mapping community development in kansas city mscdc...

1

Mapping Community Development in Kansas City MSCDC Economic Report Series No. 9902 September 2000 By Douglas H. Bowles Center for Economic Information, University of Missouri-Kansas City Introduction

Within our urban communities, diverse groups exist with diverse development agendas. These include the following (not necessarily mutually exclusive) groups:

Private sector, profit-oriented metropolitan development interests Local government interests, including urban planners, administrators, revenue

offices, and political leadership “Civic” leadership1 Corporate business interests with national and global market penetration Local and national-level charitable foundations Governmental and non-profit sector social service agencies and funders (such

as United Way) Non-profit community-based development organizations (CDCs, CCIs, etc.) State and Federal agencies with an urban mission, such as HUD (the U.S.

Department of Housing and Urban Development) Last (and often least), neighborhood/community residents, activists, and

leaders From this diversity of groups with diverse development interests emerges a diversity of

goals, policy preferences, and prescriptions. There exists an ongoing need for the most rigorous tools and methods available which can help these groups with the choice and evaluation of alternative policy implementations.

The relatively recent emergence of GIS (Geographic Information Systems) 2 applications has introduced the potential for new tools and methods in the field of urban and community development. In Kansas City, the GPLAN Project is emerging as a collaborative, parcel-based GIS model and methodology with the potential to help evaluate this diversity of metropolitan development policy agendas. Evolution of the GPLAN Project and the residential conditions survey

The Neighborhood GPLAN project evolved in Kansas City between 1997 and 1999 as one outcome of the activities funded by a HUD COPC grant to the University of Missouri--Kansas City (UMKC), involving the joint effort of The Center for Economic Information (CEI) and The Urban Affairs Program in the College of Arts and Sciences.

The specific grant activity which provided the organizing momentum for the GPLAN project was generically called neighborhood “asset mapping.” Asset mapping is an exercise which usually employs the idea of “mapping” in a relatively figurative sense. The CEI’s ability to work with GIS software applications provided an opportunity to perform this exercise literally. 1 This is a term often used to refer to the active leadership of relatively wealthy and successful private sector interests who are well-established among the local metropolitan social elite. 2 Geographic Information Systems, or GIS, is the name for computer software applications that utilize digital mapping functions in conjunction with relational database functions to provide the capacity to represent and analyze the geographic, or spatial, dimensions and relationships of “natural” and “socio-economic” data.

2

As we began to meet with neighborhood activists to organize and implement our “asset-mapping” activity, we encountered the “Neighborhood Codes Academy,” developed and administered by the Kansas City Neighborhood Alliance (KCNA),3 underway as a pilot project in the 49/63 Neighborhood Coalition, financed by a Jackson County COMBAT4 grant to 49/63. Neighborhood volunteers were trained to perform inspections of residential property with respect to the issues addressed by property maintenance codes. This was accomplished by evaluation on a five-point scale of the conditions of property features such as roofs, foundation & walls, windows & doors, exterior paint, private sidewalks & drives, lawns & shrubs, litter, etc. Also rated on the same scale were the conditions of public infrastructure such as streets, sidewalks, lighting, etc. In all, for each property, eleven “private” and five “public” features were rated. Inspectors performed “windshield evaluations,” working as teams of two in vehicles. In the 49/63 pilot project, inspections were performed by neighborhood and Americorps volunteers, and by UMKC students working for the CEI. All inspectors were required to go through a standardized training process developed and delivered by KCNA neighborhood specialists. Issues of inter-reliability among inspectors and quality control were addressed, but were not quantified in the pilot project.

It became our task at CEI, in performance of the neighborhood “asset-mapping” activity financed by the COPC grant, to convert the Codes Academy inspection project into an electronic database, link that database to “parcel-level” geography in a GIS system, and make the resulting GIS database available to various community constituencies for neighborhood analysis and planning. Potential of the GPLAN Project

The GPLAN Project’s interpretation and realization of “asset-mapping” (parcel-level inventory and GIS-mapping of the physical conditions of residential property and public infrastructure) has two important features.

First, parcel level mapping of residential property conditions is of real interest in its own right, to several major urban and community development constituencies. Conventional CDCs whose principle activity is the development of affordable housing in low-income neighborhoods, city urban planners, neighborhood residents themselves, and a variety of private sector interests including developers, real estate agencies, mortgage bankers, construction contractors, and insurance companies, just to name the most obvious, all have a keen interest in the collection and mapping of residential conditions data.

Over a period of several months, the GPLAN pilot project in 49/63 came to the attention of planners and administrators in the City of Kansas City’s Department of Housing and Community Development. The real value of this project for the development community was clearly ratified in April 2000 with the award of a contract to the GPLAN partnership. The contract was to apply the survey, mapped on the City’s electronic geographic parcel-level database, to 100 percent of the residential structures (approximately 87,000 parcels) in the urban core (defined as a contiguous area of 118 neighborhoods with specific boundaries), with a 5 percent tract-level sample applied to the remaining areas of the city. That contract runs through May 2001. See the

3 KCNA, established in 1979, is one of the most active and successful CDCs in the Kansas City area. 4 COMBAT is the acronym for COM(munity) B(ased) A(nti-drug) T(ax), a sales tax passed by residents of Jackson County, Missouri, for the express purpose of funding county-wide strategies for “combating” the social problems of substance abuse and addiction.

3

Map Appendix for detail on the geographic scope of the city contract, and a representative illustration of the kind of information and output which will be available.

As a result of the residential conditions survey contract with Kansas City, Missouri, the project has a relatively high profile among the entire range of urban/community planning and development constituencies in the entire Kansas City MSA, which crosses the Missouri/Kansas state line. Negotiations are in progress for a similar contract with the Unified Government of Kansas City, Kansas, and Wyandotte County.

The second (arguably even more) important feature of the GPLAN project is that it establishes a methodological framework for geographic community modeling with virtually unlimited potential. The development of a parcel-level geographic database allows the collection and representation of social and economic data at the finest possible level of “social resolution,” i.e., the houshold.5 Higher level social “geographies” (e.g. “blocks” or “neighborhoods” or “communities”) are (more or less) easily added to the household/institution/enterprise-level model. This, of course, includes the conventional social geographies such as low-level census geography (blocks, block groups and tracts), zip codes, school districts, voting districts, cities, counties, and MSAs.6 The database functions of GIS allow the linkage of virtually unlimited datasets to whatever levels of geography for which they may be relevant and available. The implicit role of space and spatial relationships in the study of community development is rendered integral, explicit, and amenable to formal analysis.

As a result of its activity of the last three years, the GPLAN project partnership (CEI & Urban Affairs at UMKC, and the Kansas City Neighborhood Alliance) has also developed significant expertise and efficiency in the management of a standing and active field survey team, survey instrument design and application, survey team training and managment, database processing, and the network/desktop delivery of GIS applications and network map servers. The GPLAN project to date has provided a means by which to cover the high overhead costs which exist in terms of learning how to manage, manipulate, and process the parcel geography for parcel and block-level mapping. City and county resources are rarely adequate to keeping the geographic and data attribute components of the parcel geography current with the real estate land use, value, and tax records which are their basis (and which also represent important parcel-level data available to us.) GPLAN project staff at CEI have learned some of the intricacies and idiosyncracies of this parcel geography; the city contract has provided a context within which our staff can collaborate with city personnel to identify and correct certain kinds of errors, maintaining a relatively “clean” database which will significantly reduce the cost of mapping additional parcel and block-level information. CEI staff have invested significant time and effort in defining and constructing a “block-level”7 geography derived from the parcel level. See Map 2 for an example.

All this represents an investment in a parcel-level GIS model and methodology that can be leveraged for additional relatively low-cost application as a development policy evaluation tool.

5 Or, in the case of non-residential property, commercial and industrial enterprise, institutions, etc. 6 Metropolitan Statistical Areas, which are usually defined as aggregates of counties. 7 Among GIS practitioners, “block-level” geography is usually understood in terms of physical blocks, such as the census block geography, which is a layer of conventional enclosed polygon geographic features. Among community development constituencies, “block-level” is understood to refer to “face blocks”, the property and structures situated on facing sides of a street block. Face block geography cannot be easily represented as a set of conventional closed polygons. The GPLAN block level geography derived from the parcel level is a true face-block social geography, entailing an aggregation of relevant parcels to the “block” on which they are located.

4

Additional leverage for the GPLAN project as a development policy evaluation tool comes from the institutional network of collaboration and partnership which has brought the project this far along its path. Active institutional partners in the GPLAN project presently include:

at UMKC -- CEI and the Dept. of Economics The Urban Affairs Program and Dept. of Sociology University Extension

HUD (U.S. Department of Housing and Urban Development) KCNA City of Kansas City, Missouri The Kauffman Foundation Economic Development Corporation of Kansas City, Missouri KCPD Planning & Research Unit Numerous KCMo neighborhood associations and other CBOs

The list of organizations with a potential partnership interest in GPLAN is even longer.

at UMKC -- The Health Research Group in the Community Psychology Program The GIS Laboratory in the Department of Geosciences Researchers in the Departments of Political Science and AOJ The Social Science Consortium

KC KS City of Kansas City, Ks KC Ks neighborhood associations and other CBOs Wyandotte County DOTTES KC Ks School District KCK Community College Research Center

Local Initiatives Support Coalition (LISC) Mid-America Regional Council (MARC) KC Area Development Corporation (KCADC) Greater KC Chamber of Commerce Fannie Mae The Red Cross The Local Investment Commission (LINC)

Discussions aimed at active participation are already underway with several of these organizations. Development and pilot application of the non-residential parcel inventory

In order to advance the GPLAN project as a useful tool and methodology for community development and policy evaluation, it is crucially necessary to map more than residential property conditions. However, as with any research problem, the most fundamental and often deceptively simple issue is the choice and design of what indicators/variables to observe. A good illustration of the deceptively simple significance of these choices would be the interesting result of a technical choice to map the first categorical variable of the residential conditions survey, which was designed to establish the parcel typology among residential and non-residential structures, and vacant lots. The real information of interest was, presumably, the

5

observed physical condition of standing residential structures. However, mapping the typology variable (for a no more profound purpose than management of the inspection process) immediately results in the interesting and dramatic display of the spatial pattern and intensity of abandoned property, together with a (partial)8 display of standing residential vs. non-residential land use. (This is illustrated in Map 3.)

The most obvious extension of the program would seem to be in the direction of a comprehensive parcel-level property inventory which would provide the capacity to map both residential and a wide variety of non-residential parcel usage. The ability to map residential, commercial, institutional, industrial, and civil property use and conditions within the confines of a specific area, or neighborhood, would be of clear interest to the neighborhood/community, the private-sector economic development, and the municipal planning constituencies of the GPLAN project. And it is precisely within the context of such a jointly-owned analytical and planning tool that we might expect the often diverse interests of these groups to be brought together in a constructive metropolitan-level dialogue.

Beyond the scope of the comprehensive parcel-level property survey, the possibilities for what characteristics of the neighborhood, urban, suburban, and metropolitan communities to observe and map are virtually unlimited. A comprehensive data development framework for the project, called the Community Development Indicators (CDI) program is presently in the design phase. As presently articulated, its components are:

the comprehensive parcel-level inventory, detailing both residential and non-residential property use and conditions

a “development status” survey, (variously represented as parcel, block, point, and line-type features) which represent the investment of new or rehabilitated physical assets; a qualitative neighborhood-level development survey will employ a combination of field survey, observation, and interview data collection methods to identify intangible (i.e. social, or social capital) community development “assets.” These “development” features may be mapped at the point, line, parcel, block, and even neighborhood levels.

a block-level survey, including both a general and detailed typology (residential, commercial, urban, suburban, low/high density, etc.), indexes for both blight and aesthetics, and block-level digital photography

a “secondary data” program, which would incorporate a vast array of existing data resources, such as block group, tract, and neighborhood-level census data, block-level offense and arrest statistics, real estate value and tax data, address-level mortgage loan data, and zip-code-level business activity.

an Economic Development Indicators (EDI) program, specifically focused on the interests and needs of the public/private sector economic development community

8 Non-residential parcels were not comprehensively inventoried. Primarily commercial and industrial districts were excluded from the inspection a priori, although “mop-up” procedures were designed to capture as many residential structures/uses as possible in those areas. Non-residential structures/uses found within the primarily residential areas in which the survey was conducted were mapped.

6

Incorporation of extensive census data in the GPLAN project (including both 1990 and 2000 decennial data and eventually the ACS9) simultaneously accomplishes two complementary goals. One, it adds unquestionable value to GPLAN as an analytical and planning tool; and 2) it represents a significant realization of the value of Census data to a constituency (grass-roots neighborhood and community organizations) which have historically underutilized the potential of census data. This second goal is mandated by the CEI’s mission are a member of the Missouri State Census Data Center (MSCDC) core agency group.

In addition to these relatively well-defined program elements detailed above, additional elements are in various stages of discussion with collaborators, including

natural geography, land use, and cover derived from satellite photography community health conditions political and civic participation

And, as already noted, the list of potential additional elements in the program can easily grow to include the interests of any group or constituency who wants to join the project.

Lacking the immediately available resources to implement the comprehensive parcel, block and neighborhood level survey elements of the CDI program throughout the urban core, at least four potential target areas can be identified for application of a pilot survey project:

the Westside neighborhood (characterized by widely heterogeneous mixed land use--residential, commercial, and industrial), where a collaborative relationship between CEI and the Hispanic Economic Development Corporation (HEDC) has already generated an intense interest;

the Troost corridor, a commercial corridor running along the north/south backbone of the city, serving as a stark black/white racial demarcation line, and bounding some of the most distressed neighborhoods of the urban core;

the Midtown TIF district, where a major urban re-development initiative is underway with proposed subsidy by tax-increment financing, and

the 3rd City Council District, which bounds probably the most distressed contiguous area of the city.

Each of these areas have various characteristics (some similar, some different) which make them attractive candidates for pilot application of the comprehensive survey. Identification of an optimal pilot area will possibly include more than one, in whole or in part. Analytical potential

Incorporation of parcel, street block, and neighborhood geography, together with indicator/attribute data for these geographic levels as described above, provides us with the opportunity to develop (and possibly estimate) a multi-level community hierarchy analytical model. A proposed linear regression model of exactly this kind can be found in recently published research literature from the fields of urban sociology and criminology.10

9 The American Community Survey, scheduled to be fully implemented around 2006, will eventually supercede the decennial long form, making detailed, high-quality, low-level demographic and socio-economic data available on an annual basis for most heavily urbanized areas. 10 See Taylor (1997).

7

Less formal (and more ad hoc) methods of analysis, however, constitute the principal analytical approach, at least initially, enabled by the GPLAN project. Employment of the ad hoc approach may plausibly lead to the development of estimable, formal regression models.

Sophisticated application software exists to support a variety of ad hoc strategies. Anselin’s work in the field of spatial econometrics11 has led to the development of two software extensions to ESRI’s Arcview GIS which provide valuable GIS functionality in both exploratory spatial data analysis (ESDA) and spatial econometrics (intergrated with Anselin’s own spatial econometrics software package, SpaceStat). Exploratory analysis of the GPLAN project’s muli-level community hierarchy geography, using Anselin’s ESDA extension for Arcview, could potentially yield significant insight into the relationships which exist among those levels. Incorporation of spatial dependence in regression models can be accomplished with employment of spatial econometric methods supported by SpaceStat and linked to Arcview GIS through Anselin’s SpaceStat extension. Other useful ad hoc methods--such as point pattern, spatial surface, and network analysis--are supported by standard ESRI extensions to Arcview.

Methods such as those detailed above might also be employed within the framework of another kind of ad hoc analytical method with very intriguing potential that we might plainly refer to (for lack of any prior referent) as neighborhood/community analysis. The GPLAN Project’s comprehensive parcel and block-level mapping, together with the identification of both material and social development “assets,” provides the intriguing opportunity to begin to comprehensively map and study both the static and dynamic constitution of neighborhood and community as social, material, and spatial constructs, and thus the potential dissonance between both our common sense and our formal perceptions of neighborhood and community, and their reality. Application to policy and program evaluation

The CDI program as outlined above provides the crucial information baseline for the GPLAN project as a program and policy evaluation tool for neighborhood, community, and economic urban development. Program and policy evaluation is made possible with the ability to monitor change in the information baseline of component indicators of interest. This requires an ongoing commitment to follow-up surveys, maintenance, and update of the CDI database, always an issue in an arena where financing is chronically inadequate. Of course, the shortage of financial resources for community development programs and projects is precisely the dynamic driving the interest in GPLAN as an evaluation and planning tool.

The utility of the GPLAN project as a whole, however, entails much more than the CDI program alone. The essense of the project is its employment of low-level parcel geography, from which “social” block (i.e. “face” block, or “street” block) and neighborhood geographies can be aggregated. The combination of this geography with the CDI database in a GIS environment allows us to:

present indicator information related to the geographic dimensions of interest in intuitively appealing and insightful ways;

use geographic representations as a convenient, efficient, and effective information inquiry interface;

explicitly and formally incorporate spatial relationships in our analysis of communities and neighborhoods.

11 Anselin (1999a, 1999b).

8

And eventually, community development indicator mapping in a multi-layered geographic hierarchy combined with GIS analytical tools may well give us the capacity to develop a bona-fide and useful tool for the promotion of community development.

We have frequently stated our belief that the GPLAN project has the potential to serve a wide range of development interests in the Kansas City metropolitan area. Much of what has already been said here clearly illustrates the diversity of development constituencies who, despite the diversity of their development agendas, share a common interest in the GPLAN project. Specification of a distinct Economic Development Indicators (EDI) program within the CDI program is an explicit reflection of the carefully crafted diverse appeal of the GPLAN project.

In spite of an obvious and relatively undisputed relationship between “economic” and “community” development, the interests of “economic” and “community” development constituencies are often the most widely diverse of all. “Economic” development constituencies are usually driven primarily by interests in population and economic growth, land use intensification, and the profits which flow as a result. “Community” development constituencies are usually interested in the non-economic, non-profit-oriented values associated with urban land use, such as public green space, the preservation, or development, of “livable” neighborhoods, and remedial/support services for distressed populations of the urban core. City planners are often caught in the conflict between the two groups, although the access to resources conferred on economic development interests by the asymmetrical power relations of the business system, more often than not, tips the scales on the side of “economic” development. Not incidentally, this frequently leads to a certain distrust of city planning offices by some “community” development constituencies, particularly grass-roots neighborhood organizations--often the groups with the most limited of access to resources.

From its inception, the GPLAN project was commissioned by the HUD COPC grant which financed the 49/63 pilot as a tool for grass-roots neighborhood empowerment. The assurance of grass-roots access to GPLAN has always been an integral part of the project’s strategic plan. During the 49/63 pilot stage, access for the inspection database to the City’s Neighborhood IMS (internet map server) was explored, but the City indicated it did not have sufficient personnel resources to provide the necessary interface. Failing to gain access to the City’s Neighborhood IMS, the CEI built a prototype GPLAN IMS on its own web server platform (address: cei.umkc.edu/gplan), using residential inspection data from the 49/63 pilot, and subsequent Citizen Codes Academy inspection data for several more neighborhoods.12 The GPLAN strategic plan calls for its eventual implementation on a fully functional server platform. For a good example of how this kind of technology can serve grass-roots neighborhood interests, see the “Neighborhood Knowledge Los Angeles” website (address: nkla.sppsr.ucls.edu), maintained by the Community Information Technology Center (CITC) at the UCLA Advanced Policy Institute.

Reference to the earlier section detailing current and potential institutional and organizational partnerships in the GPLAN project, including a significant number of grass-roots neighborhood organizations, will provide a clear indication of the appeal which it is has generated across a very wide spectrum of diverse interests. This wide diversity of interests, and partners, is specifically reflected in the content of the CDI/EDI program.

12 The Citizen’s Codes Academy is the neighborhood residential inspection program administered by KCNA, which trains and employs neighborhood volunteers to conduct the residential conditions survey in their own neighborhoods. The program was subsidized by the City Council with prioritization of City services for participating neighborhoods.

9

Partnership enterprise in the GPLAN project implies a common “ownership.” Common ownership of the GPLAN project and the associated CDI/EDI program can provide a common venue for diverse, and often conflictual, development interests to come together and find accommodation in policy and program planning and evaluation.

The diversity of interests reflected in the CDI/EDI program is just a beginning. By design, there is virtually no limit to its scope and content. Once GPLAN is up and running, the marginal cost of adding any given set of indicator data drops significantly. Private-sector developers, city planners and politicians, academic researchers, civic leadership, public and private sector social service agencies, CDCs, and grass-roots neighborhood interests, all have equal access. Everybody’s development agenda can be “on the map.”

10

References Anselin, Luc (1999a). “Spatial Econometrics.” Unpublished. __________ (1999b). “The Future of Spatial Analysis in the Social Sciences.” Geographic

Information Sciences 5, 1999. Ferguson, Ronald F. and William T. Dickens, eds. Urban Problems and Community

Development. Brookings Institution Press: Washington D.C. 1999. Logan, John R. and Harvey L. Molotch. Urban Fortunes: the political economy of place.

University of Califormia Press: Berkeley. 1987. Taylor, Ralph B. “Social Order and Disorder of Street Blocks and Neighborhoods: Ecology,

Microecology, and the Systemic Model of Social Disorganization.” Journal of Research in Crime and Delinquency, Vol. 34 No. 1, February 1997 113-155.

11

II

III IV

V

VI

VII

VIII

IX

X XI XII

XIII

XIV

XV

XVI

Li tt leBl u

BirmBttms

Hi viewEsts

NEIndDist

Minneville

Hi llcrest

Missi onLake

Fairlane

Leeds

Davidson

BrnEsts

BluValleyInd

LegacyEst

Oakwood

ParkFarms

Hi llHaven

Ri ssLake

Lykins

BlueHill s

LomaVi sta

MarlbrghEst

BluVuHills

Sechrest

WhiteO ak

LeaManor

Ri verView

Cali coF arms

StCathrnsGrdns

EastwoodHillsEst

Sheff ield

RobandeeSth

Hi ckmanMills

RuskinHills

Scarrit tPt

Volker

Kirksi de

EastwoodHillsWst

UnityRi dge

StaytonMdws

WardPky

RuskinHts

Vineyard

Wst49-63

WillowCrk

WstrnBl uTwnshp

PendHts

NthTwnFrkCrk

TowerHomes

ChouteauEsts

EstSwopeHil nds

Winwood

BluHill sEsts

Crestview

Winnetonka

SthBluValley

BooneHills

MaplePark

Briarcl iff /Cl aymont

Hi ckmanMillsSth

Harlem

SwopePky-Elmwd

Anti ochAcres

Stratford Ests

VeronaHi lls

RedBridgeNthRoyalOaks

Li ndenHil ls/Indi anHts

Hi ddenValley

Est49-63

HospHill

KnochesPk

Chaumiere

ECommTeamNrth

LewisHts

VineyardEsts

Ri verForest

Gracemor-Rand

LakeviewTerr

Bridlespur

BannisterAcres

CBDDntown IndepPl z

EstMeyer6

WesternHills

Noble&GregRidge

SunsetHill

FairwayHills

Briarcl iffWst

NbrsUnited

WestsideSth

OldhamFarms

AshlandRdg

Fairwd/Robandee

SthIndianMnd

CrownCenter

WendellPhi llips

NrthBlueRidge

EstMeyer7

CntryVally-HwthrnSq

WstPlaza

MapleParkWst

MarlbrghHts/Pri de

NrthIndianMnd

OakPkNW

KeyCoali tion

SantaF eHi lls

OakPkSW

Ri verMkt

Dunbar

WashW heatley

EstCommTeamSth

CntryClbEsts

Ci tadel

RedBridgeSth

OakPkSE

SantaFe

CountryLnEsts

WstWal do

WestsideNrth

CunninghmRdg

TerrLakeGrnds

CooleyHilnds

BeaconHi ll

ArmourFlds

Sterli ngAcres

ArmourHills

EstBluVal ley

Glenhaven

Ingleside

MtClevlnd

PaseoWst

Cntryside

HolmesPk

SherwoodEsts

Crossgates

Foxwds-CarrHills

Longfellow

WaldoHomes

Southmorel and

WstBluVall ey

Valentine

Crossroads

SthPlaza

IvanhoeSW

SthTwnFrkCrk

VineyardNW

ColumbusPrkInd

SwopePkRdgWinchstr

St rl ingGrdns

SthHydePk

Parkview

FoxtwnEst

CCDistrict

Morningsi de

SelfHlpNbhdCncl

OldWestport

SwopePkCampus

ManheimPk

CoachliteSq

CntrlHydePk

Rockhill

BrdwyGil lham

HanoverPlc

18th&Vine/DntwnEst

IvanhoeNE

NthHydePk

Woodbri dge

BlenheimSq-RsrchHosp

QualityHill

UnionHil l

Foxcroft /G lenArbor

ColumbusPk

Strupwood

Palesti neEst

Coloni alSqr

ColemanHilndsBlvdVi llage

IvanhoeSE

RomanelliWst

CntrlBl uValley/PkTowrsGrdn

Roanoke

MtHope

Westwood

Roll ingMdws

WinwoodGardens

WardEsts

SquierPk

RockhillManor

CntryClub

SunsetHill Wst

Plaza-Westport

PkCntrl-RschPk

CenterCi ty

Holi dayHill s

OakMeyerGrdns

StratfordGrdns

WardPkyPlaza

Wornal lHmstd

TimberValley

CCPlaza

Crestwood

IvanhoeNW

ForgttnHms

GreenwayFlds

Palesti neW st/OakPkNE

WoodsonEsts

SheratonEsts

BrooksidePk

GlenLake

869142

326

626

583

319

1440

156

339442

414414

294556511

478 523

3761286 118

843

844

1233

272

14722073

209

1900

2481

757862

478

42

1209

626

744

1026

7371271

851 1096

1329

1698

631

907

145

706397

353

302

4370

3238

1322

406

1829

6841475

221

208

520

612

1166 870

1711

559

973531

1084

514136

1601

171

202

528

547

137

175

411

1064

311

1097

938219

12722260

1967

1843

1932677

92065

156345

328

72178

517

448

1057

193

643

383

997

358

358

100

496

454623

602

82278

638

876

810

9711608

668344

I

0

I

Neighborhood BoundariesInsp. UnderwayInsp. CompletedInsp Certified

Map 1. Kansas CityHousing Survey 2000

100% Coverage Area(Balance of City, 5%Tract-Level Sample)

Project Status: August 1, 2000

Order of Inspection

12

31ST ST

LINWOOD BLVD

32ND TER

33RD ST

34TH ST

3

AR

TR

OO

ST

AV

E

FO

RE

ST

AV

E

TR

AC

Y

AV

E

TH

E

PA

SE

O

FL O

RA

A

VE

TR

OO

ST

A

VE

FO

RE

ST

A

VE

TR

AC

Y A

VE

TH

E P

AS

EO

VIR

GI N

IA A

VE

FL O

RA

A

VE

32ND TER

ARMOUR BLVD35TH ST

1320

1207

1300

3115

3400

3229

1326

3103

3429

3200

1112

3238

3131

3420

1301

1120

3116

1108 1206

3231

3436

3309

3126

3343

33383335

3114

3311

3401

3416

3201

3423

3400

3415

3346

3216

3135

3434

3426

1216

3336

1116

1212

3300

3310

3306

3340

3106

3344

3134

3325

1224

3240

3212

3249

3217

3219

1310

3429

1120

3424

3344

1110

3228

1201

3100

3222

1316

3124

1204

3244

3314

3320

3316

1201

3310

3121

1217

12121208

3301

3412 3415

3418

3320

3417

3307

3426

3321

3427

3334

1121

3318

3337

3335

1207

1200

3422

1205

3419

3328

3305

3324

3428

3333

3325

3408

1114

3232

3407

3343 3342

3331

3304

3411

3328

3404

3429

3324

1325

3218

3331

3312

1315

3301

1219

3411

3421

3321

3239

33193314

3323

3315

3118

3223

1319

3401

3304

3120

3118

1206

1216

3332

3235

3227

13291339

3405

13351331

3114

1315

13321334

3403

1330

3128

1328

3333

3331

3300

3334

1336

3330

3304

1311

3301

3116

3337

3423

1314

3307

3321 33203318

3308

3116

3325

1311

3309

130713013303

3336

3322

3339

3305

3335

3338

3320

3316

3306

1210

3329

1309

3324

3336

3101

3311

34213419

1200

3426

1201 1205

3347

3300

1212 1216 3345

34223420

3328

3319

3241

3317

33133315

3225

3112

3237

3311

3428

3425

1316

34133414

3410

3229

3310

3323

3338

3422

3411

33193315

3339

3406

3312

3308

3224

3343

3424

3420

3412

3333

3327

3335

3321

3337

3418

3341

3314

3245

3416

3325

3235

32333236

3231

3427

3242

3227

12001202

1204

3221

3219

111911091115

1215

3215

3435

3305

3431

1211

Map 2.Center CityBlock Map067.0

13

31ST ST

LINWOOD BLVD

32ND TER

33RD ST

34TH ST

3

AR

TR

OO

ST

A

VE

FO

RE

ST

AV

E

TR

AC

Y

AV

E

TH

E

PA

SE

O

FL O

RA

A

VE

TR

OO

ST

AV

E

FO

RE

ST

AV

E

TR

AC

Y

AV

E

TH

E

PA

SE

O

VIR

GI N

IA A

VE

FL O

RA

A

VE

32ND TER

ARMOUR BLVD35TH ST

1320

1207

1300

3115

3400

3229

1326

3103

3429

3200

1112

3238

3131

3420

1301

1120

3116

1108 1206

3231

3436

3309

3126

3343

33383335

3114

3311

3401

3416

3201

3423

3400

3415

3346

3216

3135

3434

3426

1216

3336

1116

1212

3300

3310

3306

3340

3106

3344

3134

3325

1224

3240

3212

3249

3217

3219

1310

3429

1120

3424

3344

1110

3228

1201

3100

3222

1316

3124

1204

3244

3314

3320

3316

1201

3310

3121

1217

12121208

3301

3412 3415

3418

3320

3417

3307

3426

3321

3427

3334

1121

3318

3337

3335

1207

1200

3422

1205

3419

3328

3305

3324

3428

3333

3325

3408

1114

3232

3407

3343 3342

3331

3304

3411

3328

3404

3429

3324

1325

3218

3331

3312

1315

3301

1219

3411

3421

3321

3239

33193314

3323

3315

3118

3223

1319

3401

3304

3120

3118

1206

1216

3332

3235

3227

13291339

3405

13351331

3114

1315

13321334

3403

1330

3128

1328

3333

3331

3300

3334

1336

3330

3304

1311

3301

3116

3337

3423

1314

3307

3321 33203318

3308

3116

3325

1311

3309

130713013303

3336

3322

3339

3305

3335

3338

3320

3316

3306

1210

3329

1309

3324

3336

3101

3311

34213419

1200

3426

1201 1205

3347

3300

1212 1216 3345

34223420

3328

3319

3241

3317

33133315

3225

3112

3237

3311

3428

3425

1316

34133414

3410

3229

3310

3323

3338

3422

3411

33193315

3339

3406

3312

3308

3224

3343

3424

3420

3412

3333

3327

3335

3321

3337

3418

3341

3314

3245

3416

3325

3235

32333236

3231

3427

3242

3227

12001202

1204

3221

3219

111911091115

1215

3215

3435

3305

3431

1211

No inspection data

Structure TypeResidentialNonresidentialVacant Lot

Building outlinesNeighborhood Boundaries

Map 3.Center CityNeighborhoodMapping of"Structure Type"

14

31ST ST

LINWOOD BLVD

32ND TER

33RD ST

34TH ST

3

ARM

TR

OO

ST

A

VE

FO

RE

ST

A

VE

TR

AC

Y A

VE

TH

E

PA

SE

O

FL O

RA

A

VE

TR

OO

ST

AV

E

FO

RE

ST

AV

E

TR

AC

Y A

VE

TH

E

PA

SE

O

VIR

GI N

IA A

VE

FL O

RA

AV

E

32ND TER

ARMOUR BLVD35TH ST

1320

1207

1300

3115

3400

3229

1326

3103

3429

3200

1112

3238

3131

3420

1301

1120

3116

1108 1206

3231

3436

3309

3126

3343

33383335

3114

3311

3401

3416

3201

3423

3400

3415

3346

3216

3135

3434

3426

1216

3336

1116

1212

3300

3310

3306

3340

3106

3344

3134

3325

1224

3240

3212

3249

3217

3219

1310

3429

1120

3424

3344

1110

3228

1201

3100

3222

1316

3124

1204

3244

3314

3320

3316

1201

3310

3121

1217

12121208

3301

3412 3415

3418

3320

3417

3307

3426

3321

3427

3334

1121

3318

3337

3335

1207

1200

3422

1205

3419

3328

3305

3324

3428

3333

3325

3408

1114

3232

3407

3343 3342

3331

3304

3411

3328

3404

3429

3324

1325

3218

3331

3312

1315

3301

1219

3411

3421

3321

3239

33193314

3323

3315

3118

3223

1319

3401

3304

3120

3118

1206

1216

3332

3235

3227

13291339

3405

13351331

3114

1315

13321334

3403

1330

3128

1328

3333

3331

3300

3334

1336

3330

3304

1311

3301

3116

3337

3423

1314

3307

3321 33203318

3308

3116

3325

1311

3309

130713013303

3336

3322

3339

3305

3335

3338

3320

3316

3306

1210

3329

1309

3324

3336

3101

3311

34213419

1200

3426

1201 1205

3347

3300

1212 1216 3345

34223420

3328

3319

3241

3317

33133315

3225

3112

3237

3311

3428

3425

1316

34133414

3410

3229

3310

3323

3338

3422

3411

33193315

3339

3406

3312

3308

3224

3343

3424

3420

3412

3333

3327

3335

3321

3337

3418

3341

3314

3245

3416

3325

3235

32333236

3231

3427

3242

3227

12001202

1204

3221

3219

111911091115

1215

3215

3435

3305

3431

1211

No inspection data

Exterior Paint12345


Map 4.Center CityNeighborhoodMapping of"Exterior Paint"Conditions

15

31ST ST

LINWOOD BLVD

32ND TER

33RD ST

34TH ST

3

ARM

TR

OO

ST

A

VE

FO

RE

ST

A

VE

TR

AC

Y A

VE

TH

E

PA

SE

O

FL O

RA

A

VE

TR

OO

ST

AV

E

FO

RE

ST

AV

E

TR

AC

Y A

VE

TH

E

PA

SE

O

VIR

GI N

IA A

VE

FL O

RA

AV

E

32ND TER

ARMOUR BLVD35TH ST

1320

1207

1300

3115

3400

3229

1326

3103

3429

3200

1112

3238

3131

3420

1301

1120

3116

1108 1206

3231

3436

3309

3126

3343

33383335

3114

3311

3401

3416

3201

3423

3400

3415

3346

3216

3135

3434

3426

1216

3336

1116

1212

3300

3310

3306

3340

3106

3344

3134

3325

1224

3240

3212

3249

3217

3219

1310

3429

1120

3424

3344

1110

3228

1201

3100

3222

1316

3124

1204

3244

3314

3320

3316

1201

3310

3121

1217

12121208

3301

3412 3415

3418

3320

3417

3307

3426

3321

3427

3334

1121

3318

3337

3335

1207

1200

3422

1205

3419

3328

3305

3324

3428

3333

3325

3408

1114

3232

3407

3343 3342

3331

3304

3411

3328

3404

3429

3324

1325

3218

3331

3312

1315

3301

1219

3411

3421

3321

3239

33193314

3323

3315

3118

3223

1319

3401

3304

3120

3118

1206

1216

3332

3235

3227

13291339

3405

13351331

3114

1315

13321334

3403

1330

3128

1328

3333

3331

3300

3334

1336

3330

3304

1311

3301

3116

3337

3423

1314

3307

3321 33203318

3308

3116

3325

1311

3309

130713013303

3336

3322

3339

3305

3335

3338

3320

3316

3306

1210

3329

1309

3324

3336

3101

3311

34213419

1200

3426

1201 1205

3347

3300

1212 1216 3345

34223420

3328

3319

3241

3317

33133315

3225

3112

3237

3311

3428

3425

1316

34133414

3410

3229

3310

3323

3338

3422

3411

33193315

3339

3406

3312

3308

3224

3343

3424

3420

3412

3333

3327

3335

3321

3337

3418

3341

3314

3245

3416

3325

3235

32333236

3231

3427

3242

3227

12001202

1204

3221

3219

111911091115

1215

3215

3435

3305

3431

1211

No inspection data

Litter12345


Map 5.Center CityNeighborhoodMapping of "Litter"Conditions

16

31ST ST

LINWOOD BLVD

32ND TER

33RD ST

34TH ST

3

ARM

TR

OO

ST

A

VE

FO

RE

ST

AV

E

TR

AC

Y

AV

E

TH

E

PA

SE

O

FL O

RA

A

VE

TR

OO

ST

AV

E

FO

RE

ST

AV

E

TR

AC

Y

AV

E

TH

E

PA

SE

O

VIR

GI N

IA A

VE

FLO

RA

A

VE

32ND TER

ARMOUR BLVD35TH ST

1320

1207

1300

3115

3400

3229

1326

3103

3429

3200

1112

3238

3131

3420

1301

1120

3116

1108 1206

3231

3436

3309

3126

3343

33383335

3114

3311

3401

3416

3201

3423

3400

3415

3346

3216

3135

3434

3426

1216

3336

1116

1212

3300

3310

3306

3340

3106

3344

3134

3325

1224

3240

3212

3249

3217

3219

1310

3429

1120

3424

3344

1110

3228

1201

3100

3222

1316

3124

1204

3244

3314

3320

3316

1201

3310

3121

1217

12121208

3301

3412 3415

3418

3320

3417

3307

3426

3321

3427

3334

1121

3318

3337

3335

1207

1200

3422

1205

3419

3328

3305

3324

3428

3333

3325

3408

1114

3232

3407

3343 3342

3331

3304

3411

3328

3404

3429

3324

1325

3218

3331

3312

1315

3301

1219

3411

3421

3321

3239

33193314

3323

3315

3118

3223

1319

3401

3304

3120

3118

1206

1216

3332

3235

3227

13291339

3405

13351331

3114

1315

13321334

3403

1330

3128

1328

3333

3331

3300

3334

1336

3330

3304

1311

3301

3116

3337

3423

1314

3307

3321 33203318

3308

3116

3325

1311

3309

130713013303

3336

3322

3339

3305

3335

3338

3320

3316

3306

1210

3329

1309

3324

3336

3101

3311

34213419

1200

3426

1201 1205

3347

3300

1212 1216 3345

34223420

3328

3319

3241

3317

33133315

3225

3112

3237

3311

3428

3425

1316

34133414

3410

3229

3310

3323

3338

3422

3411

33193315

3339

3406

3312

3308

3224

3343

3424

3420

3412

3333

3327

3335

3321

3337

3418

3341

3314

3245

3416

3325

3235

32333236

3231

3427

3242

3227

12001202

1204

3221

3219

111911091115

1215

3215

3435

3305

3431

1211

No inspection data

Vehicles12345


Map 6.Center CityNeighborhoodMapping of "Disabled Vehicle"Conditons

17

31ST ST

LINWOOD BLVD

32ND TER

33RD ST

34TH ST

3

ARM

TR

OO

ST

A

VE

FO

RE

ST

AV

E

TR

AC

Y

AV

E

TH

E

PA

SE

O

FL O

RA

A

VE

TR

OO

ST

AV

E

FO

RE

ST

AV

E

TR

AC

Y

AV

E

TH

E

PA

SE

O

VIR

GI N

IA A

VE

FLO

RA

A

VE

32ND TER

ARMOUR BLVD35TH ST

1320

1207

1300

3115

3400

3229

1326

3103

3429

3200

1112

3238

3131

3420

1301

1120

3116

1108 1206

3231

3436

3309

3126

3343

33383335

3114

3311

3401

3416

3201

3423

3400

3415

3346

3216

3135

3434

3426

1216

3336

1116

1212

3300

3310

3306

3340

3106

3344

3134

3325

1224

3240

3212

3249

3217

3219

1310

3429

1120

3424

3344

1110

3228

1201

3100

3222

1316

3124

1204

3244

3314

3320

3316

1201

3310

3121

1217

12121208

3301

3412 3415

3418

3320

3417

3307

3426

3321

3427

3334

1121

3318

3337

3335

1207

1200

3422

1205

3419

3328

3305

3324

3428

3333

3325

3408

1114

3232

3407

3343 3342

3331

3304

3411

3328

3404

3429

3324

1325

3218

3331

3312

1315

3301

1219

3411

3421

3321

3239

33193314

3323

3315

3118

3223

1319

3401

3304

3120

3118

1206

1216

3332

3235

3227

13291339

3405

13351331

3114

1315

13321334

3403

1330

3128

1328

3333

3331

3300

3334

1336

3330

3304

1311

3301

3116

3337

3423

1314

3307

3321 33203318

3308

3116

3325

1311

3309

130713013303

3336

3322

3339

3305

3335

3338

3320

3316

3306

1210

3329

1309

3324

3336

3101

3311

34213419

1200

3426

1201 1205

3347

3300

1212 1216 3345

34223420

3328

3319

3241

3317

33133315

3225

3112

3237

3311

3428

3425

1316

34133414

3410

3229

3310

3323

3338

3422

3411

33193315

3339

3406

3312

3308

3224

3343

3424

3420

3412

3333

3327

3335

3321

3337

3418

3341

3314

3245

3416

3325

3235

32333236

3231

3427

3242

3227

12001202

1204

3221

3219

111911091115

1215

3215

3435

3305

3431

1211

No inspection data

Pcl Pvt Avg -- StructuresBelow 2.52.50 - 3.003.00 - 3.503.50 - 4.004.00 - 4.504.50 - 4.754.75 - 5.00


Map 7.Center CityNeighborhoodMapping of"Private Prop.Conditions Avg."for Structures

18

31ST ST

LINWOOD BLVD

32ND TER

33RD ST

34TH ST

3

AR

TR

OO

ST

A

VE

FO

RE

ST

A

VE

TR

AC

Y A

VE

TH

E

PA

SE

O

FL O

RA

A

VE

TR

OO

ST

AV

E

FO

RE

ST

AV

E

TR

AC

Y A

VE

TH

E

PA

SE

O

VIR

GI N

IA A

VE

FL O

RA

AV

E

32ND TER

ARMOUR BLVD35TH ST

1320

1207

1300

3115

3400

3229

1326

3103

3429

3200

1112

3238

3131

3420

1301

1120

3116

1108 1206

3231

3436

3309

3126

3343

33383335

3114

3311

3401

3416

3201

3423

3400

3415

3346

3216

3135

3434

3426

1216

3336

1116

1212

3300

3310

3306

3340

3106

3344

3134

3325

1224

3240

3212

3249

3217

3219

1310

3429

1120

3424

3344

1110

3228

1201

3100

3222

1316

3124

1204

3244

3314

3320

3316

1201

3310

3121

1217

12121208

3301

3412 3415

3418

3320

3417

3307

3426

3321

3427

3334

1121

3318

3337

3335

1207

1200

3422

1205

3419

3328

3305

3324

3428

3333

3325

3408

1114

3232

3407

3343 3342

3331

3304

3411

3328

3404

3429

3324

1325

3218

3331

3312

1315

3301

1219

3411

3421

3321

3239

33193314

3323

3315

3118

3223

1319

3401

3304

3120

3118

1206

1216

3332

3235

3227

13291339

3405

13351331

3114

1315

13321334

3403

1330

3128

1328

3333

3331

3300

3334

1336

3330

3304

1311

3301

3116

3337

3423

1314

3307

3321 33203318

3308

3116

3325

1311

3309

130713013303

3336

3322

3339

3305

3335

3338

3320

3316

3306

1210

3329

1309

3324

3336

3101

3311

34213419

1200

3426

1201 1205

3347

3300

1212 1216 3345

34223420

3328

3319

3241

3317

33133315

3225

3112

3237

3311

3428

3425

1316

34133414

3410

3229

3310

3323

3338

3422

3411

33193315

3339

3406

3312

3308

3224

3343

3424

3420

3412

3333

3327

3335

3321

3337

3418

3341

3314

3245

3416

3325

3235

32333236

3231

3427

3242

3227

12001202

1204

3221

3219

111911091115

1215

3215

3435

3305

3431

1211

No inspection data

Pcl Pvt Avg -- Vacant LotsBelow 2.52.50 - 3.003.00 - 3.503.50 - 4.004.00 - 4.504.50 - 4.754.75 - 5.00


Map 8.Center CityNeighborhoodMapping of"Private Prop.Conditions Avg."for Vacant Lots

19

31ST ST

LINWOOD BLVD

32ND TER

33RD ST

34TH ST

3

ARM

TR

OO

ST

A

VE

FO

RE

ST

A

VE

TR

AC

Y A

VE

TH

E

PA

SE

O

FL O

RA

A

VE

TR

OO

ST

AV

E

FO

RE

ST

AV

E

TR

AC

Y A

VE

TH

E

PA

SE

O

VIR

GI N

IA A

VE

FL O

RA

AV

E

32ND TER

ARMOUR BLVD35TH ST

1320

1207

1300

3115

3400

3229

1326

3103

3429

3200

1112

3238

3131

3420

1301

1120

3116

1108 1206

3231

3436

3309

3126

3343

33383335

3114

3311

3401

3416

3201

3423

3400

3415

3346

3216

3135

3434

3426

1216

3336

1116

1212

3300

3310

3306

3340

3106

3344

3134

3325

1224

3240

3212

3249

3217

3219

1310

3429

1120

3424

3344

1110

3228

1201

3100

3222

1316

3124

1204

3244

3314

3320

3316

1201

3310

3121

1217

12121208

3301

3412 3415

3418

3320

3417

3307

3426

3321

3427

3334

1121

3318

3337

3335

1207

1200

3422

1205

3419

3328

3305

3324

3428

3333

3325

3408

1114

3232

3407

3343 3342

3331

3304

3411

3328

3404

3429

3324

1325

3218

3331

3312

1315

3301

1219

3411

3421

3321

3239

33193314

3323

3315

3118

3223

1319

3401

3304

3120

3118

1206

1216

3332

3235

3227

13291339

3405

13351331

3114

1315

13321334

3403

1330

3128

1328

3333

3331

3300

3334

1336

3330

3304

1311

3301

3116

3337

3423

1314

3307

3321 33203318

3308

3116

3325

1311

3309

130713013303

3336

3322

3339

3305

3335

3338

3320

3316

3306

1210

3329

1309

3324

3336

3101

3311

34213419

1200

3426

1201 1205

3347

3300

1212 1216 3345

34223420

3328

3319

3241

3317

33133315

3225

3112

3237

3311

3428

3425

1316

34133414

3410

3229

3310

3323

3338

3422

3411

33193315

3339

3406

3312

3308

3224

3343

3424

3420

3412

3333

3327

3335

3321

3337

3418

3341

3314

3245

3416

3325

3235

32333236

3231

3427

3242

3227

12001202

1204

3221

3219

111911091115

1215

3215

3435

3305

3431

1211

No inspection data

Parcel Public AvgBelow 2.52.50 - 3.003.00 - 3.503.50 - 4.004.00 - 4.504.50 - 4.754.75 - 5.00


Map 9.Center CityNeighborhoodMapping of"Public InfrastructureConditions Average"

20

31ST ST

LINWOOD BLVD

32ND TER

33RD ST

34TH ST

3

AR

TR

OO

ST

A

VE

FO

RE

ST

AV

E

TR

AC

Y

AV

E

TH

E

PA

SE

O

FL O

RA

A

VE

TR

OO

ST

AV

E

FO

RE

ST

AV

E

TR

AC

Y

AV

E

TH

E

PA

SE

O

VIR

GI N

IA A

VE

FLO

RA

A

VE

32ND TER

ARMOUR BLVD35TH ST

1320

1207

1300

3115

3400

3229

1326

3103

3429

3200

1112

3238

3131

3420

1301

1120

3116

1108 1206

3231

3436

3309

3126

3343

33383335

3114

3311

3401

3416

3201

3423

3400

3415

3346

3216

3135

3434

3426

1216

3336

1116

1212

3300

3310

3306

3340

3106

3344

3134

3325

1224

3240

3212

3249

3217

3219

1310

3429

1120

3424

3344

1110

3228

1201

3100

3222

1316

3124

1204

3244

3314

3320

3316

1201

3310

3121

1217

12121208

3301

3412 3415

3418

3320

3417

3307

3426

3321

3427

3334

1121

3318

3337

3335

1207

1200

3422

1205

3419

3328

3305

3324

3428

3333

3325

3408

1114

3232

3407

3343 3342

3331

3304

3411

3328

3404

3429

3324

1325

3218

3331

3312

1315

3301

1219

3411

3421

3321

3239

33193314

3323

3315

3118

3223

1319

3401

3304

3120

3118

1206

1216

3332

3235

3227

13291339

3405

13351331

3114

1315

13321334

3403

1330

3128

1328

3333

3331

3300

3334

1336

3330

3304

1311

3301

3116

3337

3423

1314

3307

3321 33203318

3308

3116

3325

1311

3309

130713013303

3336

3322

3339

3305

3335

3338

3320

3316

3306

1210

3329

1309

3324

3336

3101

3311

34213419

1200

3426

1201 1205

3347

3300

1212 1216 3345

34223420

3328

3319

3241

3317

33133315

3225

3112

3237

3311

3428

3425

1316

34133414

3410

3229

3310

3323

3338

3422

3411

33193315

3339

3406

3312

3308

3224

3343

3424

3420

3412

3333

3327

3335

3321

3337

3418

3341

3314

3245

3416

3325

3235

32333236

3231

3427

3242

3227

12001202

1204

3221

3219

111911091115

1215

3215

3435

3305

3431

1211

No inspection data

Block Private AvgBelow 2.52.50 - 3.003.00 - 3.503.50 - 4.004.00 - 4.504.50 - 4.754.75 - 5.00


Map 10.Center CityNeighborhoodBlock AverageMapping of"Private Prop.Conditions Avg."

21

31ST ST

LINWOOD BLVD

32ND TER

33RD ST

34TH ST

3

AR

TR

OO

ST

AV

E

FO

RE

ST

A

VE

TR

AC

Y A

VE

TH

E P

AS

EO

FL O

RA

AV

E

TR

OO

ST

AV

E

FO

RE

ST

A

VE

TR

AC

Y A

VE

TH

E P

AS

EO

VIR

GI N

IA

AV

E

FLO

RA

A

VE

32ND TER

ARMOUR BLVD35TH ST

1320

1207

1300

3115

3400

3229

1326

3103

3429

3200

1112

3238

3131

3420

1301

1120

3116

1108 1206

3231

3436

3309

3126

3343

33383335

3114

3311

3401

3416

3201

3423

3400

3415

3346

3216

3135

3434

3426

1216

3336

1116

1212

3300

3310

3306

3340

3106

3344

3134

3325

1224

3240

3212

3249

3217

3219

1310

3429

1120

3424

3344

1110

3228

1201

3100

3222

1316

3124

1204

3244

3314

3320

3316

1201

3310

3121

1217

12121208

3301

3412 3415

3418

3320

3417

3307

3426

3321

3427

3334

1121

3318

3337

3335

1207

1200

3422

1205

3419

3328

3305

3324

3428

3333

3325

3408

1114

3232

3407

3343 3342

3331

3304

3411

3328

3404

3429

3324

1325

3218

3331

3312

1315

3301

1219

3411

3421

3321

3239

33193314

3323

3315

3118

3223

1319

3401

3304

3120

3118

1206

1216

3332

3235

3227

13291339

3405

13351331

3114

1315

13321334

3403

1330

3128

1328

3333

3331

3300

3334

1336

3330

3304

1311

3301

3116

3337

3423

1314

3307

3321 33203318

3308

3116

3325

1311

3309

130713013303

3336

3322

3339

3305

3335

3338

3320

3316

3306

1210

3329

1309

3324

3336

3101

3311

34213419

1200

3426

1201 1205

3347

3300

1212 1216 3345

34223420

3328

3319

3241

3317

33133315

3225

3112

3237

3311

3428

3425

1316

34133414

3410

3229

3310

3323

3338

3422

3411

33193315

3339

3406

3312

3308

3224

3343

3424

3420

3412

3333

3327

3335

3321

3337

3418

3341

3314

3245

3416

3325

32353233

3236

3231

3427

3242

3227

12001202

1204

3221

3219

111911091115

1215

3215

3435

3305

3431

1211

No inspection data

Block Public AvgBelow 2.52.50 - 3.003.00 - 3.503.50 - 4.004.00 - 4.504.50 - 4.754.75 - 5.00


Map 11.Center CityNeighborhoodBlock AverageMapping of"Public InfrastructureConditions Average"

22

1755

1013813

892

1598

675

1310

674

793

475

830

663

666

1377 753

724

357

1557767

1107

744

431

862 1391

494

222

163

117

58

996

0

1274

58TH

57TH

54TH

55TH

56TH

OAK

TRO

OST

HO

LM

ES

MA I

N

TRA

CY

RO

CK

HI L

L

63RD

CH

ERR

Y

FO

RES

T

MC

GEE

LYD

IA

HA

RRI

SON

66TH

BRO

OKS

IDE

53RD

VIR

GIN

IA

59TH

LO

CUS

T

MEYER

65TH

GAR

FIE

LD

HIG

HLA

ND

60TH

PASEO

MIC

HIG

AN

CH

ARL

OT T

E

61ST

WA

YNE

67TH

62ND

64TH

KE

NW

OO

DGRA

ND

WY

AND

OT T

E

MO

RN

ING

SIDE

BLU

E H

I LLS

CITA

DEL

BR

OO

KLY

N

EDGEVALE

WA

LNU

T

WO

ODL

AND

LINDEN

BUSHMAN

THE PA

S EO

BA

LTIM

OR

E

CRESTWOOD

EU

CLI

D

WESTOVER

FLOR A

HUNTINGTON

UNNAMED STREET

BR

OA

D MO

OR

BR

OO

KW

OO

D

62ND

THE PAS

EO

BROOKSIDE

BR

OO

KL Y

N

65TH

56TH

54TH

WA

LNU

T

61ST

MEYER

VIR

GIN

IA

60TH

WESTO

VER

WA

YNE

62ND

CHERRY

62ND

54TH

LO

C US

T63RD

57TH

65TH

67TH

LYD

IA

62ND

PA

SEO

66TH

66TH

EUCLID

BRO

OK

LYN

MAI

N

62ND

BR

OO

KLY

N

BA

LTIM

OR

E

61ST

55TH

66TH

WO

ODL

A ND

CH

ARL

OT

T E

PAS

EO

EU

CLI

D

FO

RES

T

55TH

58TH

HIG

HLA N

D

TRA

CY

59TH

59TH

CHA

RLO

TTE

63RD

PAS

EO

MIC

HIGAN

BR

OO

KLY

N

LYD

IA

66TH

LOCUST

GARFIELD

61ST

CH

AR L

OTT

E

WY

AND

OTTE

53RD

VIRG

INIA

61ST

LO

CUS

T

60TH

KE

NW

OO

D

63RD

GRAN D

WO

ODL

AN D

49/63 inspection data -- block averages of prvt. prop.ratings, and selected surrounding demographiccharacteristics

Map 12.NeighborhoodGeographicPlanner (GPLAN)

Data sources are 1990Decennial Census, andthe Neighborhood CodesAcademy (1999)

N

Persons in Renter-occupied Hsg0 - 142143 - 292293 - 472473 - 788789 - 1496

Streets

Insp's - Block Avg of Pvt Prop Conds.3.00 - 3.753.75 - 4.254.25 - 4.504.50 - 4.754.75 - 5.00

Population/Census Block Group

mapping community development in kansas city mscdc...

Documents