HomeMy Public PortalAboutORD15605 BILL NO. 2016-87
SPONSORED BY COUNCILMAN Mihalevich
ORDINANCE NO. 57/9 i76
AN ORDINANCE APPROVING THE EAST CAPITOL AVENUE URBAN RENEWAL
AREA URBAN RENEWAL PLAN.
BE IT ORDAINED BY THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF JEFFERSON,
MISSOURI, AS FOLLOWS:
SECTION 1. The City Council hereby makes the following findings:
a. It is desirable and in the public interest that the Housing Authority of the
City of Jefferson, State of Missouri (herein called the "Local Public
Agency"), acting in its capacity as The Land Clearance for Redevelopment
Authority of the City of Jefferson, undertake and carry out the urban
renewal project (herein called the "Project") encompassing the area
generally bounded as follows:
East State Street to the north, Adams Street to the west, East High Street
on the south (including parcels on the south side of the 500 and 600
blocks of East High Street), and Lafayette Street on the east.
The Area consists of 116 parcels and approximately 38.1 acres of
land including street and alley rights-of-way and 25.6 acres
exclusive of street and alley rights-of-way, and is located in the City
of Jefferson, State of Missouri (herein called the "City").
b. The Local Public Agency and the City have made a detailed study of the
location, physical condition of structures, land use, environmental
influences and social, cultural and economic conditions of the Project
area, and the Local Public Agency and the City have determined that the
area is a blighted area and that it is detrimental and a menace to the
safety, health and welfare of the inhabitants and users thereof and of the
City at large, because of defective, inadequate street layout; insanitary or
unsafe conditions; deterioration of site improvements; improper
subdivision or obsolete platting; which together retard the provision of
housing accommodation and constitute an economic and social liability or
a menace to the public, health, safety and welfare in its present condition
and use, and the members of the Governing Body have been fully
apprised by the Local Public Agency and are aware of these facts and
Bill 2016-87
Page 1
s
conditio n .
c. There has been prepared and referred to the City Council of the City
(herein called the "Governing Body") for review and approval an urban
renewal plan for the Project Area, dated November 23, 2016, consisting of
twenty-three (23) pages and nine (9) exhibits, attached hereto as
ATTACHMENT 1, supported by the written recommendations of the City
Planning and Zoning Commission, indicating that the urban renewal plan
does not conflict with the general plan for the development of the
community as a whole.
d. The Urban Renewal Plan has been approved by the governing body of the
Local Public Agency, as evidenced by the copy of said body's duly
certified resolution approving the Urban Renewal Plan, which is attached
hereto as ATTACHMENT 2.
e. A general plan has been prepared and is recognized and used as a guide
for the general development of the City as a whole.
f. The Planning and Zoning Commission, which is the duly designated and
acting official planning body for the City, has submitted to the Governing
Body its report and recommendations respecting the urban renewal plan
for the Project Area and has certified that the urban renewal plan
conforms to the general plan for the City, and the Governing body has
duly considered the report, recommendations, and certification of the
planning body.
g. The urban renewal plan for the Project Area does not prescribe new or
different land uses for the Project Area and will not require, among other
things, changes in zoning, the vacating and removal of streets, alleys and
other public ways, the establishment of new street patterns, the locations
and relocation of sewer and water mains or other public facilities, or other
public action.
h. The Local Public Agency would follow legal requirements for the relocation
of individuals and families that may be displaced as a result of carrying out
the Project in accordance with the urban renewal plan.
It is necessary that the Governing Body take appropriate official action
respecting the urban renewal plan for the Project, and in conformity with
the laws of the State of Missouri and the City of Jefferson.
j. The Governing Body is cognizant of the conditions that are imposed in the
undertaking and carrying out of urban renewal projects with Federal
financial assistance, including those prohibiting discrimination because of
race, color, creed, or national origin.
k. The Project addresses a blighted, deteriorated and deteriorating area and
qualifies as an eligible Urban Renewal Project under Section 99.320,
Bill 2016-87
Page 2
Revised Statutes of Missouri.
I. The objectives of the urban renewal plan cannot be achieved through
more extensive rehabilitation of the Project Area.
m. The urban renewal plan for the Project Area is feasible and conforms to
the general plan for the development of the community as a whole.
n. In addition to the elimination of blight from the Urban Renewal Area, the
undertaking of the Project in such area would promote the public welfare
and the proper development of the community (a) by potentially making
land in such area available for disposition, for uses in accordance with the
urban renewal plan, for redevelopment in accordance with the use or uses
specified in the Plan, and (b) by providing, through the redevelopment and
rehabilitation of the urban renewal area in accordance with the plan,
improved environments within the Project Area.
o. The urban renewal plan for the urban renewal area will afford maximum
opportunity, consistent with the sound needs of the City as a whole, for the
urban renewal of the Area by private enterprise.
p. The existing program for the proper relocation of individuals and families
displaced in carrying out the Project in decent, safe, and sanitary
dwellings in conformity with acceptable standards is and has been feasible
and has been or can be reasonably and timely effected to permit the
proper prosecution and completion of the Project; and such dwellings or
dwelling units available or to be made available to such displaced
individuals and families are at least equal in number to the number of
potentially displaced individuals and families, are not generally less
desirable in regard to public utilities and public and commercial facilities
than the dwellings of any displaced individuals and families in the Project
Area, are available at rents or prices within the financial means of the
displaced individuals and families, and are reasonably accessible to their
places of employment.
SECTION 2. The urban renewal plan for the Project, attached hereto as
ATTACHMENT 1, having been duly reviewed and considered, is hereby approved, and
the City Clerk is hereby directed to file said copy of the urban renewal plan with the
minutes of this meeting.
SECTION 3. In order to implement and facilitate the effectuation of the urban
renewal plan hereby approved, it is found and determined that certain official action may
be necessary to be taken by this Body, this Body hereby (a) pledges its cooperation in
helping to carry out the urban renewal plan; (b) requests the various officials,
departments, boards, and agencies of the City having administrative responsibilities in
Bill 2016-87
Page 3
3
the premises likewise to cooperate to such end and to exercise their respective
functions and powers in a manner consistent with the urban renewal plan; and (c)
stands ready to consider and take appropriate action upon proposals and measures
designed to effectuate the urban renewal plan.
SECTION 4. This ordinance shall be in force and effect from and after its
passage and approval.
Passed: i A "( -'l Approved: IL e 1"?
awut.e: 0.(acrt
Presiding Officer Mayor Carrie Tergin
ATTEST: APPROVED AS TO FORM:
,I r,
City Clerk City Orelor
Bill 2016-87
Page 4
NOTICE OF PUBLIC HEARING
APPROVAL OF THE
EAST CAPITOL AVENUE URBAN RENEWAL AREA URBAN RENEWAL PLAN
The City Council of the City of Jefferson, Missouri,will hold a public hearing on the following matter
on Monday, December 19, 2016 at 6:00 p.m. in the Council Chamber of the John G. Christy
Municipal Building, 320 East McCarty Street, Jefferson City, Missouri.
Approval of the East Capitol Avenue Urban Renewal Area Urban Renewal Plan. The East
Capitol Avenue Urban Renewal Area is located within Jefferson City, Cole County, Missouri, and is
generally bordered by East State Street to the north,Adams Street to the west, East High Street on
the south(including certain parcels on the south side of the 500 and 600 blocks of East High Street),
and Lafayette Street on the east. The Area consists of 116 parcels and approximately 38.1 acres of
land including street and alley rights-of-way and 25.6 acres exclusive of street and alley rights-of-
way.
The East Capitol Avenue Urban Renewal Area Urban Renewal Plan sets forth the general plan of
action and the program that the City of Jefferson and Land Clearance Authority(Authority) propose
to undertake to address the problems documented in the Chapter 99"Blight Study,"undertaken by
PGAV Planners including insanitary, blighted, deteriorated or deteriorating areas within the area for
the establishment and preservation of well-planned neighborhoods of decent homes and
businesses and suitable environment for both;for utilizing appropriate private and public resources
to eliminate and prevent the development or spread of insanitary, blighted, deteriorated, or
deteriorating areas;to encourage needed urban rehabilitation;;to provide for the redevelopment of
blighted, insanitary, deteriorated and deteriorating areas; or to undertake other community activities
as may be suitable to achieve the objectives of such a program.
All interested parties shall be afforded at the public hearing a reasonable opportunity to express their
views respecting the proposed urban renewal plan.
The East Capitol Avenue Urban Renewal Area Urban Renewal Plan may be viewed in person at the
office of the City Clerk or on the City of Jefferson, Missouri webpage at
www.jeffersoncitymo.gov/government/plann ing_and_protective_services.
Individuals should contact the ADA Coordinator at(573) 634-6570 to request accommodations or
alternative formats as required under the Americans with Disabilities Act. Please allow three
business days to process the request. Please call (573) 634-6410 with questions regarding these
matters.
Phyllis Powell, City Clerk, City of Jefferson, Missouri
P.T. - Friday, December 2, 2016
Friday, December 9, 2016
For contact information only.
Department of Planning and Protective Services/Planning Division
320 East McCarty Street, Room 120, Jefferson City, Missouri 65101
Contact: Anne Stratman or Janice McMillan
Phone (573) 634-6475 Fax (573) 634-6457
ATTACHMENT 1
URBAN RENEWAL PLAN
Bill 2016-87
Page 5
- - - ,
41.
4. 1
•
HoUSING AUTHORITY
ecg,
.174_ •ip •uri.
of the City of Jefferson; Missouri
1040-Myrtle Ave 4 Post Office'Box 1029 Cynthia ciuetsCh John S.Pletz.
Fax 573B35-9600 Zin Code 65102-1029 Executivd Diwtor General
573635-4163/1/jijce/TDD
November 23,2016
CounCil Member
city of Jefferson
_Dear.Members'ofthe'City Council:,
nclosed please find the proposed East Capitol Avenue Urban Renewal Plan.
Pursuant to Section 99 430(7), RSIvio,please be advised. of the following:
I. The Planning and Zoning Commission 'has approved:the proposed plan
and the, Commission's documents on this are attdched. Three of its four recommended
changes have been included in the final version approved by the Jefferson City Housing
Authority, acting in its,capacity:as the:Land learance-fOr geclevelopment Authority.
2. The proposed.methods of acquisition would ,primarily include voluntary
,sale, purchase at tax sale or foreclosure, gift, devise, and dondentiatibri. The costs of
.acquisition and preparation for redevelopment or urban.renewal'Within the project:area
are unknown at this time because the specific acquisition.decisions would be Made:at a
later time,
3. Any acquisitions by the Housing Authority would be financed by the
Housing Authority and the city. Proceeds from any dispositions made to redevelopers of
acquired parcels are also unknown at this time, but they would primarily be used to offset
acquisition costs and expenses.
4. Any families to be relocated 'if their properties are acquired by the
Housing AtithotitY-Would be relocated following federal and :stateguidelines on these
Matters. There should be little difficulty in accomplishingany such relocations, not only
because they would probably. be few in number but also because of the availability of
alternative housing units in the City.
1
5. Since the plan has no distinct phases, no schedule indicating estimated
length of time for completion of different phase§ can be provided. It is estimated that,the
plan would be cOMpleted by December 31, 2026.-
COMMISSIONERS
Larry Vincent Penny Rector Larry Kolb Dennis Mueller Donna White Minnie Word
EQUAL
Chairman Vice Chairman
His
OPPORTUNITY
Please let us know if we can submit anything else that would be of benefit to the
Council at this time for your consideration of the proposed plan.
Very truly yours,
Cyn 'a Quetsch
Executive Director
cc: Mayor Carrie Tergin
Janice McMillian
Enclosures
NOTICE OF PUBLIC HEARING
APPROVAL OF THE
EAST CAPITOL AVENUE URBAN RENEWAL AREA URBAN RENEWAL PLAN
The City Council of the City of Jefferson, Missouri, will hold a public hearing on the following matter
on Monday, December 19, 2016 at 6:00 p.m. in the Council Chamber of the John G. Christy
Municipal Building, 320 East McCarty Street, Jefferson City, Missouri.
Approval of the East Capitol Avenue Urban Renewal Area Urban Renewal Plan. The East
Capitol Avenue Urban Renewal Area is located within Jefferson City, Cole County, Missouri, and is
generally bordered by East State Street to the north, Adams Street to the west, East High Street on
the south (including certain parcels on the south side of the 500 and 600 blocks of East High Street),
and Lafayette Street on the east. The Area consists of 116 parcels and approximately 38.1 acres of
land including street and alley rights-of-way and 25.6 acres exclusive of street and alley rights-of-
way.
The East Capitol Avenue Urban Renewal Area Urban Renewal Plan sets forth the general plan of
action and the program that the City of Jefferson and Land Clearance Authority (Authority) propose
to undertake to address the problems documented in the Chapter 99 "Blight Study," undertaken by
PGAV Planners including insanitary, blighted, deteriorated or deteriorating areas within the area for
the establishment and preservation of well-planned neighborhoods of decent homes and
businesses and suitable environment for both; for utilizing appropriate private and public resources
to eliminate and prevent the development or spread of insanitary, blighted, deteriorated, or
deteriorating areas; to encourage needed urban rehabilitation;; to provide for the redevelopment of
blighted, insanitary, deteriorated and deteriorating areas; or to undertake other community activities
as may be suitable to achieve the objectives of such a program.
All interested parties shall be afforded at the public hearing a reasonable opportunity to express their
views respecting the proposed urban renewal plan.
The East Capitol Avenue Urban Renewal Area Urban Renewal Plan may be viewed in person at the
office of the City Clerk or on the City of Jefferson, Missouri webpage at
www.jeffersoncitymo.gov/government/planning_and_protective_services.
Individuals should contact the ADA Coordinator at (573) 634-6570 to request accommodations or
alternative formats as required under the Americans with Disabilities Act. Please allow three
business days to process the request. Please call (573) 634-641 0 with questions regarding these
matters.
Phyllis Powell, City Clerk, City of Jefferson, Missouri
P.T.-Friday, December 2, 2016
Friday, December 9, 2016
For contact information only.
Department of Planning and Protective Services/Planning Division
320 East McCarty Street, Room 120, Jefferson City, Missouri 65101
Contact: Anne Stratman or Janice McMillan
Phone (573) 634-6475 Fax (573) 634-6457
Bl LL NO. --=20::...;1:...;::;6-=-8:..:...7 __
SPONSORED BY COUNCILMAN __ .:.:.;M:.:.:.ih:.:a=le..:..:vi=ch..:....._ __
ORDINANCE NO.
AN ORDINANCE APPROVING THE EAST CAPITOL AVENUE URBAN RENEWAL
AREA URBAN RENEWAL PLAN.
BE IT ORDAINED BY THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF JEFFERSON,
MISSOURI, AS FOLLOWS:
SECTION 1. The City Council hereby makes the following findings:
a. It is desirable and in the public interest that the Housing Authority of the
City of Jefferson, State of Missouri (herein called the "Local Public
Agency"), acting in its capacity as The Land Clearance for Redevelopment
Authority of the City of Jefferson, undertake and carry out the urban
renewal project (herein called the "Project") encompassing the area
generally bounded as follows:
East State Street to the north, Adams Street to the west, East High Street
on the south (including parcels on the south side of the 500 and 600
blocks of East High Street), and Lafayette Street on the east.
The Area consists of 116 parcels and approximately 38.1 acres of
land including street and alley rights-of-way and 25.6 acres
exclusive of street and alley rights-of-way, and is located in the City
of Jefferson, State of Missouri (herein called the "City").
b. The Local Public Agency and the City have made a detailed study of the
location, physical condition of structures, land use, environmental
influences and social, cultural and economic conditions of the Project
area, and the Local Public Agency and the City have determined that the
area is a blighted area and that it is detrimental and a menace to the
safety, health and welfare of the inhabitants and users thereof and of the
City at large, because of defective, inadequate street layout; insanitary or
unsafe conditions; deterioration of site improvements; improper
subdivision or obsolete platting; which together retard the provision of
housing accommodation and constitute an economic and social liability or
a menace to the public, health, safety and welfare in its present condition
and use, and the members of the Governing Body have been fully
apprised by the Local Public Agency and are aware of these facts and
Bill2016-87
Page 1
conditions.
c. There has been prepared and referred to the City Council of the City
(herein called the "Governing Body") for review and approval an urban
renewal plan for the Project Area, dated November 23, 2016, consisting of
twenty-three (23) pages and nine (9) exhibits, attached hereto as
ATTACHMENT 1, supported by the written recommendations of the City
Planning and Zoning Commission, indicating that the urban renewal plan
does not conflict with the general plan for the development of the
community as a whole.
d. The Urban Renewal Plan has been approved by the governing body of the
Local Public Agency, as evidenced by the copy of said body's duly
certified resolution approving the Urban Renewal Plan, which is attached
hereto as ATTACHMENT 2.
e. A general plan has been prepared and is recognized and used as a guide
for the general development of the City as a whole.
f. The Planning and Zoning Commission, which is the duly designated and
acting official planning body for the City, has submitted to the Governing
Body its report and recommendations respecting the urban renewal plan
for the Project Area and has certified that the urban renewal plan
conforms to the general plan for the City, and the Governing body has
duly considered the report, recommendations, and certification of the
planning body.
g. The urban renewal plan for the Project Area does not prescribe new or
different land uses for the Project Area and will not require, among other
things, changes in zoning, the vacating and removal of streets, alleys and
other public ways, the establishment of new street patterns, the locations
and relocation of sewer and water mains or other public facilities, or other
public action.
h. The Local Public Agency would follow legal requirements for the relocation
of individuals and families that may be displaced as a result of carrying out
the Project in accordance with the urban renewal plan.
i. It is necessary that the Governing Body take appropriate official action
respecting the urban renewal plan for the Project, and in conformity with
the laws of the State of Missouri and the City of Jefferson.
j. The Governing Body is cognizant of the conditions that are imposed in the
undertaking and carrying out of urban renewal projects with Federal
financial assistance, including those prohibiting discrimination because of
race, color, creed, or national origin.
k. The Project addresses a blighted, deteriorated and deteriorating area and
qualifies as an eligible Urban Renewal Project under Section 99.320,
Bill2016-87
Page2
Revised Statutes of Missouri.
I. The objectives of the urban renewal plan cannot be achieved through
more extensive rehabilitation of the Project Area.
m. The urban renewal plan for the Project Area is feasible and conforms to
the general plan for the development of the community as a whole.
n. In addition to the elimination of blight from the Urban Renewal Area, the
undertaking of the Project in such area would promote the public welfare
and the proper development of the community (a) by potentially making
land in such area available for disposition, for uses in accordance with the
urban renewal plan, for redevelopment in accordance with the use or uses
specified in the Plan, and (b) by providing, through the redevelopment and
rehabilitation of the urban renewal area in accordance with the plan,
improved environments within the Project Area.
o. The urban renewal plan for the urban renewal area will afford maximum
opportunity, consistent with the sound needs of the City as a whole, for the
urban renewal of the Area by private enterprise.
p. The existing program for the proper relocation of individuals and families
displaced in carrying out the Project in decent, safe, and sanitary
dwellings in conformity with acceptable standards is and has been feasible
and has been or can be reasonably and timely effected to permit the
proper prosecution and completion of the Project; and such dwellings or
dwelling units available or to be made available to such displaced
individuals and families are at least equal in number to the number of
potentially displaced individuals and families, are not generally less
desirable in regard to public utilities and public and commercial facilities
than the dwellings of any displaced individuals and families in the Project
Area, are available at rents or prices within the financial means of the
displaced individuals and families, and are reasonably accessible to their
places of employment.
SECTION 2. The urban renewal plan for the Project, attached hereto as
ATTACHMENT 1. having been duly reviewed and considered, is hereby approved, and
the City Clerk is hereby directed to file said copy of the urban renewal plan with the
minutes of this meeting.
SECTION 3. In order to implement and facilitate the effectuation of the urban
renewal plan hereby approved, it is found and determined that certain official action may
be necessary to be taken by this Body, this Body hereby (a) pledges its cooperation in
helping to carry out the urban renewal plan; (b) requests the various officials,
departments, boards, and agencies of the City having administrative responsibilities in
Bill2016-87
Page3
the premises likewise to cooperate to such end and to exercise their respective
functions and powers in a manner consistent with the urban renewal plan; and (c)
stands ready to consider and take appropriate action upon proposals and measures
designed to effectuate the urban renewal plan.
SECTION 4. This ordinance shall be in force and effect from and after its
passage and approval.
Passed: __________ _ Approved: __________ _
Presiding Officer
ATTEST:
City Clerk
Mayor Carrie Tergin
APPROVED AS TO FORM:
Ci~~
Bill2016-87
Page4
ATTACHMENT 1
URBAN RENEWAL PLAN
Bill2016-87
Page5
HOUSING AUTHORITY
of the City of jefferson/ Missouri
1040 Myrtle Ave • Post Office Bo x 1029
Fax 573-1335-9680 • Zip Code 65102-1029
573-635-6163/V oice.ITDD
cynth ia Quetsch
Ex ecutive Director
John s . Pletz
General Counsel
Council Member
C ity of Jefferson
November 23 , 2016
Dear Members of the City Counci l:
Enclosed please find the proposed East Cap ito l A venue Urban Renewal Plan.
Pursuant to Section 99.430(7), RSMo, please be adv ised ofthe following:
1. The Planning and Zo ning Commission has approved the proposed plan
and the Comm ission 's documents on thi s are attached. Three of its four recommended
changes have been included in th e final version approved by the Jefferson City Housing
Authority , actin g in its capacity as the Land Clearance for Redevelopment Authority.
2. The proposed m et hods of acquisition would primarily include vo luntary
sale , purchase at tax sale or foreclosure, gift , devi se, and condemnation . The costs of
acqui s iti on a nd preparation for redeve lopm ent or urban renewal within the project area
are unknown at t hi s time because the s pecific acqu is iti on decisions wou ld be made at a
lat er time.
3. Any acqms1ttons by the Housing Authori ty would be financed by the
Housing Authorit y and the City. Proceeds from any dispositions made to redeve lopers of
acquired parcels are also unknown at this time , but they wou ld primarily be used to offset
acquisition costs and expenses .
4 . Any familie s to be relocated if their properties are acquired by the
Housing Authority would be relocated following federal and st ate guidelines on these
matters. T here s hould be littl e difficulty in accomplishing any such relocations, not only
because they would probably be few in number but also because of the availability of
alternative housing units in the City.
5. Since the plan has no distinct phases, no schedu le indicating estimated
len gth of time for completion of d ifferent phases can be provided. It is estimated that the
plan would be completed by December 3 1, 2026.
COMMIS~ON ERS ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
Larry Vincent Penny Rector Larry Kolb Dennis Mue lle r Donna White Minnie Word
Chairman Vice Chairman EQUAL
HOUSING
OPPORTUNITY
Please let us know if we can submit anything else that would be of benefit to the
Council at this time for your consideration of the proposed plan.
cc: Mayor Carrie Tergin
Janice McMillian
Enclosures
Very truly yours,
cGua~t~
Executive Director
Housing Authority of the City of Jefferson, Missouri
1040 Myrtle Avenue
P.O. Box 243
Jefferson City, MO 65102
East Capitol Avenue Urban Renewal Area
Urban Renewal Plan
--------J 2016
Housing Authority of the City of Jefferson, Missouri
East Capitol Avenue Urban Renewal Area
Urban Renewal Plan
Table of Contents
Section 1-Introduction1
A. Forward ...................................................................................................................................................... 1
B. Description and Background of Project Area .............................................................................. 1
Section 2 -Blighted Area .................................................................................................................................... 3
A. Basis for Area Designation .................................................................................................................. 3
B. Defective or Inadequate Street Layout. .......................................................................................... 6
C. Unsafe Conditions ................................................................................................................................... 7
D. Deterioration of Site Improvements ............................................................................................... 9
E. Improper Subdivision or Obsolete Platting ................................................................................ 10
F. Existence of Conditions Which Endanger Life or Property by
Fire and Other Causes ......................................................................................................................... 11
G. Summary of Blighted Area ................................................................................................................ 12
(1) Economic Liability ......................................................................................................................... 12
(2) Social Liability ................................................................................................................................. 14
(3) Menace to the Public Health, Safety, Morals or Welfare ................................................ 15
( 4) Conclusion ........................................................................................................................................ 15
Section 3-Redevelopment Plan for the East Capitol Avenue Urban Renewal Area ................ 17
A. Introduction ............................................................................................................................................ 17
B. Qualification of the Area .................................................................................................................... 17
C. Conformance with the General Plan, Proposed Land Use Plan,
and Proposed Changes ...................................................................................................................... 17
D. Conservation and/or Rehabilitation of Existing Structures ................................................ 19
E. Acquisition of Property and Preparation for Redevelopment ............................................ 19
F. Rehabilitation of the Area ................................................................................................................. 20
G. Consolidation of Property and Disposal of Property .............................................................. 20
H. Leveraging Additional Funding for Redevelopment. .............................................................. 21
I. Estimated Date of Completion ......................................................................................................... 21
J. Relocation Assistance ......................................................................................................................... 22
K. Amendment of Plan ............................................................................................................................. 22
Exhibit A-Boundary Map
Exhibit B -Parcel Locator
Exhibits
Exhibit C -Existing Land Use Map
Exhibit D -Streets and Sidewalks
Exhibit E-Existing Conditions Map
Exhibit F-Reported Crimes Since 2008
Exhibit G-Code Violation Citations
Exhibit H -Parcels Exhibiting Blight Factors
Exhibit I -Land Acquisition Map
SECTION 1
INTRODUCTION
A Forward
The purposes of this plan are to present the findings and condition of blight in
the area shown on Exhibit A, Boundary Map, and Exhibit B, Parcel Locator, for the East
Capitol Avenue Urban Renewal Area in Jefferson City, Missouri, and to present the
plan for the urban renewal project to mitigate or eliminate the conditions of blight in
the area.
Section 99.320(3), Revised Statutes of Missouri, defines a ~~blighted area" as:
It an area which, by reason of the predominance of defective or inadequate street lay-
out, insanitary or unsafe conditions, deterioration of site improvements, improper
subdivision or obsolete platting, or the existence of conditions which endanger life or
property by fire and other causes, or any combination of such factors, retards the
provision of housing accommodations or constitutes an economic or social liability or
a menace to the public health, safety, morals, or welfare in its present condition and
use."
Based upon the findings and the analysis set out in Section 2, the East Capitol
Avenue Urban Renewal Area (the ~~Area") was found to exhibit the conditions that
warrant a declaration that it is a blighted area under the Land Clearance for Redevel-
opment Law, Sections 99.300-99.660, Revised Statutes of Missouri (the ~~Law").
B. Description and Background of Project Area
The East Capitol Avenue Urban Renewal Area is located within Jefferson City,
and it is generally bordered by East State Street to the north, Adams Street to the
west, East High Street on the south (including certain parcels on the south side of East
High Street), and Lafayette Street on the east. The Area is located along the eastern
and southern portion of the Citis Downtown area. Parts of the Area are within the
Capitol Avenue Historic District which is federally designated on the National Register
of Historic Places. The Area consists of 116 parcels and approximately 38.1 acres of
land including street and alley rights-of-way and 25.6 acres exclusive of street and
alley rights-of-way. Sixty-six percent (66%) or 76 of the 116 parcels within the Area
are within the historic district. Exhibit B numbers the parcels consecutively begin-
ning at the northwest corner of Adams and State Streets.
1
Exhibit C, entitled Existing Land Use, shows the existing land uses with the Ar-
ea. The Area is a mix of land uses that includes single and multi-family residential,
public/semi-public, commercial, and even industrial land uses. Building architectural
styles run a gamut of buildings with no particular style to French Colonial, Mid-19th
Century Late Victorian, late 19th and 20th Century Classical Revival, Craftsman, and
Art Deco. Many of the single-family homes with the architectural characteristics not-
ed have been converted to commercial or multi-family uses. In most instances, the
outward appearance of the structures has not been significantly altered.
The property conditions are rapidly deteriorating in the Area. Many buildings are
vacant and a number of properties were deemed abandoned under City ordinance,
forcing the City to board up these buildings. Electricity, water, and gas services have
been terminated in some buildings. Some of these properties are occupied by indi-
viduals illegally.
2
SECTION 2
BLIGHTED AREA
A Basis for Area Designation
A land clearance authority may prepare an urban renewal plan under the Law if the
area in question meets the definition of a "Blighted Area." Field investigations and
analyses undertaken by PGAV Planners found the Area exhibited the requirements
necessary for designation under the Law as a Blighted Area. The analysis of existing
conditions and evidence of the factors present in the Area are described in detail in
this section. The Blighted Area qualification factors present in the Area include the
following:
• Defective or Inadequate Street Layout;
• Insanitary or Unsafe Conditions;
• Deterioration of Site Improvements;
• Improper Subdivision or Obsolete Platting; and the
• Existence of Conditions Which Endanger Life or Property by Fire and Other
Causes.
The Law, in Section 99.310, RSMo gives the following declaration of policy:
It is hereby found and declared that there exists in municipalities of the state in-
sanitary, blighted deteriorated and deteriorating areas which constitute a serious
and growing menace injurious to the public health, safe~ morals and welfare of
the residents of the state; that the existence of such areas contributes substantial-
ly and increasingly to the spread of disease and crime, necessitating excessive and
disproportionate expenditures of public funds for the preservation of the public
health and safe~ for crime prevention correction prosecution punishment and
the treatment ofjuvenile delinquency and for the maintenance of adequate police,
fire and accident protection and other public services and facilities, constitutes an
economic and socialliabili~ substantially impairs or arrests the sound growth of
communities and retards the provision of housing accommodations; that this
menace is bg_vond remedvand control solelvbvregulatozyvrocess in the exercise
of the volice vower and cannot be dealt with effectivelv bv the ordinarv oPera-
tions of private enterprise without the aids herein Provided: that the elimination
or prevention of the detrimental conditions in such areas, the acquisition and
preparation of land in or necessary to the development renewal or rehabilitation
3
of such areas and its sale or lease for development renewal or rehabilitation in
accordance with general plans and redevelopment or urban renewal plans of
communities and any assistance which may be given by any public body in con-
nection therewith are public uses and purposes for which public money may be
expended and private property acquired; and that the necessity in the public in-
terest for the provisions hereinafter enacted is hereby declared as a matter of leg-
islative determination; and that certain insanita~ blighted, deteriorated or dete-
riorating areas, or portions thereof, may require acquisition and clearance, as
provided in this Ia"" since the prevailing condition of decay may make impracti-
cable the reclamation of the area by conservation or rehabilitation, but other are-
as or portions thereof, through the means provided in this law may be susceptible
of conservation or rehabilitation in such a manner that the conditions and evils
hereinbefore enumerated may be eliminated, remedied or prevented, and to the
extent feasible, salvable, insanitary and blighted areas should be conserved and
rehabilitated through voluntary action and the regulatory process. A municipality,
to the greatest extent it determines to be feasible in carrying out the provisions of
this Ia"" shall afford maximum opportunity, consistent with the sound needs of
the municipality as a whole, to the rehabilitation or redevelopment or renewal of
areas by private enterprise.
The underlined portion of the declaration of policy emphasizes that the aids provided
with the Law should be used when the menace of a "Bighted Area" cannot be dealt
with by the regulatory process of the community and the ordinary operations of pri-
vate enterprise. The following factors led PGAV to conclude that the conditions men-
acing the Area are not likely to be remediated through the redevelopment of the Area
without the aids provided within the Law:
• The Area contains many buildings of historic significance many of which were
single-family residences and many of which have been converted to multi-
family use or commercial uses. The cost of restoring these buildings for their
original purpose and removing inappropriate exterior elements will be prohib-
itive without the financial assistance that can be provided through the LCRA
Law or other redevelopment statutes that can be overlaid on the Area;
• The age of the buildings in the Area is a contributing factor to the conditions
that were found. Of the 106 parcels within the Area with building improve-
ments (there are 123 buildings within the Area) 101 of the improved parcels
have structures that are 35 years old or older. The 35-year standard as a
measure of potential blighted conditions evolved from Federal urban renewal
statutes. It is a recognition that as buildings age, a pattern of deferred mainte-
4
nance will result and the need for significant repairs will be required. As a Na-
tional Register Historic District, the majority of the buildings in the Area are
much older. Forty-two ( 42) buildings are over 100 years old and 88 buildings
are 90 years old or older.
• The number of deteriorated properties that are owned by parties who are un-
willing sellers or where asking prices exceed true market value will likely re-
quire the eminent domain powers available via the LCRA Law;
• Vacant parcels, vacant buildings, deteriorated residential and commercial
buildings, and parking lots have, in many instances, been in the same condition
for extended periods of time, in some cases for years. These poor conditions
have caused the City to deem the buildings unfit for occupancy, and incur the
costs of boarding the structures shut. This clearly indicates a lack of develop-
ment or redevelopment in the Area. The lack of cooperation or compliance on
the part of the property owners is an indicator that the conditions are not like-
ly to improve and will probably get worse;
• While PGAV was unaware of any environmental investigations that may have
occurred in the Area relating to sites or buildings, it is likely that restoration of
the buildings (or demolition where necessary) will incur environmental reme-
diation costs due to the presence of lead paint on the exterior or interior of the
buildings given their age. The age factor also virtually assures that some of the
structures have lead piping and asbestos in pipe wrapping or floor coverings;
• The cost of demolition of some of the structures where rehabilitation may not
be financially feasible will create an additional impediment to redevelopment
of the Area; and
• The cost of removal of obsolete utilities or the need to construct utilities and
other public infrastructure capable of supporting redevelopment are not
known at this time, since there are no overarching single or multiple redevel-
opment project currently identified. It is possible that some level of such costs
will be incurred.
The Area is hampered by the significant additional costs associated with rehabilita-
tion or redevelopment activities. Given the factors impacting the Area, it is clear that
without the aids provided to the City and the LCRA Law, the Area is not likely to expe-
rience growth and development through investment by private enterprise.
5
This Section documents the conditions that were found to be present in the Area and
contains the analysis of how such conditions cause the Area to be a "Blighted Area"
according to Section 99.320 of the Law. Blight conditions may be physical, such as
"insanitary or unsafe conditions," "deterioration of site improvements" or "the exist-
ence of conditions which endanger life or property by fire and other causes," or func-
tional, such as "defective or inadequate street layout" or "improper subdivision or ob-
solete platting."
B. Defective or Inadequate Street Layout
For a site to be served by a proper and adequate street layout, it should be easily
accessible from nearby streets and, for an area of this size, should have an adequate
internal network of streets to serve all businesses or residences within the Area. This
street network should provide for vehicular access, public transit, pedestrians,
bicyclists, service and delivery vehicles, as well as emergency vehicles and equipment.
Proper planning for an intuitive flow of automobile traffic decreases the frequency
and severity of accidents. In addition, a proper internal street layout allows for
pedestrians to move about safely. The design of effective and adequate street layouts
must account for both the automobile and the pedestrian, and decrease the conflict
points between each.
Summary of Findings:
The streets and alleys of the Area conform to a typical grid layout reflecting the
age of the Area and platting for the time over which the Area was developed.
While roadways throughout the Area are not inadequate for the land uses that
they support, they suffer from a number of deficiencies which represented de-
fects. Exhibit D -Streets and Sidewalks depicts the general conditions of street
surfaces, sidewalks, and curbs and gutters in the Area. The following are the de-
fective and inadequate conditions observed:
• Street surfaces throughout the Area are generally in good condition; how-
ever, as shown on Exhibit D, East High Street between Lafayette and Ad-
ams Street and Marshall Street between East High and East Capitol Avenue
are showing deterioration in the form of fairly extensive surface cracking.
• Sidewalks have been replaced along many of the Area streets but as shown
on Exhibit D, there are still street segments with deteriorated sidewalks in
need of replacement and, in some instances, represent a pedestrian safety
6
hazard. This is primarily confined to Capitol Avenue between Jackson and
Adams Streets and Jackson Street between High Street and Capitol Avenue.
• East Capitol Avenue between Lafayette to Adams and East State Street be-
tween Marshall and Jackson have deteriorated curbs and gutters.
C. Unsafe Conditions
Unsafe conditions are evidenced by a lack of proper public infrastructure that would
be adequate for ensuring the public's health and safety and the presence of harmful
substances and conditions which threaten the health and safety of the public. Exhibit
E -Existing Conditions Map displays various factors present within the Area. The
number of factors in the map legend shows the extent to which those conditions exist
based on the number of improved parcels. There are 106 improved parcels with the
Area, some with more than one building.
Summary of Findings:
The Area has certain insanitary or unsafe conditions as generally described be-
low. As Exhibit E shows, 19 of the 106 parcels demonstrate exterior evidence of
unsafe conditions. It is certain that interior inspection of the buildings would re-
veal further evidence of such conditions, particularly given the number of vacant
buildings in the Area (28).
• While some buildings that are unsafe for occupancy are boarded up, there
is evidence that some of the buildings have been accessed and the City has
noted instances where these properties have been occupied. These build-
ings have no working utilities and thus present both health and safety haz-
ards for occupancy.
• There are many instances of large older homes that have been converted
for multi-family occupancy. PGAV observed multiple instances where sec-
ondary access, unit access, or fire escape stairs were built to second floor
(and in some cases third floor) levels. Most of these stair structures are
constructed of wood. In several instances these stairs were constructed to
these upper stories using 4" by 4" vertical wooden posts. Not only does
this fail to meet current (or past) building code requirements, its creates
stair structures that have considerable "shake" when used. These struc-
tures have a serious potential for failure, and carry a risk for collapse when
7
used by heavier individuals or more than one person. This represents a
very serious unsafe condition.
• The number of unoccupied structures with deteriorating siding, soffits,
and eaves present a multitude of opportunities for invasion by various
types of vermin and birds. During field inspection of the properties many
instances were observed of squirrels and birds entering and exiting vari-
ous openings; in two instances mice were observed entering or exiting.
Other evidence of mice (or maybe rats) habitation was observed in the
form of droppings in the proximity of probable entry /exit points to build-
ings or accessory structure. In one building we noted bats hanging under
the eaves. City building inspectors have observed feral cats entering and
exiting buildings and have observed people feeding cats in and around
some buildings in the Area.
• The field inspection of the properties was conducted on an exterior-only
basis and thus interior conditions could not be observed first hand. The
number of boarded up structures is an indication of interior conditions
that prevent occupancy. Given the condition of roofing, siding, soffits, and
window frames on many of these properties it is virtually certain that
rainwater is entering some of the buildings; thus it is likely that many of
these properties are experiencing interior water damage and subsequent
mold formation.
• In general, as a neighborhood deteriorates, the incidence of crimes in-
creases. Vacant buildings promote crime because there are fewer resi-
dents, businesses owners, and employees to observe unusual or illicit ac-
tivities. At the time of the PGAV field visits, 34 buildings (nearly 28%)
were vacant and many were boarded up. Exhibit F provides a map of the
reported crimes since 2008 based on the City's police department records.
For what is predominantly a residential neighborhood 142 crimes is a sig-
nificant number that represents an unsafe neighborhood (or is at least
perceived to be). In addition, this list filters out all but the most significant
ones. What Exhibit F shows are crimes that include arson, assault, burgla-
ry, robbery, rape, vehicle theft, and theft from persons or property. This
data represents an average of 8 crimes per year over the 8-year period
that the data covers.
• It was previously noted that many structures have various deteriorated
soffits, entryways, and other conditions that provide access to birds and
8
vermin. Invasion by these animals can quickly create situations wherein
significant interior damage with negative environmental implications,
combined with significant building deterioration can negate the ability to
rehab a property.
• Observation of the properties indicates clear evidence of code violations.
The City has cited many properties and the number of boarded up struc-
tures indicates that this has been an ongoing problem. City code violation
records have been entered into the Springbrook Code and Contact module.
Records are also entered in the City's GIS system, but data input is not yet
complete. However, with much of the information currently available and
based on the latest update of this data, since january of 2011 there have
been 175 code violation citations within the Area. Exhibit G -Code Viola-
tion Citations shows the properties which were cited. Various code viola-
tions observed during the field work included fire stair structures improp-
erly constructed, porches and steps in severely deteriorated condition, di-
lapidated buildings that require demolition, and other unsafe conditions.
Some of these are not yet represented in the data base information shown
on Exhibit G, therefore, the number of violations is likely to be higher.
D. Deterioration of Site Improvements
Deterioration may be evident in buildings with defects in the primary and secondary
building components, where the defects cannot be cured in the course of normal
maintenance. Primary building components include the foundation, exterior walls,
floors, roofs, wiring, plumbing, etc. Secondary building components include the doors,
windows, frames, fire escapes, gutters, downspouts, siding, fascia materials, etc. Dete-
rioration may also be evident in buildings with sound primary and secondary compo-
nents, due to a lack of painting, loose or missing roof tiles, floor or ceiling plates, or
holes and cracks over limited areas.
Summary of Findings:
During field investigation, many instances of deterioration to primary and sec-
ondary building components, as well as to utilities and paved surfaces (e.g.,
roadways and parking areas) were observed to be affecting the vast majority of
the structures in the Area. The extent of this deterioration is displayed on Exhibit
E. This map depicts the various factors that were found based on the number of
parcels. As indicated on the exhibit, 79 improved parcels have deteriorated site
improvements. This represents 75% of the improved parcels. The fact that a very
9
high proportion of the buildings (72%) are more than 80 years old has accelerat-
ed the level of deterioration in Area buildings. Since there were significant occur-
rences of deteriorated site improvements, only some of those observed are listed
below as examples.
Three-quarters of the property demonstrates varying levels of deterioration
many of which have been previously described. These include:
Rotting window and door frames;
Roofing that is worn or missing shingles;
Eaves, soffits, and facias that are rotting, missing, or falling;
Porches, steps, and exterior stairways that are rotting, severely
cracked or spalling (in the case of concrete structure); handrailing that
is leaning, rotting, or generally unstable;
Falling or missing gutters and downspouts;
Exterior walls exhibiting various signs of deterioration including dete-
riorating siding; bricks and mortar showing signs of step-cracking
(sometimes an indicator of foundation issues); and a need for tuck-
pointing;
Sidewalks, driveways, and other paved areas of the parcels that are
cracking, spalling, heaving, or sinking; and
Shrubbery that is overgrown, dead or dying.
Exhibit G depicting code violations is further evidence of the extent to which dete-
rioration of site improvements exists within the Area.
E. Improper Subdivision or Obsolete Platting
Improper subdivision can consist of the platting of a lot or lots with irregular shapes
which renders construction of appropriate land uses difficult or impossible or ren-
ders the lot or lots in violation of the City's code. Obsolete platting is where the shapes
of lots or the arrangement or organization of lots is no longer suited for current, mod-
ern, land use and development.
Summary of Findings:
The platting of the Area reflects its age and time at which it was developed. Many
of the lots are very narrow and have width to depth ratios of five or six to one.
Other lots suggest that they were platted in similar configurations, but the back
portions were sold off and consolidated for use by larger buildings in the same
block. This has resulted in situations where housing units are on parcels that are
10
so small as to be undesirable in today's real estate markets, even in older neigh-
borhoods which are being revived in many cities. Although Exhibit E notes 5 in-
stances of obsolete platting where narrow easements, unusable lots, and/ or flag
lots have been created, in fact much of the Area suffers from platting that is not
likely to be desirable in the market. In terms of bringing the Area "back to life,"
the platting scenarios that existed in the Area as it was originally developed pre-
sent a significant impediment to rehabilitation of some of the most historic hous-
ing units. For example, the ability to create off-street parking for these housing
units would be impossible without acquisition of adjacent property. Existing yard
areas are, in many instances, already too small.
F. Existence of Conditions Which Endanger Life or Property by Fire and Other Causes
The existence of conditions which endanger life or property by fire and other causes
includes such circumstances as structures in danger of collapse, the lack of modern
life safety measures, physical deficiencies which could cause harm, the existence of
hazardous conditions that could cause a fire or hinder the suppression of a fire, or po-
tential flooding conditions which could threaten life or property.
Summary of Findings:
• The physical deterioration of Area buildings and many of the factors dis-
cussed previously represent situations that are an endangerment to life
and/ or property. Factors such as deteriorated steps, porches, and exterior
stairways that can cause personal injury are numerous. Vacant buildings
present situations of illegal habitation or break-ins which are hazardous
and represent potential fire hazards. The predominance of building deteri-
oration, pavement deterioration, and other site improvements within the
Area represent conditions which endanger life or property by fire and oth-
er causes.
• One building is in a state of complete collapse. Although the site is fenced, it
represents a danger as an unattractive nuisance, potential fire hazard, and
potentially a haven for disease-carrying vermin and could impact the sur-
rounding properties.
• Buildings with falling soffits, facias, and eaves represents hazards to any-
one walking the building perimeter.
11
• Due to their age and design, most of the buildings potentially contain envi-
ronmentally hazardous asbestos materials, and lead paint. Both lead paint
and asbestos, if not properly identified and disposed of, can be harmful or
even fatal to persons exposed to them.
• The age of Area buildings also means that building systems, in most in-
stances, do not comply with current City codes or any that may have in ef-
fect over the past 20 years. This means that electrical, plumbing (including
water heating), and heating systems are most likely deficient, inoperable,
and/ or hazardous. It was the experience of PGAV that many of these prop-
erties may still have knob and tube wiring in at least part of the building
and their heating systems may present carbon monoxide risks.
G. Summary Of Blighted Area
(1) Economic Liability
The Area, by reason of both a predominance of each, as well as a combination of, de-
fective and inadequate street layout, unsafe conditions, deterioration of site im-
provements, improper subdivision, and obsolete platting constitutes an economic lia-
bility. The Area, in its present condition and use, is severely underutilized. The condi-
tions described herein are a deterrent to future investment and development in the
area. As a result of the building and property deterioration, vacancy, and little in-
vestment in rehabilitation and/ or redevelopment, the Area is becoming a declining
source of revenue for the City and the other taxing districts.
The history of assessed values for Area properties shows that all but 14 of the 116
properties in the area have either declined or have had no increase in value over the
7-year period from 2007 to 2015. In the 14 instances where property increases have
occurred, the increases in assessed value are small and started from a small base. Of
the properties that increased in value, the percentage of increase only amounted to
8.8% over the seven-year period and only amounted to a total of $262,210. This is an
increase of 1.3% per year. In certain instances there are property values that have no
value in preceding assessment years. This was the result of certain parcels being sub-
divided into multiple smaller parcels. This contributes to skewing the data as well.
Overall, even considering the increases attributable to only 14 parcels, the assessed
value of the Area has declined 11 Ofo. If the 14 properties which increased in assessed
value are removed from the list and the 35 properties that have declined in value are
considered, the overall decline in assessed value of these parcels is 18.4% or 2.6%
12
annually; therefore, the properties declining in value are doing so at more than twice
the rate of increase of the 14 properties that showed increases. This represents a loss
of nearly $778,000 in assessed value for the 35 declining properties over the seven-
year period. In terms of dollar value, the amount of decrease of the decreasing par-
cels is three times the amount of the increasing parcels. Also, it is important to note
that the remaining 67 parcels have values that were flat (zero) or had no prior value
because they were a subdivision of a larger parcel, that in some instances, was declin-
ing in value.
The City as a whole experienced an increase in assessed values over the time frame of
nearly 8% and an average annual increase of 1.5% over the same period.
PGAV was of the opinion that in consideration of the condition of some of these prop-
erties, the Cole County Assessor will be forced to decrease values of many of the
properties further in the 2017 assessment period. Many of the parcels are not worth
more than the value of the land and in instances where the condition of the building
would require demolition, the cost of demolition is really an offset to the value of the
land.
The Area is an economic liability to the City and the affected taxing districts that rely
on real estate taxes to provide services to the Area and the City in general. In the in-
stances where the City has been forced to board up the buildings because they are un-
fit for occupancy, the City has had to incur those costs in the hope that it can collect
the costs from the property owners through filing liens or other legal action for collec-
tion. These properties are clearly also economic liabilities to their respective owners
who must pay the taxes that are levied. The many vacant properties are producing no
income or use for their owners. In addition, the vacant buildings are providing no
revenue to the utility entities serving the Area.
It should also be noted that economic underutilization is a function of economic liabil-
ity. Economic underutilization has been recognized by Missouri courts as a blighting
factor. The factors outlined in this section contribute to the existing economic un-
derutilization found in the Area. The courts of Missouri have recognized economic
underutilization as a blighting condition or one that contributes to blight. This prem-
ise was explicitly stated by the Missouri Supreme Court case Tierney v. Planned In-
dustrial Expansion Authority of Kansas City. Missouri. 742 S.W. 2d 146, 151
(Mo.1987). While that case related to Chapter 100 (the Planned Industrial Expansion
Authority statute), the definition of "blighted area is not dissimilar to that of the Chap-
ter 99 LCRA Law.
13
In Tierney at 151, the Missouri Supreme Court stated:
... (10) The owners, finally, attack the concept of"economic underutilization" as a
basis... They suggest that almost all/and could be put to a higher and better use,
and argue that the concept of economic under-utilization is so broad as to confer
upon the legislative authority and PlEA the unlimited discretion to take one per-
son's property for the benefit of another, contrary to Mo. Const Art l Sec. 28.
We do not find the fault or the danger perceived The concept of urban rede-
velopment has gone far beyond ''slum clearance" and the concept of economic
underutilization is a valid one. This is explicit in State ex re1 Atkinson v. Planned
Industrial Exoansion Authority of St Louis. 517 S. W.2d 36 (Mo. Bane 1975), sus-
taining the statutes governing this case. Centrally located urban land is scarce.
The problems of assembling tracts of sufficient size to attract developers, and of
clearing uneconomic structures, are substantial and serious ... We need not repeat
all of the evidence which was before the city council tending to show that rede-
velopment of this area would promote a higher level of economic activity, in-
creased employment, and greater services to the public. ..
In other words, the performance of a use below its economic potential is a symptom
of a Blighted Area when examining uses that generate economic activity, (i.e., com-
mercial uses). As the court stated in Tierney. urban redevelopment is far more than
mere slum clearance, and includes the concept that economic under-utilization may
be used as evidence of blight. The economic underutilization of the Area is further ev-
idence that the Area exhibits those factors that qualify it as a Blighted Area and repre-
sent an economic liability.
(2) Social Liability
By reason of the predominance of the above mentioned blighting factors, the Area
constitutes a social liability to the City and the taxing districts that collect certain tax-
es in the Area. The Area contains unsafe conditions, potentially hazardous substanc-
es, and various fire and building code violations, all of which constitute a social liabil-
ity.
In addition, the negative trend in property tax collection has an adverse effect on the
governmental entities that provide services to the community. The City, which is en-
trusted with providing police protection, snow removal, and other public services,
faces a challenge due to the decline of the Area and, correspondingly, the quantity of
taxes that are being generated. The level of crime that has been occurring in the Area
14
(noted in a previous discussion) also presents a social liability that stigmatizes the
neighborhood and represents an outsized cost for police protection for what is a
comparatively small area of the City.
Also, most of the districts which levy property taxes in the Area provide social ser-
vices such as education, recreation, library services, and disease prevention that are
integral to a functional society. These districts, which constitute approximately 90°/o
of the total property tax levy in the Area, are adversely affected by the decline in
property taxes within the Area. The Area constitutes a social liability due to the de-
creasing amounts of tax revenue that are being produced by the Area, and the corre-
sponding negative effect that this decrease in taxes has on taxing jurisdictions which
provide essential social services.
(3) Menace to the Public Health, Safety, Morals or Welfare
The Area, by reason of both a predominance of, as well as a combination of, defective
and inadequate street layout, unsafe conditions, deterioration of site improvements,
improper subdivision and obsolete platting constitutes a menace to the public health,
safety, morals or welfare. The lack of compliance with existing codes, the other un-
safe conditions observed throughout the Area, and the level of crime reinforce the
conclusion that the Area is a menace to public health, safety, morals and welfare in its
current condition and use.
( 4) Conclusion
After consideration and examination of each individual parcel in the Area, the Area,
on the whole, is a ~~Blighted Area," as such term is defined in the Law. The Area meets
the requirements for a Blighted Area, exhibiting factors including, but not limited to:
• Defective or Inadequate Street Layout;
• Insanitary or Unsafe Conditions;
• Deterioration of Site Improvements;
• Improper Subdivision or Obsolete Platting; and
• Existence of Conditions Which Endanger Life or Property by Fire and Other
Causes.
The preponderance of the Area is therefore found to meet the statutory definition of
ftblight." (Exhibit H -Parcels Exhibiting Blight Factors)
15
The Area is a portion of the City which by reason of the predominance of: defective or
inadequate street layout, insanitary or unsafe conditions, deterioration of site im-
provements, improper subdivision or obsolete platting, or the existence of such con-
ditions which endanger life or property by fire and other causes, or any combination
of such factors, constitutes an economic or social liability or a menace to the public
health, safety, morals, or welfare in its present condition and use.
16
SECTION 3
EAST CAPITOL A VENUE URBAN RENEWAL AREA
REDEVELOPMENT PLAN
A Introduction
This Redevelopment Plan (the "Plan") sets forth below the general description of
the plan of action and the program that the Authority proposes to undertake to
accomplish the objectives for the Area. Those objectives are to effectively deal
with the problem of insanitary, blighted, deteriorated or deteriorating areas with-
in the Area for the establishment and preservation of well-planned neighbor-
hoods of decent homes and businesses and suitable environment for both, for uti-
lizing appropriate private and public resources to eliminate and prevent the de-
velopment or spread of insanitary, blighted, deteriorated, or deteriorating areas,
to encourage needed urban rehabilitation, to provide for the redevelopment of
blighted, insanitary, deteriorated and deteriorating areas, or to undertake such of
the aforesaid activities or other feasible community activities as may be suitably
employed to achieve the objectives of such a program.
B. Qualification of the Area
As is detailed in Section 2 of this document, the Area meets the requirement of
the Law that the Area qualifies as a Blighted Area as defined in the Law.
C. Conformance with the General Plan, Proposed Land Use Plan, and Proposed Chang-
es
This Redevelopment Plan encourages growth and the strengthening of the eco-
nomic health and quality of life in the Area and in proximity to the Area. The
Project described in this Plan is designed to assist the Authority through redevel-
opment to alleviate the blighted or insanitary conditions which currently exist in
the Area. This Plan conforms to the general plan of the City of Jefferson ap-
proved by the City Council through its zoning ordinances and the Central Eastside
Plan adopted on February 20, 2006 by Resolution RS2005-13. One specific ob-
jective of the Central Eastside Plan was the reestablishment and revitalization of
residential areas, restoring and enhancing the neighborhood fabric where needed.
The mission of the Central East Side Neighborhood Master Plan is to foster eco-
nomic development, promote historic preservation, and enhance the quality of life
17
consistent with the comprehensive plan of the City of Jefferson through guide-
1 ines that will:
• Conserve the character and scale of the traditional neighborhood in-
cluding its mixture of commercial, residential, and institutional proper-
ties
• Respect historically and architectuarally significant resources
• Encourage revitalization
• Promote cultural diversity
• Support a safe, stable, and aesthetic environment.
During the proposed land clearance activities, the initial land use plan for the Ar-
ea will remain as it is today as shown on Exhibit C-Existing Land Use unless oth-
erwise permitted by zoning.
The goal of the Plan is to eliminate the conditions that qualify the Area as blighted
under the Law and prepare the site for future development. First, the land clear-
ance for redevelopment activities described below will be undertaken, and once a
redeveloper or redevelopers are selected for all or a portion of the Area, addi-
tional redevelopment plans or proposals may be submitted by or to the Authority
or others to supplement this Plan and to further the redevelopment of the Area.
The land uses for the Area ultimately may consist of only one type of land use but
will likely result in a combination of several uses or mixed uses, which uses may
include residential, commercial, recreational or public use, or the Authority may
retain such land for its own use, or any combination of the foregoing, consistent
with the objectives of the Plan and the General Plan of the City of Jefferson.
Any use or development of any parcels in the Area that is inconsistent with cur-
rent zoning will require the rezoning of all or a portion of the Area to the applica-
ble zoning district classification for the City consistent with such use, including
but not limited to a planned development district or mixed use district.
All proposed land uses and building requirements in the Area are designed with
the general purpose of accomplishing, in conformance with the general plan, a
coordinated, adjusted and harmonious development of the Area and its environs
which, in accordance with present and future needs, will promote health, safety,
morals, order, convenience, prosperity and the general welfare, as well as effi-
ciency and economy in the process of development. The Authority will consider,
as applicable in connection with the Plan or additional redevelopment, adequate
provision for traffic, vehicular parking, the promotion of safety from fire, panic
18
and other dangers, adequate provision for light and air, the promotion of the
healthful and convenient distribution of population, the provision of adequate
transportation, water, sewerage, and other public and community facilities and
other public requirements, the promotion of sound design and arrangement, the
wise and efficient expenditure of public funds, the prevention of the recurrence of
insanitary or unsafe dwelling accommodations, or insanitary areas, or conditions
of blight or deterioration including the control or elimination of animals that
threaten buildings or property, and the provision of adequate, safe and sanitary
dwelling accommodations. The initial land clearance projects undertaken in ac-
cordance with this Plan will have the effect of eliminating the conditions that
qualify the Area under the Law and will pave the way for the Area to be part of a
coordinated, adjusted and harmonious development of the community.
D. Conservation andfor Rehabilitation of Existing Structures.
All structures which are in conformance with the land use provisions of this plan
and which are economically feasible for rehabilitation should be conserved or re-
habilitated. An owner of a property identified to be acquired may retain the owner-
ship, occupancy and use of such property if it is not required for public use and if it
is not required for the redevelopment of adjacent properties, provided that the
owner enters into a written agreement with the Authority committing and obligat-
ing the owner to construct, restore, repair, rehabilitate, occupy and use such prop-
erty in compliance with the Plan and with City building and occupancy standards
and eliminating any and all conditions relative to that property which helped lead
to the designation of the Area as blighted. In order to preserve such right, an owner
would have to enter into a written contract with the Authority relating to the re-
quired rehabilitation, construction or reconstruction of the structure prior to the in-
itiation of action by the Authority to acquire such property, and such rehabilitation,
construction or reconstruction would have to be completed in a timely manner as
set out in the terms of that agreement. If an owner provides notice of intent to en-
ter into such an agreement but the parties are not able to reach mutually acceptable
terms within thirty (30) days after the receipt by the Authority of written notice of
the owner's interest in doing so, the Authority may initiate and proceed with any
acquisition action with regard to that property.
E. Acquisition of Property and Preparation for Redevelopment.
Redevelopment of the Area which may include land clearance is at the core of the
Plan. As necessary or incidental to the proper clearance, development or redevel-
opment of the blighted areas or to the prevention of the spread or recurrence of
19
substandard or insanitary conditions or conditions of blight, the Authority will at-
tempt to acquire property within the Area as it becomes available from time to time
due to tax sales and other opportunities for acquisition whether by purchase, lease,
options, gift, grant, bequest, devise, or otherwise. Acquisition may also be under-
taken through the exercise of the power of eminent domain to acquire any real
property which the Authority may deem necessary for a land clearance project or
for its purposes under the Law. The acquisitions may include some or all of the
property in the Area and may include any real or personal property or any interest
therein, including fee simple absolute title, together with any improvements there-
on.
The Authority will consider the acquisition of any or all of the properties identified
in Exhibit I -Land Acquisition Map.
The Authority may also acquire and clear any property that is dilapidated and dete-
riorated to such a point that it is not feasible to be conserved and rehabilitated by
demolishing structures within the Area as necessary or remove existing buildings,
structures, streets, utilities or other improvements within the Area essential to the
preparation of Area for development consistent with this Plan. The clearance of the
Area will be undertaken in accordance with the provisions of the Law. The Author-
ity may also hold, improve, clear or otherwise prepare the acquired property for
redevelopment or urban renewal. In addition, where necessary, the Authority will
acquire property within the Area for the purposes of land consolidation and public
improvements.
In addition, the Authority may also make or have made all surveys, studies and
plans necessary to the carrying out of the Plan, and in connection therewith may
enter into or upon any land, building, or improvement thereon for such purposes
and to make soundings, test borings, surveys, appraisals and other preliminary
studies and investigations necessary to carry out its powers. The Authority may
contract or cooperate with any and all persons or agencies, public or private, in the
making and carrying out of the surveys, appraisals, studies and plans.
F. Rehabilitation of the Area
The Authority may, from time to time, rehabilitate or repair existing buildings,
structures or other facilities in the Area or undertake any rehabilitation or conser-
vation work to eliminate conditions that qualify the Area under the Law. The Au-
thority may also, from time to time, reconstruct and construct new public im-
provements throughout the Area.
20
In connection with the undertaking of the land clearance projects set out herein, the
Authority may arrange or contract for the furnishing or repair, by any person or
agency, public or private, of services, privileges, works, streets, roads, public utili-
ties or other facilities for or in connection with the land clearance projects, and may
take any other actions as permitted under the Law as it deems necessary to fulfill
the purposes of this Plan and Project.
G. Consolidation of Property and Disposal of Property.
As the Authority acquires property, the Authority will consider whether to sell,
lease, transfer or otherwise make available to developers tracts of land for rede-
velopment. The Authority will facilitate the complete redevelopment of the Area
to address the blighted or insanitary conditions currently existing. The Authority
will work with the City and use the means at its disposal to consolidate property
in order to provide a catalyst for complete redevelopment and urban renewal of
the Area.
Upon property assembly, the Authority may, from time to time, advertise for ad-
ditional redevelopment proposals for specific redevelopment sites with the Area.
Disposition of the property by the Authority will be in accordance with the provi-
sions of the Law.
H. Leveraging Additional Funding for Redevelopment
The Authority will consider using any funding sources in order to eliminate the
conditions that qualify the Area under the Law. To initiate the complete redevel-
opment of the Area, the Authority will consider development within the Area us-
ing any funding sources available. The Authority will work with the City to utilize
provisions under the Law or other development or incentive programs to lever-
age additional funding for the redevelopment of the Area. Such sources may be
public or private and may include additional economic development mechanisms
and tools as allowed under local, State and Federal laws.
As regards the method of financing, the Plan will be financed through a combina-
tion of public and private financing methods, to be determined in greater detail as
it is implemented. The Authority may make such expenditures as may be neces-
sary to carry out the purposes of this Plan and Project or otherwise carry out the
purposes of the Law, including but not limited to loaning the proceeds of bonds
or temporary notes that may be hereinafter authorized to provide for the pur-
21
chase, construction, extension and improvement of a project by a private or pub-
lic developer pursuant to a development contract approved by the Authority.
I. Estimated Dates of Completion
The estimated time for completion of the foregoing Plan and Project is 10 years
from the date of adoption of the Ordinance approving this Plan. Should the Au-
thority determine that additional activities are required, this time frame may be
extended.
J. Relocation Assistance
If any relocation is necessary due to the implementation of this Plan, relocation
assistance will be provided per the Authority's relocation assistance plan as
adopted by the Authority from time to time. A feasible method will be provided
for those requiring relocation, in compliance with Sections 523.200 -523.215,
RSMo and any applicable State statute or City that may apply.
K. Amendment of Plan
All of the laws of the State of Missouri respecting changes, modifications, or
amendments of the Plan shall be complied with. The City Council may amend the
Plan upon the recommendation of the Agency. If major changes or modifications
to the Plan are necessary, the Agency shall hold a public hearing on the proposed
amendment. The Agency may not amend the Plan without approval of the City
Council.
22
APPENDIX
Exhibit A-Boundary Map
Exhibit 8 -Parcel Locator
Exhibit C -Existing Land Use Map
Exhibit D -Streets and Sidewalks
Exhibit E-Existing Conditions Map
Exhibit F-Reported Crimes Since 2008
Exhibit G-Code Violation Citations
Exhibit H -Parcels Exhibiting Blight Factors
Exhibit I -Land Acquisition Map
23
Legend
ff I] Redevelopment Area Boundary
1-i Capitol Ave nue Historic Distn ct --
Exh ibit A
Boundary Map
Ea st Capitol Ave nu e Redevelopment Area
Jeffe rso n C ity, Misso uri PC~V ~·
June 2016
0 76 160
I'!?
Fnel
300
I
I
_j
=1 r-
Ill
~
.....j ~
ct -u ..... u
' -1
j
2 =:
ADAMS ST
>-I=J G=~~--1----l _l]~,
~·=-.
JACI<SON ST
MARSHALL ST
•
•
•
LAFAVETIE ST
Exhibit B
Parcel Locator Numbet'li
Em t C apitol Avenu e Rede velop ment A rea
Jeff e rson Cit y, Misso uri
1--
Ill
:z:
(!)
5:
w
1--1 ·-l--·-1 ~
• • !C.·-· •
• • .,.,.
• • •
• • • •
• • • • • • • •
•
.,.~.~. -. ~ • • • • •
• •
~ .
• ;;"( s:
th z
PC'\V
l . ~.
• •
~ • •
. , .
• • • •
• •
Jun e 2016
?';;;\"" 0~~ ~ ~2.5 12 5 25 0
Fee l
A DAMS Sl
JA C K SON ST
·~
t-~ w Vl .-l ~ 1: <(
1-u .-l ~ I Vl ~ ~ <( lU j u J: 2 0:: u t!l 2 <( 2 i: 0 I u
~ lU _(.),-..J lU
L A FAYETTE ST
Legend
D Prop osed Red e velopm ent Areu Bounda ry Mixed Us e • Industria l
D Sing le-Fa mtly Restd enti al ~~ O ffic e • Public/Sem i-Public
D Two-F <J mily Res i de nti al 1m Public Pa rl<ln g
M ulti-Fa mily Restden tt at D Va can t I Undeveloped Land
C HERRY ST
Ex hi bit c Jun e 20'1 6
Existing LCR n d Use
East Capitol A ve nu e Re d ev nla pmen l A re a
leffe rso •' Cit y, Ml~s o un PC\V ~~ ~~~~!!!~50 ~ 1: 62.5 125
Feel
ADAMS ST
JACI<SON ST
MARS HALL ST
LAFAYETTE ST
"j
r! r
CHERRY ST
E "h i bit ~ I
ElCis ti ng Conditio ns ~Streets and S idewalks
East Capitol Avenue Redevelopment A rea
le ffe rson City. Missouri
In
UJ III II 'I ~
Legend
0 Proposed Redevel opme nt A rea Boundary
Deteriorated S treet Pavement
~ Deteriorated Curbs & G utt ers
~ Dete riorated Sldewall<s
June 2016
62.6 125 250
PC'\V • Foot
ADAMS ST
JACI<SON ST
MARSHALLST
LAFAYETTE ST
CHERRY ST
Exhibit E
Existing Conditions
• .,
• t-
Ul
r
~ r
w
Legend
II
UJ
~
..J
0
t: a.
5 It . ____ ._.l lll
IC:J Proposed Red evelopment Area Boundary
Factor (Pa r ce l atrectecl out of ·t Oli
tmprovecl parcel s)
Age(101 )
Deterlomtton of S ilo Improvements (70)
£ lttsllnilary or Unsa fe Conditions (19)
East C apitol Avenue Redevolopm enl Areo
Je ff e rlon C ily, Mis ~oun PC'\V
•
(··~· fi _ .
I :11 ~~~~~ ~ . =~
---· J
!C
II
!J
Imp roper Subdivision or Obsolete Plotling
(3)
Condilfons Which Endanger Life or
Property by Fire a n d O ther Causes (19)
Dilapidation (3)
Obso lete (32)
High Denslly of Population and
Overcrowding of B uildings (13)
I Vacant Buildings (28)
250
Jun e 2016
0 0 62.5 125
,. ---Foot
ADAMS ST
JACI<SON ST
MARSH ALl.. ST
r-Ill
~ 1-ct Ill <(.
J: u
(!) u
::E r
~ iW
L AFAYETIE ST
CH ER RY S"l
Exh ibit F
Repo rted Cr imes Since 2 008
Eosl Co pilei Ave nu e Rodevelopmont A rea
l effm so n Cit y, Mi~sotHi
w
~
..J
0 ,_
u:
<(. u
w
Legend
D Proposed Red evelopment Are a
Boundar)'
Reported c n mes s tn ce 2008
Arson (4 )
• Assa ult (4 )
PC\V
~ s
til
~u w
!;;:
0:: ' • 1-
Ill it w
4 Burglary (53)
~ Robery (7 )
* Rape (2)
Stolen Vehicle (1)
e Theft (7 1)
Ju ne 2016 ®~ll e !!6!!!2 •. 5iii!,iil!2!!!5 !!!!!!1250
Feet
~\DAMS Sl
JACI(SON ST
MARS HA L L ST
!ii
~
ct u u
2
~
LAFAYETTE ST
CHERRY S T
Exhibit G
Code Violation Citations
Ea st Capit ol Ave nu e Redeve lopmen t Areo
J eff erso n Ci ty, Missouri
1-
(/)
J:
l!>
:X:
UJ
lU
~
....J
~
0::
<( u
IU UJ
Legend
D Proposed Redeve l opment Area
Bo un dary
PC~V
Properties That Have Been Cilled for
Code Violations Sin ce 2010
,Jun e 2 0'1 6
~J 0 62.5 125
Fo ot
250
A DAMS ST
JACKSON ST
L A FAYETT E ST
CHERRY ST
Exhibit H
Parcels Exhibiting Blight Factors
East Capitol Avenue Redevelopment Area
Jefferson City, Missouri
0
~
Ill
w
~
Ill
~----~=L~~~ w
]
~1-0~~ 1tC:>/ ~.5 125 250
Feet
l
I
J
A DAMS ST
l i ~ ' --~ .
•
Jif r •.
MARSH A L L ST
• • •
•
,_______, () fl ()
0 L.. -1------=·=----• • • •
•
• • • '-r----l • 0
-Le gend
• 'elee -----~ • • ~ . •
• -----)--..d==-"""""""1
--·---j ~l • • F--~.
e 'O •
J
1-------D Properties that may be acquired
CHERRY ST
Exhibit I
Land Acquisition Map
East Capito l Avenue R edeve lopm e nt A rea
Jefferso n C ity, Misso uri
I
~J 01!!!!621iiiii.5 ii12!!!5 ~~250
Feet
City of Jefferson
Department of Planning & Protective Services
320 E. McCarty St.
Jefferson City, MD 65101
Cynthia Quetsch, Execut ive Director
Jefferson City Housing Authority
1 040 Myrtle Avenue
Jefferson C ity , MO 65109
RE: Planning and Zoning Commission Case No. P16021
East Capitol Avenue Urban Renewal Plan
Carrie Tergin, Mayor
Janice McMillan, AICP, Director
Phone: 573-634-6410
Fax: 573-634-6457
November 21, 2016
At its Special Meeting of Thursday, November 17 , 2016 the Planning and Zoning Commission reviewed
the East Capito l Avenue Urban Renewal Plan subm itted by the Housing Autho rity on be half of th e Land
Clearance for Redevelopment Authority . The case was presented to the Planning and Zo nin g
Commission in a public hearing format. Comments were received from members of t he pub lic, verbally,
and in writing at the meetin g. Attached to th is letter is the excerpt of the unapproved meeting min utes,
along with copies of written comments rece iv ed, and pertinent sections of plan documents.
The Planning and Zoning Commission found the Capito l Avenue Urban Renewal Plan conformed with the
City of Jefferson general plans with the following recommended modifications:
1. That parcels 31 and 33 on Exhibit I, Land Acquis ition Map, be included as properties that may be
acquired .
2. That the mission statement of the Central Easts ide Neighborhood Plan be included within the text
of the Urban Renewa l Plan . An excerpt of the Central Eastside Neighborhood Plan is attached,
with the miss ion statement highlighted.
3. That a statement be inserted into the Urban Renewal Plan stat in g that new multifami ly res idential
uses comply with the recommendations from the Central Easts ide Neighborhood Plan
(specifically , that new multi-family residential be compatible with the surrounding uses from a
building size, mass, and scale perspective). Attached are excerpts of the Centra l Easts ide
Neighborhood Plan regarding specific recommendations for Capitol Avenue and East High Street
areas as identified in that plan. Both area recommendations reference that new construct ion be
compatible with the size and density of the surrounding area (shown highlighted on the
attachments from the Central East Side Plan).
4. Tha t language be inserted into the Urban Renewal Plan recogn izing that stray animals
(specifically feral cats) are a problem to be addressed .
My department looks forward to working with you and your organiza tion as this plan progresses. If you
have any questions or need any additiona l information please do not hesitate to contact me.
Sincerely ,
(f,:±Y.;~
Attachments : Unapproved meeting minutes , November 17 , 2016 Planning and Zon in g Commission
Excerpt of Central Eastside Neighborhood Plan
Correspondence from: Mayor Carrie Tergin, Cathy Bordner and Jane Beetem
-UNAPPROVED MINUTES -
SPECIAL MEETING OF THE
JEFFERSON CITY PLANNING AND ZONING COMMISSION
November 17,2016
COMMISSION MEMBERS PRESENT
Bunnie Trickey Cotten
Jack Deeken
Dean Dutoi
Bob George
Chris Jordan, Chairman
Michael Lester
David Nunn
Dale Vaughan
Chris Yarnell, Vice Chairman
Ron Fitzwater, Alternate
Matthew Hall, Alternate
COMMISSION MEMBERS ABSENT
Blake Markus, Alternate
COUNCIL LIAISON PRESENT
Ken Hussey (Alternate Council Liaison)
GUESTS
12:15 p.m.
ATTENDANCE RECORD
3 of4
3of4
4of4
2 of4
4 of4
4 of4
4 of4
2 of4
4of4
3of4
4 of4
ATTENDANCE RECORD
2of4
Cynthia Quetsch, Executive Director, Housing Authority of the City of Jefferson
Jack Pletz, General Counsel, Housing Authority of the City of Jefferson
STAFF PRESENT
Janice McMillan, Director, Department of Planning and Protective Services
Eric Barron, Senior Planner
Ryan Moehlman, City Counselor
Jayme Abbott, Neighborhood Services Coordinator
Diane Cary, Administrative Technician
1. Call to Order and Introduction of Members, Ex-officio Members and Staff
The Chairman and 8 regular members and two alternates were present. A quorum was present.
Designation of Voting
The Chairman announced that all regular members are eligible to vote.
2. Procedural Matters and Procedures Explained
Mr. Barron explained the procedures for the special meeting. The following documents were
entered as exhibits. Mr. Barron advised that copies of the exhibits are available through the City
Clerk or the Department of Planning and Protective Services:
The City Code of the City of Jefferson, as amended
Comprehensive Plan and Land Use Map
Copies of applications under consideration
Affidavit of publication of the public notice in the newspaper
Rules of Procedure, Planning & Zoning Commission
3. Adoption of Agenda
Mr. Yarnell moved and Ms. Cotten seconded to adopt the agenda as printed. The motion passed
8 -0 with the following votes:
Aye: Cotten, Deeken, Dutoi, George, Lester, Nunn, Vaughan, Yarnell
4. Communications Received
Written comments on Case P16021 were received from Mayor Tergin.
Page 1
Minutes of Special Meeting/Jefferson City Planning & Zoning Commission
November 17,2016
5. New Business/Public Hearings
Case No. P16021-East Capitol Avenue Urban Renewal Plan. Request filed by the Housing
Authority of the City of Jefferson, Missouri. to review conformity of the proposed East Capitol
Avenue Urban Renewal Plan with the City's general plan and provide recommendations to the
Land Clearance Authority and City Council. The Land Clearance for Redevelopment Authority
Board of Commissioners adopted the proposed East Capitol Avenue Urban Renewal Plan at their
meeting on October 25. 2016 (Cynthia Quetsch, Executive Director; JohnS (Jack) Pletz. General
Counsel).
Mr. Barron stated that the purpose of this meeting was two-fold: to review the conformity of the proposed
East Capitol Avenue Urban Renewal Plan with the City's general plan and to provide recommendations
on the plan to the Land Clearance for Redevelopment Authority (LCRA) and City Council.
Ms. McMillan explained that the East Capitol Avenue Urban Renewal Area is located within Jefferson
City, and is generally bordered by East State Street to the north, Adams Street to the west. properties
fronting on East High Street on the south. and Lafayette Street on the east. The Area is located along the
eastern and southern portion of the City's Downtown area. The Area consists of 116 parcels.
Ms. McMillan explained that the Jefferson City Land Clearance Redevelopment Authority (LCRA)
commissioned a blight study for the area. which found that many of the parcels within the area have one
or more blighted qualifications which Include defective street layout. unsafe conditions. deterioration of
site improvements. improper subdivision platting. and the existence of conditions which endanger life or
property by fire and other causes.
Ms. McMillan described the area as a mix of land uses that includes single and multi-family residential.
public/semi-public, commercial, and even industrial land uses. Many of the original single-family homes
within the area have been converted to commercial or multi-family uses. In most Instances, the outward
appearance of the structures have not been significantly altered, but for many properties the property
conditions are rapidly deteriorating. Many buildings are vacant and a number of properties were deemed
abandoned under City ordinance, forcing the City to board up those buildings.
Cynthia Quetsch. Executive Director of the Housing Authority spoke regarding the Blight Study that was
conducted. The study located properties that had unsanitary problems and properties that had
deterioration of site improvements. She stated that the map of parcels exhibiting blight factors were taken
into consideration, as well as including parcels that were adjoining multiple dilapidated properties. when
developing the map of parcels that may be acquired as part of the Urban Renewal Plan.
Several questions were asked by Planning and Zoning Commission members regarding the details of
when a property might be acquired, how the boundaries of the area were developed, and what the goals
of the plan are.
Jack Pletz stated that the program would first encourage rehabilitation of these homes by the current
owners. They would enter into a contract with LCRA in bringing their property up to certain standards. If
the Housing Authority came into ownership of such properties, they would be held to the same standards.
He stated that the City Council and the LCRA would work together with this project.
Testimony was opened for anyone in favor of the request.
Mayor Tergin's written statement was read.
Testimony was opened for anyone in opposition.
Gary Buettner, 606 E. State Street, was concerned that this project might become a land grab project -
where the owners might lose their homes because they may not be able to afford the changes that would
be required.
Testimony was opened for anyone else who wished to speak.
Cathy Bordner, 718 E Capitol Avenue, expressed appreciation to the Mayor, City Council and Housing
Authority for putting this plan together. First, she would like to see the Mission Statement of the Central
Eastside Neighborhood Plan inserted into the body of the East Capitol Avenue Urban Renewal Plan.
Second, because of the blight of this area, many of the buildings may be torn down and she wanted to
Page 2
Minutes of Special Meeting/Jefferson City Planning & Zoning Commission
November 17, 2016
ensure that someone cannot come in and combine lots and then build a large multi-unit buildings that do
not fit the area. New construction should conform to the Central Eastside Neighborhood Plan. Finally,
she wanted to address the problem of feral cats in the area. Many cats are living in the vacant homes
and could cause public health problems. Ms. Bordner also wanted to make sure that the public would be
kept informed with the project.
Linda Buettner, 606 E State Street, testified about the number of feral cats in the area.
Jenny Smith, 1211 Elmerine, said she was happy that this is being worked on. Ms. Smith wanted to
make sure the proposed overlay district would be in place before this project takes off, which would
provide design guidelines for the homes that will be rehabbed. Second, she stated that she knew
properties will be appraised at some point and she would like to see restrictions on demolition until all
avenues of rehabilitation have been looked into. Many properties might have investors that would love to
buy them and foe them up.
Jane Beetem, 1612 Payne Dr, wanted to make sure that the plan would meet the needs of the
community. She stated that the plan should identify how success is reached and how would the
community retain the old and match the new as close as possible. She would like to see more terms to
tweak the document in that regard. She stated that she would submit her written comments electronically
after the meeting.
With no other parties wishing to speak, public testimony was closed.
Ms. McMillan completed the staff report and recommendations. She stated that the City of Jefferson will
undertake an infrastructure improvement project on Capitol Avenue In 2017, thus addressing many of the
blighting influences due to condition of public infrastructure, such as sidewalks, curbs, gutters, and lack of
street lighting. She stated that the East Capitol Avenue Urban Renewal Plan represents the most
significant tool, to date, to promote and induce revitalization for the privately owned site and building
conditions within the area. She state that the East Capitol Avenue Urban Renewal Plan does conform
with the City's general plans. Planning Division staff suggested that Parcels #31 and #33 be added to
Exhibit 1, Land Acquisition Map, so that the entirety of the block that those properties are contained in
would be Included.
Mr. Lester moved and Mr. Yarnell seconded that parcels #31 and #33 be added to Exhibit I, Land
Acquisition Map, to promote revitalization of the entire block. The motion passed 8-0 with the following
votes:
Aye: Cotten, Deeken, Dutoi, Fitzwater, George, Lester, Nunn, Vaughan
Mr. Lester moved and Ms. Cotten seconded that the East Capitol Avenue Urban Renewal Plan does
conform with the City's general plans with the insertion of the Mission Statement from the Central
Eastside Neighborhood Plan, insertion of language that new multi-family uses established as part of the
Urban Renewal Plan would comply with recommendations from the Central Eastside Neighborhood Plan,
and that the animal problem in the area would be addressed. The motion passed 8-0 with the following
votes:
Aye: Cotton, Deeken, Dutoi, Fitzwater, George, Lester, Nunn, Vaughan
6. Other Business
There was none.
7. Adjourn
There being no further business, the meeting adjourned at 1:25 p.m.
Respectfully Submitted,
Eric Barron, Assistant Secretary
Page3
Central East Side Ne ighborhood Plan Foundations of the Plan
Jefferson City, Missouri
Ad Hoc Committee
Michael Berry
Councilman
Ken Fergu son
Councilman
Cathy Bordner
cOST Side Neighborhood
Development Association
Juanita Donehue. Co -Chair
Citizen
Charles Jac kson
Citizen
David Nunn
Planning & Zoning
Toni Prowl, Co-Chair
Citizen
Tom Rynard
Historic Preservatio n Comm iss ion
Jim Jordon
Jeffe rson City Housing Authorit y
Tommy Loote n s
C o pilot Moin Street
Steve Salomone
Citizen
Bob Dallmeyer. Jr.
Citizen
Charlie Brzuchal ski
MSP Redevelopment Commission
Janice McMillan, Deputy Director
Planning & Tronsporlolion
City Of Jefferson
Allen Pollock, Execu tive Director
Je fferson Cit y Ho u sing A u th orit y
The P lanning Process
The Planning Process for the Central East Side
Neighborhood Plan cons isted of:
Consu ltant Selection -The City and Ho using
Authority selected Parsons as the lead plann ing
consu ltant in association with George Butler
Associates, Inc. providing traffic analysis and
Development Strategies , Inc. providing economic
development input to the plan .
Formu lation of the AD HOC Committee-A
committee of thirteen was appo i nted by Mayor
Landwehr to assist the Planning Team in the
development of the neighborhood plan. The
Planning Team defined the purpose of the Ad Hoc
Committee as :
... to offer the planning team direction and
guidance throughout the development of the
Master Plan . Through a consensus buil ding
process, the Ad Hoc Committee shall strive to
develop a plan that will be presented to the
public, appro ved by the Jefferson City Coun cil
and ultimately implemented, thus enriching the
quality of life for the citizens of Jefferson City.
M ission Statement -The following Mission Statement
was drafted by Juanita Donehue, Charles Jackson
and Toni Prawl and approved by the Ad Hoc
Committee March 3rd 2004 .
The mis sion of the Central East Side
Neighborhood Master Plan is to foster
economic deve lopment, promote historic
preservation, and enhance the quality of life
consiste nt with the comprehensive plan of the
City of Jefferson through guidelines that will:
1 -3
Central East Side Neighborhood Plan Foundations of the Plan
J efferson City, Missouri
Sc h O<!h Church~~
• Conserve the character and scale of the
traditional neighborhood, including its mixture
of commercial, residential, and institutional
properties
• Respect historically a nd architecturally
significa nt resources
• Encourage revitalization
• Pro mote cultural diversity
• Support a safe, stable, and aesthetic
environment
The Master Plan shall be responsive to
appropriate change while maintaining its essential
vita lity and subject to continuou s review.
Data Collection - Much of the data concern ing the
neighborhood areas was provided by the City of
Jefferson Departme nt of Planning in a GIS format
and used by the Pla n ni ng Team for analysis and plan
formulation . Ext ensive field observations were
co nducted by the Project Team as well.
Data Analysis -Based on the in forma ti on provi ded
the following data maps were prepared and analyzed:
• Exist ing Land Use
• Exist ing Zoning
• Exist ing Topograph y & Flood Plain
• Exist ing Parking
• Existing Parks and Open Space
• Exist ing Vacant Lands properties
• Residential Density
• National Register Properties
• Honorary Lo ca l Landmarks
• Historic Dis trict Boundaries
• Rehabilitated/Renovated Properties
• Existi ng Conditions
• Key Plann ing Issues
• Land Use Zoning Issues
• Neighborhood Features
• Eme rg ing Land Use Plans
• Transportation Issues
1 -4
Central East Side Neighborhood Plan The Plan
Jeffers on Ci ty, Miss ouri
The Plan District Descriptions
Capitol Avenue District
• District Character As previously mentioned , the
Capitol Avenue District contains a large number of
archite cturally significant residential buildings, many
of which ha ve been converted to offices . The Land
Use Plan recommends reinforcing and expanding
this character within the proposed district
boundaries . Other items which contribute to or are
applicable to supporting to this character include :
1. Large homes or large residential build ings
converted to offices.
2. Large Homes co nverted to multi-family.
3 . Mi x of open lawns and minimal side yards .
4 . Signifi c ant arch itectu ral character with variety.
• Proposed Land Use The existing land use wi thin
the proposed Capitol Avenue District is varied and
often does not support the future vision of the
District. In orde r to ma intain the vibrant nature of the
Centra l East Side Neighborhood , th is plan suggests
a mi xing of uses w ithin the Capitol Avenue Distric t.
Some uses may be mixed vertically. For example
residential living units, in the future, may occur
above office space . Ad ditionally , in order to
accommodate uses which are new to this district, the
relaxat ion of some aspects of the current parking
standards may be necessary . In summary, a mix of
the following land uses are suggested :
1. Residential
2. Office and B&B Commercial only, no reta il.
3. Residential/Office vertical mixed use.
4 . Institutional
5. Relaxed Parking Standards
6. Garden Apartments
3-12
Central East Side Neighborhood Plan The Plan
Jefferson City, M issou ri
---~ --· --· ... ... -..
~
Preservation/Rehabilitation/Redevelopment
Building Patterns Critical to re inforcing the
character of this district is the preservation and
rehabilitation of existi ng historic structures . These
preservation/ rehabilitation efforts should be
sensitive to and respect the development patterns
which currently exist within the district. New
construction, when necessary, should also respect
these patterns . Finally , a p rocess for "Grandfathering
in " existing elements with in th e ne ighborhood should
be created . Additional Preservation , Rehabi li tation,
and Redevelopment Building Patterns for the Capitol
Avenue District include :
1. Preserve historic build ings where possible. lnfill
when necessary.
2. No garage doors facing the street. Back yard or
rear entry garage acceptable. Front porches
where possible .
3. No enclosed front porches .
4 . No parking on front yard .
5. New construction consistent with existing building
set backs .
6. Parcel combination/infill (more a t corners , less at
mid-block).
7. New construction compatible with existing
neighborhood size and density .
8. Process for "Grandfather in " of existing elements.
• Circulation The circulation system within t he Capitol
Avenue District should support the character and
land use vision for the future. It should also
accommodate vehicles in ways that improv e the
pedestrian oriented environment, and also maintain
the Central East Side Neighborhood goals of
supporting the MSP Redevelopment project. As a
component part of the district, it shou ld include the
following factors:
3-13
Central Eas t Side Neighborhood P lan The Pl an
Jefferson Ci ty, Missou ri
1. Street s and s idewalks connected.
2. A ll eys provid e access to rear of property and
provide service access.
3 . Continuous s idewalks, bot h si d es of streets ,
street t re e s & lighting .
4. Ke e p pa ra ll el p arking a l ong streets , w here
feasible .
5. Street Improveme nts should add ress ways t o
mi nimize im pacts on adjacent p roperties .
• Community Facilit ies A key component of both th e
Cen tral E ast Side Neighbor hoo d and the Capitol
A ven ue D ist rict is th e in clusion of C ommunity
Facilities . These facilities add both variety and
vitalit y of t he district. They may incl ude:
1 . Churches
2 . Open s pace
3 . Reinforced pedestrian lin k a ges to MSP .
4 . Preserve ope n areas surround ing e x isting
build ings.
Capitol Avenue District Images
3-14
Central East Side Neighborhood Plan The Plan
Jefferson City , Missouri
East High Street Business District
• District Character The character of the proposed
East High Street Business District is envisioned to
be a revital ized traditional storefront retail area
interspersed with historic homes adapted to
commercial or related uses . This business district
will be the focal point of the Central East Side
Ne ighborhood, bringing together the other districts
and villages. In an effort to further create a
pedestrian environment, on-street parking will be
prov ided in addition to shared parking lots behind
storefront bui ldings. The following are key
components to establishing this character:
1. Vibrant neighborhood "marketplace" where cars
and people coexist. Preferential treatment to
pedestrians .
2. Buildings built to front property line to create a
street "wall ". -Various areas along High Street
contain buildings which were originally designed
in the traditional commercial development
pattern . T hi s pattern is defined by building
fac ades which are; lined up along the edge of the
sidewa lk, contain large shop windows, signs,
awnings, and front a public streetscape.
Specifically within this district, the follow ing areas
exhibit these characteristics: mostly the south
side of the 800-1000 b locks of High Street, and
the general area of the intersection of H igh and
Lafayette Streets.
3. Residential uses ranging from single fami ly
homes to multi family units occur between these
commercial buildings .
4. On street park i ng.
5. Shared parking behind buildings .
6. Encourage key commercial uses oriented to the
needs of the neighborhood.
7. Garden Apartments
3-15
Ce ntral East Side Neighborhood Plan The Plan
Jefferson City, Missouri
• Proposed Land Use As the Central Eas t Side
ne ighborhood's primary commercial area , the
pr incipal land use will be commercial. The
or ientation of this commercia l area will be primarily
in su pport of those goods and services required by
th e surroundi ng ne ighborhood. To support this
neighborhood the p roposed land uses include:
1. Commercial
2. Resident ial/Comme rcial vertical mixed use with
commercia l on the ground floor and residential
above.
3. Limited single family (detached) residential. This
plan recognizes that a portion of the existing
u ses within this district are si ngle fam ily
residential. New, detached single family
residentia l development shou ld be d iscouraged ,
especially along High Street within this d istrict.
An emphasis shou ld be placed on t ransi tioning
these uses to th ose which are more commerc ia l
i n natu re. T he trans itio n does not always
necessitate the demo lition of residentia l
structu res, but could include the adaptive reuse
from re sidential to commercial while maintaining
the architectural character of the build ing.
4. Restaurants/Retail
5. Theater/Arts/EntertainmenUBoutique
6. Limited uquick shop" and ufast food "
esta bli shmen ts.
7. No drive through service/retail.
• Preservation/Rehabilitation/Redev e lopm e nt
Building Patterns Th e preservation of buildings
wh ich ha ve in t he past established the trad itional
storefront cha racter along High Street, should be a
hi g h pr io ri ty w he re possible. Redeve lopment projects
which inclu de ne w buildings should be d esigned to
replicate this storefront ambiance.
Additio nal preservation , rehabilitation , and
redevelopme nt buil ding patterns include :
3-16
Central East Side Neighborhood Plan The Plan
Jefferson City, Missouri
"Storefront" additions to residential
buildings should be avoided .
Th is
Not This
1. Preservation where possible . -Because of the
significant number of individual properties with some
historical integrity within this district, preservation
shou ld be a high priority. As the land uses in this area
change to those recommended by this plan, the use of
some of the resident ial homes may c hange as well.
Modifications for these new uses shou ld respect the
integrity of the origina l structure. "Storefront" additions
to residential buildings should be avoided . The pl an
supports the preservation and historic integrity of
architecturally significant buildings even if they are used
for purposes other than res i dences.
2. lnfill when necessary to create a commercial street
front. -In areas where the predominate c haracte r
represents the traditional commercial development
pattern, infill should seek to maintain the commercial
street front. In areas where the traditio nal commercial
development pattern transitions to residentia l style
building s, infill development should strive to reinforce
these transitions in a sensitive manner.
3. New construction compatible with existing character of
Distri c t. -Because t he character along H igh Street
varies considerab ly, new construction should be
compatib le with its immediate context. In some
instances, new construction may be located in areas
which serve as transit ions between commercial and
residential uses. Under these circumstances, new
construction will need to be designed sensitively to
adequately articulate these transitions.
4. The height requirement for new construction within this
district should not exceed three stories f rom the Hig h
Street e levation. The design of new construction should
draw upon common characteristics of structures in the
immediate vicinity to provide continuity and
consistency.
5. Live-work un its.
• Circulation The circulation system within the East
High Street Business District should support the
character and land use vision proposed for the
District. Specifically, it should focus on maintaining
the traditiona l storefront aspect of this District while
also supporting the MSP Redevelopment project and
traffic and mass transit needs. As the integral part of
the district, it should include the following factors:
3-17
Central East Side Neighborhood Plan The Plan
Jefferson C ity, Missouri
1. Accommodate levels of traffic appropriate w ith its
designation as a "marketplace ".
2 . High Street and McCarty Street to support major
bus routes and/or shuttle routes .
3. Retain/encourage para llel parking as a
pedestrian buffer and for drive-up convenience .
4 . Alleys provide access to rear of property and
provide service access .
• Community Facilities The inclusion of Community
Facilities should include the following factors:
1. Public gathering space to anchor eastern edge of
District.
2. Incorporate civic uses such as police substation,
or library.
3. Neighborhood gateway at High Street and
Adams .
4 . Open Space should be public gathering spaces .
East High Street Business District Images
3-18
-'77_~':...: .. . _.._._ ... __
::=.:::: .......... .
~~~f:''"i
:::::;.~.:.::;··· ........
·-.-~· :-:.::.:;:.::::.·------.... _ .. _
·-··-·
h:.:::.-
0 _...,,_ ......... ,..._ ·-··-
''V 'll ;f o i<~-~~I•C.t
'~·&;~
....... __ __
. --·
Neighborh ood Pl an
PARSONS 111 >S\!lCilllon \\ll h I>SI ond (.iO,\
.~.,.-.
Land Usc C unc..:pt Pla n
McMillan, Janice
From:
Sent:
To:
Subject
Attachments:
Tergin, Carrie
Thursday, November 17, 2016 9:50AM
McMillan, Janice
Mayor's comments for P & Z
Comments for P & Z about Capitol Avenue.docx
Members of the Planning and Zoning Commission,
Thank you for your consideration of the East Capitol Avenue Urban Renewal Plan. Although I am not able to
attend today's meeting, I would like to show my support and appreciation for calling this special meeting. We
are a proud Capital City, but unfortunately this area so close to the Capitol has become an eyesore and
extremely blighted. As Mayor, I am committed to seeing this project through, with the goal of revitalizing the
Capitol Avenue area, and knowing that time is a factor for these very fragile and quickly deteriorating homes
in this historically significant area.
With my sincere thanks,
Mayor Carrie Tergin
carrie Tergin, Mayor
573-230-7645
CT erqin@ieffcitvmo.org
1
•
·commmtts from 'Cathy'Bordner, ·tl ~17.:1:6, 'Planning and Zoning ·commission
We appreciate Mayor, City Council, citY staff and the housing authority getting this project this
far. This is the first opportunity we have had to give public input into this plan. The Planning
and Zoning commission may not be the appropriate body to hear our comments, but we want
to get the comments that we have on the record so that they can be considered at some point.
1. The plan states it conforms to the Central East Side Neighborhood Plan (CESNP). I would
like to see the mission statement of the CESNP inserted into the East Capitol Avenue
Urban Renewal Plan. I was on the committee that developed the CESNP and the
mission statement accurately describes what we tried to accomplish in that plan. The
people implementing this urban renewal plan may not read the CESNP. By inserting the
mission statement into the body of the urban renewal plan you will increase the
potential for the goats in the mission stateu1e1atbeingpurstredcrsthe urban renewal
plan is implemented.
The mission statement of the CESNP states:
The mission of the Central East Side Neighborhood Master Plan is to foster economic
development, promote historic preservation, and enhance the quality of life consistent
with the comprehensive plan of the City of Jefferson through guidelines that will:
• Conserve the character and scale of the traditional neighborhood, Including its
mixture of commercial, residential, and institutional properties
• Respect historically and architecturally significant resources
• Encourage revitalization
• Promote cultural diversity
• Support a safe, stable, and aesthetic environment
·J -sogge5t it 'be inserted in the urban nmewal plan in section 3, 'Redev~lopment·Pian, -c.
Conformance with the General Plan, Porposed Land Use Plan, and Proposed "Changes.
2. Because of the incredible blight In this area, many of the buildings wi_ll be demolished
and replaced with new construction. The urban renewal plan must conform to the
· ·cesNP, whith "Stertes on page 2-2,
New construction will comply with the Central East Side Neighborhood Plan. When new
multi-family residential Is mixed Into residential areas of differing densities, it should
match the size, mass and scale of existing neighborhood structures.
The abo~ iss~ ~uald 'lminsaa ted into "the ·arban Tenewai1Jian. ·r Tetommentlit'be i11ser ted ·into
Section 3, Redevelopment Plan, E. Acquisition of Property and Preparation for Redevelopment,
'between the third anti fourth paragraphs nfthat -section.
3. The blight study identified the issue of feral cats and other vermin. My husband and I live 3 blocks
from Jackson St. We walk that area every day. We believe the feral cat problem is out of control.
It is possible that over 30 cats are living in buildings just In the 100 block of Jackson St. If we do
not address the cat problem, these buildings will not be salvageable. I suggest the following
statement be inserted Into the urban renewal plan:
The t:itywlll work with the 'J:IA to 'determine if1h~ iera'l t:ats, other anlmcds cmtl p-ests
have reached a level of public health risk that requires addressing and if so will take
necessary steps to remove animals from the area and end the feeding of cats In the
Area.
'Pl!rhaps antrtht!r'heading wald'b~ -arldedto 'Se'Ction 3, theTedevelopmentplan, cmrl"tftle~·l=fecllth
and Safety Issues.
4. Transparency: Moving forward transparency is important. I believe that the community is
passionate about Capitol Ave. We should seek assistance from the community to educate the
public about this plan, and utilize the talents, experience and passion of members of our
community to develop the processes, educate the public and implement the plan so that it will
be successful. •
Barron, Eric
From :
Sent:
To:
Subject:
Attachments:
for the case file.
Thanks.
McMi llan , Jan ice
Friday, November 18, 2016 10:26 AM
Ca ry, Diane; Bar ron, Eric
Jan e Beete m com m ents
Urban Renewal Plan 10-2016 word doc ll-16-16.docx
From: Jon and Jane Beetem [ma ilto:jbeetem@embarqma il.com ]
Sent: Thursday, November 17, 2016 3:15PM
To: Barron, Eric
Cc: McMillan, Jan ice; Ab bott, Jayme; caquetsch @embarqmail.com
Subject: Urban Re newa l Plan comments
Here are the draft comments o n the Urban Redeve lopment P lan
for the Capi to l Avenue a rea tha t were mentione d today in th e
Planning & Zo nin g Commissio n meetin g. I've added la n guage in
italics, for ease of reference . No lang uage was de leted as part of
these comment s.
Thank yo u!
Jane Beetem
Thi s email has been scanned by the Symantcc Em ai l Secu rity.cloud service.
For more information please visit http ://www .svmantcccl o ud .c o m
1
sub s tance s and condition s \\·hich threaten the hea lth and safety of th e pub lic. Ex hibi t E -
Exis tin g Co nditi ons Map di s pla ys vario us fact ors pre sent within the Area. The numb er
o r !actors in the map legend shows the ex tent to whi ch tho se co ndition s exis t ba sed o n the
number of impr oved parc e ls. There arc I 06 impro ve d parcels with th e Area. so me ,,·i th
more than one buil ding.
S umnwry of Findings:
Th e /\rca ha s certa in in sa nitary o r unsafe condit ions as genera ll y desc rib ed bc lovv. As
Exhibit E shows. 19 o r th e I 06 parce ls demons tra te ex terior evidence o f un sa fe
condit io ns. It is cert ain th at int er ior in s pec ti o n of the buil d in gs wou ld reveal furth e r
evidence of s uch conditions , part icularl y g ive n the numbe r of vac ant build ing s in the
Area (28).
Whil e so me bui ld in gs that arc un safe fo r occup ancy arc boarded up. there is
evidence that so me or the buildings have been ac cessed and th e C it y ha s note d
in stan ces where th ese prop e rt ies ha ve been occupied. Th ese bu ildings have no
working utilities and thu s pr esen t bo th health and safety haza rd s fo r
occ upancy.
Th e re a re many in s tances o r large o lde r ho mes that ha ve be en converted fo r
multi-t~m1il y occ up ancy. PG/\ V obse rved mu ltiple in stanc es where se condar y
acce ss. unit access. or li re esc ape sta irs were bu ilt to second tloor (a nd in
some cases third tl oo r) levels. Mo s t o r the se sta ir s truc ture s are const ructed of
wood. In seve ral in s tances th ese stairs were const ruc ted to th ese upper sto rie s
us ing 4" by 4" ve rtic a l wooden post s. Not on ly does thi s rail to meet current
(o r past) bu il ding code req uirem e nt s. its creates stair s tru ctur es that have
considerab le "s hake" when used. The se st ructures ha\·e a se riou s potential fo r
fai lure. a nd carry a ri sk tor collapse when used by heavier indiv idual s or more
than one perso n. Thi s rep rese nt s a ve ry ser ious un safe cond iti on .
The nu mb er of un occup ied s truct ure s with de teriorating s iding, so nits, and caves
pr ese nt a mu ltitud e of o pp o rtuniti es fo r in vas ion by var io us types o f verm in and
bird s. Durin g fi e ld in spect io n of th e properti es man y in s tances were observed o r
squ irr e ls an d b irds ente ring an d exiting various ope nin gs: in two ins tan ces mice
were o bserv ed en tering or exiting. Ot her ev ide nce of mice (or maybe rats)
habitat ion wa s o bse rved in the form o r droppings in the proximit y o r pr obab le
en try/ex it point s to building s or accessory struc ture. [n o ne building. we no ted
ba ts hang in g under the ca ves. Cit y bui ldi ng inspec to rs have observed fera l cat s
ent e rin g and ex iting bui ldings and have obser ved people feeding cats in and
arou nd some build in gs in th e Area. The cily will work wilh !he Aulhorily lo
7
de t ermine ((the fera l cats, other animals and pests hm e r eached a level o.{public
health r isk tha t requir es addressing and ifso will take n ecessm y steps to r emove
animals from th e a r ea and e nd the feeding of cats in the A r ea.
Th e ti e ld in s pecti o n of the prop erti es was co ndu c ted on a n ex te ri o r-onl y bas is
and t hu s int eri o r co nditi o ns could not be obser ve d fir s t ha nd. Th e numb er of
boa rd ed up s tru ct ures is an in dica ti on o r inte ri or co nditi o ns tha t p reve nt
occ up ancy . Given th e conditi on o f roo fin g, siding, soffit s, and w in dow fra mes
on many o f th ese prope rti es it is virtu a ll y certa in th at ra in wa ter is e nter ing
som e of th e buildi ngs; thu s it is lik e ly th a t ma ny of th ese pr ope rti es are
ex peri encin g interi or wat e r da mage a nd sub se qu ent mold fo rm at io n.
In ge ne ra l, as a ne ighb orh oo d de te ri ora tes, th e inc id ence of crim es in creases.
Vacan t bu ildin gs promo te cr im e beca use th ere a re fewe r res id e nt s, bu sin esses
own ers, and empl oyees t o observe unu s ua l o r illi cit acti viti es. A t th e tim e of
the PGA V fi eld visits, 34 buildings (nearly 2 8%) we re vaca nt a nd ma ny were
boa rd ed up . E xhibit F pr ov id es a ma p of th e re port ed crim es sin ce 200 8 base d
on th e Cit y's poli ce depa rtm e nt reco rd s. Fo r w hat is predominan tly a
res id en t ial neighb o rh oo d 142 c rimes is a sig ni fica nt numbe r th at re pr esent s a n
un sa fe ne ighbo rh oo d (o r is a t le as t pe rce ived to be). In addition, thi s li st filt e rs
o ut a ll but the mos t s ignifi cant o nes. Wha t Exhibit F s hows are cr imes tha t
in c lud e arso n, assa ult , burgla ry, ro bb e ry, rape, ve hicl e t he ft , a nd theft fro m
perso ns or pro pert y. Thi s da ta repre se nt s a n ave rage of 8 c rim es per yea r ove r
th e 8-ye ar pe ri od th at th e data cove rs.
It was prev io us ly no ted that many struc tures have va rio us de ter io rat ed soffits,
entr yways , and oth er co nditi o ns that pr ov id e access to birds a nd ve rm in.
In vas ion by th ese anim a ls can q ui ck ly c reate s itu a ti o ns whe rein s ig ni fican t
inte ri o r damage w ith nega ti ve e nvir o nm enta l im pli cati o ns, co mbined w ith
sig ni fica nt buildin g de teri oration can negate the a bili ty to re ha b a prope rty.
• Observa ti o n of th e pr operties in dica tes c lea r evi de nce of co de vio lati o ns. The
Cit y has c it ed ma ny pro pe rti es a nd th e nu mbe r of bo arded up s tru c tur es
indi cates th at thi s has been an ongo in g pro bl em. C it y cod e v io la tion rec o rds
ha ve been e nte red in to t he Sprin gbrook Co de a nd Co nt ac t modul e. Records
are also e nt e red in th e Cit y's GIS sys te m, but da ta in put is no t ye t co mpl e te.
Howeve r, with mu c h of the in fo rm at ion c urr entl y ava il abl e and based o n the
lates t updat e of thi s da ta, sinc e Ja nu ary of 2011 th e re have bee n 175 code
v iola ti o n c it a ti o ns within th e Area. E xhibit G -Code Violation Citations
shows th e pr ope rti es whi c h we re cit ed. Va ri ous cod e vio lation s obse rve d
8
SECT ION 3
EAST CA PI TOL A VENUE URBAN RENEWA L AREA
REDEVEI.OP!VI ENT PLAN
A. Introduction
Thi s Rede vel o pm en t Plan (th e "Plan") sets forth bel ow th e ge ne ral desc ripti on of th e
plan of act ion and the prog ra m th at the Auth o rit y proposes to und e rt ake to
acco mpli s h th e objective s for the.:: Are a. Th ose objectives a re to e iTecti ve ly deal wit h
th e prob lem of in san itary. b li ght ed . deteri ora ted or deteriorating areas wi thin th e Area
for the estab li shm e nt a nd preserva tion o f we ll-pl a nned ne ighbo rho ods o f decent
homes an d bu sinesses and s uit ab le e nviron me nt for both. lor utili z ing a ppropriate
priYate a nd public reso ur ces to elimi nat e and prevent the dev e lopme nt or spread or
in sanita ry. blighte d. de te ri ora ted. or de terio ratin g are as, to e nc ourage ne eded urban
re habi lit ati on. to prov ide for th e redeve lop me nt of bl ighted . in sa nit ary. deteriorated
and deter iora tin g a reas. or to und e rt ake such or th e afo resa id ac ti v iti es o r ot he r
feasib le community act iviti es as ma y be suit ab ly empl oyed to ac hi eve th e obj ec ti ves
or such a program.
B. Qualificlltion of the Area
As is detailed in Sec ti on 2 of thi s do c um ent. the A rea meets the req uire me nt of th e
Law that the Area qua lili es as a Bli g ht ed Area a s defined in th e l .aw.
C. Co nformance with th e Gene ral Plan, Propos ed Land Usc Plan, and Proposed
C hang es
Th is Redeve lopment Plan e nco ura ges growt h and the str e ngthenin g o r th e eco nom ic
hea lth and qua lit y o f life in the Area a nd in proximit y to th e Area. T he Project
desc rib ed in thi s Plan is de s igned to a ss is t the A uthority throu g h redeve lo pm e nt to
al leviate th e blight ed or in sa nitary conditions w hi ch c urr entl y ex is t in th e Are a. This
Plan co nf o rm s to the ge ne ral p lan o f th e C it y of Jefferson approved by th e C it y
Co un cil th ro ugh it s zo nin g ordin ances and the Cen tral Easts id e Pl a n adop ted o n
Feb ru ary 20. 2006 by Reso lut io n RS 2 00 5-13. One s pecific objective o r th e Ce ntral
Eas tside Pla n wa s the reestabl is hm ent and rc,·it a lizat ion of reside nti al areas. res torin g
and e nh a nc ing th e neighborhood fa br ic whe re needed. Implem enta tion <~/the Ur ban
Rene wal Plan s hed I f ollow th e mission of !lw Ce ntral Eas t S ide Ne ig hborhood Mast er
Plan. which is to fo ster economic de ,·elopm enl . promote his toric pres ervation. and
17
enhance the quality of l {le consis tent with th e comprehensive plan c~f" th e Ci ty of
Jeffe rso n through g uidelin es that will:
• Conserve th e character and scale of the traditional neighborhood. includ in g its
mixture ofcommerc ial, r es idential, and institutional properties
• Respect his torica lly and arch it ecturally s ig n(ficant resources
• Enco urage r evitalization
·Pro mot e c ultured dive rs ity
• S upport a safe. stable , and aesthetic environme/11
During the proposed land clearance activities , the in itial land use plan for the Area wi ll
remain as it is toda y as shown on Exhibit C - E xisting Land Usc unless othetwise
permitted by zon in g.
Th e goa l of the Plan is to e limin ate the cond iti ons that qualify the Area as blighted
under the Law and prepa re the s it e fo r fu ture devel opment. First , the land clearance for
redeve lopme nt ac ti vit ies described below will be undertaken , and once a redeveloper
or redevelopers are se lected for all or a portion of the Area, additiona l redevelopment
plans or proposals may be submitted by or to the Aut hority or others to s upplement thi s
Pl an and to f urth er the redevelopment of th e Area . The term ''r edeveloper " does not
limit the Author ity to dealing with those employed in real estate developm ent full tim e,
but may also in clude individuals who ag ree to r edeve lop one or mor e pr operties
a ccording to milestones establis hed by th e Authority. The Auth ority s hall co ns ider the
r edeve loper 's experience in rehabilitating historic s tructure s for reuse when selecting
one or more redevelopers . Th e land uses for th e Area ultimately ma y co nsist of o nl y
o ne type of land use but wil l likely resu lt in a combi nation of several uses or mi xe d
uses, whi ch use s may in cl ud e residential. commercial , recreational or public use , or the
A uth orit y may retai n s uch land for it s own use, or any combination of th e fo regoing,
co ns istent with the object ives of the Plan a nd th e Gen eral Plan of the City of J efferso n.
Any use or development of any parcels in the Area that is incons istent with curr ent
zoning w ill require the rezo ning of a ll or a portion of the Area to th e app lic ab le zo ning
district cl ass ification for th e Cit y consistent with s uch use, including but not limited to
a planned development di stri ct o r mixed use district.
A ll proposed land uses and building req uirements in the Ar ea are designed with the
ge ne ral purpose of accomp li s hing , in conformance with the genera l plan , a
coordinated , adj usted and harmonious de ve lopment of th e Area and its e nvir o ns whi ch,
in accordance with present and future needs, will promote health , safety, morals , order,
convenience, prosperity and th e gene ral we lfa re , as we ll as efficiency and economy in
the process of developm ent. The A uthor it y will conside r, as app lic able in connection
18
w ith th e Plan or add it io na l red ev e lo pment. adequ ate prov isio n fo r traffic, ve hi cul a r
park in g, the prom ot ion o f safety fro m fir e. pa ni c and o the r da ngers, adeq ua te provision
fo r light and air. th e promoti on of the hea lt hful and conven ie nt d is tribu ti o n of
po pul at io n, the pr ov isio n of adequ ate tra nspo rtation , wa ter , sewerage, and o th er publ ic
a nd co mmuni ty fac ilit ies a nd ot her publi c require men ts, th e pr omo ti on of sound des ign
a nd a rr ang eme nt , th e wise and e fti cie nt ex penditu re of pu blic funds, th e pre vention of
the rec urr ence o f insanitary or unsa fe dwe ll in g acc omm od ations, o r in sanit ary areas, or
co ndit io ns o f bli ght or dete riorati o n, and th e prov is ion of adeq uate, safe and sa nitary
dwe ll in g accommodation s. The in iti a l land cle a ran ce pr ojec ts unde rt ake n in ac co rd-
ance with thi s Pl an w ill have the e ffec t o f e limin a ti ng the cond iti ons th a t qu alify the
Area u nder the Law and wi ll pav e th e way for th e Area to be pa rt o f a coo rd in ated,
a dju s ted and harmo nio us deve lo pm ent of the comm uni ty.
D. C o n s ct·v ation and/o r R e hab il itation of E xi stin g S tru ctures.
A ll stru cture s whi c h are in conforma nce wit h the land use prov isio ns o f thi s p lan a nd
wh ic h a re eco nom ica ll y feas ible fo r rehab ilit ati on s houl d be co nserved or re habi litated .
Economically feas ible is a term tha t may h a ve a different meaning to e a ch poten tial
r ede velop er I buyer. A num be r of hist oric propert ies have been r ehab il itated (o r
r ede velop ed) in our co mmunity Jllh ere th e am o w7t of inves tm ent exceeds th e current
appraised va l ue , as th e redevelop ers are int erested in both community impr ovement and
r eal estate inves tm em. Th erefore, all properties will be offe red fo r sale fo r a peri od of
lime no t less than s ix (6) months. regardl ess of th e ir co nd ition. Th is tim eframe m ay be
req uired t o a ttract a buyer ancl 1o ha ve mult iple in spections co nduct ed. Advert ising of
the p rope rties f or sale may be assisted by local n on-profits in terested in redeve lopm ent
of the blig hted area. An ow ner of a prope rt y id e nt i fi ed to be acqui red may retai n th e
owne rsh ip, oc cupan cy a nd usc o f s uc h pro pe rt y if it is not requi red fo r pu b li c use a nd if
it is not req uired fo r the rede ve lo pme nt of adj acent pro perties, prov id ed that th e ow ne r
ent e rs into a written agreeme nt with the Author it y co mmitti ng and obl igati ng th e owner
to co nstruct, res to re, repai r, re ha bil ita te, occupy and use s uch pr ope rty in co mpl iance
with the Pl a n a nd with City bu il din g and occ upa ncy standard s and e limin a ti ng a ny and
a ll co nd it io ns re lat ive to th at pro pe rty which he lp ed lead to the des ign atio n of th e Area
as blighted. In ord er to pr ese rve such rig ht , an own er wou ld have to ent e r in to a written
co ntract w ith th e Autho rit y rela ti ng to the required rehab il ita tio n, constructio n or
reconstruc ti o n of th e str ucture pr ior to th e in it iati o n o f ac ti on by the Aut hor ity to ac q ui re
such prope rt y, and s uch rehab ili tati on, co ns tructi on o r rec on s truc tio n wo uld have to be
co mp le te d in a ti me ly man ner as se t ou t in th e te rms of th at ag reeme nt. If a n owne r
pr ov ides no t ice o f int ent to ent e r int o s uc h an ag ree ment but the parti es are no t a bl e to
reac h mutu a ll y accepta bl e term s w ith in th irt y (3 0) days afte r th e rece ipt by the
A utho rit y of writte n no ti ce of th e owne r's int eres t in do in g so, the Auth or ity may in itiate
an d proc eed wit h any acq ui s it ion ac tion with regard to that prop er ty.
19
E. Acquisition of Property and Preparation for Redevelopment.
Redevelopment of the Area which may include land clearance is at the core of the Plan.
As necessary or incidental to the proper clearance, development or redevelopment of the
blighted areas or to the prevention of the spread or recurrence of substandard or
insanitary conditions or conditions of blight, the Authority will attempt to acquire
property within the Area as it becomes available from time to time due to tax sales and
other opportunities for acquisition whether by purchase, lease, options, gift, grant,
bequest, devise, or otherwise. Acquisition may also be undertaken through the exercise
of the power of eminent domain to acquire any real property which the Authority may
deem necessary for a land clearance project or for its purposes under the Law. The
acquisitions may include some or all of the property in the Area and may include any
real or personal property or any interest therein, including fee simple absolute title,
together with any improvements thereon.
The Authority will consider the acquisition of any or all of the properties identified
in Exhibit I -Land Acquisition Map.
20
T he A utho rity m ay a lso ac quire and cl ear any pro pe rty t hat is d il apidated a nd dete-
rio rated to s uch a point tha t it is no t fe as ible to be co nse rved and rehab il itate d by
d emol is hin g s truc tur es w it h in t he Area a s necessary o r re mo ve existing b ui ld ings,
s tru ctur es , stre e ts , utili ties o r o the r im provements w ithin the A rea es sential to th e
preparat ion o f A rea fo r d eve lopm ent cons is tent w ith t hi s Pl an. T he cl eara nce o f the Area
w ill be undertake n in accorda nce w ith th e p rovis ions of the Law. The A utho rit y may
a lso h o ld , im prove, clear o r o the r w ise prepare t he ac qui red pr opert y fo r re de velopm ent
o r urban re newal. In ad d ition, w he re necessary , t he Authority w ill acqui re p ro per ty
w ithin the A rea for the purposes of land conso lid ati o n a nd public im pro vements .
In ad d ition, th e A ut hority m ay a lso m ake or h ave mad e a ll s urveys, stud ies and pla ns
necessary to th e carry in g out o f the Pl an , an d in connectio n therewith may enter into or
up o n any land, building , o r improvem ent the reon fo r s uch p urposes a nd t o make
so und in gs, test borin gs , surveys, appr a isal s a nd other prelimina ry s tud ies and
in vesti g ations necessary to carry o ut its p owers. T he Autho ri ty m ay cont ract o r
coo p e rate with an y a nd all persons o r agencies, pu bli c o r private, in t he m aki n g a nd
c a rry in g o ut of the surveys, a ppra isals, s tudi es a nd pl a ns.
F. Rehabilitation of the Area.
The A ut ho rity m ay , fro m time to time, rehabilitate o r repair e x is ti ng b ui ld ings,
struc tures or other facil iti es in th e Area o r und e rta ke any re ha bilitatio n o r conser vatio n
work to e lim inate cond iti o ns that qua lify the A re a un de r the L aw. The Authority may
acc ept jimding assistance ji-o m o ther sources to facilitat e r epair or s tabiliz ation of
quai{/Y ing build ings. T he A uthority m ay a lso, fro m time to time , reconstruct a nd
cons truc t new p ub li c improveme nts thro ugho ut the A rea.
In co nnection w ith the und ert ak ing of the la nd clearance proj ects set out h erein, t he
Auth o ri ty may ar range o r contract fo r the fu rni s hing o r repai r, by any pe rson or agency,
p ub lic or pri vate, of ser v ices, priv il eges, wo rk s, streets , roads, pu b li c ut il ities o r othe r
fac ili t ies for o r in connecti o n w ith th e land cl eara nc e proj ects, a nd may ta ke any othe r
acti o ns as p e rmi tted unde r the Law as it deems necessary to f ulfill the p urposes o f thi s
Plan and Proj ect.
G. Consolidation of Property a nd D isposal of Property.
As the A uth o rit y a c quires prope rty, the Auth o rity w ill consider w het her to sell , lease,
transfer o r o the rwise make avail a bl e to d evelope rs tracts of land for red evelopment.
Econo mically feasible is a term th at m ay have a differ ent meaning t o each potential
r ede velop er I buyer. A number of historic proper ties have been r ehabilitated (or
redeveloped) in our community wher e t he amount of investment ex ceeds t he curr ent
appra ised value, as !he r ede ve lopers are inter es t ed in bo th co m1111 111ity improvement
and r ea l e s tat e in veslmenl. Th erefore, all p roperties will be offered .for sale for a
p eriod of t im e no! less than six (6) II IV J7l hs, r egardless of !he ir condit ion. Th is
time.fi'a me may be requ ir ed to a ttra ct a buyer and to have m ultip le inspection s
conduc!ed. Advert ising o.f !he propertiesfor s ale may be ass is !ed by lo cal non-p r ofi!s
int erested in r edevelopm ent of th e blig ht ed area. The wrillen agree m en l betw een the
Auth ority and !h e redeve loper shall speci}jl which exleri or el em ents are in tegr al 10
ma in lena nce of th e p r operty 's his toric chamcter and tha t th ese elem ents s hall be
retained and repair ed, tf poss ibl e. or rep lac ed according lo the Secr etwy of the
Inter ior 's Guidelines for Rehabil itation. Th e ag r eem ent shall a lso specify an en t ity to
rerie w and approve or disapprove ch anges t o the p roperly in t he f uture. New
co ns truction will comp ly wit h the Ce ntml Ea st S ide Ne ig hborhood P lan . Wh en new
multi-family r es ident ial is mixed into res id entia l areas o.ldif(ering dens it ies , it sh ould
mat ch the size. mass and scale o,( exisl ing ne ig hborhood s tr uc tures. The Autho rit y
will fac il ita te the co mp lete redeve lopm en t of the Area to address th e b light ed or
in sanit ar y cond ition s c urre ntly ex is t ing . Th e Author ity
20
wi ll wo rk with th e Cit y and use th e means at its di s posa l to co nsol ida te p rope1ty in
o rde r to prov id e a cata lys t for co mp lete redeve lo pm ent and urban re newa l of th e
Ar ea, s hould sale a./ind ivid ual p rop ert ies no t occ ur w ithin t we l ve (1 2) m o nths of firs t
advert isem ent .for sale.
Upon prope rty asse mb ly, the A ut ho ri ty may , from ti me to tim e , adv ertise for ad-
d itiona l rede ve lo pme nt prop os a ls lo r s pec ifi c re developme nt s it es \V ith th e Area .
Di spos itio n o f th e pr opert y by th e Auth or ity wi ll be in ac c o rdance wit h th e prov i-
s ion s o f th e Law.
H. Lever·a g in g A dditi o n a l F undin g for · R e d evelo pm ent
The A uth o rity will co ns ider using any fun d ing sourc es in ord e r to e limi nate the
co ndit io ns that qu a lify the Are a und er th e Law. To initi ate th e compl e te redevel-
opme nt of th e Area, the Auth o rity wil l co ns ider deve lopme nt with in th e Area us in g
a ny fund ing s ources ava ilabl e. T he Aut hori ty will work wi th the City to ut il ize
pro vis io ns under the Law o r oth e r deve lo pm ent o r incenti ve prog ram s to leverage
ad dit io nal f un din g fo r th e redeve lopm en t o f th e Area. Suc h so urces may be publi c o r
priva te and ma y inc lud e addit iona l eco nomi c deve lopm e nt mec hani sms a nd too ls as
a ll o we d und er loc a l, Stat e and Federa l la ws.
As rega rds the met hod of fin a nc ing, the Pl an will be fin anced th ro ug h a co mbin at ion
or pub lic and pri va te fina nc ing me tho ds, to be d ete rm ined in grea ter de ta il as it is
imp leme nt ed. Th e A ut ho rit y may ma ke s uc h ex pe nditures as may be necess ary to
carry out the purposes of this Plan and Project or otherwise carry out the purposes of
the Law, including but not limited to loaning the proceeds of bonds or temporary
notes that may be hereinafter authorized to provide for the purchase, construction,
extension and improvement of a project by a private or public developer pursuant to a
development contract approved by the Authority.
I. Estimated Dates of Completion
The estimated time for completion of the foregoing Plan and Project is 1 0 years from
the date of adoption of the Ordinance approving this Plan. Should the Authority
determine that additional activities are required, this time frame may be extended.
J. Relocation Assistance
If any relocation is necessary due to the implementation of this Plan, relocation
assistance will be provided per the Authority's relocation assistance plan as
21
adopted by the Authority from time to time. A feasible method will be provided for
those requiring relocation, in compliance with Sections 523.200 -523.215, RSMo and
any applicable State statute or City that may apply.
K. Amendment of Plan
All of the laws of the State of Missouri respecting changes, modifications, or
amendments of the Plan shall be complied with. The City Council may amend the
Plan upon the recommendation of the Agency. If major changes or modifications to
the Plan are necessary, the Agency shall hold a public hearing on the proposed
amendment. The Agency may not amend the Plan without approval of the City
Council.
22
ATTACHMENT 2
RESOLUTION OF LCRA
Bill2016-87
Page6
CERTIFICATE OF RECORDING OFFICER
I, James Jenkins,the duly appointed, qualified and acting Assistant Secretary of the
Housing Authority of the City of Jefferson City, Missouri, in the absence of Cynthia Quetsch,the
duly appointed, qualified and acting Secretary of the Housing Authority of the City of Jefferson
City,Missouri, do hereby certify that the attached extract from the minutes of the Special Board
Meeting of the Board of Commissions of the Housing Authority held on November 22, 2016 is a
true and correct copy of the original minutes of such meeting on file and of record insofar as they
relate to the matters set forth in the attached extract, and I do further certify that each Resolution
appearing in such extract is a true and correct copy of a Resolution adopted at such meeting and
on file and of record.
IN TESTIMONY WHEREOF, I have hereunto set my hand and the seal of said Housing
Authority of the City of Jefferson this 30 day of November, 2016.
ames Jenkins,Assis . t Secretary
•
RESOLUTION NO. 4569
RESOLUTION APPROVING URBAN RENEWAL PLAN FOR THE EAST CAPITOL
AVENUE AREA
WHEREAS, The purpose of the plan is to present the findings and condition of blight,
and the plan for the urban renewal project to mitigate or eliminate the conditions of blight in the
East Capitol Avenue Urban Renewal Area in Jefferson City,Missouri;and
WHEREAS, Section 99.320(3) Revised Statues of Missouri, defines a 'blighted area" as:
an area which, by reason of the predominance of defective or inadequate street layout, insanitary
or unsafe conditions, deterioration of site improvements, improper subdivision or obsolete
platting, or the existence of conditions which endanger life or property by fire and other causes,
or any combination of such factors, retards the provision of housing accommodations or
constitutes an economic or social liability or a menace to the public health, safety, morals or
welfare in its present condition and use; and
WHEREAS, the City Council for Jefferson City Missouri on September 19, 2016
declared the East Capitol Avenue area blighted based upon a study conducted by Peckham
Guyton Albers & Viets(PGAV)in 2016; and
WHEREAS, The Board of Commissioners of the Housing Authority of the City ofvuy.
Jefferson, Missouri, acting in its capacity as the Land Clearance Authority, has considered-the
findings in the blight study and developed a plan intended to alleviate the blight; and y r
WHEREAS, the proposed modifications have been considered by the planning agency' _
for the City of Jefferson and it's Planning and Zoning Commission, which -have found the
proposed modified Plan to be in conformity with the City's general plan for development of the
community as a whole, subject to several suggestions for changes, which changer have been
incorporated into the modified Urban Renewal Plan now under consideration; and `r>,-,
WHEREAS, the Housing Authority has considered and determines that.the proposed land
uses and building requirements in the urban renewal plan for.the project area are designed with
the general purpose of accomplishing, in conformance with the general plan of the City of
Jefferson, a coordinated, adjusted and harmonious development of the community and its
environs which, in accordance with present and future needs, will promote health, safety, morals,
order, convenience, prosperity and the general welfare, as well as efficiency and economy in the
process of development; including, among other things, adequate provision for traffic, vehicular
parking, the promotion of safety from fire, panic and other dangers, adequate provision for light
and air, the promotion of the healthful and convenient distribution of the population, the
provision of adequate transportation, water, sewage and other public utilities, schools, parks,
recreational and community facilities and other public requirements, the promotion of sound
design and arrangement, the wise and efficient expenditure of public funds, the prevention of the
recurrence of insanitary or unsafe dwelling accommodations, or insanitary areas, or conditions of
blight or deterioration, and the provision of adequate, safe and sanitary dwelling
accommodations;and
WHEREAS, the plan proposes conservation and rehabilitation of structures where
economically feasible and identifies certain properties that may be acquired to facilitate the
elimination of the blight;and
WHEREAS, the proposed plan is considered to be in the best interest of this Authority
and the City of Jefferson.
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED by the Board of Commissioners of the
Housing Authority of the City of Jefferson,Missouri, acting in its capacity as the Land Clearance
Authority for the city,as follows:
1. That the proposed Urban Renewal Plan is hereby in all respects approved.
2. That the approval of the City Council ofthis Urban Renewal Plan will be sought.
3. That the officers of the Board and the staff are directed to take whatever steps
may be necessary to facilitate the approval of this Plan according to law.
4. _ This Resolution shall take effect immediately.
-:ADOPTED this 22nd day of November 2016.
[S-EAL]
nom.
Ar!;�_A/ /
FLarry Vinc t,Chairman
ATTEST: '
fr Cynthia Quetsc ecretary