Discuss items in the urban core outside of Downtown as described above. Everything in the core including the east side (18th & Vine area), Northeast, Plaza, Westport, Brookside, Valentine, Waldo, 39th street, & the entire midtown area.
Cratedigger wrote: ↑Wed Mar 06, 2024 10:32 pm
Didn't know this was happening. Remind me again - who do we write letters of support to? City Council? Specific city officials?
public.testimony@kcmo.org with the ordinance in the title i.e. "Supporting Testimony for Ordinance 240217" also good to mention the case #: CD-CPC-2023-00173, and what the issue is: Rezoning 4511-4521 Summit St
Also good to CC each Councilperson in on the committee (https://clerk.kcmo.gov/DepartmentDetail ... DF&Search=) and in the District (4th). If City Planning wasn't in support, you could CC them and the planner in charge as well.
You can see the emails testifying against in the attachments on the first link I posted, helpful to write a contrasting perspective.
Showing up in person, even with very simple testimony, is always going to be most effective – but definitely worth the 5 min to send an email if can't.
Cratedigger wrote: ↑Wed Mar 06, 2024 10:32 pm
Didn't know this was happening. Remind me again - who do we write letters of support to? City Council? Specific city officials?
public.testimony@kcmo.org with the ordinance in the title i.e. "Supporting Testimony for Ordinance 240217" also good to mention the case #: CD-CPC-2023-00173, and what the issue is: Rezoning 4511-4521 Summit St
Also good to CC each Councilperson in on the committee (https://clerk.kcmo.gov/DepartmentDetail ... DF&Search=) and in the District (4th). If City Planning wasn't in support, you could CC them and the planner in charge as well.
You can see the emails testifying against in the attachments on the first link I posted, helpful to write a contrasting perspective.
Showing up in person, even with very simple testimony, is always going to be most effective – but definitely worth the 5 min to send an email if can't.
Thanks - it is in the 6th district now so if CC'ing the in district council person keep that in mind
The main issue in this area is not street parking, but its that 45th Street should not have on-street parking as it's too narrow and backs up.
It's typical NIMBYism to try and prevent others from living in the same great area. This lot is surrounded on 3 sides by medium-dense multi-family housing constructed in the past couple years. We need to stop adding red tape to residential construction.
alejandro46 wrote: ↑Thu Mar 07, 2024 1:58 pm
The main issue in this area is not street parking, but its that 45th Street should not have on-street parking as it's too narrow and backs up.
It's typical NIMBYism to try and prevent others from living in the same great area. This lot is surrounded on 3 sides by medium-dense multi-family housing constructed in the past couple years. We need to stop adding red tape to residential construction.
And almost all of the opposition to this is coming from multifamily! The 48 unit Brentwood condo association is VERY against this 16 unit project
alejandro46 wrote: ↑Thu Mar 07, 2024 1:58 pm
The main issue in this area is not street parking, but its that 45th Street should not have on-street parking as it's too narrow and backs up.
It's typical NIMBYism to try and prevent others from living in the same great area. This lot is surrounded on 3 sides by medium-dense multi-family housing constructed in the past couple years. We need to stop adding red tape to residential construction.
And almost all of the opposition to this is coming from multifamily! The 48 unit Brentwood condo association is VERY against this 16 unit project
Which is extremely ironic given their multifamily housing, AND the fact that this development replacing a surface lot would great enhance the condo's property value.
I wish we had an eloquent speaker who would attend these meetings, and after the selfish NIMBYs do their testimony, this person would get up and point out how the City doesn't have enough money for things because it's not dense enough, and that the previous speakers are all selfish assholes who once they got their multi-family apartment want to keep others from doing so.
FangKC wrote: ↑Thu Mar 07, 2024 5:13 pm
I wish we had an eloquent speaker who would attend these meetings, and after the selfish NIMBYs do their testimony, this person would get up and point out how the City doesn't have enough money for things because it's not dense enough, and that the previous speakers are all selfish assholes who once they got their multi-family apartment want to keep others from doing so.
I've met people that would be fantastic at this and get it. Unfortunately they don't want to be the one person out there speaking or don't want to piss people off by being the contrarian in the room.
FangKC wrote: ↑Thu Mar 07, 2024 5:13 pm
I wish we had an eloquent speaker who would attend these meetings, and after the selfish NIMBYs do their testimony, this person would get up and point out how the City doesn't have enough money for things because it's not dense enough, and that the previous speakers are all selfish assholes who once they got their multi-family apartment want to keep others from doing so.
I've met people that would be fantastic at this and get it. Unfortunately they don't want to be the one person out there speaking or don't want to piss people off by being the contrarian in the room.
Classic KC. If/when I move back I’ll do it heavily, but I may not take the “eloquent” approach. ha
Didn't know this was happening. Remind me again - who do we write letters of support to? City Council? Specific city officials?
public.testimony@kcmo.org with the ordinance in the title i.e. "Supporting Testimony for Ordinance 240217" also good to mention the case #: CD-CPC-2023-00173, and what the issue is: Rezoning 4511-4521 Summit St
Also good to CC each Councilperson in on the committee (https://clerk.kcmo.gov/DepartmentDetail ... DF&Search=) and in the District (4th). If City Planning wasn't in support, you could CC them and the planner in charge as well.
You can see the emails testifying against in the attachments on the first link I posted, helpful to write a contrasting perspective.
Showing up in person, even with very simple testimony, is always going to be most effective – but definitely worth the 5 min to send an email if can't.
Plaza Westport Neighborhood board just came out against the rezoning/project, saying it should only be 9 units.
Send an email in support before tomorrow's NPD meeting! Example:
My understanding is that the owner (Block?) wants to rezone from R-1.5 to R-0.75. Under R-1.5, you can built 9 units by right (1,500 SF minimum lot size per unit). Under R-0.75, you can build 18 units by right (750 SF minimum lot size). This proposed project is 16 units, which would be possible with R-0.75 zoning. The Dorset next door to the south is R-0.75 which is why in part city staff supports the rezoning request.
Minimum lot sizes are a terrible way to regulate density and should be abolished.
