Kansas City neighborhood pushes for historic status to ward off further demolition

Part of a Midtown neighborhood could gain local historic status, placing new protections and regulations on its buildings after more than 20 nearby demolitions by an area insurance company.

Kansas City’s Historic Preservation Commission voted on June 27 to recommend a request by the Valentine Neighborhood Association to turn a section of Valentine — south of West 35th Street and north of Valentine Road between Pennsylvania Avenue and Southwest Trafficway — into the Norman School Historic District, named after the historic school that has been converted into lofts.

The request comes as the neighborhood association works toward national historic status for the neighborhood.

The commission voted that Valentine would be eligible for its unique architectural characteristics, dating back to when the area transformed into an early streetcar suburb featuring colonnade apartments and shirtwaist houses, among other prominent architecture types as a microcosm of Kansas City in the earlier 20th century.

That was before the streetcar line was taken down in 1951 and Southwest Trafficway was completed as cars became the main mode of transportation.

Substantial changes to properties in a historic district that would be visible to the public are subject to review by the preservation commission to make sure the changes fit the district’s character. Other changes can be approved by city staff.

Owners also face stronger regulations if they want to demolish buildings in a historic district, which could be delayed for three years.

Other nearby historic districts include parts of Roanoke, Coleman Highlands and Hyde Park. The Plan Commission is expected to consider the Norman School proposal at a later date, and the City Council would have final approval.

Kansas City Life demolitions in Valentine

Hanging over the historic district application are the roughly two dozen demolitions of homes in Valentine, outside of the Norman School boundaries, in fall 2024.

Residents mourned after Kansas City Life Insurance, which owned the homes, pursued the demolitions and called the buildings unsafe and non-viable, but said they planned future development.

The demolitions have left the blocks between 33rd Street and 35th Street almost entirely empty.

Within the proposed Norman School district, KC Life has proposed demolishing four more buildings, including two colonnades facing Southwest Trafficway. The company says the structures are dangerous and saving them is not feasible.

KC Life has presented an early vision for redevelopment in the neighborhood with new homes, including knocking down the two dilapidated colonnades in the Norman area and replacing them with a new colonnade court that would add 30 units of new housing.

The historic district application has delayed those demolitions.

Advocates for the local historic designation say there’s a bigger picture, beyond KC Life.

“This is a designation that has real meaningful impact on the ground, and can have the potential for catalyzing compatible redevelopment and reinvestment in our community,” Ethan Starr, executive director of Historic KC, told The Star.

That big picture includes eventually getting the neighborhood on the National Register of Historic Places. Neighborhood leaders have been working on an application since 2019.

That would not only document Valentine’s history, but it could unlock tax credits and grants for rehab projects in the neighborhood — including KC Life’s, Starr said.

Neighborhood leaders said they need to seek historic status in pieces, rather than all of Valentine at once, because there are non-contiguous areas. The fall demolitions also upended the application.

Neighbors split on historic designation

The Valentine Neighborhood Association says that it believes a majority of property owners in the proposed historic district support the change.

KC Life opposes it and says that a majority of properties in the area have owners who are against the plan.

There are 67 lots in the area, including nine that are vacant. KC Life owns 18 of those properties.

Meanwhile, some residents who were supportive have since changed their minds.

Supporters include Anna Seydel of the neighborhood association, who lives in the proposed district.

She told the preservation commission that she was drawn to the neighborhood by the opportunity to live in a well-built and character-rich home. Seydel has been inspired by the strong sense of community among her neighbors.

The local historic status would provide stability and reassurance in what makes Valentine special, Seydel said, while attracting investment and inspiring pride.

“Architecture, the scale, the history, all of that’s protected,” she said. “It really gives us all of the confidence that future development will respect and reflect the unique character that we’ve all chosen to be part of.”

The KC Life demolitions have raised concerns that the wrecking ball could go further south, into the Norman School area, Seydel said, further threatening the neighborhood. Supporters want a safeguard.

“We are not against responsible and thoughtful development. We welcome collaboration with developers who share our vision of enhancing what already makes this neighborhood very special,” she said. “Local historic designation does not prevent redevelopment. Instead, it helps guide it intentionally.”

Development more difficult?

KC Life calls the proposal an abuse of the historic designation process in an attempt to stop the company from demolishing four properties in the proposed district.

Attorney David Frantze, representing KC Life at the hearing, said there is a false narrative that the company owns a lot of property, runs it down and demolishes it. He said that KC Life once owned even more properties within the Norman School area, and they remain intact after the company sold them to new owners.

He acknowledged that KC Life demolished the houses north of 35th Street, but said they were very old structures that had fallen into disrepair, and noted that city planning documents call for higher-density development in that area.

“We need to accept the reality that designation of a historic district is a substantial impediment on the property rights of the owners in the district,” Frantze said. “That’s a given.”

He said historic status would make the path forward to redevelopment more complex.

“It’s more expensive, and it will not drive investment,” Frantze said. “It will scare away investment in the district, particularly in the areas where you’re dealing with projects that are going to be marginal from a financial standpoint anyway.”

Higher costs for renovations?

Residents who oppose the historic status have concerns that the new standards and regulations could make it more difficult and costly to make repairs and renovations to their homes.

Resident Julie Fast, who lives in the proposed area, told the commission that Valentine stole her heart even before she moved to Kansas City and dreamed of living in the homes one day, never thinking it would be a reality.

“Fast forward, and not only did I move to Kansas City, but I’m buying a home in the neighborhood I’d fallen in love with, a beautiful home built at the turn of the century,” she said.

“One of the things I sought after most in any home I’ve purchased was a home where I wasn’t bound by excess rules and regulations for what I could and couldn’t do with my home. It was one of the things I hated most about the suburbs.”

But historic status would add costs to her home maintenance and renovation budget that she did not have to consider when moving into the neighborhood, Fast said.

Fast believes the idea of historic designation for the neighborhood needs to be separated from the idea of stopping KC Life from making undesirable changes to the neighborhood.

Opponents worry about the potential for higher property values and the impact on property taxes and the ability for people to buy homes in the area while limiting future redevelopment on lots that need it.

Fast said she fears that maintenance and upgrades could get more expensive, negatively affecting the upkeep of properties in the neighborhood.

“I fear that added cost and increased property values would keep new neighbors from being able to purchase or rent properties and move into our great neighborhood, and I fear that the added cost of redevelopment would mean that the currently vacant land would continue to sit vacant instead of being redeveloped into something beautiful,” she said.

Fast said she didn’t want to pretend there isn’t a history between the neighborhood and KC Life.

“The fear and mistrust that the neighborhood has stems from a history that predates most of us in this room,” she said. “But I’m hoping that we can turn that fear and mistrust into working together.”

Supporters and historic commission members say there are misconceptions about what it means to live in a historic district and that property owners do not need to be spooked, as city staff and the commission work with residents to help them get projects done.

And they say that being in a historic district brings advantages to homeowners like increased property values while reducing the possibility that they will be surrounded by demolished, vacant lots.

Several nearby neighborhood associations also filed letters of support for historic status in Valentine.

Valentine neighborhood leaders have said they heard from those in areas that already have historic status that concerns are often overstated, while the status has brought benefits that include thoughtful growth and preserving character.