, because the majority of the vacant lots in Kansas City, Mo. are in Jackson County.

REVISED DEMOLITION POLICY The demolition of existing housing units exacerbates the problem of vacant lots in many neighborhoods. While demolition of blighted structures may be a cheaper option in the short term, demolition of housing units can undermine neighborhood stability, eliminate low cost housing units, destroy historic resources and leave more vacant lots for Kansas City, Mo. to manage long term.

Currently, publicly funded demolition of dangerous buildings units is an ad-hoc, unplanned process that is often a policy of last resort. Prioritization of vacant structures for demolition involves a rating system based on structural conditions with little information about the neighborhood context. Integrating demolition decisions into neighborhood planning would better serve the overall interest of adjacent property owners, neighborhood organizations, local businesses and government.

The City often subsidizes demolition rather than preservation of existing structures. For example, the City will pay for the demolition of a property and place a lien on the property owner, but these charges often go unpaid. Having cleared the land of its structure, the City often assumes that its job is complete. The neighborhood is then left with another vacant lot to manage and no resources for the protection of

the remaining housing stock. In cases where the City has raised funding for neighborhood stabilization - such as the 2011 Public Safety Tax, these funds would be better targeted toward the restoration of existing housing units rather than spending limited funding on demolition.

There are a number of conditions that compound property decay which then eventually leads to vacant lots. Three of these conditions include: ■■ Foreclosure: Banks address lowest value foreclosures last, thereby compounding neglect in the inner city.

Conditions are allowed to exist in the urban core that would never be allowed in outlying neighborhoods.

■■ Family History: Houses are neglected and deteriorate because inheriting family members can’t afford to maintain the property however nostalgia prevents them from selling.

■■ Urban Flight: Houses sit vacant when home buyers no longer find a neighborhood appealing. One vacant house can result in an image of blight which continues to decrease the attractiveness of the neighborhood.

A neighborhood on the tipping point is salvageable with incentives, but after a certain point it will need a significant catalyst.

Kansas City, Mo. should look for new ways to encourage the restoration of existing housing units and structures.

Look for opportunities for collective impact by working with

partners including the Chamber of Commerce, the Urban Neighborhood Initiative, the Third City Council District and Jackson County, Mo. Actively working to maintain populations in target neighborhoods will help reduce abandoned and neglected homes.

Recent data gathered and analyzed for the Mid-America Regional Council (McClure, 2011) shows that there is a high demand for affordable housing in our region. In particular, the region is estimated to lack about 30,000 affordable housing units. Initiatives and incentives focused on meeting some of this demand could be focused on areas with high amounts of vacant properties.

The City should look to opportunities for collective impact by working with partners including the Chamber of Commerce, the Urban Neighborhood Initiative, the Third City Council District and Jackson County, Mo.

In many cases, demolition could be prevented if Kansas City, Mo. developed an “early warning system” for vacant houses. The current waiting period of three years for the process of delinquent taxes to alert the City and County to start condemnation is much too long. An early warning system could help neighborhood organizations, the City and the County work together to address and prevent the decline of quality housing units. Part of the early warning system

Vacant Lot Task Force | 15

should include a survey of the community development corporations, neighborhood organizations and key partners available to better understand the causes of housing abandonment. The City can work closely with neighborhoods at a tipping point, especially if they have active residents who can market properties to attract rehabilitation. Refer to figure 3 on the following pages for an example Action Plan focusing improvement efforts at a block level that can serve as a catalyst for neighborhood investment.

Kansas City, Mo. could prioritize work for code enforcement officers and target properties that need extra monitoring and enforcement such as those owned by banks, investment companies, and speculators. Neighborhood residents can assist in the prioritization of demolition and targeting enforcement efforts.

Fines for neglect and incentives for rehabilitation can be used strategically to prevent the demolition of quality housing structures. The Task Force recommends the following as possible strategies: ■■ Provide incentives for homeowners to purchase and rehabilitate properties in target neighborhoods.

■■ Be intentional with proposed rehab projects and reject undesirable development. Publicize rehab success stories to encourage more rehab.

■■ Support potential renovators or homeowners with a list of possible resources (such as home repair loans or Community Development Block Grant subsidies)

16 | Best + Most Sustainable Uses of Vacant Properties

and a forum to post their successes, along with providing contractor recommendations.

■■ Provide buyers with a list of properties with violations prior to purchase that need abated and then give the new owner an agreed-upon period of time to complete the list before re-visiting the property.

When demolition is necessary, refer to a decision-making matrix to encourage and enable future reuse of the vacant lots left behind. For example, alter codes to allow for the preservation of water and sewer hookups to reduce the cost of installing water and sewer connections for redevelopers.

By simply cutting off, capping and marking water and sewer lines extending to the property, subsequent users can simply re-connect pipes without incurring thousands of dollars in additional expenses traditionally expended for new construction. This method would also provide a means for urban gardeners to more readily access water.

Additionally, the Task Force recommends the City review their current demolition protocol for the reseeding of cleared demolition sites. By swapping the traditional practice of planting labor-intensive grass mixes, such as fescue, with alternative drought-resistant, low-grow or no-grow natural grasses and/or clover ground cover, the City could decrease maintenance and mowing costs. In addition, these low-grow plantings could help provide the look of a maintained property, decreasing the appearance of abandonment that commonly leads to illegal dumping and societal impacts of neglect.

A decision-making matrix could additionally help to determine the development potential of City demolition sites, therefore allowing the prioritization of low-grow species and other beautification or green infrastructure implementation on the sites that may be held in public ownership for extended periods of time.

PRESERVATION + NEIGHBORHOOD CONSERVATION

The State of Missouri is well known for its historic tax credits program, which is a leading program nationally.

Tax credits, however, work best for income producing properties and thus are limited in their usefulness for homeowners. To be eligible for historic tax credits there is a certain level of information needed to develop a local or national designation for the historic registers. City staff, neighborhoods and local preservation advocacy groups should work together to develop the necessary information through an expanded historic resources survey process especially for neighborhoods that have not been surveyed.

One strategy that is under-utilized in Kansas City, Mo.’s urban neighborhoods is the neighborhood conservation overlay district. This overlay district strategy creates a means to conduct local review of demolition, alteration and new construction in areas with many historic structures but low historic integrity overall. In areas with historic housing units that have experienced disinvestment and demolition, it is often difficult or impossible to create new historic

districts. The neighborhood conservation overlay is now an option in the City’s zoning code that can be used to plan for neighborhood stabilization, prevent demolition and promote compatible, infill housing.

Combining neighborhood conservation strategies with the financial means and programs to fund rehabilitation of existing housing is key to this strategy. For example, the use of TIF funds for housing rehab as part of the RAMP program could be targeted with the identification of new neighborhood conservation overlay districts. This strategy is just beginning to take form in the Historic Manheim Park Neighborhood. Other financial strategies might include a revolving loan fund; a diverse mix of strategies is necessary to attract homeowners, responsible renovators and nonprofit partners to invest in neighborhood stabilization.

ECONOMIC INCENTIVES FOR REVITALIZATION Existing Incentives

Existing incentives available to developments in Kansas City, Mo. typically fall into one of two categories. One category is tax abatement, such as that offered through Chapter 353, the Land Clearance for Redevelopment Authority, or the Planned Industrial Expansion Authority. The other category of tax incentives are direct financial incentives such as tax increment financing through Kansas City’s TIF Commission or New Markets Tax Credits offered by the Kansas City, Mo. CDE.

Vacant Lot Task Force | 17

6

42ND ST

41

14 4 1 4 5 1 4 2

4 4 5 4 4

1

1

1 5 4 4

1

5

4

4

4 5

5 1

43RD ST

4

4

6

4

4

1

TROOST AVE

4

1

1

6

15 2 2 1 1

44TH ST T

1

Sidewalk Repair

2

Curb Repair

4

Vacant lot(s)

5

Boarded Up Buildings(s)

6

Transit Stop

Tracy Avenue currently has a signicant number of vacant lots and dangerous buildings. Using varied strategies of public funding, code reinforcement, and private development, the proposed solu�ons offer a drama�c alterna�ve to its current state. Increasing the residen�al density in this area also helps support commercial development along Troost Ave and Paseo.

THE PASEO

6

42-44th Street, Tracy Ave. to Forrest Ave.

1

1 4

EXISTING CONDITIONS

6

2

6

GREEN IMPACT ZONE STUDY Tracy Street Model Block Project

43rd St

Prepared by APD Urban Planning & Management Legend 4301

1309

Building Conditions

4302

4305

4300

4304

4307

Deteriorated

Parcels

Fair

Dilapidated

Building Footprints

Poor

Vacant Lot 100

4313

Based on a windshield survey conducted by the Ac�on Plan team in November 2012, this home’s condi�on has signicantly improved requiring only minor improvements.

4312

4317

Tracy Ave

4319

4327

4328

4331

4323

4330

4328

4331

4339 1212 1214

4334

4335

1206 1218

4341

44th St

Parcel is a vacant lot

4330

4333 4334

1204

4326

4329

4333

1200

4322

4327

1310

1316 1312 1314

Virginia Ave

4325

50

4310

4309

This windshield survey was taken January 2010 to assess home condi�ons within the Green Impact Zone. Factors such as roofs, founda�ons, sidewalks, curbs, landscaping, etc. were studied to determine parcel condi�on.

East Side of Tracy Ave., 43-44th Street

Figure 3. Historic Manheim Park Neighborhood Action Plan created for the Neighborhoods & Housing Services Department of the City of Kansas City, Mo. Source: DRAW Architecture + Urban Design

E 43rd 43r STREET STRE T

*

BANCROFT B BA FT RED EDEV EVELOPMENT NT P OJECT PR

ress with re * in progre

FOREST A AVE

TR RACY AVE

NHS fundi n ng*

FUTURE SITE FOR COMMUNITY GARDEN AND PLAYGROUND

E 44th STREET

PROPOSED SITE MODIFICATIONS

EXISTING BUILDING KEY

0 MINOR REPAIRS & IMPROVEMNTS RESTORATION/ FULL RENOVATION

80

N

KCMO DANGEROUS BUILDING

STREET SCAPE POTENTIAL

160 Feet

VACANT LOT POTENTIAL

ROAD REPAIR

CLEANUP & MAINTENANCE

DECONSTRUCTION

SIDEWALKS: Repair and Replace

PAINT SCHEMES

TREE MAINTENANCE: Replacing & Pruning

MOW, RESEED, CLEAR INVASIVE PLANTS, ETC.

NEW HOUSES

STREET TREES

NEW HOUSES HOME RELOCATION

Tax abatement provides advantages to developers seeking to repurpose vacant properties for either residential or commercial use because the original assessed value of a vacant property is sufficiently low, therefore providing significant tax savings post-redevelopment. However, tax abatement does not generate a funding stream that can be used to remedy many of the problems associated with vacancy highlighted in this report. Various taxing jurisdictions have historically opposed tax abatement for a variety of reasons.

Tax increment financing has some advantages; if a project area is large enough to sufficiently cover areas plagued by vacant properties, tax increments generated can be directed towards the public purpose of stabilizing and repurposing vacant properties. The disadvantage of using tax increment financing is that once properties are redeveloped, particularly in residential areas, the subsequent increase in assessed valuation can affect affordability for existing residents.

There are additional tools available to incentivize residential redevelopment. For example, the Land Clearance for Redevelopment Authority provides a simple mechanism to allow tax abatement for residential rehabilitation of properties.

Additionally the RAMP program managed by Kansas City, Mo.’s Economic Development Corporation provides a mechanism for financing residential property improvements. New Market Tax Credits are a powerful tool that could be used to direct investment toward areas facing high vacancies; however the credits are subject to a complex regulatory scheme, which substantially increases transaction costs.

20 | Best + Most Sustainable Uses of Vacant Properties

Ideally, a combination of tax abatement, tax increment financing, and other incentives could be brought to bear, with tax increment financing providing a mechanism for redevelopment of key commercial zones or corridors in areas affected by higher density of vacant properties, with a portion of the increment generated being directed towards adjacent residential neighborhoods, which could be afforded some form of abatement to ensure affordability for long-time residents.

Given that the region suffers from a lack of approximately 30,000 affordable housing units (McClure, 2011), priority should be given to developments that provide affordable housing. The primary tool for development of affordable housing is the Low Income Housing Tax Credit (LIHTC). Kansas City, Mo. should actively work to connect developers who use LIHTC to develop properties with opportunities afforded by the Land Bank of Kansas City. The LIHTC provides a federal tax credit to investors in affordable housing that can be used each year for 10 years. Since these credits are allocated to the owner of a development, investors take an ownership interest to utilize the credits, thereby generating equity to construct or acquire and rehabilitate the development.

Because the amount of available LIHTC is limited, competition is fierce. In Missouri, the decision as to which projects receive an allocation of tax credits is made by the Missouri Housing Development Commission (MHDC). MHDC looks at a number of factors that are set forth in its annual Qualified Allocation Plan (QAP). Kansas City, Mo. should work proactively with developers to both ensure that adequate political support

is provided for applications to MHDC and that an appropriate subsidy mix is provided to support project feasibility.

As these before mentioned incentives are costly to set up and administer, scarce and often necessarily layered to assist with key impact projects, they may serve most effectively if targeted at “anchor” projects (school conversions, etc.) with an eye towards how the recipient project will facilitate redevelopment and reuse of as many vacant properties in the vicinity as possible.

Beyond the creation of additional housing to drive density, Missouri passed an urban agriculture zone law to incentivize urban farming, which requires cities to provide tax abatement in blighted areas, gives urban farmers access to wholesale rates for water usage (although still being worked through), and establishes a trust fund to benefit agricultural education in schools.

Realign Tax System to Deter Unproductive Use Land speculation and non-productive uses of land are intertwined with Kansas City, Mo.’s vacancy problem. Tax policy is often used to direct movement toward a desired policy change. There are a number of concepts adopted by municipalities throughout the country to alter taxation on vacant and speculative land uses that have proven effective.

While development incentives provide a carrot to developers, realignment of taxes can provide a stick to discourage conditions that contribute to the vacancy problem. Should these types of disincentives be considered, Kansas City, Mo. would need to be careful to avoid negatively affecting lower-income and

disadvantaged persons living in affected areas. Other cities have examined a number of alternatives that include: ■■ Vacant Land Tax: Revising the tax structure to provide incentives for property owners to improve their vacant land. Increasing the property tax on undeveloped parcels to the same level of commercial properties will stimulate sale and land aggregation for both private and municipal development. Such a tax increase could also be phased in slowly, increasing the property tax or imposing a penalty each year the lot sits vacant to help gradually reintroduce these parcels to the market.

■■ Impose New Fees and Strengthen Enforcement: Continue to impose penalties on landowners who allow their land to be used for dumping or other illegal activities. Utilize neighborhood and volunteer code officers to assist the City in its efforts.

■■ Fees on Impervious Surfaces: Kansas City, Mo. currently assesses fees on impervious surfaces to reduce stormwater run-off, discourage impervious surfaces and generate public funding for improved water quality through various programs. The fee, however, does not generate enough funding to have a significant influence. Effective impervious surface fee programs also include incentives that reduce fees for property owners that construct green infrastructure or take initiatives to mitigate the impacts of their impervious surfaces.

Vacant Lot Task Force | 21

RECOMMENDATIONS FOR ECONOMIC INCENTIVES ■■ Enhance strong, sustainable financial incentives for productive use of vacant properties.

■■ Provide expedited permitting and reduced permit fees within targeted zones.

■■ Combine incentives like the LCRA Urban Renewal Tax Abatement with special consideration for agricultural businesses that are willing to convert vacant lots that are in food deserts into food production for that community.

■■ Utilize federal and state resources to incentivize new development on vacant properties to utilize a number of economic tools to incentivize reuse.

■■ Discount existing inventory for reuse provided buyers complete construction within a desirable time frames. Refunds of portions of the purchase price could also be given upon completion of timely redevelopment goals.

■■ Forgive mortgages to existing qualifying residents if they build on and live on the property for five years.

■■ Strategically utilize property taxes to support desired land use. Impose punitive taxes for owners of harmful or unproductive uses; offer property tax reductions and other incentives for favored uses ■■ Utilize federally funded Brownfields programs to perform assessments of land and buildings for contaminants and finance loans and subgrants for cleanup. Target Missouri Brownfield credits to reimburse developers for the cost of remediation for projects that create at least 10 new full-time, permanent jobs, or retain 25 existing jobs.

■■ Replicate a program developed in Indianapolis, which provides $20,000 grants, based on 50/50 matching funds, to be used for the assessment and/ or remediation of a Brownfield or contaminated site.

The grant is available for nonprofit organizations, or for-profit businesses only in conjunction with a neighborhood nonprofit.

■■ Conservation Tax Credits: Virginia allows an income tax credit for 40 percent of the value of donated land or conservation easements. Taxpayers may use up to $100,000 per year for the year of sale and the ten subsequent tax years. Unused credits may be sold, allowing individuals with little or no state income tax burden to take advantage of this benefit. Adopting similar tax credits in Missouri would encourage reforestation and conservation along defined corridors, mitigating the harmful environmental effects of highways and protecting eco-sensitive waterways.

■■ Distinguish and prioritize types of zones allowable, use to create and implement development incentives for vacant lots.

■■ Further explore and advance opportunities for incentives based on job creation and retention.

■■ Provide greater political support and coordination to ensure that the City is able to effectively capture and use Low Income Housing Tax Credits.

ANALYSIS + STABILIZATION

To achieve a comprehensive, problem-solving approach and to enable Kansas City, Mo. to find an appropriate solution for each vacant property, the Task Force has three key recommendations, which are outlined in greater detail in the following section: 1. Build a Vacancy Database: Establish a comprehensive, usable and accessible database to house relevant property data and provide tools for analysis and application of this data. Engage and empower neighborhoods to help build and use this database.

2. Create a Vacant Property Coordinator: Assign an interdepartmental city planner within Kansas City, Mo.’s Manager’s Office who will ensure collection and distribution of data, coordinate policy responses across various City departments, and regularly engage City and community stakeholders in decision making processes. Such a coordinator would not replace the current work of the Land Bank of Kansas City or other City departments or entities dealing with this issue, but would act as a coordinator to assist various City departments and agencies in more effectively identifying and resolving issues.

3. Develop a Triage Process + Decision Making Matrix: Establish a triage process and decision making matrix to rapidly assess available properties and identify an appropriate strategy for reuse or future development.

IMPORTANCE OF COLLECTING + USING GOOD DATA Information informs decisions and inspires initiatives.

When readily available for application, information can be used to create a road map to achieving cohesive, sustainable developments upon seemly scattered parcels. Getting information to people making decisions and to people working with vacant properties will broaden understanding, paint a full picture, spark creative energies, as well as promote local, invested stewards to assist throughout an entire redevelopment process from visioning to implementation to maintenance.

Vacant properties present numerous ways to combat climate change and promote sustainability, promote transit and walkability, improve regional air quality and community health, encourage urban reinvestment and increase density all while engaging an underemployed local population.

As a means to achieve both Kansas City, Mo. and regional long-term development objectives, vacant properties present numerous ways to combat climate change and prioritize sustainability, promote transit and walkability, improve regional air quality and community health, encourage urban

Vacant Lot Task Force | 23

reinvestment and increase density all while engaging an underemployed local population. This can only happen if the right data is available to highlight these opportunities. Only when opportunities for capturing stormwater are overlaid, for example, with vacant lot density will planners be able to identify target areas for best reuse.

The Task Force recommends Kansas City, Mo. create a comprehensive database resource to house a wide variety of data covering all aspects of vacant properties. Instead of creating a massive technical database, the Task Force advises the City be strategic and intentional to create useful and usable tools paired with training to help all various stakeholders access the information they need to make informed decisions about the vacant properties available within their communities.

This toolbox must reflect the people, character, and true needs of the individuals looking to access the information.

The database must make municipal information available online and on the ground. For example, in areas of high visibility, placing signs on available Land Bank of Kansas City parcels that explain the property’s status and steps that can be taken to be able to purchase and/or use this land will inform a larger number of people. By pairing education about Land Bank of Kansas City and City goals and initiatives with recommended ways to participate in decisions that may shape the surrounding neighborhood, Kansas City, Mo. can develop and maintain networks that allow communities to share knowledge and relationships with decision-makers.

24 | Best + Most Sustainable Uses of Vacant Properties

Data collection in itself is not an end point. It is a resource to be used to spark the creative energies of the Kansas City population. One person, one task force, one department will not solve the vacancy issue, but many people working toward a common goal will find solutions.

Making useful data readily available to creative minds will help facilitate that process.

DATA WISH LIST + WHERE TO FIND THE DATA

Various levels of information are required for varying scales of analysis; therefore data needs range from regional planning considerations to localized lot level criteria. Specifically: ■■ Regional, City Scale Data: This data provides the big picture on issues, including where do vacant properties fit into the fabric of Kansas City Mo., how decisions in particular areas affect larger city goals and initiatives, etc.

■■ Neighborhood or Proximity Data: This data provides a snapshot at the neighborhood scale and demonstrates the context of the vacant properties to the neighborhood where they are found, including assets and liabilities found nearby that may be drivers for change or renewal.

■■ Block Level Data: This data provides the street view and is specific to the block where the lot is located, including both sides of the street based on lot address.

“Block” is defined by the street address, shared street

Figure 4. Data “Wish List” Source: David Dods and Jake Wagner; graphic created by Daniel Dermitzel

Vacant Lot Task Force | 25

frontage rather than backyards or property lines. For example, data could include proximity to transportation and other amenities and cultural resources.

■■ Lot Level Data: This data provides site-specific issues that may affect opportunities on a specific parcel.

For example, this could include any environmental conditions, soil conditions, watershed characteristics, ownership, title status, and a variety of data points.

THE CASE FOR CREATING A VACANCY DATABASE Currently, some of the before mentioned information is available, but it is spread across widely different departments and some of the information is derived from sources outside City control. For instance, some data is only available on KivaNet (Kansas City, Mo.’s land database system,) while other data needs to be found on the Kansas City, Mo. GIS/Parcel Viewer and still other data will be found on Jackson County, Mo.’s GIS/ mapping website. Additionally, the Land Bank of Kansas City website contains data needed to understand opportunities for a vacant property. Some data that is very useful, may not be accessible or known. For example, UMKC Department of Architecture Urban Planning + Design, and the Kansas City Design Center, have developed research and resources that help explain vacancies and point to their potential.

However available all this data may be, it is not integrated, not easy to manipulate and requires significant time and resources to use. As one can see, in figure 4 on the previous 26 | Best + Most Sustainable Uses of Vacant Properties

page, the amount of potential subsets of information can be overwhelming. The Task Force recommends that support be dedicated to developing in more detail how information resources across the City can be compiled and easily used for the purpose of generating creative solutions for vacant property uses.

The Task Force recommends support be dedicated to developing how information resources across the City can be compiled and easily used for generating creative solutions for vacant property uses.

Kansas City, Mo. is currently implementing the EnerGov platform across 10 city departments and will be replacing Kiva, Paragon, and other legacy systems. Additionally, Kansas City, Mo. is beginning to connect City data in an open source platform, the Open Data KC initiative. These efforts illustrate an emerging example of making data readily available to the public with the intent of facilitating positive community use of information, as well as providing a means to integrate data internally for the purpose of capturing and using data to drive better policy decisions.

In six months, once the EnerGov platform has been developed, the Task Force recommends the City revisit the idea of establishing a vacant properties database and if necessary, provide resources for this effort to enable collection and analysis of vacant property data.

A SUCCESSFUL DATA PROGRAM + COORDINATOR

As The Vacant Lot Task Force undertook this initiative, it worked with multiple City departments and outside resources such as UMKC Department of Architecture Urban Planning + Design and neighborhood associations to both understand the scope of the issue and evaluate potential solutions. Since the scope of the issue spans a wide range of scales from individual lots to citywide planning, one of the challenges was compiling useful information. It was challenging to analyze information in a manner that would spark ideas and help creative solutions emerge. This led to the realization that similar challenges face all other stakeholders working on the vacancy issue, whether Land Bank of Kansas City staff, City departments, neighborhood associations, potential business investors, or individual homeowners.

The Task Force has identified the following three elements essential to compiling and using data to support solutions for vacant properties: 1. Availability: Information needs to be readily available in a central location; it needs to be accessible to a wide range of stakeholders from City staff to residents to businesses, and it needs to be easy to use for all types of stakeholders.

2. Community Engagement: Community input needs to be a constant and ongoing component of the data compilation process to ground it in community needs and build local ownership in outcomes.

3. Interdepartmental Integration: The vacancy issue, and use of the data compiled, needs to become a topic of discussion and an initiative embraced across all City departments. The most far-ranging solutions for Kansas City, Mo. will emerge when diverse perspectives are all brought to bear on the issue.

The Task Force recommends the creation of a position within the City for a Vacant Property Coordinator is crucial to implementing successful solutions to the issues surrounding vacancy. This person should be responsible for engaging stakeholders, pursuing community input, pushing initiatives around vacancy and facilitating communication across City and community lines that allow for the best possible solution for vacant properties.

Additionally, the Vacant Property Coordinator could serve valuable to connect idle assets among private, public and quasi-public institutions (PIEA, LCRA, Homesteading Authority, school district, etc.). Assembly of more valuable clusters of property could be enabled and strategies aligned.

The Coordinator should also be responsible for performing an ongoing vulnerability analysis to predict future vacancy in order to plan effectively.

A Vacant Property Coordinator is crucial to implementing successful solutions to the issues surrounding vacancy.

Vacant Lot Task Force | 27

USING DATA TO INFORM COMMUNITY PLANNING:

A Local Case Study

U

MKC’s Department of Architecture, Urban Planning + Design partnered with neighborhood president Marlon Hammons and the Washington Wheatley Neighborhood Improvement Association in 2007-2008 to develop a comprehensive neighborhood action plan. While the neighborhood had been “planned” many times before, this was the first time a comprehensive plan was developed from the inside out.

The student team developed a variety of data to inform the planning efforts. The first task was to survey every parcel in the neighborhood (See in figure 5). The students utilized the Land Based Classification System (LBCS) of the American Planning Association (APA) to categorize the land uses in the neighborhood. Students also gathered data on housing and structure vacancy, foreclosure, historic structure status, and type of housing unit and architectural styles.

Data from the survey research conducted on-site were then compared with the housing data available from the US Bureau of the Census.

Census data showed the historical process of housing loss from 1980 to 2000, which included a loss of 575 units, or almost 29 units lost per year.

Results of the parcel-by-parcel survey of the neighborhood were a shocking confirmation

of this loss of housing. In 2008, more than 40 percent of the land in the neighborhood was a vacant residential parcel (921 parcels). As a result of very effective demolition practices, the amount of vacant land had more than doubled between 2000 and 2008. As a result, the neighborhood contained 95 acres of vacant land.

In this case, an abundance of vacant land was the unintended consequence of the effective demolition of housing units and commercial buildings, which created a new crisis of illegal dumping and overgrown and dangerously unmanaged land.

Based on these findings, the neighborhood recognized land vacancy as a key challenge and focused its attention on new approaches to vacant land management. The neighborhood plan included a strategy for both the infill of new housing units on vacant land, and the strategic re-purposing of vacant land for urban agriculture.

To implement the urban agriculture strategy, the neighborhood organization sought funding from various partners and new partnerships including Kauffman Foundation, the Audubon Society’s Together Green program, and the City of Kansas City Missouri.

Figure 5. Types of Vacant Property in Washington Wheatley Neighborhood, 2008.

Source: Washington Wheatley Neighborhood Improvement Association and the Department of Architecture, Urban Planning and Design, UMKC. Survey results from 2008 survey of all parcels in the neighborhood. Vacancy included vacant lots with no structure (991), vacant boarded-up structures (134), vacant structures with open windows (19), not occupied, for sale (23), not occupied, for rent (11) and general vacant structures (not for rent or sale – 37). This variation in the type of vacancy suggests the complexity of conditions that are often included in the “vacant” label.

LOT TRIAGE PROCESS + DECISION-MAKING MATRIX

It is not feasible to expect that all vacant lots will become community gardens or urban forests; in fact, it is the hope of this Task Force that the majority of these lots are treated as future sites for redevelopment as the City builds back its population density. However, Kansas City, Mo. has a unique opportunity to flag certain lots that meet established criteria to preserve them as open space and green infrastructure or community amenities like community gardens or orchards.

To determine the highest and best use of a lot, the Task Force recommends a triage process. In the triage process, the Vacant Lot Coordinator will be able to determine if the site should be preserved as open space or primed for future development and help recommend next steps if this is the case. The Development Flow Chart (figure 6) was obtained from The Scattered Sites Guidebook for Infill Lot Improvement Strategies and could serve as a reference or starting point for what the City’s decision making process may look like.

LOT STABILIZATION FOR FUTURE DEVELOPMENT

As Kansas City, Mo. develops classification systems for future reuse of lots, it must also work to support policies that help stabilize the condition of current vacant lots. The before mentioned Scattered Sites Guidebook, outlines step-by-step processes for stabilization and preparation for future development.

30 | Best + Most Sustainable Uses of Vacant Properties

In mowing and cleanup costs alone, we have established that Kansas City, Mo. is now expending almost $2 million a year to maintain neglected properties, yet still receives numerous complaints from neighborhood residents due to unkempt conditions. The Task Force recommends a more thoughtful approach to maintenance: improve the conditions and quality of life for the community, rebuild the economic climate and increase marketability of the vacant properties. Communitywide stabilization strategies could be more broadly replicated than site-specific strategies, such as urban agriculture or green infrastructure, and significantly less costly.

Taking steps to allow for more sustainable interim uses will have many positive benefits, including saving money in mowing costs over the long-term; enhancing property values; helping encourage reinvestment; and helping to transform neighborhood resident’s pride and outlook.

Below are four recommendations to allow better interim use that will help stabilize vacant lots for future development: 1. Implement low-cost beautification efforts and cleanup funds replacing fescue with low-grow, native grasses or clover ground cover or adding shrubs.

2. Establish vacant lot management standards that impose limits on herbicides and chemical treatment of vacant lots and minimize the environmental hazards.

3. Promote creative artist projects and community initiatives that engage citizens and the private sector to re-imagine or “adopt” lots.

SHOULD THE SITE BE DEVELOPED

OR PRESERVED AS OPEN SPACE? PRESERVE AS OPEN SPACE

DECISION FACTORS: 1. Is it a watershed site for the surrounding neighborhood?

Is there any other riparian use?

2. Is it a habitat for native species?

3. Could it provide a link to a nature corridor?

4. Is the site too small for the footprints of most residential/ commercial uses?

YES

NO

PREREQUISITE: Basic Cleanup/Maintenance Plan, See 1a of the Scattered Sites Guidebook for more details.

MENU OF TREATMENTS: 1. Natural Urban Greenspace 2. Storm-Water Management: Bio-retention, constructed wetland, stream daylighting 3. Soil Remediation: where soil samples prove hazardous 4. Deep Tillage and Pavement Removal

WHAT IS THE SITE’S DEVELOPMENT POTENTIAL? DECISION FACTORS TO CONSIDER: 1.

2.

3.

4.

5.

6.

7.

8.

9.

Is the market favorable for development?

Does the site have a clear title?

Is it close to any amenities such as schools, retirement homes, grocery stores or shopping?

Is it nearby any development in progress? Could this increase the lot’s potential for development?

Is the site in a populated area? Highly visible to the street? In a walkable neighborhood?

Is there soil contamination?

Is there evidence that the foundation of a demolished home is still present? (Look for divots indicating the sunken basement) Are there any plans for the lot? (Existing neighborhood intentions, potential developer interest) Is there any funding committed to the project?

STRONG DEVELOPMENT POTENTIAL (0-5 years)

COULD BE RESTORED FOR DEVELOPMENT

PREREQUISITE: Basic Cleanup & Infrastructure Plans; See 1a and 1b of SS Guidebook for more details.

PREREQUISITE: Basic Cleanup/

PREREQUISITE: Basic Cleanup/

Maintenance Plan, See 1a of SS Guidebook for more details.

Maintenance Plan, Consider SS Guidebook Strategies 2a-d.

1. Visit with the neighborhood association or community planning organization regarding their goals and the potential for creating a design template to unify new development plans.

1. Visit with the neighborhood association or community planning organization regarding their goals within the community. What does it have? What does it lack? Consider the best management practices for the site.

1. Community Garden 2. Nature Playground & Rain Garden 3. Block Green Solution 4. Community Plaza & Farmer’s Market

2. Follow the Native Planting Guide & Reference for planting street trees.

3. Publish advertising for the sale of the lot- be sure to check with neighboring property owners for interest in purchasing the lot.

2. Soil Remediation may be necessary if converting to interactive greenspace. See Site Analysis for more details on pollutants and soil testing.

WEAK DEVELOPMENT POTENTIAL (>5 years)

Refer to the Guidebook’s Appendix for a City-Wide Resource List and outlined Steps to Create a Community Land Reuse Project.

Figure 6. Development Flow Chart Source: Scattered Sites Guidebook for Infill Lot Improvement Strategies, created for the Neighborhoods & Housing Services Department of the City of Kansas City, Mo.

REPURPOSING + REUSE

The Task Force recommends that Kansas City, Mo. develop long-range, sustainable, systems-based policies, programs and partnerships to repurpose and reuse vacant properties. The Task Force further recommends that these policies, programs and partnerships advance the following goals and initiatives adopted by Kansas City, Mo.: ■■ Climate Change and Sustainability ■■ Local Input ■■ Infrastructure ■■ Transit and Streetcar Lines ■■ Urban Density and Reinvestment ■■ Economic Development ■■ Workforce Development ■■ Regional Air Quality and Community Health

In order to accomplish these identified City goals, fulfill needs expressed by the communities affected by vacancy and use models proven successful, the Task Force recommends that once lots are identified for repurposing and reuse, Kansas City, Mo. apply one of three key interventions, some temporary and some permanent, including: 1. Green Infrastructure: Create green infrastructure to manage stormwater, increase and sustain urban forests, reduce air pollution and heat islands, and 32 | Best + Most Sustainable Uses of Vacant Properties

establish open spaces that beautiful urban spaces, improve public health, restore biodiversity and protect natural areas.

2. Urban Agriculture: Utilize urban agriculture to help provide income opportunities and access to fresh food; work to improve community health education.

3. Infill Development: Promote infill development to increase economic vitality and density.

The City should further explore and integrate programs of other cities successfully returning vacant properties to productive use. Strengthening and increasing support to enhance the capacity of repurposing programs will maximize their effectiveness. As previously recommended, the proposed Vacant Lot Coordinator could concentrate specifically on vacancy programs -- envisioning outcomes, providing strategies, leveraging resources, and implementing incentives.

The following three sections further expand upon interventions that have proven successful while providing recommendations for implementation. The City should consider these core opportunities when developing tools and systems for screening vacant properties. These tools and systems for screening will require data collection and management, adequate access to resources, funding mechanisms to support and incentivize, and institutional systems and programs to promote, track and manage repurposing and reuse.

RECOMMENDATIONS FOR REPURPOSING + REUSE ■■ Develop appropriate tools and methods to analyze and catalogue vacant properties for recommended priority interventions, including green infrastructure, stormwater mitigation, increasing urban forest canopy, urban agriculture opportunities or lots to be preserved as open space.

■■ Maintain a repository of vacant properties in order to streamline and expedite processes of putting the land back on the market. Utilize land inventories to track vacant lots and to identify parcels for reuse.

■■ Dedicate long-term funding sources and staff to support building an integrated data program to maintain and manage inventory. Establish regular analysis and reporting of inventory.

■■ Revise local land use and development standards to promote repurposing and reuse of vacant lots. Institute a focus on permitting mixed uses when modifying zoning standards. Any new changes in zoning need to concentrate on classifying and eliminating any harmful and unproductive uses that remain.

■■ Actively promote opportunities for vacant properties for priority interventions to the public. Set up an ongoing process such as a listserv or newsletter to notify interested individuals and organizations such as neighborhood organizations, agriculture and horticultural organizations, and other non-profits about the availability and assessed potential of vacant sites as they enter the Land Bank of Kansas City.

■■ Create and require effective and proven mechanisms to facilitate meaningful community engagement in development planning and land use decisions to align with community vision. Establish and include processes to allow the whole community to have

meaningful involvement at every stage of the process of infill development and land reuse because equity and buy-in is a crucial component to making longlasting and effective improvements.

■■ Create programs and streamline systems to encourage and support community members repurposing and re-using vacant lots for urban agriculture and green infrastructure in their neighborhoods. Community groups should commit to maintain the lot in an acceptable state.

■■ Legitimize community-designated property, even if it is currently held as vacant, as a way to protect and maintain equitable development, and to ensure the existing community reaps the rewards that will inevitably come from unlocking the value in vacant properties.

■■ Codes should be amended to protect community uses intended to use the land for necessary community benefits. City staff should invest time with community partners to help neighborhoods re-zone properties dedicated to community use to prevent the loss of these investments when appropriate. For example, a successful community garden could be re-zoned as urban agriculture or a neighborhood park could be converted to open space from residential.

■■ Increase support and collaborate with public- private partnerships to create jobs, to promote vacant property opportunities, to conserve open space and engage the public in vacant lot reuse for green infrastructure and urban agriculture. Examples of successful partnerships include Heartland Tree Alliance, Green Works, Boys Grow, Urban Rangers, Heartland Conservation Alliance, Bridging the Gap, Cultivate Kansas City, and Healthy River Partnership.

EQUITABLE DEVELOPMENT:

Addressing a Local Issue

E

quitable development is needed in the Kansas City region in order to address the context in which vacancy and the uneven development of our region has occurred.

The Equity Profile report conducted by the Program for Environmental and Regional Equity (PERE) and PolicyLink, was commissioned

by MARC as part of the Creating Sustainable Places (CSP) planning process. This profile was completed in November 2013 and provides an overview of the equity issues existing in our region now and in the future.

The Kansas City region has a number of opportunities to address inequities and to create a more sustainable region. Many of these issues are linked to the concentration of vacant properties in areas with higher levels of poverty.

The report addresses four key areas related to Equity in Kansas City: 1) a demographic profile of our region, 2) how our region is doing in terms of economic vitality, 3) the readiness of our region and its workforce, and 4) the connectedness of our region.

Income inequality has increased in Kansas City, Mo. over the past three decades. Overall, Kansas City, Mo. was ranked 104th among the largest 150 regions in the U.S. in income equality. In this region, the bottom half of wages decreased by 6 percent, but the top half of wages increased by 13 percent. The region also saw an increase in poverty and working poverty, defined as “working fulltime for an income below 150 percent of the federal poverty level.” Poverty is also highly concentrated in urban communities of color.

Other sources of inequity in Kansas City, Mo. include education, housing, and health.

Kansas City, Mo.’s youth of color are less likely to finish high school. Kansas City, Mo. has also seen an increase in disconnected youth, which the report defines as youth that are not working or in school. Blacks and Latinos represent higher numbers of disconnected youth. Black Americans suffer from high rates of obesity, asthma, and diabetes. Part of this issue may be attributable to food deserts,

The Equity Profile shows that rather than increasing social equity in our region, for measures of health, housing, and income, the Kansas City region is becoming more inequitable over time.

which are clustered around Kansas City, Mo. and primarily in urban communities of color and rural areas.

In Kansas City, Mo. 44 percent of renters are “housing burdened,” which is defined as “spending more than 30 percent of their income on housing.” “African Americans, Latinos, and people of other or mixed race are much more likely than whites to pay too much for housing, whether they rent or own.”

There is a disparity in quality of life and longevity for Kansas City, Mo.’s lower-income communities. Communities with restricted access to transportation, healthy food, and safe, affordable housing are living sicker and dying younger. Barriers to good health, quality education, jobs that pay a living wage and energy-efficient housing disproportionately affect communities of color and lower-income groups in Kansas City, Mo. The report shows that rather than increasing in equity measures over time where it matters, like health, housing, and income, Kansas City, Mo. is losing equity.

Vacant property is an issue related to environmental justice – one of the few topics that the Equity Profile does not address directly.

Building on the Equity Profile in the future and incorporating vacancy as a measure related to environmental justice is an imperative that should be address by the region’s metropolitan planning organization.

The Kansas City Regional Equity Network is a coalition of community-based organizations and individuals working to implement a more equitable region and to address the issues raised in the profile.

The Task Force Recommends that the Environmental Management Commission (EMC) develop a partnership with MARC and the KC Regional Equity Network to develop an environmental justice profile of the Kansas City metro region including indicators that can be measured related to vacancy and uneven development.

GREEN INFRASTRUCTURE What is Green Infrastructure?

When discussing a city’s infrastructure, we often refer to the “gray” infrastructure, or the sewers, bridges, highways, streets, energy sources and buildings. Green Infrastructure (GI), as a broad term, refers to plants, soils, and built structures purposefully integrated into urban and other build environments. The Conservation Fund offers this working definition of GI: A strategically planned and managed network of natural lands, working landscapes, and other open spaces that conserve ecosystem values and functions and provide associated benefits to human populations. So, in the same way the City plans networks of roads, it can plan networks of open spaces and natural resources that connect communities and regions.

Why Green Infrastructure?

Artfully designed and implemented GI initiatives build resiliency in Kansas City, Mo. in the face of climate change while enhancing the health of its residents and establishing a reputation as a leader in the region for sustainability. Rather than covering urban areas with hardscape, GI solutions increase rainwater storage capacity in the urban landscape, resulting in dramatically less runoff water entering the sewer system and less “intense” peak flows during precipitation events. A number of cities are recognizing that green, decentralized stormwater management, combined with costeffective traditional gray infrastructure upgrades, provide

36 | Best + Most Sustainable Uses of Vacant Properties

superior value and community benefits than traditional gray infrastructure alone.

GI provides the City a long-term investment that improves and safeguards City infrastructure, addresses issues of aging sewer lines and inadequate, underdeveloped public transit. Additionally, GI improves home values and provides a high return on investment. A Boulder. Co. report estimated the city gets a $3.67 return on every dollar spent on the urban forest. According to the Missouri Department of Conservation, a healthy, mature tree adds $8,000 to the value of a home.

The current abundance of publicly owned vacant lots presents an opportunity for the City of Kansas City, Mo. to integrate GI solutions to address stormwater filtration and environmental challenges while building and re-establishing the necessary foundations of vibrant neighborhoods. GI initiatives can revitalize neglected areas, turning them into attractive areas that encourage reinvestment and infill development. Furthermore, GI investments enable Kansas City, Mo. to act on its commitment to create the greenest city in the country, specifically “to improve the quality of life by providing recreational, leisure and aesthetic opportunities for all citizens, and by conserving and enhancing the environment” (2017 Parks, Recreation and Boulevards Master Plan).

Green infrastructure supports and is recommended in the following City-adopted plans: ■■ MARC Regional Plan for Sustainable Development ■■ Transportation Outlook 2040

■■ Smart Moves Transit Plan ■■ Clean Air Action Plan ■■ MetroGreen ■■ Solid Waste Management District Strategic Plan ■■ Regional Energy Efficiency and Conservation Strategy ■■ Comprehensive Economic Development Strategy ■■ KC Parks and Recreation 2017 Master Plan Properly implemented and maintained Green Infrastructure improves the overall health of our city.

Environmental health factors, such as air and water quality, can be improved through GI for air purification and greenhouse gas mitigation. Regional biodiversity is improved by adding more native habitat corridors and planting more native species that attract pollinators and wildlife. Kansas City, Mo. can preserve public health through natural areas while providing people a connection to nature through areas for outdoor recreation and play. GI provides options to “prioritize lands [the City] would like to see remain green in perpetuity and to restore natural features of the land (Schilling, 2006).”

Local economic development opportunities could and should be associated with GI investments. The Task Force recommends the City of Kansas City, Mo. foster a conversation of how stormwater management agencies

and economic development organizations can improve job opportunities, wealth creation, and career outcomes for members of local and/or disadvantaged communities. The Kansas City Equity Report discusses a variety of steps that must be taken to close the racial and income gap including, “growing good jobs paying middle-class wages, providing job training using community colleges, reconnecting minority youths with education and jobs, building a diverse leadership core, creating healthier communities with more grocery stores, and improving public transportation, connecting people to jobs.”

Drivers of Green Infrastructure Investment

The Kansas City Water Services Department (WSD) currently faces the challenge of maintaining an aging infrastructure and must devote $2.4 billion in 25 years to reduce sewer overflow. WSD is required by the Environmental Protection Agency to develop green solutions in combination with “gray” solutions to mitigate existing combined sewer overflow issues. The City is also using GI to help address localized flooding problems.

GI that reduces stormwater runoff and non-point source pollution control provides long-term savings.

Studies in Maryland and Illinois show that new residential developments using GI stormwater controls saved $3,500 to $4,500 per lot (quarter- to half-acre lots) when compared to new developments with conventional stormwater controls (Kloss & Calarusse, 2006).

Vacant Lot Task Force | 37

Studies show that new residential developments using green infrastructure stormwater controls saved $3,500 to $4,500 per lot when compared to new developments with conventional stormwater controls.

The WSD’s Middle Blue River Basin Green Solutions Pilot Project has been successful and demonstrates advantages of using GI, like rain gardens, bio-retention, porous pavement sidewalk, and permeable paver sidewalks to stop overflow.

Trees and other vegetation provide stormwater treatment and filtration to keep contaminants out of streams and rivers. Natural stormwater treatment can save a city thousands of dollars in stormwater management costs. A study of municipal trees in Boulder, Co., found that the average tree intercepts 1,271 gallons of precipitation annually, saving the city $523,311 in stormwater retention costs (McPherson et al., 2005)

Kansas City, Mo. has identified a need for large-scale tree planting as part of the Mayor’s Climate Protection Plan and for replacing trees lost to the Emerald Ash Borer. By 2020, the Plan recommends planting 120,000 trees in City-owned and maintained right-of-ways. This is especially significant near highways, which negatively impact surrounding communities by dividing neighborhoods, creating traffic, noise, and air pollution. According to recent analysis by students at UMKC AUPD, 63 percent of vacant lots exist in close proximity to

38 | Best + Most Sustainable Uses of Vacant Properties

a major highway. Air pollution has a real, tangible public health impact; in fact Kansas City, Mo. suffers from some of the nation’s highest incidents of asthma. Reforesting and adding more tree canopy is a tool that can help counteract air pollution and serve as carbon sequestration. Removal of ground level ozone helps improve residents’ health and decrease asthma rates.

Incorporating more permanent, perennial vegetation and open green space in Kansas City, Mo urban areas will also help to combat the “heat island effect.” According to Georgia Tech University’s Urban Climate Lab, “large cities in the United States are warming at more than twice the rate of the planet as a whole as a result of the loss of naturally vegetated land covers.” Trees and the shade they bring serve a vital function in cooling a city.

Identifying Lots for Green Infrastructure Previously discussed tools and systems must first consider which lots will be preserved as long-term green space and those that will ultimately serve as sites for future development. Short-term holding strategies may also serve to beautify target investment areas in transition and help to highlight a neighborhood’s development potential.

There are several criteria that should be considered prior to conversion of City-owned vacant lots into GI: 1. Is the vacant land in a floodplain or a key area of high stormwater runoff? Certain properties can provide valuable aid in stormwater management for localized flood control or sewer overflow control projects.

2. Is the vacant land developable? If the property is of high value for neighborhood redevelopment, the opportunity should be explored as population density is a key component of vibrant urban communities.

3. Is the vacant land suitable for local neighborhood use?

If support from surrounding residents is present, uses such as community gardens, urban farms and orchards, pocket parks, safe routes to schools or walking/bike access to other transportation corridors should be considered.

4. Is the vacant land adjacent to other vacant lots, community amenities (e.g. schools, parks, markets) or natural resource assets? If so, aggregating several vacant lots for alternative use or expanding existing amenities may be preferable options. If located near a site recognized as regional Natural Resource Inventory (NRI) lots could extend or enhance that resource (i.e., extend or improve the quality of a prairie, forest or riparian ecosystem).

5. Is the vacant land located near highways which are significant sources of air pollutants and noise?

Establishing tree buffers along highways can improve neighborhood health and livability.

6. Is the vacant land suitable for growing trees? Trees are a constant need for city right-of-way and park replacement.

Challenges to be Addressed for Green Infrastructure 1. Site selection is a complex process. It will need to consider and have policies in place for possible mitigation of environmental and/or structural issues on existing vacant property. Also, vacant land used for stormwater management must meet strict runoff criteria. Stormwater management features need to be attractive, safe and create neighborhood amenities.

2. Developing partnerships with neighborhood groups for open space by communities is critical for success.

Programs will need to address mitigation of illegal dumping and other potential problems. Programs will need to identify or provide funding for improvements.

3. Coordination. Community involvement and use of multiple and scattered vacant parcels for GI initiatives requires more coordination and planning than centralized projects managed by a single entity.

4. Funding is difficult to find for initial site improvements, especially for urban forestry and plantings. Initial costs associated with the establishment of trees, such as soil improvements and labor to plant the trees can be high for community members and organizations.

5. Ongoing maintenance is required and will need to be addressed. Neighborhood engagement, such as the work in Center City demonstrates the value of volunteers in this effort.

Vacant Lot Task Force | 39

RECOMMENDATIONS FOR IMPLEMENTING GREEN INFRASTRUCTURE ■■ Create a long-term Green Infrastructure Plan for the City that includes all City Departments, identifies the best locations for Green Infrastructure, plans and finances for long term maintenance, job training and workforce development goals and standards, and a community-based vision for integrating green infrastructure into existing land use and public works plans and policies.

■■ Establish ideal lots as permanent open space; identify target zones for protecting natural resources.

■■ Build green infrastructure into new development plans.

■■ Include local conservation organizations in planning and implementing maintenance and community engagement of preserved open spaces.

■■ Create cost-share programs to implement approved green infrastructure projects using vacant lots.

■■ In some cases, aggregating multiple vacant lots may facilitate redevelopment or provide sufficient space for access corridors, trails, restored streamways, or general habitat restoration. Use these opportunities to build bike and walking trails and to connect corridors, encourage healthier lifestyles and improve transportation options and access.

■■ Develop and promote an urban reforesting strategy that is a planning and management priority for Kansas City, Mo. and includes adopting tree protection and replacement ordinances.

■■ Identify lots in target zones within half a mile of highways as permanent open space to provide tree buffers in order to sequester carbon and reduce air pollution as part of a larger plan for improved air quality standards.

■■ Investigate programs for growing trees from nursery stock and then transplanting once they reach an acceptable size. Sites could be operated by City staff or leased to local nurseries. While requiring some investigation into the interest level of nurseries, this might not be a true “lease” in that instead of monetary remuneration, the City could require that a percentage of trees be allocated to City right-of-ways.

■■ Develop youth training programs, or “tree teams”, for young people to learn forestry and agricultural skills. Programs could be coordinated through university extension and local nonprofit partners and should target job creation incentives tied to education and training.

■■ Expand a vacant lot tree nursery program to include locally grown plant materials for the maintenance of stormwater features that Kansas City, Mo. is investing significantly in for green solutions stormwater controls such as rain gardens and wetlands.

■■ Change local regulations to encourage green design, including ordinances to regulate and set standards for leasing to private nurseries for urban forestry.

■■ Provide utility rebates to property owners that use rainwater recapture, reducing the impact on the City’s fresh water resources and stormwater runoff.

■■ Develop new and support existing programs such as MARC Water Quality Education Committee and Blue River Watershed Association to encourage and educate residents on benefits of stormwater retention and ways to participate in quelling stormwater runoff.

■■ Encourage Kansas City, Mo. Water Services Department to expand on the success of pilot programs to utilize vacant lots for overflow (Appendix A in Consent Decree allows Kansas City, Mo. to substitute some control measures).

URBAN AGRICULTURE What is Urban Agriculture?

Urban agriculture in its broadest definition includes activities that grow food or produce meat and dairy products, that distribute locally and regionally produced foods, and that process those foods, as well as activities and entities that support that production and distribution of food, such as nursery businesses and seed and equipment stores. It also generally includes non-food products, such as flowers or other non-edible crops. Urban agriculture may take place in open lots or fields or in wooded areas for mushroom production, wild harvesting or for other forestry products; it may also take place inside a building, a greenhouse or other structure.

The Kansas City metropolitan area has seen tremendous growth of urban agriculture activities in the last decade: ■■ Community gardens and non-profit “partner” gardens associated with Kansas City Community Gardens have increased from 125 in 2010 to 230 in 2013.

■■ School Gardens have increased in number from 80 in 2010 to 140 in 2013 (Kansas City Community Gardens, not including school gardens not affiliated with KCCG).

■■ Urban Farms have gone from 17 in the metro area in 2004 producing on 32 acres of land to 133 farms producing on 109 acres of land (Cultivate Kansas City).

Kansas City, Mo. has been proactive in promoting urban agriculture by: ■■ Adapting ordinances affecting growing and selling of food in residential neighborhoods ■■ Developing Urban Agriculture Zone designations and associated property tax breaks in response to statewide legislation ■■ Adapting animal control ordinances to recognize the growing numbers of chickens being kept for pets ■■ Sponsoring the KC Grow water access program ■■ Providing financial support to the Kansas City Community Gardens

Benefits of Using Vacant Lots for Urban Agriculture

Urban agriculture can provide food for a household, supplemental or primary cash income, enhance the image of neighborhood, create jobs or learning opportunities, and turn vacant land into a productive site that is a gathering place and an asset for the community. A single acre can produce upwards of 12,000 pounds of produce, depending on the crops produced, the quality of the soil, and the farm management practices. A 4-foot by 8-foot raised bed can produce between 30 and 50 pounds of food. Other production methods can also generate significant volumes of food and economic value for a family or for an urban business.

Vacant Lot Task Force | 41

A single acre can produce upwards of 12,000 pounds of produce, depending on the crops produced, the quality of the soil, and farm management practices.

1. Sun: A majority of a site needs to get direct sun for at least eight hours a day.

Continuing and expanding on the integration of urban agriculture on vacant lots offers a variety of direct and indirect benefits and would be a logical choice as Kansas City, Mo. continues to collectively reimagine and develop a city landscape for the 21st century. As efforts are underway to mitigate the effects of climate change, an emphasis on urban agriculture would be a good approach to ensuring long-term food security for the City’s residents. Other benefits include expanded opportunities for employment and entrepreneurship.

Urban agriculture also provides a way to promote health in urban communities and build equity by breaking down certain barriers to health for communities of color and lowerincome communities. So, in neighborhoods where access to healthy and fresh foods is a major challenge, the Task Force recommends that suitable vacant lots could be developed as an urban garden or farm.

3. Soil/Site History: Soil needs to be relatively uncompacted, free of building or other debris, and should be screened for environmental concerns due to past use or proximity to sources of contamination (steer clear of filling stations, dry cleaners, industrial areas, etc.). Soils must be tested if a concern arises to ensure contaminants are consistent with applicable state residential use levels, or regional background concentrations.

Identifying Best Lots for Urban Agriculture

Criteria for assessing a site for urban agriculture can be developed in consultation with organizations that provide technical assistance for urban agriculture, but would reasonably include the following considerations: 42 | Best + Most Sustainable Uses of Vacant Properties

2. Shade: Wooded sites may be appropriate for food products that require shade, like mushrooms or edible ferns; some fruit trees do best in partial shade as well.

4. Slope: A flat soil surface or one that is only moderately sloped is ideal for planting food crops.

5. Size: Home, community, educational gardens can be any size; for commercial production, Âź acre minimum; larger acreages increase the potential for volumes produced, for sales and for job creation.

6. Water: Access to a water supply must be present, which might mean city water lines, groundwater that could be accessed through digging a well, or nearby nonpermeable surfaces where rainwater could be captured.

RECOMMENDATIONS FOR IMPLEMENTING URBAN AGRICULTURE ■■ Develop and promote an urban agriculture initiative that is a planning and management priority for the City and includes adopting composting, water catchment and land use access ordinances.

■■ Integrate urban agriculture in its broadest definition into neighborhood and master planning processes to allow communities opportunities to define their urban food system. The City Planning Department should work with communities to address healthy food access and production alongside transportation, economic development and other traditional planning issues.

■■ “Community gardening” and “personal gardening” are necessary amendments to the zoning code; codes should be reviewed and revised to meet needs of local growers to prevent community gardens from experiencing difficulty in getting operating permits.

More importantly, it distinguishes this use from truly nonproductive uses, which later sections of this report propose regulating.

■■ Continue to fund and operate Kansas City Mo.’s Grow Fund.

■■ Direct Kansas City, Mo.’s Economic Development Corporation to assess how current programs can further support urban agriculture and food businesses.

Develop a small grant program for market growers and/ or low-interest business loans to urban farmers.

■■ Actively promote National Resources Conservation Service’s (NRCS’s) Seasonal High Tunnel Initiative under Environmental Quality Incentives program (EQIP) which provides cost-sharing for growers in purchasing and installing high tunnels.

■■ Develop a Land Bank of Kansas City program to give away houses and buildings that have vacant lots attached for use as an urban farming business in exchange for commitments to maintain, invest, and pay property taxes.

■■ Institute city-wide composting of materials in addition to yard waste and make it available at no or low cost to help meet a nearly unlimited need for organic matter like compost and mulch to improve soil. Availability of this compost should be widely advertised and its distribution should be facilitated for urban agriculture.

An annual free compost distribution day or days could be set up and advertised, with the possibility of compost being delivered for a nominal fee.

■■ Increase the depth of topsoil when buildings are torn down if a site is appropriate for urban agriculture. One issue that urban growers have seen when tilling soil for in-ground production is the relatively shallow depth of the topsoil on some sites; their plows hit building debris in some cases at less than six inches.

■■ Create and implement a national promotional campaign to highlight Kansas City, Mo. as a community that welcomes and supports urban agriculture. Designate City staff to work as a Food Systems planner and lead contact. This person must work closely with the Land Bank and the proposed Vacant Lot Coordinator.

■■ Adapt building codes to support construction and use of high tunnels, temporary structures that extend the growing season and increase yields through use of passive solar heating. These offer low-cost technology that significantly increases amount of food grown on small spaces.

■■ The Urban Agriculture Zones provide good incentives for urban agriculture and local food businesses and should be continued.

■■ Designate resources to examine the Hancock Amendment and its restrictions to subsidization of municipal services so Kansas City, Mo. could offer water discounts to organizations that designate land for publicly-accessible community gardens.

INFILL DEVELOPMENT + SUSTAINABLE REUSE What are Infill Development + Sustainable Reuse?

Infill development and sustainable reuse concentrates new growth inward, within existing cities, instead of outward onto natural areas and working farms. The term infill is generally used to describe developments that occur in previously established areas with existing transportation and utility infrastructure; often repurposing or replacing existing buildings, parking lots, or other impervious areas; and adding homes and/or businesses in the established areas of cities.

While infill developments refer to finding room for new homes and jobs in existing areas and designing them in a way that respects their urban context and surroundings, sustainable and/or adaptive reuse refers specifically to the redesign and repurposing of vacant or underutilized buildings for a purpose other than which they were built or designed for.

Infill developments and sustainable reuse strategies, when paired with incentives and supportive policies, can increase density and reduce development pressure on outlying areas that serve important economic and ecological functions.

Existing neighborhoods and commercial centers represent considerable public investment in infrastructure and building stock. Focusing development efforts inward helps to capitalize on the embodied energy within the existing infrastructure and reduces the need for taxpayers to subsidize new roads, sewers, water lines and schools in remote areas.

44 | Best + Most Sustainable Uses of Vacant Properties

Benefits of Infill Development + Sustainable Reuse

When infill developments and sustainable reuse occurs within and around city centers near existing infrastructure, transit options, employment centers, and other popular entertainment destinations, it can help reduce the amount that people drive -- mitigating traffic congestion, improving air quality and reducing greenhouse gas emissions.

Moreover, it is expensive to continue the extension of public services to outlying areas including water and sewer line extensions, new fire stations, police stations, and a multitude of other municipal services. Therefore, infill development and sustainable reuse are powerful tools for recovering the worth of past investments while fueling new economic activity. Figure 7 on the following page serves as a potential strategy for land assembly that could be used to attract developers interested in completing both sides of a street with new infill housing. Additionally, this infill strategy identifies nodes of commercial interest, proposed sites for ideal increased density and existing parks and greenspace.

Adding residents and businesses to a community can reduce crime with “more eyes on the street,� support more public services and transportation options, reinvigorate local businesses and create more attractive, utilized public spaces. Higher densities, varying housing types and improved development standards, combined with a focus on a mix of income and emerging markets, can turn unattractive infill sites into profitable opportunities for builders that accommodate emerging markets while providing critical affordable housing needs.

Figure 7. Washington Wheatley Neighborhood Action Plan, 2008. In-fill Housing Strategy.

Source: Washington Wheatley Neighborhood Improvement Association and the Department of Architecture, Urban Planning and Design, UMKC. The two circles represent the neighborhood anchors at 27th and Prospect and 23rd and Benton Blvd. Areas in dark blue are blocks with high amounts of vacant land on both sides of the street. Land assembly on these streets into larger parcels could be used to attract one developer to complete both sides of the street with new infill housing. Areas in the orange color are sites for higher density housing development on the neighborhood’s major transit route (Prospect Avenue) or near Seton Center – which serves as a community anchor.

Sites in red are concentrated on the neighborhood’s two major parks and Benton Boulevard. These site are a higher priority for housing infill for public safety to increase “eyes on street” and passive surveillance of the neighborhood’s important public spaces.

Vacant Lot Task Force | 45

COMMUNITY ENGAGEMENT: A Local Case Study

T

he Ivanhoe Neighborhood Council (INC) is a non-profit organization. Its charitable purposes include, but are not limited to, creating and helping to maintain a sustainable neighborhood through providing enhancement of housing opportunities, safety and well-being of the neighborhood through civic projects, educational opportunities, neighborhood preservation, and recreational activities that improve the quality of life for the neighborhood residents.

Originally established to prevent real estate speculators from purchasing and holding land within the Green Impact Zone, INC has been able to maintain an open line of communication with the Land Bank of Kansas City. When The Land Bank receives an application to purchase a property located within INC’s boundaries, the applicant is requested to attend an INC Housing & Economic Development Committee meeting to present their proposed plans for the property and answer community questions.

The INC Housing & Economic Development Committee recently established and has put into practice a Neighborhood Checklist and Developer Questionnaire. The purpose of this document is to help the committee gain an understanding of potential developments within the neighborhood, gather information for residents and provide guidance to developers as they move forward. The questions listed are intended to spur conversations, address

46 | Best + Most Sustainable Uses of Vacant Lots

community concerns of beautification and safety, and establish consistency within the committee’s review process. In addition, the committee is able to assess proposed plans against established neighborhood goals outlined in the comprehensive Ivanhoe Neighborhood Plan, which outlines future goals of the neighborhood created by its residents. This line of communication allows an avenue to voice concerns early on and allows desirable developments to move forward with the full support and participation of INC. Following all applicant presentations, the committee votes to approve, disapprove or request more information prior to supporting the acquisition of the property. A formal report summarizes the committee’s recommendations and/or suggestions back to the Land Bank of Kansas City’s Operations Manager. In some cases, deed restrictions may be established to hold a purchaser accountable to the verbal agreements proposed to the committee.

Allowing a group of organized citizens the opportunity to weigh in on the future of their community promotes empowerment, stewardship and a grassroots quality control that may not be achievable through other avenues. When given access to the appropriate resources, no group or individual is better prepared to provide for the needs of internal governance to the community than the community itself.

The Impact of Sustainable, Equitable Building Practices In the United States alone, roughly $70 billion a year is spent in the building and construction industry on public, private, institutional, residential and commercial projects (U.S. Census Bureau, 2012). Those investments have an enormous impact on our energy grid, our use of material resources, water, clean air and open spaces. Most buildings have a life of 50 years, so their impact on our environment and communities is long term.

Kansas City, Mo. has an aging housing stock with many homes in the urban core having been neglected for more than 40 years. In some cases, deconstruction (preferred to demolition) is an inevitable fate. However, in structures with “good bones� there are opportunities for implementing citywide standards for energy efficiency upgrades, supportive incentive programs, and workforce training models.

Identifying Best Lots for Infill + Sustainable Reuse Though differences in the location, composition, and spatial patterns of high-vacancy areas require an individual analysis of each property, some overarching policy changes can help reduce the stem of vacancy and encourage productive use. This section focuses on how updating local code and zoning ordinances, managing growth and use, and providing financial incentives could reduce the number and concentration of vacancy. The City should continue to research and promote best practices and policies for unlocking the value that exists within vacant properties.

Some of the best practices used in other regions of the country to foster community engagement and equitable

development include: online surveys; community meetings; special outreach liaisons; connecting existing neighborhood associations; facilitated dialogue between contentious parties; focus groups; interviews; and design charrettes.

In Seattle, special outreach liaisons were able to reach those with a language barrier to ensure their inclusion and participation in the community meetings and decision-making of the community. In South Carolina, existing neighborhood groups were connected in order to discuss the needs of the whole community. Also in South Carolina, where there may have been tensions among community members, such as a factory in a neighborhood, discussions were facilitated by a neutral party to ensure progress.

Challenges for Infill + Sustainable Reuse

Designing and applying appropriate economic incentives for repurposing vacant lots is a challenge. The public sector, on its own, lacks sufficient resources to ameliorate the costs incurred by having a large city-wide inventory of vacant properties. Place-making strategies and investments in schools, community centers and employment opportunities that restore and make attractive existing urban core neighborhoods must also be prioritized as they can help to bring the market back in a robust way that direct financial incentives cannot.

Neighborhood-Based Planning is crucial. The residents of a place know what would make their neighborhood a better place to live. Developments that bring the benefits of significant new investment to a neighborhood in ways that preserve its authenticity should be encouraged and supported.

Vacant Lot Task Force | 47

RECOMMENDATIONS FOR INFILL DEVELOPMENT + SUSTAINABLE REUSE

Kansas City, Mo. has spent hundreds of hours and millions of dollars talking with residents and developing neighborhood plans. Those plans should be used, and not simply sit on a shelf in the City Planning Department.

If development occurs within the guidelines of the plans, it should be welcomed and streamlined. If a project is outside of the guidelines, it should be discouraged.

In addition to area plans, neighborhoods can benefit from more specific neighborhood plans especially in regard to vacant spaces. These plans should be encouraged and on record with City Planning as completed to work in tandem with area plans during development review. Plans should also go to the immediate neighborhood and adjacent neighborhoods early in the process in order to avoid problems later.

■■ R eview, revise and streamline regulations and implement design guidelines that ensure new developments are compatible with the existing neighborhoods. Revise local land use and development standards to promote infill and sustainable reuse of vacant properties.

■■ D evelop building design standards that fit within the context of existing urban neighborhoods to maintain density through the use of neighborhood conservation, design review and other strategies.

■■ Develop appropriate tools and methods to analyze and catalogue vacant properties for priority infill developments and sustainable reuse.

■■ Maintain a repository of vacant properties in order to streamline and expedite processes of putting the land back on the market. Utilize land inventories to track vacant lots and to identify parcels for reuse.

■■ Dedicate long-term resources to support maintaining and managing inventory. Establish regular analysis and reporting of inventory.

■■ Hire staff with skills to assess, inventory and promote lands specifically for infill development and sustainable reuse.

48 | Best + Most Sustainable Uses of Vacant Properties

Resources and Opportunities for Repurposing + Reuse

We do not need to reinvent the wheel. Kansas City, Mo. already has a number of statutory redevelopment agencies designed to spur economic development. These agencies work with businesses and developers and provide tax incentives and financing for development in Kansas City, Mo. Responsibility for developing a unified strategy for reuse of vacant parcels could be incorporated under an umbrella of one of these agencies to ensure that any future development is inclusive of a broader plan for vacant properties.

Currently, a number of groups are working to create a more equitable Kansas City, Mo. They are working on economic inclusion, social and income equity and building a healthier, and a more equitable region. These groups include: Equity Network, MARC’s Creating Sustainable Places, Communities Creating Opportunity (CCO), Green Impact Zone, Latino Civic Engagement Collaborative, Metropolitan Organization for Racial and Economic Equity (MORE2), and the Urban League of Greater Kansas City.

With the Kansas City, Mo. vacancy challenge, come fresh opportunities to create affordable housing, revitalize neighborhoods and help low- and moderate-income residents build personal wealth. For many working within areas of high vacancy, finding the capital to finance transformations can be an insurmountable obstacle. A number of cities are addressing this problem by creating “loan pools,” or reservoirs of funding that can provide mortgages to homebuyers as well as loans to smallbusiness rehabbers to acquire and renovate vacant properties.

According to the Federal Reserve Bank of Kansas City’s Fall

2013 feature, Funding Transformations, The Economic Development Corporation (EDC) has offered to manage a loan pool in Kansas City. The Task Force recommends that Kansas City, Mo. take a leading role in establishing and promoting a local loan pool to provide financing for projects that wouldn’t otherwise qualify through traditional financing sources.

The Land Bank of Kansas City highlights urban agriculture as a potential use for vacant properties in their inventory, and increasingly, informed City staff and elected officials recognize the potential benefits of urban agriculture.

Leveraging existing resources to promote urban agriculture, the City is fortunate to have Cultivate Kansas City, Kansas City Community Gardens, Lincoln University Cooperative Extension, and the University of Missouri Extension to provide technical support new and established growers.

These organizations, as well as the Growing Growers program (an apprenticeship program in local agriculture), and/or university extension programs are trained and skilled in identifying and training successful potential growers interested in using sites for urban agriculture based on applicant experience as growers. Connecting these organizations with existing incentive programs through the City’s EDC in order to take advantage of Missouri’s new Urban Agriculture Zone legislation presents an obvious opportunity.

Examples of successful efforts to focus on water projects include the Heartland Conservation Alliance’s receipt of a 2014 Urban Waters Program Grant from EPA to study and implement a project for vacant properties.

Vacant Lot Task Force | 49

Urban Barn, conceptualized rendering of a community garden + demonstration kitchen, cafe, and business incubator.

Source: DRAW Architecture + Urban Design

50 | Best + Most Sustainable Uses of Vacant Properties

CONCLUSION The Vacant Lot Task Force spent a year studying the issues and consulting with a wide variety of stakeholders and subject matter experts. It was a humbling experience for all the members of the Task Force to come to grips with how complex of a problem currently exists. Complexity was found not only in the causes of the problem, but in prescribing appropriate policy responses as solutions.

Through its work, the Task Force came to recognize several key principles. These included the reality that there are no simple answers and no one solution that could magically solve the problem. The Task Force also came to the conclusion that vacant land is an asset. It is a finite resource that can be used in a way to make Kansas City, Mo. a more livable, healthy, prosperous, and equitable community. The Task Force was also highly encouraged by the number of grassroots organizations already working on various solutions. There are neighborhood organizations working to remedy blighted conditions, nonprofit organizations focusing on environmental sustainability and urban agriculture, and individual entrepreneurs and artists working to create better places to live and work. We cannot overlook the efforts of City employees across multiple departments who are working on the problem of vacancy from a number of different directions.

The Task Force recognizes that we are living in an era of resource constraints, and that simply throwing money at problems is not a solution. Our City government has the unique ability to set policy priorities and act in a way to catalyze solutions. However, it needs to do so strategically.

Towards that end, the Task Force believes the larger view of vacancy should be focused on the three principles articulated in this report.

First and foremost, emphasize the principle of prevention by taking a proactive approach to slow and preclude future vacancy. To this end, we recommend the next step for the City must be to convene a task force to study feasibility of an urban growth boundary.

Second, ongoing analysis of the problem is crucial to effectively promote maintenance of existing vacant properties on both a short-term and intermediate basis, in order to permit time for development of longer-term uses.

The next step we recommend is the creation of a full-time position of Vacant Lot Coordinator.

Third, through reuse + distribution by developing policies focused on Kansas City, Mo.’s long-term need for environmental quality and sustainability, economic development, and neighborhood revitalization. The next step must be creating a process to identify which vacant properties are suitable for sustainable repurposing and reuse interventions such as urban agriculture or green infrastructure.

Vacant Lot Task Force | 51

APPENDIX I: DATA WISH LIST REGIONAL AND LAND USE DATA: Big picture issues – where does this neighborhood and where do these lots fit into the fabric of Kansas City?

NEIGHBORHOOD DATA: Neighborhood scale – what assets and liabilities are nearby that may be drivers for change or renewal.

BLOCK LEVEL DATA: Data specific to the block that the lot is located on (both sides of the street based on lot address) “block” here is defined by the street address, shared street frontage rather than backyards/property lines...

LOT LEVEL DATA: Site-specific issues that may affect opportunities on a specific parcel.

REGIONAL AND LAND USE DATA • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • •

Basic GIS data layers: Road locations and names, parcel lines, parcel numbers Surrounding land use by parcel: residential, commercial, industrial, schools, parks, etc.

Air photo Topography, slope Natural Resource Inventory from MARC (habitat and vegetation coverage) Drainage Features; Watershed boundaries; streams, rivers, lakes Historic stream and river locations that have been covered over by development Sewer-shed boundaries Highways, Railroads Sidewalks and Trails Kessler Plan Map of the parks and boulevards originally envisioned for Kansas City Current parks and planned acquisitions (if any) Neighborhood, Community Coalition, homes association boundaries and names (e.g.Ivanhoe, Marlborough

Community Coalition) Business and Industrial District boundaries and names (e.g. – Northeast Industrial District, Southtown Business Council) Zoning maps Area Plan Boundaries, Focus Plan Boundaries, City Redevelopment Target Areas, Urban Renewal, TIF, Tax abatement, other districts City Council District Boundary School District Boundary Public transportation routes - ATA, MAX, other… planned and existing Food-shed data (MARC): food desert geography

52 | Best + Most Sustainable Uses of Vacant Properties

NEIGHBORHOOD DATA • Ownership patterns - who owns land/property in the area? »» Who is the largest land owner in the neighborhood? »» Is the City or other public agency the largest owner?

• Businesses and employers »» Identify new or growing businesses • Investments in the community in recent years (definition of investment?) »» By type of investment: public, private; public/private • Schools »» By type (public v private/charter) »» Vacancy • Parks »» By type of facilities available: active vs passive rec.

• Community Centers, Libraries, other public facilities…

• Anchor Institutions - may be non-profit or for-profit organizations. Tend to have long histories in the area… »» UMKC, Rockhurst, other educational institution »» Hospital »» Large Business Anchor (such as Hallmark, Cerner, etc.)

• Historic Buildings and Districts • Street type, size »» Street conditions? (date of repair/resurface) »» Is it a Boulevard? »» Street class data (arterial, etc.)

• Other Connectivity: Sidewalks, trails, “walking school bus routes,” Bus lines and stops; bike routes…

• Utility service types and locations on the street and in the neighborhood: Water, electricity, gas, phone, cable, storm sewer, sanitary sewer, Google fiber • Brownfield sites in the neighborhood [how is this calculated?]

• Historic land use and property types in the community »» Historic building types (architectural types - availability will vary by location…) »» Units in structure (census data) »» Other?

• Demographics of the community – population, population change in the last 10 and 20 years, age, ethnic diversity, education levels, income »» What is “the community”? »» What is the geographic unit here? Census block, census tract, neighborhood boundaries?

Vacant Lot Task Force | 53

NEIGHBORHOOD DATA, CONTINUED • FOOD: Grocery stores, farms, farmer’s markets, community gardens, other food land use… »» Developers who are active in the area (include for profit and non-profit »» Recent developments; Any proposed developments in the works or submitted to City (permit data) »» Use of tax credits?

• Crime statistics, police reports, • Fires in recent years (how many years?)

• 311 Complaints or Requests – Street or utility complaints, or Repairs in recent years • PIAC projects in recent years (how many years?)

• PIEA and EDC data • Art and recreation programs in the community (1% for art data) • Neighborhood, Community Coalition, Homes Association contacts »» Neighborhood plans and vacant lot strategies at Neighborhood scale… »» Has the neighborhood adopted a plan? »» Does the plan address vacant land strategies?

• Planned or Proposed Public Projects in the vicinity (need to define “vicinity”) • (near- and long-term plans): »» Water Services Department: Combined Sewer Overflow, Separate Sewer Overflow, or Flood Control

Projects, Water Line Replacements »» Public Works: Street, Sidewalk, or Utility repairs »» PIAC projects »» City »» County »» State of MO »» Other…

• Building-permit data (KCMO) - by census tract or other geography…

• New Construction vs. Demolition • Type of new construction: residential v. other • Type of new residential construction: multi v single family

54 | Best + Most Sustainable Uses of Vacant Properties

BLOCK LEVEL DATA Note: block data requires selection of key criteria and aggregation of data for all of the lots on a particular street-facing block…

• • • •

umber of structures on the block vs number of parcels (% vacant parcels) N Recent sales data - real estate transactions Foreclosures Basic question: what are the characteristics of the block in which the lot is located? »» Stability of land use vs land use change (decline, transition, stability) »» Stability of housing units and unit value (where housing is the dominant land use) »» Market context for reuse

LOT LEVEL DATA (Data specific to the vacant lot) • L ot dimensions • H ouse present or absent »» If there’s a housing unit - is it occupied? Anyone living in the building »» Size; Type of Building; Quality and structural stability of the building »» Historic significance of building »» If vacant, How long vacant »» Structure conditions (UMKC / CEI housing survey data by unit / year surveyed »» 311 or other complaints?

• Ownership management of the lot: Land Bank, Privately Owned, etc. »» Ownership »» Management (may be different than owner) • Past site use »» Land use type »» Environmental issues, Brownfield contamination, Phase I site assessment report »» Date of demolition (if structure was demolished - when) »» Is there a foundation still present underground?

• Current environmental values/features »» Lot contains significant trees »» Lot contains wetland or other environmental feature…

• Urban design considerations: »» Location on the block? **Flag corner lots »» Visibility (topography, location)

Vacant Lot Task Force | 55

APPENDIX II: DEVELOPER QUESTIONNAIRE IVANHOE

NEIGHBORHOOD COUNCIL NUTTER IVANHOE NEIGHBORHOOD CENTER

IVANHOE NEIGHBORHOOD COUNCIL 3700 WOODLAND KANSAS CITY, MO 64109 (816) 921-6611 (P) (816) 921-3791 (F) EMAIL: MMAY@INCTHRIVES.ORG

Neighborhood Checklist and Developer Questionnaire Ivanhoe Neighborhood council (INC) is a non-profit business entity incorporated in the state of Missouri.

Its charitable purposes include, but are not limited to, creating and helping to maintain a sustainable neighborhood through providing enhancement of housing opportunities, safety and well-being of the neighborhood through civic projects, educational opportunities, neighborhood preservation, and recreational activities that improve the quality of life for the neighborhood residents.

The boundaries of INC are Paseo Boulevard on the west, Prospect Avenue on the east, 31st Street on the north, and Emanuel Cleaver II Boulevard on the south, all of which are in Kansas City, Jackson County, Missouri.

The purpose of this checklist and questionnaire is to help INC gain an understanding of potential developments within the neighborhood’s boundaries, gather information for our residents, and provide guidance and feedback to developers as they move forward. Additionally, this questionnaire is intended to spur conversation about proposed developments to provide feedback to the necessary parties of conditions under which any development is to proceed with the full support and participation of INC. Before proceeding on any development, any developer or buyer seeking to acquire or develop property within INC’s boundaries shall complete this questionnaire or otherwise be prepared to present information relating to this questionnaire to the INC Housing and Economic Development Committee. The INC Housing and Economic Development Committee meets monthly, on the first Monday of every month at 6pm at the Nutter Ivanhoe Neighborhood Center, 3700 Woodland Avenue, Kansas City, MO 64109.

56 | Best + Most Sustainable Uses of Vacant Properties

IVANHOE

NEIGHBORHOOD COUNCIL

IVANHOE NEIGHBORHOOD COUNCIL

NUTTER IVANHOE NEIGHBORHOOD CENTER I.

Site of Property A.

B.

II.

3700 WOODLAND KANSAS CITY, MO 64109 (816) 921-6611 (P) (816) 921-3791 (F) EMAIL: MMAY@INCTHRIVES.ORG

Current: What is the present state of the property?

1. Have we visited the site?

2. Taken photos?

3. Do we have a general feel of its place in the neighborhood?

History: The past life of the property 1. What was/is on the property?

2. Are there issues of hazardous materials or environmental contamination?

3. If a structure exists on the property, is it listed as a dangerous building?

4. Are there back taxes/assessments attached to the property?

5. How is it currently zoned?

Statement of Interest A. B.

III.

What is the buyer’s connection with the site and/or the neighborhood?

Is there a plan for construction/beautification for the site and/or neighborhood?

Plan [of the purchaser for the site] A.

B.

IV.

Financial [costs associated with property] A.

B.

V.

What does the buyer plan to do with the lot? Does it address: a) Beautification b) Concerns for safety Why is the buyer interested in this particular site?

Anticipated cost of construction or beautification of the site 1. Total estimate for improvements 2. Itemized cost for materials and labor Anticipation for “hidden” costs 1. Assessments/ back taxes 2. New property taxes for the owner of site based on improvements 3. If a renovation and structure was on the dangerous building’s list – are all involved parties aware of the required improvements to satisfy the City?

4. Re- zoning/special use permits

Financing [Ideas for paying for property/construction/beautification] A. B. C.

How is the projected site going to be purchased?

How is the construction/beautification going to be financed?

Has the financing already been secured?

Revised by INC Housing and Economic Development Committee- 06.02.14

Vacant Lot Task Force | 57

IVANHOE

NEIGHBORHOOD COUNCIL

IVANHOE NEIGHBORHOOD COUNCIL

NUTTER IVANHOE NEIGHBORHOOD CENTER VI.

Timeline A. B.

VII.

How long until construction/beautification will begin?

Projection for the length of time until the project will be completed?

Developer Experience A. B. C. D.

VIII.

3700 WOODLAND KANSAS CITY, MO 64109 (816) 921-6611 (P) (816) 921-3791 (F) EMAIL: MMAY@INCTHRIVES.ORG

Types/Locations of previous projects Pictures of previous projects Lessons learned from previous projects Concerns with the current project based on past project experiences

Community Activism A. B. C.

IX.

Economic Improvement [How and why will the project improve the community?]

A. B.

X.

Current participant in Ivanhoe programs &/or other community building forums?

Other past experiences in neighborhood development?

Plans for becoming a participant in the Ivanhoe Neighborhood Council &/or other community organizations?

Will the project benefit the individual/ their neighbors/ the overall community?

Does the project increase economic development/ prosperity of the buyer/&/or the neighborhood as a whole?

Deed Restriction [Special stipulations to secure the deed] A.

Is the buyer prepared to purchase the property if the Committee requests that the Land Bank place the discussed restrictions on the title? Potential restrictions may include: 1. The renovation is owner-occupied for 5 years 2. Mandatory investment of proposed time/energy/finances into the project as stated by purchaser 3. Beginning project at the time stated by purchaser 4. Timeline of the project proceeds along in a reasonable speed as stated by purchaser 5. Participation in community development as stated by purchaser 6. Maintains property in a specific way as stated by purchaser

Revised by INC Housing and Economic Development Committee- 06.02.14

58 | Best + Most Sustainable Uses of Vacant Properties

IVANHOE

IVANHOE NEIGHBORHOOD COUNCIL

NEIGHBORHOOD COUNCIL

3700 WOODLAND KANSAS CITY, MO 64109 (816) 921-6611 (P) (816) 921-3791 (F) EMAIL: MMAY@INCTHRIVES.ORG

NUTTER IVANHOE NEIGHBORHOOD CENTER

INC’s RECOMMENDATION Agency Requesting Feedback: Name of Developer Making Application: Parcel # and Addresses of Property Sought: Date Developer Made Application to Government Agency: Date Developer Appeared Before INC:

INC:

APPROVES

DISSAPROVES

REQUESTS MORE INFORMATION

On the above date, the INC Housing and Economic Development Committee heard information relating to the above acquisition and/or development and approves/disapproves of the development as presented and makes the following recommendations and suggestions: _____________________________________________________________________________________ _____________________________________________________________________________________ _____________________________________________________________________________________ _____________________________________________________________________________________ _____________________________________________________________________________________ _____________________________________________________________________________________ _____________________________________________________________________________________ _____________________________________________________________________________________ _____________________________________________________________________________________ _______________

________________________________________________ Chair, INC Housing and Economic Development Committee

________________________ Date:

Revised by INC Housing and Economic Development Committee- 06.02.14

Vacant Lot Task Force | 59

APPENDIX III: BIBLIOGRAPHY American Public Works Association. (n.d.). Ordinances, Regulations, & Public Policies. Urban Forestry Best Management

Practices for Public Works Managers, volume 3. Retrieved from https://www2.apwa.net/Documents/About/ CoopAgreements/UrbanForestry/UrbanForestry-3.pdf Benner, C., & Pastor, M. (2012). Just Growth: Inclusion and Prosperity in America’s Metropolitan Regions. New York, NY: Routledge.

Bowman & Pagano. (2004). Terra Incognito: Vacant Land and Urban Strategies, Georgetown University Press.

Bridging the Gap. (n.d.). The Benefits of Trees. Retrieved from https://www.bridgingthegap.org/benefits-of-trees/ City of Olathe, Kansas. (n.d.). Stormwater Best Management Practices: Cost Share Reimbursement Program. Retrieved

from http://www.olatheks.org/PublicWorks/Stormwater/StormwaterBMP Freilich, R. H. (1997). To Sprawl or Not to Sprawl: A National Perspective for Kansas City. Charles N. Kimball Lecture,

Western Historical Manuscript Collection Kansas City. Retrieved from http://shs.umsystem.edu/kansascity/ kimball/Freilich-04-21-1997.pdf Kansas City, Missouri Department of Parks, Recreation and Boulevards. (2013). Traditions & Trends 2017: Comprehensive

Parks, Recreation and Boulevards Master Plan. Retrieved from http://kcparks.org/wp-content/uploads/2013/04/

KC-Parks-Master-Plan-Exec-Summary.pdf Kansas City, Missouri Water Services Department. (2009 reivised 2012). Overflow Control Plan. Overflow Control Program

www.kcwaterservices.org/wp-content/uploads/2013/04/Overflow_Control_Plan_Apri302012_FINAL.pdf Kloss, C., & Calarusse, C. (2006). Rooftops to Rivers: Green Strategies for Controlling Stormwater and Combined Sewer

Overflows. Natural Resources Defense Council. Retrieved from http://files.harc.edu/projects/coolhouston/ rooftopstorivers.pdf Immergluck, D. (2009). Foreclosed: High risk lending, deregulation, and the undermining of America’s Mortgage Market,

Cornell University Press.

Levitan, D. (2014). Could Vacant Lots Double as Green Infrastructure Projects? Conservation, University of Washington.

Retrieved from http://conservationmagazine.org/2014/04/could-vacant-lots-double-as-green-infrastructure-projects/ McAliney, M. (1993). Arguments for Land Conservation: Documentation and Information Sources for Land Resources

Protection, Trust for Public Land, Sacramento, CA. McClure, K. (2011). Housing Affordability in the Greater Kansas City Area. Retrieved from http://www.marc.org/Regional- Planning/Creating-Sustainable-Places/assets/HousingAffordabilityIssuesMARC.aspx 60 | Best + Most Sustainable Uses of Vacant Properties

McPherson, E. G., Simpson, J. R., Peper, P. J., Gardner, S. L., Vargas, K. E., Ho, J., & Xiao, Q. (2005). City of Boulder, Colorado

Municipal Tree Resource Analysis. U.S. Forest Service, United States Department of Agriculture. Retrieved from

http://www.fs.fed.us/psw/programs/uesd/uep/products/psw_cufr624_Boulder_MBCA_web.pdf Missouri Department of Conservation. (2014). Tree Resource Improvement and Maintenance (TRIM) Grant for Community

Tree Care. Retrieved from http://mdc.mo.gov/your-property/greener-communities/community-tree-care/tree- resource-improvement-and-maintenance-trim Missouri Housing Development Commission. (2013). 2014 Qualified Allocation Plan for MHDC Multifamily Programs.

Retrieved from http://www.mhdc.com/rental_production/2014_fy_items/documents/QAP_2014.pdf National Vacant Properties Campaign: Creating Opportunities from Abandonment. (2006). Vacant Properties: The True Costs

to Communities. Retrieved June 1, 2014 from http://www.smartgrowthamerica.org/documents/true-costs.pdf Paull, E. (2010). Tax Increment Financing and Brownfields Redevelopment [PowerPoint Slides]. Retrieved from http://www.

redevelopmenteconomics.com/yahoo_site_admin/assets/docs/TIF-Brfds-_BOB_4-2010.11163210.pdf The Pennsylvania Horticultural Society - Philadelphia Green. (2002). A Philadelphia Green Guide, Reclaiming Vacant Lots.

Retrieved from http://www.cityparksphila.org/resources/vacant-land-in-philadelphia Philadelphia Water Department. (n.d.). About stormwater management on vacant land, Green Vacant Land. Retrieved from

http://phillywatersheds.org/what_were_doing/green_infrastructure/programs/vacantland Philadelphia Water Department. (n.d.). Green Stormwater Infrastructure for Vacant Lands, City of Philadelphia Green City,

Green Waters plan. Retrieved from http://phillywatersheds.org/sites/default/files2/Vacant_Lands_Fact_Sheet_

Final_LC_10-29.pdf PolicyLink and the Program for Environmental and Regional Equity. (2013). An Equity Profile of the Kansas City, Region.

Retrieved from http://www.policylink.org/sites/default/files/KANSAS_CITY_PROFILE_NOV2013_FINAL.PDF Schilling, J. (2006). Blueprint Buffalo - Using Green Infrastructure to Reclaim America’s Shrinking Cities. Center for Global

Metropolitan Studies. Retrieved from http://metrostudies.berkeley.edu/pubs/proceedings/Shrinking/18Schilling_

PA_final.pdf U.S. Department of Housing and Urban Development (2014). Evidence Matters: Winter 2014. Retrieved from http://www. huduser.org/portal/periodicals/em/winter14/index.html Wenske, P. (2013). Funding Transformations: Loan pools create investment opportunities for the urban core. Federal

Reserve Bank of Kansas City. Retrieved from http://www.kc.frb.org/publicat/ten/pdf/fall2013/TEN_Loan_Pool.pdf

APPENDIX IV: VACANT LOT TASK FORCE MEMBERS + CONTRIBUTORS Manny Abarca Indian Mound Neighborhood Association Dominique Davison DRAW Architecture + Urban Design Forest Decker KCMO Parks and Recreation Department David Dods URS Corporation Jill Erickson Heartland Conservation Alliance Gloria Ortiz Fisher Westside Housing Organization Becky Forrest Town Fork Creek Neighborhood Association Morgan Gardner Habitat for Humanity Kansas City Matt Gigliotti KCMO Legal Department Patricia Ingram Palestine Neighborhood Development Council Sean Hennessey KCMO Water Services Department Peter Hoffman Legal Aid of Western Missouri Rachel Hogan Legal Aid of Western Missouri Lisa Hummel DRAW Architecture + Urban Design Tom Jacobs Mid-America Regional Council Dr. Barbara Johnson Oak Park Neighborhood Association Katherine Kelly Cultivate Kansas City Karie Kreller Department of Architecture, Urban Planning and Design, UMKC Lala Kumar University of Missouri Extension Margaret May Ivanhoe Neighborhood Council Robin Martinez Vacant Lot Task Force Chair and KCMO Environmental Management Commission Mark McHenry KCMO Parks and Recreation Department James Miller DST Realty, Inc Patricia Noll KCMO Planning and Development David Park Land Bank of Kansas City, MO Jessica Ray Pendleton Heights Neighborhood Association Gerald Shechter KCMO Office of Environmental Quality Vivienne Smith Palestine Neighborhood Development Council Dr. Jacob Wagner Department of Architecture, Urban Planning and Design, UMKC Jeffrey Williams KCMO Planning and Development

62 | Best + Most Sustainable Uses of Vacant Properties