Skip to main content
SpeakEasy KCMO Home
A community garden with several raised beds.

Bring Vacant Lots to LIFE: Help us identify barriers to activating vacant lots.

We know there are real challenges to using vacant land—this is your chance to help us tackle them.

Kansas City is home to thousands of vacant and underused lots - many sitting empty for years. These lots represent missed opportunities for housing, jobs, green space, and neighborhood pride. We want to change that - but we need your help.

This survey is one of the first steps in understanding the real barriers people face when trying to bring these spaces to life. Whether it's turning a lot into affordable housing, a community garden, or a public gathering space, your input will help us identify what's getting in the way and how we can fix it.

What we're doing

We're launching a Vacant Land Activation Initiative to make it easier for residents, developers, and community groups to transform vacant land. This work is happening in phases:

  1. Listen - Gather input through surveys and community conversations.
  2. Understand - Identify the challenges and opportunities from what we hear.
  3. Act - Recommend and implement administrative changes to reduce barriers and support more activation.

Why now?

On May 15, 2025, the City Council passed Resolution 250396, sponsored by Mayor Quinton Lucas and Councilwoman Melissa Patterson Hazley, to formally launch this initiative. The resolution outlines the focus areas, phases of work, and our commitment to community engagement - especially in neighborhoods most impacted by vacancy.

We hope you'll take a few minutes to share your experience and ideas. Together, we can bring vacant lots back to life.

How You Can Participate:

✅ Review the draft strategic plan below and submit a comment with your feedback!

To ask specific questions about this survey or Resolution 250396, please contact Andy Savastino at andy.savastino@kcmo.org. 

Phases

Phases overview
Phase 1: Identifying Barriers to Using Vacant Land
Identifying Barriers to Using Vacant Land
Phase 2: Sharing Survey Results
Sharing Survey Results
Phase 4: Sharing Short-Term Deliverables
Sharing Short-Term Deliverables
Phase 5: Comment on the Draft Strategic Plan For Vacant Lots
Comment on the Draft Strategic Plan For Vacant Lots

Sharing Survey Results

September 1, 2025 5:00 AM - September 15, 2025 5:00 AM

This phase is intended to share the results of the Vacant Land Activation Initiative's survey which ran from June 23rd to August 4th. The results from this survey will be used to inform which areas need the most improvement in the Vacant Land Activation process and the recommendations generated from this survey will be considered for advancement into the next stage of the initiative.

Identifying Barriers to Activating Vacant Lots Survey Results

This report compiles the results from the Identifying Barriers to Activating Vacant Lots Survey.

Please select the category that best describes you as a stakeholder.

Resident

79.4% (200 choices)

Member/representative of a Neighorhood Organization

17.5% (44 choices)

Private Developer

12.3% (31 choices)

Member/representative of a Nonprofit Organization/NGO

11.5% (29 choices)

City Employee

4% (10 choices)

Non-Profit Developer

3.6% (9 choices)

Other

7.5% (19 choices)

Do you have experience using/developing vacant lots?

No experience, but I am interested in what developments go on vacant lots.

41.3% (104 choices)

No experience, but I am interested in developing vacant lots in the future.

38.5% (97 choices)

Yes, I have experience developing vacant lots.

20.2% (51 choices)

Legal Barriers

Zoning laws

39.7% (100 choices)

Outdated or unnecessary requirements

38.1% (96 choices)

No answer

31.3% (79 choices)

Liability for cleanup if lot is contaminated

24.2% (61 choices)

Title complications

21.8% (55 choices)

Minimum setbacks

18.7% (47 choices)

Easements and right-of-way

13.9% (35 choices)

Other

20.2% (51 choices)

Financial Barriers

Cost to repair damaged or missing infrastructure such as sewer, curbs, sidewalks, etc.

35.7% (90 choices)

No answer

34.9% (88 choices)

High upfront costs

28.6% (72 choices)

Difficulties obtaining loans for development

28.2% (71 choices)

Cost of surveys and assessments (incl. environmental surveys/remediation)

27.8% (70 choices)

Cost of land acquisition

25.4% (64 choices)

Cost to assemble small, irregular, or isolated parcels

20.6% (52 choices)

Complexity of requirements for multi-layered funding sources

19% (48 choices)

Cost of land maintenance during development

13.9% (35 choices)

Developer fees

12.7% (32 choices)

Other

13.1% (33 choices)

Administrative Barriers

Permitting processes

42.5% (107 choices)

No answer

37.3% (94 choices)

Inconsistent rules

29% (73 choices)

Lack of institutional capacity (i.e. knowledge, resources, and expertise to undertake development projects)

26.6% (67 choices)

Lack of transparency

24.2% (61 choices)

Environmental reviews

18.3% (46 choices)

Need for technical and administrative assistance to resolve contamination issues

15.1% (38 choices)

Lack of digital tools

10.3% (26 choices)

Other

8.7% (22 choices)

Procedural Barriers

No answer

42.1% (106 choices)

"Not in my backyard" (NIMBY) issues

30.2% (76 choices)

Difficulty addressing blight on or near the property

29.8% (75 choices)

Difficulty navigating the process to acquire land from Land Bank

27.8% (70 choices)

Permitting deadlines

20.6% (52 choices)

Appeal processes

15.5% (39 choices)

Notification processes

12.7% (32 choices)

Other

4.8% (12 choices)

Other Barriers

54/252 - Long answer - optional

A bar chart listing multiple barriers to development including such things as Difficulties with City Staff/Commissions, Cost to Develop, Process Inefficiencies, and more.

On a scale of 1 to 5 with 1 not being a problem and 5 being a major barrier, please rate the extent to which each type of barrier affects your ability to develop publicly owned vacant lots in Kansas City, MO.

1 - 1

2 - 2

3 - 3

4 - 4

5 - 5

Legal Barriers

Financial Barriers

Procedural Barriers

Administrative Barriers

On a scale of 1 to 5 with 1 not being a problem and 5 being a major barrier, please rate the extent to which each type of barrier affects your ability to develop privately owned vacant lots in Kansas City, MO.

1 - 1

2 - 2

3 - 3

4 - 4

5 - 5

Legal Barriers

Financial Barriers

Procedural Barriers

Administrative Barriers

What would you recommend? (i.e. Incentives, procedure or fee changes, etc.)

147/252 - Long answer - optional

Recommendations could be sorted into seven general categories: Code Changes, Incentives, Education/Tools, Process Changes, Disincentives, Staff/Board Changes, and Assorted.

A pie chart showing the distribution of recommendations across seven categories.

Code Changes - 65 Total Entries

The most frequently recommended code changes are listed below from the changes mentioned the most number of times to the least number of times.

  • Increase by-right development
  • Revise part of the zoning code (especially as it pertains to mixed use development)
  • Allow for single stair development
  • Remove affordable housing, green, and MBE requirements
  • Eliminate or reduce part of the zoning code
  • Remove or reduce parking requirements
  • Zero lot lines
  • Reduce/Eliminate setbacks
  • Assorted

Incentives- 53 Total Entries

The most frequently recommended incentives are listed below from those mentioned the most number of times to the least number of times.

  • Non-specified incentives (i.e. "Provide more incentives")
  • Waived/Reduced fees and/or tax abatements for developing vacant properties
  • Assistance with infrastructure construction/repair and, if needed, remediation
  • Promote development by non-profit or neighborhood organizations
  • Create/continue grant programs for development
  • Expedited permitting on vacant properties
  • Incentivize transit and density

Education/Tools- 30 Total Entries

The most frequently requested educational opportunities/tools are listed below from those mentioned the most number of times to the least number of times.

  • Maps/digital tools to understand vacant lot status and availability
  • A guide/workshops about obtaining vacant lots
  • Pre-approved plans for developing vacant lots
  • A City liaison to help navigate the process of obtaining and developing vacant lots

Process Changes- 27 Total Entries

The most frequently recommended process changes are listed below from those mentioned the most number of times to the least number of times.

  • Reduce delays/simplify the process
  • Support interim uses and interim lot maintenance programs
  • Offer large-scale assistance events
  • Make neighborhood plans legally binding
  • Create a special appeal process for vacant properties

Disincentives- 21 Total Entries

The most frequently recommended disincentives are listed below from those mentioned the most number of times to the least number of times.

  • Institute a vacant land tax
  • Special assessment or fine on vacant properties
  • Creation of CIDs

Staff/Board Changes- 6 Total Entries

The most frequently recommended staff/board changes are listed below from those mentioned the most number of times to the least number of times.

  • Add staff or partners such as neighborhood leaders
  • Remove staff or partners


Additional Responses

Additionally, some respondents provided information about what types of development they would like to see on vacant lots. These comments were primarily broken into two categories: Gardens and green space and affordable mixed use and/or high density housing.

Upcoming and ongoing events

    0 events have loaded.
    No upcoming or ongoing events are currently scheduled.

    Past events

    • Event date: September 25th, 2025 at 9:00 PM to September 26th, 2025 at 12:00 AM.

      Location

      Gregg/Klice Community Center

      Registrants

      17 registrants

    1 event has loaded.