Landmarks commission recommends demolition of two fire-damaged Parkwood-area buildings

The Kansas City, Kansas Landmarks Commission voted unanimously to approve petitions recommending demolition of two fire-damaged, vacant buildings in the environs of the Parkwood Historic District at 933 and 1015 Quindaro Boulevard.

Staff historic preservationist Randy Greaves told the commission that both properties have extensive fire damage and long-standing vacancy: the 933 Quindaro property was listed as vacant and unfit since 2021 and sustained fire damage in 2025. Greaves said owners produced building plans but did not submit a formal application in time, so the Unified Government moved forward with demolition petitions on public‑safety grounds and recommended approval. "This structure received damage in a fire sometime ago ... it's been posted on multiple times," Greaves said.

Neighbors who spoke at the meeting supported removing hazardous structures. Robin Smith, who lives at 940 Cleveland Avenue behind 933 Quindaro, said the damaged building appeared structurally unsound and could threaten nearby utilities and spread fire; he added concern for animals sheltering in the building. "It appears structurally unsound. Potentially could collapse on its own," Smith said. Jessica Porter asked whether the Unified Government pays for demolition and then bills owners; Greaves clarified the government typically demolishes and bills the property owner, and if unpaid the cost becomes a lien against the parcel.

Commissioners pressed staff for process details. Greaves and legal counsel Mike Farley said demolition billed to owners creates a lien and that properties usually enter the land bank only after multiyear tax‑delinquency or nonpayment—Farley said the land‑bank process typically requires several years before a parcel becomes a land‑bank property. "It typically takes three consecutive years of nonpayment ... for property entering the land bank," Farley said.

Commissioner Findorff moved to approve petition CA 2026‑002 (933 Quindaro Boulevard) and, later, CA 2026‑003 (1015 Quindaro Boulevard), each "as meeting all the requirements of the city code and being in the interest of the public health, safety, and welfare," subject to any staff modifications. Both motions were seconded by Vice Chair Mickey Welcome Hill and passed by roll call votes of 5–0.

Votes at a glance
- CA 2026‑002 (933 Quindaro Blvd): Motion by Commissioner Findorff; second Commissioner Welcome Hill. Roll call: Welcome Hill (yes), Hutton (yes), Gerber (yes), Curtis (yes), Findorff (yes). Outcome: forwarded/approved (5–0).
- CA 2026‑003 (1015 Quindaro Blvd): Motion by Commissioner Findorff; second Commissioner Welcome Hill. Roll call: Welcome Hill (yes), Hutton (yes), Gerber (yes), Curtis (yes), Findorff (yes). Outcome: forwarded/approved (5–0).

Why it matters
The commission framed both approvals as safety‑driven decisions where long vacancy, repeated fire damage and structural instability left few viable alternatives. Staff noted that in some cases property owners later pursue repairs or redevelopment, but that without a complete C of A application staff could not pursue an administrative rehabilitation review.

What’s next
The approved certificates go to the Unified Government Board of Commissioners as meeting city‑code requirements; the Unified Government will determine demolition timing and billing. Staff and legal counsel said property liens and land‑banking remain possible remedies if owners do not pay demolition costs.