[0:06] I'm going to call the Monday, March 23rd Finance Administration Economic Development Committee

[0:12] to order of the records show that the members are here. I'm missing councilmember matrician

[0:19] and Reese. I think they're going to be here. So we all get started because we got a triple

[0:27] tonight and a lot to discuss. So let's get started with, I don't have any other comments

[0:34] then let's make it efficient and give it a good meeting. 2026, 2027 Property and Liability

[0:40] Insurance Programs. James Charlesworth, and welcome to the table for your year-to-yearly

[0:46] presentation. Thank you, Mr. Chair.

[0:47] Thank you.

[0:48] Good evening, James Charlesworth, so first consulting. The item title is going to be longer than

[0:53] my presentation, basically I've got some very good news which is refreshing.

[0:59] The property liability insurance renews on April 1st are insurance broker, Gallagher,

[1:05] negotiated favourable terms with our current insurers.

[1:09] The good news is we've increased our property coverage so it's better than it was before.

[1:14] We did change our equipment breakdown coverage which is very minor.

[1:17] We enhanced our cyber protection program, which is excited about, and our overall premium

[1:25] annualized is decreased over-expired.

[1:27] So not only do we get better terms and conditions, they were able to negotiate a premium reduction

[1:33] based on the annualized premium of our current program.

[1:38] So the only other item I will note is on the packet on the staff recommendation or proposed

[1:47] motion there is a typo federal insurance company an amount of $5.75 it should be $5.95 which is

[1:56] included in the item title but the overall recommendation of $1,400,400 is an accurate number.

[2:08] So I'm happy to talk about insurance online but I don't have a big agenda so I will pause and

[2:13] any questions? All right, nearly something yearly we do guys for who are new to the committee and

[2:20] we have to do it tonight so that we can move on. We hit the dates. Any questions for James?

[2:31] Relations on getting a similar favourable rates, I know. We all like to hear that.

[2:35] I wish I could do it for your personal insurance. That's not my concern.

[2:38] Do you have a discussion on their day? No. No questions? I'll take a motion. Perfect.

[2:45] So I have a new motion that Trevor gave me so the previous one had each policy just out just one that is

[2:55] Okay, so the motion is I move to recommend the C Council approve the 2026 2027 property liability insurance program as

[3:03] presented and he met not to exceed one million four hundred and four thousand dollars

[3:11] That motion the second any other questions or comments

[3:14] the community? Seeing none, all those in favor say aye. Aye. All is opposed to the same

[3:19] sign. Not passes five zero. And they're like the record show that, uh,

[3:26] Councilman, welcome. Welcome. Thank you. Sorry. No, it's all good. It's all good. Thank you.

[3:33] And then we're moving to number four, uh, ordinance number PT RP-3508 to talk about our

[3:41] property tax rebate program.

[3:45] Thank you. So in January, the Fayette Committee gave staff the authorization to move forward

[3:50] with negotiating an agreement with Community Capital Fund for a long-term administration

[3:54] of the property tax rebate program. And then in this committee in February, you all discussed the

[3:59] program criteria and any potential future revisions. As a result of that, staff put together an

[4:05] agreement with community capital with five one year renewable terms and holds the criteria

[4:11] the same for 2026. So as part of that agreement the criteria will be reviewed annually and added

[4:17] to the agreement as an exhibit, but the agreement itself will not be reviewed every year.

[4:23] And as a part of the adjustments made by the committee in February we have added on page 12

[4:28] an exited A, a reference to proxy-based income verification programs, such as SNAP Medicaid, WIC, TAMP, and WEEK,

[4:38] which would allow residents who are applying to provide documentation of their participation in those programs,

[4:45] rather than providing AW2 and more deaf and deaf community.

[4:50] I'm happy to answer any questions about the criteria

[4:52] and the adjustments the staff made, and also do want to note that this is coming to all as an ordinance tonight,

[4:57] just to establish the property tax remit program in the city's charter via the Kansas State Constitutional Homehold Powers.

[5:06] So just formalizing the existence of the program.

[5:10] Thank you for that. A question from me.

[5:14] So, you know, there was concern to make sure that we do have it in the agreement that we will be qualifying people automatically through WIC programs

[5:23] government assistance programs that they want home and eat all the other criteria as well

[5:28] automatically and community capital fund is able to handle that, is that correct?

[5:32] Yes, that's correct. It is listed in the Exit at A as an administrative change rather than

[5:37] being listed in the eligibility criteria. That was the decision we made based on a recommendation

[5:41] by community capital fund. Their opinion was that adding a long list like that to the eligibility

[5:47] criteria may confuse it and deter residents from applying because they're no longer sure if they

[5:52] have to be a part of one of those programs, or if it's an or just because it's easy to get confused

[5:57] when you have that long list of programs. All right. All right, Andrea. I'll just make the point

[6:03] that I don't think that that's confusing to have the list of programs that makes it easier for people

[6:10] if they're part of SNAP or WIC, or TANF to know that they're eligible. It's a lot easier than looking

[6:16] at the HUD table to see how many kids you have in your house where you can come in. So I guess I

[6:23] would disagree with that conclusion, but support this.

[6:29] Hopefully we can relook at that.

[6:32] And to your point, Drew, we will be looking, things we discussed, right? We need to see more data,

[6:38] and we need to see some more things. I think there will be some changes to the program once we kind

[6:43] of get more full year under our belts under the program. And when do we see that July, August?

[6:48] It will be about August, August, so that when we get to that September timeframe, that's adjusted and hopefully give more people there

[6:55] because if you believe the goal is you want to keep people in their homes, divide, delete,

[7:01] but we can fight for the private relief, and then if you have a bucket of funds, you need to use those funds appropriately for the year two program and looking forward to it, go ahead and process it.

[7:13] Just like I'm glad we're moving forward. Do you see this helping with the timeline?

[7:35] We're excited about getting our reach a little bit further this year.

[7:42] Anyone, there's no questions. I'll take that from motion. Sure. I moved to recommend the City Council passage for ordinance number.

[7:50] PTRP-3508, approving the agreement with Community Capital Fund for Administration of the City's Property Tax Rebate Program in 2026 Program Criterion.

[8:01] Second.

[8:02] We've got a motion in a second. Any other comments?

[8:06] All those in favor say aye.

[8:09] All opposing sign.

[8:11] Passage unanimous lead 6-0.

[8:13] Council member Reese has joined.

[8:15] So.

[8:17] I actually got stopped by the mayor.

[8:19] You wouldn't need to do a photo.

[8:21] Yes.

[8:22] No one believes that.

[8:23] I can't make this.

[8:26] All

[8:29] right.

[8:29] All right.

[8:29] Let's move in.

[8:30] Number five.

[8:31] Sounds a bit tabulation for south town glass.

[8:35] Oh, Tony's right there.

[8:37] Music.

[8:39] I appreciate it.

[8:41] Councilmember mimics short.

[8:43] Comments are pretty self-explanatory a replacing five rip-up units on Tom

[8:47] Oak Ridge, bitten out using competitive bidding did receive one bid it is

[8:52] underneath the engineers estimate and under budget so we're doing they're

[8:56] actually installing the new back at power source of part trains in our currently

[9:00] for us.

[9:01] or well if I can do more. So we've got to answer any questions you want me to have.

[9:06] Oh, you're okay with the Monday event? Yes. Yeah, we batted on. We did we did feel

[9:12] it was well within the engineers under the engineers estimate and so we felt like it was no

[9:18] So, you know, there's rigging and anything like that.

[9:21] And you've worked with them.

[9:25] Yes.

[9:29] Any other questions?

[9:31] Take a motion.

[9:31] Sure.

[9:32] I move to recommend to the City Council award the bid in the Tomahawk Ridge Community Center rooftop unit replacement project number in the 2873.

[9:42] It's downtown glass appropriated in the amount of one thousand thirteen or one million thirteen thousand five hundred dollars.

[9:54] All right, any other questions or comments?

[9:57] Seeing none, all those in favor say aye.

[10:00] All right, all those opposed same sign.

[10:02] And that passed the unit.

[10:03] Thank you.

[10:06] Number

[10:09] six, we have a bid process for all those nations

[10:12] to negotiate through agreements.

[10:15] Yes.

[10:16] Thank you, Kate.

[10:17] Yes.

[10:18] Thank you.

[10:19] So the current Wi-Fi solution.

[10:21] at the Convention Center was deployed in 2014,

[10:24] and it has reached the end of its useful life

[10:27] and the manufacturer's support as well.

[10:30] So the upgraded Wi-Fi network will replace all access points,

[10:33] switches, controllers,

[10:35] while retaining the existing design and cabling,

[10:38] this will remain within its warranty period

[10:40] over the next 10-year life expectancy of the new network.

[10:44] So waiver of the bed process is requested

[10:46] to ensure continuity of the system,

[10:48] and for it to be in place by World Cup.

[10:51] So funding is available in the Overland Park Convention Center budget.

[10:56] So when I will note, the proposal was included in the packet.

[10:59] And when it's to clarify one of the line items currently listed under the professional services category,

[11:07] that line item should actually be contingency and not under professional services.

[11:12] So this would be corrected in the final agreement, but didn't want to know if that changed.

[11:16] it does not change the dollar figure either.

[11:19] So staff recommends that the committee

[11:21] recommend to the City Council approval

[11:23] of the request to waive the bid process

[11:25] and authorization to negotiate the agreement

[11:27] with clarity SSU and the facility manager

[11:30] be authorized to execute the agreement.

[11:34] And will that the grant Mitchell is here?

[11:36] Lower in the chair.

[11:37] The answer any questions from my committee is in the center as well.

[11:40] I try to figure out how to lift it in the game off.

[11:43] This is great for my customer service perspective upgrading this system and going to the

[11:49] new system should really help customer service wise and providing people connectivity

[11:53] that they need when they're there doing business as well as ever enjoying the self-convention

[12:00] of customer service.

[12:01] Yes, sir.

[12:01] It pushes us to Wi-Fi 7 technology, which is just come out so it's the latest technology

[12:06] so we'll also do this a long way before we really need to do this again.

[12:12] So timing is actually good.

[12:15] Right.

[12:17] Can you talk a little bit about legacy system

[12:20] or why it needs to be this vendor in terms of connectivity?

[12:25] We received different quotes as we were going through

[12:28] the budgeting process.

[12:31] Very comfortable.

[12:32] This quote was very, very attractive to us

[12:35] based on what we were seeing and the equipment

[12:39] that they were speccing was top of the live equipment.

[12:42] So that's what we'll lock this in to this vendor, however we'll truly

[12:47] push this to move in this direction is the timing to get this done before.

[12:54] And we've worked with this vendor in the past and we have actually a Wi-Fi

[12:59] consultant that we worked with on the last installation ten years ago and

[13:04] he's working on this project as well. So kind of have the same team to go.

[13:11] Any other questions?

[13:17] I move to recommend City Council approval of the requests to waive the process and authorization

[13:22] to negotiate agreement with clarity as you for the purchase and installation of the

[13:27] Wi-Fi 7 network solution for the Overland Park Convention Center in the amount not to exceed

[13:33] We need 616,000 five six hundred sixteen thousand five hundred and forty one dollars and that the city manager be authorized to execute the motion and second any of their questions or comments.

[13:47] Seeing none, all those in favor say aye.

[13:50] Aye.

[13:51] All of those names, aye.

[13:53] And that passes unanimously.

[13:55] Thank you very much.

[13:57] for both of ground lease agreement at 120 Foster Street, Christine, on the table. Thank you.

[14:05] Some of you may recall how a year ago, you authorized the extension of a ground lease

[14:12] with US Bank National Association and the former tenant of 128 hundred foster. They had entered

[14:20] in to a ground lease with the city in 2010 as part of their location at that building.

[14:27] They were not the owner, they were the tenant.

[14:31] We extended that ground lease for them to fulfill their obligation to remove those

[14:36] parking improvements up right away that they had built for their operation to June 30th.

[14:44] A new property owner has purchased the building and has requested that they enter into a ground

[14:50] lease with the city so that they can continue to use those improvements, maintain and operate

[14:57] them for the benefit of their building, they are

[15:00] So we would, unlike with the U.S. Bank ground lease, where U.S. Bank was not the owner of the building, this would be a ground lease with the owner of the building. Our recommendation is subject to the committee's approval and councils approval that we go ahead and be authorized to negotiate a ground lease with the new owner of the building and to terminate the existing ground lease with U.S. Bank subject to approval of the new ground lease.

[15:29] We don't see, it's right-of-way that the city does not have any long-term expectation to use,

[15:41] and our ground lease would enable our right to terminate that at any time.

[15:47] Happy to answer any questions if you have it, but we need your authorization and the council's

[15:52] authorization to negotiate that. In the interest of time, we also recommend that once we negotiate

[15:59] that ground lease the city manager be authorized to ask any questions on this matter for Christine.

[16:08] Seeing none, I move that the committee won direct staff to negotiate a new ground lease agreement with

[16:17] 12800 foster LLC and recommend City Council approval thereof for the city manager to

[16:23] And to recommend to the City Council termination of the current ground lease with US Bank National Association, subject to a new ground lease being entered into by the city and authority for the city manager to execute the same.

[16:39] Thank you.

[16:40] Got a motion?

[16:41] Second.

[16:42] Any other questions or comments?

[16:44] Seeing none, all those in favor say aye.

[16:46] Aye.

[16:47] I'll pose same side.

[16:49] And that passes unanimously.

[16:50] Six.

[16:51] Zero.

[16:53] Now.

[16:56] Number eight, proposed before their home project.

[16:58] We've got a full room tonight to hear about this.

[17:02] Jack, I'll hand it off to you to tell us what you would like.

[17:07] what the city would like to do in possible problems.

[17:10] Well, let me see what happened here.

[17:14] I wasn't trying to get to OPEAN yet.

[17:20] Thank you, Mr. Chairman, committee, Jack Messer,

[17:24] Assistant City Manager of the City of Roland Park.

[17:26] With me is Christina Finwick, the Director of the Development.

[17:30] I'll introduce her a little bit further as we get along.

[17:34] Here tonight, you know, to talk about housing

[17:38] In the planning department, in our history, we've often said that it's our job to help

[17:45] people meet their dreams.

[17:48] And in this case, I think that we're talking about that in its essence, the opportunity

[17:53] to pursue the American dream of home ownership.

[17:58] I think that's reflected in Overland Parts vision is articulated in Forward OP and that will

[18:06] be that overall part will lead as a forward thinking, innovative and welcoming community.

[18:13] So that's a collective stated vision in one that we can all aspire to.

[18:18] I think it's one that we developed together.

[18:21] Housing, or better stated, the lack of housing has been on the radar screen of this community

[18:27] for as an issue for quite some time, 15 years or so, and it's been a key issue of the council.

[18:35] I think that from our housing and needs analysis, you can see that over a period of time housing an overall park is lagged in the need by a significant margin year after year.

[18:51] We have not had a self-sustaining housing market for 15 years.

[19:00] We have, as identified in the 2019 UCS housing study, underbuilt housing of all types

[19:11] by half for that same period of time.

[19:15] What the market is delivering are large homes around 5,000 square feet in large apartment complex.

[19:25] It's not delivering smaller homes.

[19:28] And the lack of these options at all levels suggests that we're missing out.

[19:33] Our range of options that overall partner needs to build the kind of city it aspires to be.

[19:39] So tonight I'm presenting to you an opportunity to consider that and that's what we're talking about.

[19:49] What we're going to propose and recommend is a for sale housing pilot project.

[19:56] It will build portfolio homes as we have studied what those are with the city.

[20:03] And we're also going to recommend a relationship with driven development to accomplish that.

[20:08] So I'm going to, I have three primary topics tonight.

[20:12] I want to give you an overview of the project.

[20:14] I want to talk a little bit about what a set of agreement

[20:17] parameters might look like.

[20:20] And I'm going to introduce Christina so that she can introduce driven development.

[20:26] I want to emphasize that tonight is the first step.

[20:30] We haven't, we have not developed anything.

[20:33] We have, we have a couple of pieces of property

[20:36] and we have an opportunity that we're introducing for the first time to the committee for you to

[20:42] say whether it's worthwhile to take the next thing. And that's really what this is. It will take

[20:51] quite a bit of time to do that. I'll talk about that a little bit. We still have planning processes

[20:55] to go through. We still have engineering processes to go through. We have we have construction processes

[21:01] to go through but this one this step tonight gets us started. So let's talk about the project a

[21:09] little bit. We have two, as I mentioned, remnant parcels from right-of-way acquisitions that we did

[21:16] as part of the slicer and 167 street thoroughfare projects. Shown here kind of in those yellow dots for

[21:25] a general location. There are each small parcels around to an acre and a quarter, and what

[21:37] we bought these for, we have used them for right away, and then we have leftover property

[21:46] that we can consider, presents this opportunity for use. Just a little bit closer view of what

[21:55] the parcel is that the city owns at 167th and the Schweitzer, so this gives you an idea of what

[22:03] we're working. A small remnant parcel that we would consider as an infill development opportunity.

[22:11] We had our architect that helped us with the portfolio home program

[22:20] place on this piece of property, this remnant piece of property, a set of portfolio homes that you can see there.

[22:30] What you can see is a parcel where you have access to the side and behind with rear entry garages, this includes three duplexes and three single family homes.

[22:46] So nine units on this approximate two-figure piece of product.

[22:52] Go ahead.

[22:53] Is there an error with that number four in the upper right hand corner?

[22:56] It's just four is floating there.

[22:57] Oh, that four is floating.

[22:58] That is an error.

[22:59] That's a floaty.

[23:00] Sorry, it's a floating forward.

[23:01] Yeah.

[23:02] That happens to all of us.

[23:03] Yeah, sorry about that.

[23:04] Yeah, I was not confused by that.

[23:05] But yes.

[23:08] Six structures, nine units on this layout.

[23:12] These are the associated properties that we just talked about.

[23:21] These are from our portfolio homes program.

[23:24] If you want to see these further with the floor plans and such,

[23:29] those are shown on the on our website.

[23:33] We have that second parcel that I showed you that is at the southern

[23:37] are it is a little further south at 170 of terrorists in Switzer. This is the

[23:44] parcel as you can see that the city purchased the the roadway has

[23:49] encountered part of it and we would reserve that for right away so there is

[23:53] leftover property there. There used to be a single-family home on this property

[23:57] that has since been demolished. This is the layout five single-family homes shown

[24:05] on that person, that remaining person.

[24:10] And again, the associated look at what those,

[24:15] what we've shown on this conceptual sketch.

[24:19] So that gives you an idea of what we're suggesting

[24:23] is the project.

[24:25] The project would involve the building of these houses,

[24:29] involve the extension of infrastructure

[24:32] necessary to serve them.

[24:33] water, water, electric, gas, all of those general services that you might think of.

[24:44] So I'm going to move on to the second topic.

[24:46] We have proposed an agreement with driven development.

[24:51] The city is not in the house building business.

[24:54] That's not something that we do as a core function.

[24:59] And so we've looked around for a developer to do that.

[25:03] we found driven and we think that their kind of perspective on on delivering housing matches what

[25:12] we have talked about in framework OP and as the city's strategic goals. The parameters that we

[25:21] will do we should the council the committee allow us to go forward this evening there are nine

[25:27] topics that we would talk about in an agreement, that would talk about how we have a land transfers

[25:35] and we have associated issues that we have to deal with related to that, that we would

[25:43] use the portfolio program, how you know issues such as permitting fees and regulatory process

[25:50] we would define all of that. One of the things that we're attempting to do is

[25:56] make a lower entry cost of home where we have a target. I hesitate to use

[26:03] numbers but we have a target in the in the range where the UCS Johnson County

[26:09] Housing Study put us that we ought to be targeting something around $400,000. So

[26:13] So, it's not an inexpensive home, but for over one part, an attainable home.

[26:20] So things like permitting fees, regulatory process will help driven in helping drive those

[26:28] costs.

[26:30] An oldman's scope and phasing would be a portion of the contract where we define what would

[26:34] actually get built.

[26:37] our homes with the appropriate finishes, whether it's on a basement or slab, the elements

[26:45] of how the homes built, its energy efficiency, so on, so forth, that would all be included

[26:51] in agreement we would deal with.

[26:56] Driven has a manner in which they are moving people to single-family home ownership, and

[27:03] And so there are some commitments about how we select what the affordability elements

[27:08] are, how we get people on that path, the home ownership, and we would apply those models

[27:14] in this agreement.

[27:16] We would talk about design quality and neighborhood compatibility, financing, or risk allocation.

[27:22] Those are the elements of what we would negotiate the staff.

[27:26] It should you give us now to 40 in detail with driven and bring back to you for future concern.

[27:36] So I'm going to go to the third topic here and that's really to introduce driven development and Christina Fenway.

[27:45] I think that what I want to make sure that you understand is we've done a little bit of looking around town and people who do this work.

[27:56] and we think the fact that driven is a nonprofit supported by the VAN Trust Development Group, and if you remember VAN Trust, maybe some of their more familiar work in this part of the city is a metal Brook Country Club, they did that redevelopment in concert with the county.

[28:15] So it's an idea of the quality that they're used to working with.

[28:21] But what we thought was important and what we really found with Driven was there, this whole

[28:30] idea of what is affordable is really a difficult question. And when we talked about that in framework

[28:36] OP, our community told us, listen, it isn't at the bottom end of an income range necessarily, or

[28:45] that's not the best way to define it. The best way to define it is talk about jobs like teachers,

[28:50] firefighters, police officers, nurses, health care, you know local government workers. We want

[28:57] the people that make our community go to be had the opportunity to live here. And what we found

[29:03] in ribbon was that very specific thing. And I put in in my staff comments what they call people

[29:12] empowering communities as a list of a representative list of what we would be trying to market this to.

[29:20] So, I'm going to stop there, but I wanted to explain a little bit about how we settled on

[29:27] driven and begun this conversation. I want to give Christine an opportunity to introduce herself

[29:34] and the company to you. Obviously, we'll both be available for questions. I have a couple of final

[29:40] wrap-up slides that I'll turn it over to Steve.

[29:43] All right well thank you Jack thank you all for the opportunity to introduce

[29:46] Irvin I do have some examples of those now but to jack's point

[29:51] driven development is a housing non-profit

[29:55] developer that has been fully operational for a little over a year.

[30:00] Vantrust and the Vantile family helped get driven established. We are a board

[30:06] government nonprofit separate from the for-profit entity of Vantrust, but have the

[30:12] benefit of utilizing their staff and back office and some of the expertise in

[30:19] development and construction to really use institutional construction and

[30:23] development expertise but keep a mission driven approach to the work that we do.

[30:28] So, we are developing and preserving all types of housing.

[30:34] So, I know today we're talking about home ownership

[30:37] and that is a big, big focus for us,

[30:39] but we are also doing multi-family.

[30:42] We are doing acquisitions of existing properties

[30:45] and trying to kind of bring those back to life.

[30:48] We have to date done projects only in the KCMO area

[30:53] But have a strong commitment and desire to help overland park in Johnson County, you know,

[31:01] create this type of housing.

[31:03] To Jack's point, also, we have a very specific mission right now to empower the people that

[31:09] power our communities.

[31:10] So we define that as emergency services, first responders, health care workers, educators,

[31:17] folks that work in nonprofit, folks that work in local government.

[31:21] So, our research suggests, I think some other research suggests that oftentimes those folks

[31:27] are priced out of the communities that they serve and so we are really narrowing in on

[31:33] product types that provide quality housing for those specific professions.

[31:40] We have today acquired, started or completed about 220 units of housing.

[31:47] three of those are brand new single-family homes. We're about to get started on

[31:51] our next seven in the next couple of months but what we've built today is very

[31:58] similar to the portfolio home kind of size. There are three or four bedrooms, two

[32:03] or three bathrooms, high-quality construction. What you would envision Van

[32:08] Trust developing but doing it at a nonprofit level. So that's how we're able to

[32:14] drive down the costs. We're expecting no profit going back to investors on these and that

[32:20] provides us the ability to create this housing for the folks that really need it. We're also

[32:26] able to leverage some of the relationships that Vantrust has with vendors to help with material

[32:32] costs and things like that. So, I was really excited about the opportunity and really want to focus

[32:38] is on delivering that attainable housing

[32:41] and opportunity for homeownership.

[32:45] I should note, I guess too,

[32:46] that we would like to do housing directly for sale,

[32:50] but we also have a rent to own model

[32:52] that we have created to allow people a runway

[32:57] to prepare for homeownership.

[32:59] That includes financial education

[33:03] so that there is debt reduction, mortgage, eligibility,

[33:06] credit repair, anything like that that may help a family step into home ownership and be more prepared to to maintain a home.

[33:15] So I will leave it at that as an introduction to driven.

[33:18] Great. I think I have just a couple more slides and so I know you probably all have questions and perhaps you just will finish up and then we can dive into questions.

[33:29] One of the things that Christina just mentioned is trying to drive down costs, and so far I've spoken to these four entities who are all interested in a system and some partnership.

[33:44] There are others that are not on this list that we would want to talk to and open up that kind of conversation.

[33:51] It's interesting that a wide variety of individuals have an interest in housing and affordability

[34:00] and how they impact that.

[34:02] And so all of these folks have that interest and I think that this is an opportunity for

[34:11] us to begin to explore.

[34:13] we've talked about this as a pilot project project. It's five buildings on one site,

[34:21] six buildings on another site, and it is an opportunity to learn a little bit more for

[34:28] all of us as part of that. So, I think this is an exciting opportunity, and I expect

[34:34] that as we get an opportunity to have this conversation further, this list will grow as well.

[34:40] So, I also want to talk a little bit about schedule.

[34:44] And I know that for many of you, this is, for the committee, this is the first time

[34:51] you're hearing about this project.

[34:53] This is an opportunity that staff has been exploring as to whether it's even feasible on

[34:59] some property that we had left over.

[35:03] We've gotten to that point.

[35:04] It doesn't mean that we're done.

[35:06] I already mentioned all of the other things that we're doing.

[35:09] You can see kind of a schedule here.

[35:11] You remember the tagline on Driven Slide that said a developer with no patients or

[35:16] a nonprofit with no patients.

[35:18] This is a very aggressive schedule that suggests construction might start in quarter one of

[35:24] 2027.

[35:25] We have a lot of work to get to there.

[35:27] We have a neighborhood meeting to have.

[35:29] We haven't talked with the neighbors.

[35:31] We need to.

[35:32] We have to go through a planning process.

[35:35] We're not going to exempt the city from that, so we have to do that.

[35:39] We have to do some engineering in construction to get the sites ready.

[35:43] And then we have to do, and then we have to get started with the building itself.

[35:49] So this is a early look at that schedule.

[35:53] All of these things that we're talking about are best estimate of how we might get started

[35:59] and what that looks like, as we get, as most things happen when we get into the discussion,

[36:06] these kinds of things may or may not change. But this is our best estimate of how these

[36:12] things might look. So with that, that's a description of the project. What we're looking for this evening

[36:20] is the authorization to move forward as outlined in our staff comments, which basically suggests that we

[36:28] We can begin negotiating with driven development for development agreement on this project.

[36:36] Be happy to answer any questions.

[36:39] Thank you, Jack, for that.

[36:40] I'm sure we have a lot of questions.

[36:42] I will start over the last 24 hours.

[36:45] I've gotten lots of comments and questions.

[36:49] I think there's definitely some misunderstanding about this project and where it stands.

[36:53] I'm thinking for outline of this is the first step of the process.

[36:56] because even if we aren't before,

[36:58] but I do wanna talk about the two remnants of land,

[37:04] full disclosure, let's smack in the middle

[37:07] of these two remnants of land.

[37:09] So I know them very well.

[37:12] I know everyone around me well.

[37:15] Was this our initial plan when purchasing this land

[37:20] of putting homes on this land?

[37:22] Now, the order of that process was it was a thoroughfare project, the Public Works Department

[37:30] was out there acquiring land for a thoroughfare project, and in these two particular cases

[37:36] that process led them to what is called a total taking, so they acquired the entire person.

[37:46] When that was done, the public works department then reserved the land they needed for all of the elements of the street, the sidewalk, a trail, and the green space associated with it.

[38:00] And then we have this leftover property and sort of staff talked about how would we use this leftover property and is there a city used to.

[38:15] They're really one of one of those individuals was the park's director and we didn't identify a need for a park.

[38:23] the size just wasn't quite right or located in the right spot and we the

[38:29] planning department had been working on the portfolio for some time and said

[38:35] that might be here and so we examined that so that's a little bit about the

[38:41] chronology of how that came to be.

[38:46] Okay thank you I got a concern about I know we're

[38:50] We'll probably talk about this in the planning process,

[38:52] but get there.

[38:54] Traffic and infrastructure concerns around these new homes.

[38:59] I know it's not a lot of homes,

[39:01] but considering what we have in the area now,

[39:05] will there be traffic study and studies done enough

[39:07] to make sure that we can handle all that?

[39:11] What I can tell you is the development process

[39:15] will follow that knee, whatever is required, I'm not trying to be evasive of the question,

[39:26] but I would say the roadway system is going to be able to handle the single-family homes

[39:34] that would be planting.

[39:36] But we will have more information about that.

[39:40] In terms of determining whether it worked or not, the planning staff did some initial analysis related to that in terms of where the access points were, whether there were some issues and did what the traffic related issues are fire accessed and the plans that you saw today fit that in terms of other infrastructure.

[40:06] sure that they would be served by sewers, sewers would need to be extended, they're available.

[40:13] There's some minor extension from the west for the property on 167th and kind of the

[40:20] north west from from kind of harms of the, I

[40:28] do,

[40:38] I mean, as we look at framework and this

[40:43] project as it looks towards

[40:45] character of the neighborhoods that's going to be next to how do the staff see

[40:50] how that relates because these houses are smaller than

[40:55] what they are and I know they're also concerns about property values and

[41:00] you know stuff like that so how do we see the city traditionally have we

[41:05] seen that happen when we put in smaller and

[41:08] smaller homes have gone in or other type of housing has gone in next to

[41:11] It seems like this and scene drops in property value.

[41:15] I think that drops in property value, I would say,

[41:22] show me the place where we've dropped in property value.

[41:26] We have a drop in property value in this city, in my team,

[41:30] it doesn't happen.

[41:32] The place where we are concerned about property value

[41:35] is where we're concerned at the end of 2008,

[41:38] along Metcalf and we saw Decline decline produces property value issues development increases

[41:50] property. So if the concern is is a decline in property value, I don't believe that will

[41:57] happen staff does believe that plan. The character question I think is an analysis that I want to

[42:03] reserved for the planning department to make in more detail.

[42:08] They're single family homes.

[42:11] A few duplex units at the Northern Project going in and single family homes.

[42:19] So I don't think it's incompatible from that perspective.

[42:23] I don't think it's incompatible from the character framework from that perspective.

[42:28] But I also want to reserve that for the planning department to analyze and be fair to them to give them the opportunity.

[42:38] Christine, I have a few questions.

[42:41] Welcome. I want to, I'm mostly interested if we were to do this that they be owned.

[42:49] But if you know, I did read your website, and I do know you do the right time.

[42:55] So talk to me about eligibility and how this works.

[42:59] I know this is not the same as have it have for humanity, I want everyone to make sure

[43:03] they understand that.

[43:04] This is not HUD housing, either.

[43:09] And talk about how that eligibility works.

[43:13] Is there any, I mean, maybe this has to be an agreement checks at all and we are stepping,

[43:16] is there going to be HOA requirement so that we are whatever agreement we

[43:22] come to we're holding it here because even though we're trying to do for

[43:26] first-home buyers here I did get a concern today it what someone wants to

[43:30] come and buy all six of those properties and run them out how do we kind of how

[43:36] do we stop that from happening because that's what we don't want to do it

[43:39] start this program and have it go in a direction that it was not intended to go

[43:44] I mean, I think one of the ways that we're able to control some of that is that if we now I want to make certain that everybody understands to that we are not not open to going direct to sale.

[43:57] We just feel like a rent to own model helps especially teachers and folks in health care.

[44:05] first responders have a runway to home ownership that might be necessary in

[44:11] terms of us helping with down payment savings the resident you know going

[44:17] through financial education courses or whatever that may look like so that is

[44:23] just our way of helping people kind of on ramp into home ownership but we are not

[44:28] against a direct-to-sale model.

[44:32] But we would own and operate those properties as the nonprofit.

[44:37] We would manage them, maintain them,

[44:40] and we would have control over who leases those properties

[44:45] and then becomes eligible to become the homeowner.

[44:48] So how we have done that to date

[44:51] is we target all those folks we just talked about.

[44:55] educators, first responders, self-care workers, etc.

[45:00] We do not take them to market and blast them on Zillow for rent so that thousands of people

[45:06] see them. We do direct marketing with school districts, healthcare systems, police stations,

[45:14] fire stations, and say, who really needs housing? This is an opportunity for us to help those

[45:20] folks please encourage your employees to apply. We set the rent so that those families can afford

[45:30] that rent and a portion of that rent is saved to then help with down payment assistance.

[45:36] It is a standard lease during the lease term. However, we have the right to offer that home to

[45:45] sale to the person living there, the family living there, when they are ready, when the market

[45:51] is ready, when they are mortgage eligible. We also retain the right to say, hey, you may not be

[45:57] ready. We need to sell this home. This home was intended for home ownership, and we can either get

[46:03] somebody else into the program or we can go direct to sale in the market. But our intention is that

[46:10] all of these become owned properties. We're not we're not going to sell them to investors. We're

[46:17] going to lease them or sell them directly to people in those categories that we're really trying to

[46:24] serve. Today is there all your questions? Yeah, it's a jack. Can we put some of that stuff in this

[46:30] agreement? Absolutely. And we fully intend to. I think that one of the things that is we're

[46:39] excited about is the folks that Christine is talking about. We want this to be a blue valley

[46:46] teacher right down the road from blue valley west right up the road from blue valley south west.

[46:51] We want this to be an overall park firefighter. That's what we're after here. We're trying to find

[46:58] that pathway for people that are in our community that can't be here to be. And so that's the goal

[47:09] So the goal will be supported by the development agreement and we will be talking on what that looks like with you also mentioned briefly HOA and and so we will have we will have restricted covenants we envision restricted covenants applied to the property for for some of these kinds of things we also envision there would be some level of HOA between these properties that that again controls

[47:39] roles, controls, neighborhood character, many of our HOAs in this city operate their

[47:47] trash system.

[47:48] We got to figure out how to operate a waste collection system here, and so we can see

[47:53] that happening as well.

[47:55] So we see there being an HOA.

[47:57] We see there being a structure, not like any community, residential community in London.

[48:08] This is exciting.

[48:10] We've been talking about this just before I was elected.

[48:14] So I have big, big picture questions and then specific questions.

[48:23] So we launched the portfolio homes and we've been researching it and really excited about it for a long time.

[48:30] And it's exciting to see us put it into action to actually look at it to see what the product is.

[48:36] We know we've been getting lots of conversation with people wanting these homes.

[48:41] These look attractive and people are ready to buy them immediately.

[48:46] Where are they working to buy them?

[48:48] So, this is our first step in looking at them in real time and building them.

[48:57] I love it, I love this concept I want them to go everywhere and want them to be in our

[49:03] and fill sites that are having a really hard time finding a product to go into the site.

[49:10] So I guess my big picture questions are,

[49:20] the question we're trying to solve with this

[49:22] are portfolio homes is how do we make this doable other places, right?

[49:29] Will we always need a partner to get this to happen?

[49:36] We won't be able to donate land with every project.

[49:39] How do we work

[49:43] on that equation?

[49:44] You know, obviously, that's going to be a factor in other spots.

[49:50] I

[49:54] have a lot of questions.

[49:55] Let me keep going.

[49:56] You're doing a Chinese answer.

[49:57] Let me take a shot at a few of those a little bit.

[50:01] Those aren't, I mean, maybe they are a big picture.

[50:06] So the best way, it's a pilot.

[50:09] It's a test. It's not a huge number of houses. We expect to learn a lot. We expect to test

[50:21] a little bit, like try a couple of different things. We expect to get a complete and detailed

[50:29] cost report from driven about and anything that's donated or used in kind or

[50:39] anything we expect to capture market value out of it so we can report on what it

[50:44] really goes.

[50:47] Our home building industry you know the market is building average

[50:52] 5,000 square foot houses. How come we're not building anything else? That's the

[50:57] big picture question in my mind and maybe it's just can't happen. I don't know that maybe what our conclusion is at the end of this.

[51:07] But what this opportunity gives us is a couple of pieces of land to determine what that really is. So proof of concept to proof of use is what is what we're having.

[51:22] We've had a few, we've had some feedback from builders that, hey, we really like this, but nobody's done it, we don't want to be first.

[51:32] So part of the idea might be to show, show that it can be done, and this is why we have driven to help us do it.

[51:42] You heard, you heard Christina say they're not after a profit necessarily they have a different mission and that's

[51:49] What I think matches what we're trying to do so I hope I got your first

[51:54] And then with our partners are these like folks who are willing to donate

[52:00] Services and help out like financially that and where are they more like we would like to like Blue Valley like to see teachers

[52:09] I think both I think both

[52:12] I think that we, the general conversations that we've had have been with some of those

[52:20] utilities that you saw on the list about, can we give reductions in fee connections

[52:25] and things like that?

[52:27] Maybe they have other ideas too.

[52:29] We haven't explored those in detail.

[52:31] It's just been a general conversation about, we have this need, you know there's a need,

[52:36] do you want to be a part of it?

[52:38] And they won't say yes.

[52:39] And I think the out of box thinking on this is excellent because we all have been feeling the need for more housing and this grouping that we obviously have made has been what the market has been calling for us to do.

[52:55] So it's exciting to see us thinking about that and how this specific size look helped to

[53:05] create a diversity in neighborhoods that only will make neighborhoods stronger.

[53:12] I feel like the neighborhoods who have more diversity and different housing types

[53:17] I feel like become stronger neighborhoods and become really cohesive units.

[53:23] It's exciting to see them, and they're such beautiful signs.

[53:27] I think that's a little for now to you.

[53:29] Okay, Drew.

[53:31] Three questions.

[53:33] I think the first one, maybe it's for both of you,

[53:36] but just schedule.

[53:37] Obviously you've indicated this as an aggressive schedule.

[53:41] I've never built a housing subdivision.

[53:43] So just a lot of the projects we approve take a long time to actually get built.

[53:49] Can you talk about this schedule and how aggressive it is versus making the difficult schedule?

[53:53] schedule that you guys see and maybe

[54:00] where exactly we're able to accelerate

[54:02] so it's time wise. Yeah it's a really tough question because now the follow-up

[54:11] and that is how come you don't make it happen forever. But I think that I think that

[54:17] one of the things that we've done you know at the front end is we kind of know

[54:23] So what we want to build, we have a very small and discrete two parcels.

[54:33] We kind of have a good idea of where that's going.

[54:38] So you see, I think you see some real acceleration at the front end of this schedule.

[54:46] I think design development, they're very simple and straightforward infrastructure pieces.

[54:52] So, you see a Q3, a Q1, 2027 design development.

[54:58] That is a very, that's very fast.

[55:00] It's compared to what we normally get.

[55:03] I mean, we don't get very many

[55:07] to parcel subdivisions with seven structures

[55:10] or whatever the number is.

[55:13] And so a project a construct,

[55:14] I mean, that's the project a construction starter

[55:17] would be a Q1, 27.

[55:18] But I think that where you see that the speed is in that design development and kind of getting the second minute.

[55:30] It's a great point about how we don't see proposals where there's just five or six buildings.

[55:36] Not only do we only see extremely large houses, but we see large footprints.

[55:41] questions. And so I also want to emphasize this is very often.

[55:48] I'm saying that

[55:49] in front of Christina when she's saying, can we go faster? So just there's

[55:55] going to be some there's going to be some work to do to me. So actually the

[56:00] why can't we do this for everyone? I think is my next question, which is like

[56:05] financing. I mean, this simplifies the financing for the developer. So maybe

[56:10] talk a little bit about the difference between why it's a perfect fit for us to find a nonprofit

[56:15] partner versus what a for-profit developer might be needing to achieve in terms of return on

[56:22] investment and how that how they have to be dead and equity partners and how we eliminate that

[56:29] in this project. Well, I am really going to let Christine talk about that. I have a viewpoint

[56:37] that I'll mention, I think that at the city, at any city,

[56:47] it's important to know what we do and do it well.

[56:52] And I think it's also important for a city

[56:55] to take a long-term view of what we do,

[56:59] because it's more than just the return, the immediate return.

[57:03] And so for us, we, what was important and what drew us to driven is they had a mission

[57:11] and a bigger mission than just the marketplace.

[57:17] But they survived within a development group that is still a for-profit entity.

[57:23] So they have many of the same elements and needs for that.

[57:27] So, I see that as a very, very compatible kind of relationship with the city.

[57:37] We're not looking necessarily for a big profit return.

[57:42] We're looking to accomplish a goal that is similar to that.

[57:47] So, that's how I would answer from the city perspective.

[57:50] But I think Christina will have a much more interesting answer.

[57:53] Oh don't don't think I think from from driven's perspective to jack's point we are utilizing

[58:04] the same underwriting, the same construction methodology, the same disciplines and development

[58:11] that VanTrust utilizes.

[58:13] We're going to use the same concepts of a meadowbrook.

[58:17] We are just eliminating the need to pay an investor 10, 15, 20 percent, whatever that number

[58:26] is on top of the cost of the home.

[58:30] And we are leaning on partnerships that we have to drive that cost down.

[58:35] And so we don't have return expectations.

[58:38] We just want to deliver a quality product at an attainable price point.

[58:45] We, that isn't to say that we are not seeking some traditional bank debt type structures.

[58:54] We actually did our first three single family homes, all cash grant dollars.

[59:00] There was no debt in those, but we are working with banks that want to be a part of this to

[59:06] also get aggressive in how they're lending so that we're not adding additional carry costs

[59:13] and interest costs and things that would drive up the cost of the home.

[59:16] So I think really what we're doing is we're delivering a market product, but we're just

[59:22] eliminating the profit.

[59:24] It's a great answer, and to that end, I would say, I think it'd be better if you thank

[59:30] you for being in the department of the park on that mission.

[59:34] My last question is maybe a little less rosy.

[59:39] So sort of a sunset clause on this property control.

[59:44] So obviously we've done deals in the path to re-control the property.

[59:47] And then we hope that somebody takes it on to develop housing or something else.

[59:52] Overland Park Farmers Market is one example where the housing side hasn't worked down yet,

[59:57] but we still control that property.

[59:59] So how are you thinking?

[1:00:00] About that, our ability to control this property long term up until the point where it's ready to go to somebody else. I'm not going to tell you that in public in front of Chris. That is going to be in the go shade. Well, then my point is it'll think about it will have. It is definitely it is definitely in our mind how we work through site control and the minutes done will will be an issue that we have to work through.

[1:00:28] Thank you.

[1:00:33] I am millionaires of fellow nonprofit worker with driven development and a little bit to

[1:00:40] your point, Drew.

[1:00:41] I think the reason why developers don't build these types of homes is because it's not

[1:00:47] profitable.

[1:00:48] We've become gotten so far away from the idea of housing as a human right and more about

[1:00:57] how much money can I make.

[1:00:58] So I really don't see how we can, unless there's a developer out there who, and I'm willing to be wrong, I think this nonprofit model is probably the way to go with these portfolio homes.

[1:01:12] The price point, $400,000 as someone who works for a nonprofit, I still can't afford to be on it. I read.

[1:01:20] So, if we're serious about, and this maybe gets back to eligibility and who we're targeting

[1:01:26] with these homes, is what else can we do to help make these accessible for first responders

[1:01:35] teachers, those service workers that we say we value so much, but make it so difficult

[1:01:40] to live here.

[1:01:41] And that's not directed at anyone in particular, it's just, it's what happens when we let

[1:01:47] market dictate so much of what we perceive as what's profit.

[1:01:54] So my question to the staff is as we move forward with this, is that we talk about it's

[1:01:59] not just about the cost of the home, it's also all the other things that it takes to afford

[1:02:05] maintaining a house.

[1:02:07] So I would want to have deeper conversations about are there some other incentives, other

[1:02:13] ways of getting folks in to ensure that they have that stable housing and can continue

[1:02:18] to live there? Is that just more, less of a question or more in a kid place?

[1:02:23] Yeah, it's good input. Thank you. I think that's another thing you've heard Christina talk about

[1:02:32] in their rent, rent to ownership model is really that runway of figuring out all of those things

[1:02:40] that are part of a larger so I do want to I hesitated to mention it that $400,000 I want to describe

[1:02:50] that a little bit more because I don't want us to get that place that's some sort of obstacle

[1:02:58] right it's really reflective of a number identified in the in the 2019 UCS Johnson County

[1:03:09] housing study. That's been inflated to today. So it's just like you should be. This is a range

[1:03:18] where you should try to find some housing in the single family ownership range. So that's where

[1:03:25] it comes from. I think I think the recognition of bringing in partners that drive down costs that

[1:03:33] help us meet needs of folks that may not be able to afford that house

[1:03:38] necessarily, but are in that target market is exactly the target market.

[1:03:44] Can I just add that the three homes that we've built to date all in costs for

[1:03:51] about $335,000. But with partnerships and other funding we were able to drive

[1:03:59] those costs down. So I think that was our goal on those homes and really frankly where they're

[1:04:08] located we would have loved to drive the cost down even further but I think we're really looking to

[1:04:13] what fits contextually in these areas that we're talking about in Oberlin Park and those numbers

[1:04:20] are always different but we were able to build those homes for about 330 and drive that cost down to

[1:04:26] just under 300. Went partnerships from materials or other grant funding or things like that. But

[1:04:33] the quality of the home is, you know, there are granted countertops and stainless steel appliances

[1:04:40] and the same flooring that you see in the 5,000 square foot homes. I mean, the quality is still there,

[1:04:46] we're finding other ways to drive the home. Thank you for the additional.

[1:04:53] I can't want to talk about the

[1:04:55] economics and the pricing so we're able to keep the cost of that. Don't

[1:05:01] any land or land is not traditional purchase. We're able to get discount

[1:05:06] on connectivity on everything. So we landed a price in all-end price.

[1:05:15] We have

[1:05:16] that number. Then we have sale number. So how do we get to that sale number?

[1:05:26] We're

[1:05:26] for 330? Are you selling it for 330? It does that 330 house or whatever it is. Does that match

[1:05:35] mark it? Not my concern, but what I'm just thinking about is if there's a delta between the price

[1:05:44] we put it on the market for and the price that you can turn around the date to itself. That's $100,000.

[1:05:51] That's what we're bringing you to think about.

[1:05:53] It's $50,000, something you might need to think about.

[1:05:56] Because if that becomes, you know, who's chosen for those,

[1:06:00] you're giving them a boost with that advantage.

[1:06:05] I don't think it's a reason not to do this.

[1:06:06] It's a pilot, it's a learning and to do it,

[1:06:08] but it's something I'm just thinking about in terms of,

[1:06:11] removing money around.

[1:06:12] Are we transferring, you know, you're not like my profit,

[1:06:16] but somebody's gonna get one if we're doing it

[1:06:19] at under a cost.

[1:06:19] So I don't know if there's any question there, just some thoughts on if you have any thoughts on that too.

[1:06:25] Do you have any thoughts?

[1:06:27] Well, and again, I think we're open to negotiating an agreement that works for everyone.

[1:06:33] Again, to what we've done to date, which is not a set and stone model, but we are not setting a purchase price for the future.

[1:06:42] So we're not setting a, hey, no matter what we're going to sell it for this.

[1:06:46] We're letting some market dynamics play out, but saying that we're going to come in, and as a nonprofit, sell it slightly below market so that someone can get into that.

[1:06:57] But that is also a function of the rent to own model.

[1:07:01] So we have not sold a house directly to Dave, so that may change how that is done.

[1:07:08] But that's how we've modeled this thus far.

[1:07:12] And I fully anticipate that's a that's a negotiation question to I think there will be I

[1:07:20] mean I have it we haven't talked about this but I think there will be some tenure of

[1:07:25] kind of concerns that we would have we don't want someone coming in and buying it and selling

[1:07:30] it the next day there this is you're going to have to stay there a bit and build a little

[1:07:36] And so I think that's what we can't control that forever. I don't think that we can don't think that I think that our limits on what we can do with the market

[1:07:49] Should be restricted. There is an end to that. There is. I don't know where that is, but there isn't it. So really good.

[1:08:01] Right.

[1:08:01] Okay, we just said donating the land, are we donating the land?

[1:08:05] So the land was acquired through the grant.

[1:08:10] We are as part of a project, we acquired it with our own money, the city's own money.

[1:08:17] There is, we will have to work out a transfer of the property that will involve some cost.

[1:08:25] How we're going to work that out is you have to be determined that we have to do that.

[1:08:29] So we're not done.

[1:08:30] be a required we're not only donating the land? Well donation is an undefined term. I think

[1:08:37] that what we're going to do is transfer the land in some way that there is a reduced or lesser

[1:08:44] cost. If we don't for a dollar we're not donating it really but we kind of are are you thinking

[1:08:50] about this type of thing? I think that what we have to I'm the reason I'm hesitating is because

[1:08:55] is I have to understand the process.

[1:08:57] There's a federal funding process

[1:08:59] that I have to understand,

[1:09:01] exactly what that's going to look in.

[1:09:04] I'm not there yet.

[1:09:05] And you said we bought this land

[1:09:07] or part of the grant.

[1:09:09] Is that a key dot?

[1:09:11] Is that a federal?

[1:09:12] So the, the, we built,

[1:09:14] slides area and we built a 167 street with federal dollars.

[1:09:19] We acquired the property with city money.

[1:09:23] So 100% city money.

[1:09:25] but because the overall project was a federally funded project there are restrictions on how we

[1:09:31] can then disperse.

[1:09:37] Maybe a last question for me. You mentioned there's 220 homes that you've

[1:09:42] developed. There are 220 units, not all single family homes. So you talked 220 said seven here and then

[1:09:50] I got really confused. So if you don't mind kind of recapture that for us, how many of these types of

[1:09:57] homes. These are portfolio homes are pretty unique, but we're talking about, you know, these new

[1:10:01] homes that are going into a kind of a brown field, you know, situation. Tell us about how many you've

[1:10:09] done in that category and where are those? So of the 220 units, only three of those are single family

[1:10:18] homes. The other units are acquisitions or multi-family construction. We are getting ready to get started

[1:10:26] on our next seven single family homes. We plan to do 14 in total this year. Those are all on the

[1:10:33] east side of Kansas City, Missouri. They're all in fill lots with environmental issues and title

[1:10:40] issues that we work through clearing and getting sight and, you know, title ready. We have a 25 year

[1:10:51] single-family home developer on staff to help us find the right partners to do

[1:10:58] these. We realized that building three single-family homes doesn't sound that

[1:11:03] impressive today but we have to staff and kind of the back office if

[1:11:08] interest to text. I heard 220 sure a lot of people heard that so I just I'm trying

[1:11:15] to help a click on this.

[1:11:17] Chair, those are all my questions.

[1:11:20] Really quick, how long have we had those slides appropriate?

[1:11:25] Oh, good question.

[1:11:26] I don't really answer that question, but it's probably been two,

[1:11:31] a couple years, two or three years.

[1:11:34] So I mean, the...

[1:11:36] No, no, no.

[1:11:37] I heard it's going to be a tariff.

[1:11:43] 167th, yes.

[1:11:45] 167th would have been a couple.

[1:11:47] So we would have been, I don't know exactly when we're working on the project, but the acquisition

[1:11:54] of right away comes well in advance of the project.

[1:11:58] So it could be just in the last year that 170 terrorists, 167th was a second project.

[1:12:06] Do

[1:12:09] you see this effecting the UDO conversation at all?

[1:12:14] Do I see this affecting the UDO commission?

[1:12:19] I think this is...

[1:12:20] It's just enhancing the portfolio.

[1:12:22] I think that, you know, we're updating a 40-year-old land use code, unified developer

[1:12:36] to the UDO.

[1:12:37] and I don't think that the UNIO envisioned things like this.

[1:12:45] I think that it is part of that proof of concept.

[1:12:49] It is part of being a pilot.

[1:12:52] We have a lot of opportunities for land to be used as infill land

[1:12:59] that perhaps people haven't envisioned that yet.

[1:13:03] and so I think that this will be a teaching opportunity in the UDO update. Yes.

[1:13:12] And it goes to the block from my house, a half duplex full of $300,000, and it is 60 years old.

[1:13:21] So $300,000 for a brand new home, you know, over one mark, really crazy.

[1:13:28] So you use a 300.

[1:13:32] I don't think these are 300 though. We heard 400. There's 300 that don't. I mean, we haven't land on a price here, but I'm just paying the market is.

[1:13:41] Do you want to use precise numbers?

[1:13:50] I just want to make sure this is a question that came across today.

[1:13:54] This is not stopping the expansion of the Switzer project in my correct.

[1:13:58] No, knowing on right now.

[1:14:00] Yeah.

[1:14:00] Anything that we're talking about here.

[1:14:04] Switzer is on building that project that next space.

[1:14:08] So we will be adding that walkability of the bike trail.

[1:14:11] Right. There will be a bike hike trail.

[1:14:13] there'll be sidewalks, there'll be spaces for for our normal fluorophair design. The acquisition

[1:14:22] of this property reserve would would would we would reserve what is needed for the street.

[1:14:30] The full street and and then whatever what we're talking about here today is what's left over.

[1:14:38] So what you're asking for tonight just I want to make this perfectly clear and

[1:14:43] what you're asking for us to do. You're simply asking us to really okay to

[1:14:51] negotiate with driven and agreement to possibly start this project. That agreement

[1:14:59] We'll be brought back.

[1:15:14] We're giving the staff the authorization to negotiate a development driven driven that includes the use of its property. We would negotiate those details, bring those details back to you as the Fayette Committee.

[1:15:29] go through the details of it with you to make sure that we're all clear on what

[1:15:33] that says. Many of the questions you asked tonight will likely be answered at some

[1:15:39] level of better detail. So that's that's what we're asking for too.

[1:15:46] And I just want

[1:15:47] to say that you know it is I re-emphasize this is the first step. One of the

[1:15:54] things that we're going to require driven to do is work with us on a neighborhood

[1:15:59] So that we can begin to talk with the neighbors when and a part of approval of an agreement we would do that that's that's part of how that phase is into the project.

[1:16:17] I am looking to the committee direct stats and negotiate development in real estate disposition agreements.

[1:16:27] We've driven developed housing to portfolio homes using remnant functions of the city of land to be brought back to committee

[1:16:38] Comments

[1:16:39] One comment is not everybody in the room has heard my soliloquies on

[1:16:45] Despite the project is a 34 million dollar project

[1:16:50] If you want to look at the map the land on the east side of the project is screen field

[1:16:54] Maybe this is getting ahead of the planning process, but if our conclusion is that at some point traffic cannot be supported on our $34 million thoroughfare project for new development of 16 new units.

[1:17:08] I'll have a lot of concerns about why we spent that $34 million.

[1:17:11] dollars. We also have 112 million dollars in our CIP for future thoroughfare projects and I hope

[1:17:18] that we use those projects as an opportunity to look for remnant parcels where we can add house

[1:17:22] if this project goes well. So those are my comments on this. My last comment is driven is kind of

[1:17:28] the toast of the town right now in the nonprofit development community and we have a great partner

[1:17:33] at the table with us, so I wish them well.

[1:17:36] I'd be supporting the motion.

[1:17:39] Holly?

[1:17:39] I second the motion story.

[1:17:41] I'm excited to see our portfolio homes get launched.

[1:17:45] The community has been begging us to build houses.

[1:17:48] Not six thousand sort of homes.

[1:17:51] But houses that everyone is clamoring to buy.

[1:17:54] So hopefully this is a jump start to get those homes into our neighborhoods.

[1:18:00] Any more comments?

[1:18:02] I will meet my comments.

[1:18:04] I'm going to be voting yes tonight on this and moving this green forward.

[1:18:08] I do fully believe that when we're doing any kind of development or any project,

[1:18:12] first step entry before an agreement is made is not to jump ahead

[1:18:17] and guess the end goal is start to see how the process works.

[1:18:22] My job is to read the agreement in depth and to make sure it fits in

[1:18:27] and that character goals would be fit for the neighborhood on both sides of me and support my

[1:18:34] constituents. But I think I do believe it's important. This is hard being the first to do attainable

[1:18:45] housing is important. And I know we have another meeting but I'm just going to say this. I remember by my

[1:18:51] My first house, which was 1,800 square feet, was $159,000 in 2002.

[1:18:59] Can't get that here, I mean, it's at 24 years later.

[1:19:05] My kids can't get that.

[1:19:06] And I do have a aspiring teacher who will voice concerns about housing to me just recently.

[1:19:16] So I think it's important that I take at least this first step, but investigating this, holding the city accountable

[1:19:27] and making sure that you're doing the right thing the whole way through so that we do it right.

[1:19:32] That's one thing I think Overland Park does do well. We take our time.

[1:19:36] We talk to the neighbors. We are transparent about the entire project.

[1:19:40] and when we do something like this we do it right the first time and we are

[1:19:46] successful the first time so I will be going yes with that let's all those in

[1:19:53] favor say aye I also pose same sign not pass the junior we have one more on our

[1:20:02] agenda item I need some approval minutes you got a motion I move to approve the

[1:20:07] minutes from November 19th, 2025 in January 21st, 2026.

[1:20:13] I got a motion and a second.

[1:20:15] Questions and comments?

[1:20:16] All right.

[1:20:17] All right.

[1:20:18] All those opposed?

[1:20:19] Same side.

[1:20:20] And that passes unanimously.

[1:20:22] We are adjourned for receiving.

[1:20:24] Thank you for everyone who came.

[1:20:26] You appreciate it.

[1:20:27] And we will move into the committee.

[1:20:29] The whole.

Mar 23, 2026 Finance, Administration and Economic Development Committee

Agenda

Transcript