Community Renewal Program
I
I
I
I
I~
I
I'
I'
~
!
I'
I
1
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
CDMMUNITV
I
RENEWAL
PRDGRAM
S.LINA
II
~ANSAS
II ,m...o IY
~U~~tR ~ WllUS
"
CONSUlTING ENGINEERS PlANNfRS & ARCHITECTS
The prepJration olthi. :.POfl wa. financially aided Ihrough a hd.rol gro"'
frOM the ".n..ol "'ni"on,. A.d",in;.lrOlion of Ih. Depor'menl
of Hou.ing and Urban On.lop"'."'. ou,horiud by ..clion 405
.f.... H.rn. 0" .f 1959, .0 .m.nd.d.
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
-I
~U(~tR
W ll~
~
CONSULTING ENGINEERS · PLANNERS · ARCHITECTS
605 W. NORTH ST.,SALINA,KANSAS 67401' 913/827-3603
6183 THE PASEO, KANSAS CITY, MO.64110' 816/363-2696
PARTNERS:
ASSOCIATES:
James D. Bucher, PE, AlP
Shelby K. Willi., PE
Kay C. Bloom, PE
G. Harold Lamfers, PE
Robert R. Myers. PE
.
SALINA, KANSAS
Lyle E. Lightfoot, AlA
Ronald A. Williamson, Assoc. AlP
Stephen L. Jennings. PE
Raymond E. Lamf.rs, PE
August, 1972
Salina City Commission
City Hall
Salina, Kansas
Gentlemen:
The preparation of the Salina Community Renewal Program has been
an interesting and exciting experience for our staff. It fs our In-
tent and hope that the recommendations and conclusions developed in
the preparation of the CRP will serve as a useful and effective guide
in the future development and redevelopment of Salina.
The study was performed through close cooperation and participa-
tion of the City staff and agencies of the City of Salina. We would
like to take this opportunity to express our particular appreciation
to the Citizens Advisory Committee, the Planning Department, and the
Fire Inspection Department for their role in reviewing and assembling
data.
It should be emphasized that the dat~ contained in the report is
very detailed in nature, and that as well as being utilized in pro-
gramming renewal activities, the data will be extremely valuable in
the. performance of many other planning tasks.
It is our earnest desire that this report serve as an effective
guide for the future renewal activities in Salina, and that the Gov-
erning Body and the Planning Commission utilize the information to its
fullest extent in guiding their decisions on other planning matters.
Sincerely yours,
BUCHER &'WILLIS
f);::;D.
Bucher
JDB:psm
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
TABLE OF CONTENTS
PURPOSE OF THE STUDY . .
. . . . . .
SURV~Y PROCEDURE
. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
NEIGHBORHOOD BOUNDARIES
SURVEY PERFORMANCE .
. . . . . .. ...
. . . . . . . . . . . . . .
NEED FOR RENEWAL . . . .
GROWTH AND DEVELOPMENT . . . . . .. ....
BLIGHT CRITERIA . . . . . .. .........
CONDITION - CITY-WIDE . . . . .. .......
Summary of City-Wide Blighting Conditions . . .
Residential Density . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
Minority Group Residences ...........
Vacant Residences ..... ..... 0
Street Conditions ... 0 . . .. .. 0
Water and Sewerage Services 0.. 0 0 .
Refuse Collection . . .0 0 . 0 . . . 0
Public Services ... 0 0 . . 0 . . 0 0
GENERAL SOCIAL CHARACTERISTICS OF PRIORITY AREAS
THE REPRESENTATIVENESS OF THE SAMPLE
GENERAL CONCLUSIONS REGARDING SOCIAL
CHARACTERISTICS OF PRIORITY AREAS 0 0 . . . 0 0 0
AREAS NEEDING HOUSING RENEWAL AND ASSIGNING PRIOR-
ITIES IN REGARD TO THEIR ORDER OF IMPORTANCE 0 0 .
CHARACTERISTICS OF RESIDENTS OF HOUSING CLASSIFIED
AS REQUIRING CLEARANCE OR. MAJOR REHABILITATION
'CHARACTERISTICS OF THE NEGRO POPULATION OF
SALINA PRIORITY AREAS . . . . . . . 0
SOCIAL CHARACTERISTIC DIFFERENCES WITHIN
PRIORITY AREAS . . . . 0 0 0 . . . . . . . . . . .
SPECIFIC CONDITIONS AND PROPOSED RENEWAL
ACTIVITIES IN EACH PRIORITY NEIGHBORHOOD
NEIGHBORHOOD
NEIGHBORHOOD
NEIGHBORHOOD
NEIGHBORHOOD
NEIGHBORHOOD
NEIGHBORHOOD
NEIGHBORHOOD
4 . .
7 . . . . . ~ . .
8
9 .
11
12 . 0 . 0
14
-i-
Page' No.
1
3
3
3
9
9
11
14
27
27
28
29
31
34
35
36
49
49
50
54
56
62
63
71
71
77
81
83
87
89
91
ECONOMIC BASIS FOR RENEWAL
. . . . . . . f . .. .
CITY GROWTH . .. .............1...
LAND USE ANALYSIS . . . . . .
. . . . . i .
FUTURE LAND USE ........ ........
UPDATE PROCEDURE . . . . . . . . .. .. :.' .
ECONOMICS .............. . I. .
RESIDENTIAL SECTOR PROJECTIONS . . . . .
COMMERCIAL SECTOR PROJECTIONS .....:: I. : . .
INDUSTRIAL SECTOR PROJECTIONS . . . [ . . .
GOALS
. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
PHYSICAL ACTION GOALS . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
ECONOMIC GOALS . . . .. ...
SOCIAL GOALS ... . .. .............
RESOURCES NEEDED AND AVAILABLE FOR RENEWAL .
SOCIAL RESOURCES . . . . . . . . . . . .
Public and Minority Forum Opportunities ....
Report of the Neighborhood and Capital
Improvement Sub-Committee . . . . . . . .
Findings and Recommendations of the.
Downtown Sub-Committee . . . .. . . . .
Salvation Army Community center . . . . . .
American Community Center . . . . . . . . . . .
Y.M.C.A. . . .. ...... ......
Y.W.C.A. . . .
Boy Scouts . . . . .
Girl Scouts ........
Other Social Agencies
RELOCATION HOUSING RESOURCES . . . . .
. . '. . . .
PROGRAM FOR RENEWAL ACTION .
GENERAL
NEIGHBORHOOD
NEIGHBORHOOD
NEIGHBORHOOD
NEIGHBORHOOD
NEIGHBORHOOD
NEIGHBORHOOD
NEIGHBORHOOD
.. . . . . .
4 . .... . . . . . . . . . 0
7 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
8 (Central Business District) ...
9 . . . . . . . . .
11 . . . . . . . . .. ......
12 . . . . . . . .. ...
14 . .. ... ....
FINANCIAL CONSIDERATIONS
APPENDIX - REHABILITATION STANDARDS
-ii-
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
'1
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
SALINA CRP MAPS
City Limit and Neighborhood Boundary Map . . . . . . . .
Salina Growth Map . . . . . . . . . .. . . .
Residential Structure Ratings Map ...........
Environmental Deficiencies Map .. .........
City~wide Blighting Map . .. .........
Neighborhood Condition Map - Neighborhood 2 . . . .
- Neighborhood 4 ......
- Neighborhood 7 . . . .
- Neighborhood 9
- Neighborhood 10 . . . . . .
- Neighborhood 11
- Neighborhood 12 . . . . . .
- Neighborhood 14 . . . . . .
- Neighborhood 15 . . . . . .
- Neighborhood 16 . . . . . .
- Neighborhood 17 . . . .
- Neighborh6od 19 ....
Neighborhood 20 . . . . . .
- Neighborhood 22 ....
Salina Airport and Industrial Complex Ownership Map
Residential Density Map . . . . . . . . .
Minority Housing Map . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
Vacant Housing Map . . . . ... ......
Unpaved Street and Sewer Service Map . . . .
Salina Traffic Volume, 1967-69 . . . . . . . . . . . . .
CBD Street Condition and Width Map . . . . . . .
Fire and Accident Map . . . . . . . . . . . . .
Law Violations By Residence of Offender ......
Community Facilities Map . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
Welfare Recipient Map . . . . . . . . . . .. ...
Neighborhood Structural Condition Map - Neighborhood 4
- Neighborhood 7
CBD Building Use and Condition Map . ........
CBD Building Use Map - Basements . . . . . . . . . .
- First Floor . . . . . . . . . . .
- Second Story . . . . . .
Neighborhood Structural Condition Map - Neighborhood 9 .
- Neighborhood 11.
o.
- Neighborhood 12.
- Neighborhood 14.
Vicinity Map . ..
Residential Land Map . .
-iii-
Page No.
4
10
14
14
18
18
18
18
20
20
20
20
22
22
22
22
24
24
24
26
26
28
30
32
32
32
36
38
38
44
72
78
82
82
82
82
86
88
90
93
96
98
Commercial Land Map . . . . . . . . . .
Industrial Land Map . . .
Existing Land Use Map . . .
Future Land Use Map . . . . . . .
Tax Delinquencies Map . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
Residential Construction Map .
Commercial Building Construction - Industrial Bui~ding
Construction . . . . . .
Salina CRP Trade Area Map
Mental Health Client Map . . . . . .
Community Renewal Activities Index Map . . . . .
Community Renewal Activities - Neighborhood 4
Proposed Community Renewal Actions - Neighborhood 4
Communi ty 'Renewal Activities - Neighborhood 7 . I. . ...
Proposed Community Renewal Actions - Neighborhood 7
Future Santa Fe Mall . . ,; . . . . . . . . . . . I. . . .
East Side Santa Fe: Iron to Walnut - West Side Santa
Fe: . Iron to Walnut . . . . . . . . . : . . . I. . . .
EastSlde Santa Fe: Ash to Iron - West Slde San~a Fe -
Ash to 'Iron '.' . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . [. . . .
.South Side Ash: 5th to 7th; South Side Iron: 5~h to 7th;
North Side Iron: 7th to 5th ...... ...
Ash at 7th: Looking East . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
Existing Parking for Core Area of CBD . . . . . . . . .
Proposed Community Renewal Activities for CBD . . .
Community Renewal Activities - Neighborhood 9 ...
City Maintenance Yard and Light Industrial Tract . . . .
. Community Renewal Activities - Neighborhood 11 . . .
Proposed Park - Old South Park School Site . . . . .
.Communi ty Renewal Activities - Neighborhood 12 . . . . .
Proposed Apartment Complex Map. . . . .. . . .
Community Renewal Activities - Neighborhood 14 . ..
Centennial Park Expansion . . . . . . . . . . .
. .
. . .
. . . .
. . . .
. . .
.. . . .
. . .
APPENDIX MAPS:
Average. Family Size - % 1 and 2-Member Famiiies
% 3 and 4-Member Families - % Non-White pophlation
% Population Over 65 - Average Age of Head bf
Household ' . . I
Average Length of Residence - Sex Head of Household
Families with 5 or r.1ore Members - Average cbst of
Housing
Police Reports - Welfare Recipients
YMCA Participation - YWCA Participation
Boy Scout Membership - Girl Scout Membership
Interior Interview Refusal Rate - % of RenBers
Welfare Case Rate - Unemployment Rates
-iv-
Page No.
I
I
I.
100
104
106
106
114
114
I
I
I
I
124
124
.136
160
160
164
166
166
178
178
I-
I
I
178
178
178
178
178
180
180
182
182
184
184
186
186
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
CREDITS
City Commission
I
Robert Caldwell, Mayor
William Yost, Former Mayor.
Carl Rundquist
G. N. Waddell, Former
Commissioner
Donald D. Millikan, Former Mayor
Leon Ashton
Charles W. Casebeer, Former
Commissioner
Robert Stark, Former Commissioner
I
I
The City of Salina and the Consultants are greatly indebted
to a large number of persons who assisted in collecting data for
the Community Renewal Program. It is impossible to name all who
aided in the project, but we do wish to acknowledge key persons
and their office staffs who were of great assistance.
I
I
Appointive City Officials
I
Norris D. Olson,
City Manager
W. E. Harris, Director of
Adminlstration
I
City Departments and Department Heads
I
Police Department - John Woody, Chief; Jack V. Richardson, Former
Chief
Fire Department - James Lacy, Chief; J. E. Travis, Former Chief
Building Inspection Department - Robert A. Lange, Former Depart-
ment Head; Hobart J. McCabe, Public Officer
Engineering Department - The late Harold F. Harper, Engineer
Water and Sewerage Department - Ron Webster, Director
Salina Recreation Commission -- David Zook, Director
City Clerk's Office - D. L. Harrtson, City Clerk
City Treasurer - M. E. Abbott
Planning 'Depar~ment - Tom Darnell, Director; Ronald R~ Tremblay,
Technician
Salina-Saline County Health Department - Paul Hooker, Director
Salina Airport Authority - Paul Wall, Director
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
-v-
Urban Renewal Agency & Housing Autho+ity
Staff
U.R.A.
Board Members
Housing Authority
Board Members
R. L. Worth, Exec. Dir.
W. W. Story, Reloc. Dir.
M. C. Tallman, Dept. Ho. Dir.
M. Bonella, Reloc. Secy.
M. Melton, Bookkeeper
R. A. Harkin, Sec'y.
C.. Achterberg, Attorney
Howard Eagleton
Max McClintock
Charles Stark
Mildred Riddell
Leland Srack
Donald McPhail
Cecil Beverly
Leland Srack
Virginia Usher
Eugene Yockers
Other Public Agencies and Official~ .
Unified School District #305 --- Lloyd Schurr, sulerintendent
I
Saline County Clerk's Office --- Paul Swartz, County Clerk
Saline County Assessor's Office- Uhl Wheatley, As~essor
Edgar Reed,- Former Saline County Superintendent Ibf Public
Instructlon '
Saline County Engineering Department - Herb Callon, Engineer
Saline County Treasurer's Office - Keith Lilly, T~easurer
Saline County Welfare Department - Mrs. June Garrlett, Director
Central Kansas Mental Health Clinic - Dr. William Richardson,
Director I
Salina Office, Kansas Employment Security Division - William
Dannenberg, Director
Service Agencies
Salina Chamber of Commerce - Robert Whitworth, Executive Secretary
Coronado Council of Boy Scouts of America - Robe~t Nichols, Exec-
utive Director
Central Kansas Council of Girl Scouts of America - Mrs. Sally
Lambert, Executive Secretary
American Community Center - Mrs. Cecil Camarena, Director
Carver Center -- Mrs. Regina Green, Director
Salvation Army - Captain John Churchill
Salina Young Men's Christian Association --- Darrel Maifield,
Former General Secretary I
Salina Young Women's Christian Association - Mrs. Thelma Wright,
Former Director '. I
Kansas Power and Light Company - Ed Pogue, Manager
Credit Bureau of Salina - Carl Rundquist, Manage~
-vi-
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I'
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I.
I
I
Citizens' Advisory Committee for Community Improvement
The Salina Citizens' Advisory Committee worked closely with
the City and the Consultants in reviewing the data collected dur-
ing the ,course of the study and made a number of important
suggestions concerning proposed Community Renewal actions. The
Consultants are greatly indebted to the committee, especially the
chairmen and sub-committee chairmen who spent a great amount of
time working on the Community Renewal Program. The 'following were
members of the Committee during the course of the study:
Robert C. Caldwell,
Chairman
E. H. Hagan, Chairman
Constance Achterberg
William Bachofer, Jr.
Richard E. Brown
Cecil'Camarena'
Capt. John Churchill
George Etherington
Gordon Gardiner
Mrs. June Garrett
Leo Geis
Dr. Donald Goering
Mrs. Regina Green
George Hagan
Harvey Holmgren
Stewart Horejsi
Mrs. George Johnson
Rev. J. E. Jones
Mrs. Robert Just
George Langshaw
V. F. Lundberg
Don McPhail
Mrs. George Quigel
Ralph Reitz
Eugene Revels
Gerald Simpson
V-lilliam Smith
Mrs. Raymond Snyder
Harry Steele
Milton Stiefel
Mrs. James Sullivan
Gus Thodis
Dwight Tolle
Mrs. Charles Weathers
Rev. Donald Weber
Myrtle ~7irth
Harry Whittaker
Don Williams
Mrs. R. M. Ziegler
Downtown Development Committee of the Salina Chamber of Commerce
The Downtown Development Committee of the Salina Chamber of
Commerce worked with the Downtown Sub-Committee of the Citizens'
Advisory Committee in reviewing the data and proposals presented
by the Consul tant:s. The, Consultants wish to acknowledge the fine
cooperation of the Committee, especially Chairman Gilbert D.
Wenger, in the review stages of this st~dy. Other members of the
Committee are as follows:
Constance Achterberg
Max Bishop.
James D. Bucher
John J. Carroll
William Cole
Dr. Maurice Connolly
B. B. Gage
Leo F. Geis
John N. Gillam, Jr.
H. L. Glover
W. F. Grosser, Jr.
George Hall
Stan Hansen
Mrs. Lucille Hed
L. C. Helbert
C. N. Hoffman, Jr.
Paul Huckins
George F. Johnson
Russell A. Jones
Glenn Mason
Vance L. Miller
Galen Z. Morris
Chuck Nichols
-vii-
J. .D. Patterson
Ed Pogue
Dwight Putnam
Paul Richard
Ned Rose
Norbert Skelley
K. C. Spaeth
C. M. Stark
Frankl Stiefel
Gus Thodis
Floyd E. Walters
Dick Worth
Economic Consultant
PLANN~RS & ARCHITECTS
I .
James D. Bucher
. I
Verne Kling
LylJ Lightfoot
Dr. Donald Chambers
and
Brad. Shaeffer
Richard Kohler
I
I
I
BUCHER & WILLIS CONSULTING ENGINEERS,
Partner in Charge
Planner
Architect
Social Consultants
I
I
I
I
*
Survey Questionnaires and Forms
I
I
I
I
NOTE:
Library copy of raw data sheets bound separately
*
Detailed Land Use Summary Tables
*
Social Characteristics Charts
I
I
I
I
I
I
-viii-
I
I
I
I
PURPOSE OF THE STUDY
I
I
The Community Renewal Program is the process of collecting
applicable and dependable facts, performing an adequate analysis
of urban renewal potential and forming a general physical, social
and financial plan for the guidance of a viable urban renewal
program. It is intended that this plan will have the organized
capacity to minimize blighting influences and create a condition
that will encourage a durable housing supply above a minimum
standard. There are numerous areas in Salina offering opportunities
to minimize blight, and there is a ~ather.wide choice in the selection
of a feasible minimum level of living conditions.
I
I
I
The purpose of this CRP study is to identify and quantify the
need for renewal and to give parameters to proposed renewal pro-
jects, cost estimates, and suggest priorities to constitute a guide
for performance of an on-going urban renewal program.
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
-1-
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I,
I
I
SURVEY PROCEDURE
NEIGHBORHOOD BOUNDARIES
A detailed study was made of the entire city to denote neigh-
borhoods which are bounded by major barriers and encompassing
homogeneous developments. Neighborhoods are urban areas having
similar characteristics and conditions, essentially the service
area of an elementary school bordered by natural or man-made bar-
riers or boundaries. Neighborhoods are employed as statistical
units on which data is tabulated in planning and transportation
studies. It is desirable to use previous neighborhood designations
unless conditions have changed or specific needs warrant a change.
It is on this basis that the neighborhood boundaries of this CRP
study were adopted. For .purpose of detail record, each of the
platted blocks were numbered in each of the neighborhoods. Sub-
stantial data was collected and tabulated for each block and
summarized for the neighborhood. (See City Limit and Neighborhood
Boundary Map)
Following the survey and analysis process, those neighborhoods
which offered substantial opportunity for renewal activities were
designated as the CRP area. The CRP area consists of Neighbor-
hoods 4, 7, 8, 9, 11, 12 and 14 which contains approximately 1/2
of the developed portion of the City.
SURVEY PERFORMANCE
The Consultant developed a survey procedure, selected areas to
be surveyed, prepared forms, and offered guidance in the perform-
ance of the survey performed in part by the City Staff and in
part by the Consultant. The individual surveys are described in
the following dissertations.
Exterior Survey
The City-wide exterior survey was performed by the City Staff
during the period June to September, 1968. The findings for each
parcel in the City were recorded on the attached "Salina CRP - Land
Use and Housing Survey." Data was tabulated on summary forms by
blocks and neighborhoods. The land use data was employed to update
the Land Use Map of the City and to compute areas for the several
types of land use. The vacant residential structure data from
this exterior survey was the source for the Vacant Structure Map,
and the residential condition and environmental deficiencies data
was used to construct the series of Neighborhood Structure Condition
Maps. The completed survey sheets are on file with the City.
-3-
Interior Survey
The CRP area (neighborhoods 4, 7, 8, 9, 11, 12 and 14) was
analyzed as to total residential structures, size and condition
as determined by the Exterior Survey.
The interior interviews were assigned to each of the seven CRP
neighborhoods to yield representative samples tb fill budgeted
quotas on a random selection procedure. There ~ere 302 interior
interviews performed, with a satisfactory degre~ of response, by
~ I
the City Staff member calling at a selected residence and ver-
bally asking each of the interior interview quektions and record-
ing same on the attached Interior Survey form. I The interviews
were distributed in each neighborhood as follows:
~ I
Neighborhood Population No. of ~nterviews
4 3,112 56
7 3,791 55
8 591 7
9 2,098 45
11 2,541 44
12 3,938 60
14 2,152 35
I
TOTAL 18,223 302
The findings of the interior survey and the public agency data~
formed the principal basis for the social characteristics study.
Public Agency Data
Data was solicited from a number of local public agencies to
provide City-wide indices and number of occurrehces in the CRP
I
area and to provide data to support neighborhood characteristics
findings. The following agencies contributed ihformation:
School Administration --- School grade failires and dropouts.
Mental Health -----------~ Occurrences by neighborhood.
Fire Department --------- Occurrences by lobation.
Police Department ------- Violations by plate of occurrence
. . I
and vlolator resldence.
Welfare Department ------ Recipients by nei~hborhood.,
Recreation Program ------ Programs in priority and non-priority
areas.
-4-
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I.. _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _" .."/_
I : . /) \:;//,//'/
I : i 6 /
I ! ! // /
I ! "I , /;;~r: /
I ;/;;:/" '\1'
g i I: > I 10 //;/ //// ,\
I .,: J .~~- //' / ' 'I
i ~: ,,'~//
I "j" "" '~u. ,//J/
I II 12: ~~~~~_./ I I
~~~~~~ ~
ill__::.'/'~i'--~"";"-"',-J.;.-----~-:--- ; ~ I .... \' II ',:'1
i / \ ',) i 10 I
I / , .: I
,\ ,;! I
ill ' , <<j'4', ! I I
~ \ II 12 13 ;:/! \V : 15
11\ "I llF\ t
\ \ \ (', / ,;~l" .1.\: (~'~~\,~ I
ill j},:~ .. ·
11\ , // '1:rY 130'1' 131
11\ ; I i " ';;~T "'ill
lilli, '=,,",=--,cf ,t,~~' .~ ,i lt""",
III 120 'F9;~I;'i ;ri;-C;~, ll~=
" ",i,',11 .\\ '" .,.tki~;II~~'i~.Pt-o
~ 2X' ~ 2.9 ~o 31~ ~g ~~, 3.4. ~~, 36
"'i>JlfJ '}/I ( '[; . ',' ,I i I :1 , ,
122 38 ~,40 41. .4~: 43.. 4,~, <\5, 1\6, .I,.. ,',~' _,', ,,'
/; , 1 49 50/~, I' ,'~ ;'!, I, "'u
, II!,/~~~ " ,48, ~~,,,g .51 . ~~ ~~J 5,4' 5.5 ~I i57 ?" I
" , 59 6~, ! i ',~h \.( II
/1;1 , ) ~~, Ii", ~ ~, ~7 ~J !~~ '1Ji' i&uJ~ : "P' R
II I '~'" ~T' 1lJ.,~~ ~5, /lP. 87
III ~, I, 123 Tlrmj ~ 8Zls99Q gU?1
I,! ~~ 5
11'1. ~) ~j
~ ' 1;!9"
\ I \ 125 / T
\\\
\\\
\ \\
\ \\
\ \ /~
, \ \. ~'
,...-J r' ~
l\("
\\
~
\\" '
.7;:' I
"
, ('~CI\~'
fl;--J
I ;i~
[
l[1;r1;
[I I
: }
; ! --
- , " ,,,JD""
,,' \
'r-~ \ ' 'I [, i>;;;;iL;0;,.i
/f~1. ~ i r(:' cr ie,
e ,"=__ I II
" I :
I ;ccd:
I: "
I I Ii
I ,I
",>, ; \ '+~.
.....
..... " "'...... J'
"- " :
~ ~,~
..... "
,
I
I
I
"......"
~ '" ..
~
5 '.~.~'--' />;:;;;;;;~ " 6'-'"''
, ~~'.~..,..,,,...
'. i'" ~;F 27 l'
_nn_mn___ 7 ~. 8 ~ <.:.
2 ...0 ,""M "",
r!' 9
...-
~
,/
f)1"
24
10
II
- ''',
;
==
3~"
29
i
I
I
I 13
!
1'2 25
46
4
;;;; c" C'
. -".",,-
14 !I 26/
!~ 44
.4..~
I
, I
I i
, i
23
/'"
,/
'-,
.--j I:
I 43 ',..I
,// {;!f~~~~..ik2~t~
'~~~~~.Ij Iii ' ~~f; ,
-4';/
22
,./
..." ~I 30
.;;t3 il::: 33
I f~1rt ,JLJ I ~
iU!~
47
,,,
47 I.(~u~i
~
; ,
d 46
~..... 42 i I
\1 \. 'C.i . ??~~~ ~
'~\. I ~ ,:trii~~ .1 I!
~\I,\ en:: ':: :';iIt,~
~\\\' = ...;1/ ~.J
\' \ 6 "j~
,~!H7 /
4 /!
:.Ik"9' 10
;';"
U ~~""
FU~URE GOL;=- CO\..;RSE
.2:';-
'=
--
!3(
-- " - jg."~["
2,4., ,
~
.!
'--'~,','"",
: " . r
~ ~~ ~ Il,' I.. Ii .7."0! 4:" U
n~'" :-;;:" :5&"" '5T~58.}i59 [OO'''!
[I" ,0;:. .c,,';.::::::' ""',;: ., I .q
t:l>aoiw ,6~ ", ",::_.. .67" ;( :: \
;;r;;,;;.. 'niL.' ~~,:L7i,-- 78 ',179
!JlJ~"I ~2"""""" '~3'= ~ ;::::;::::,1I-".tf: 87 88
~O , : 311"" "," ,,' ;-93j ,9t\..< ,,95 96
I~ :~=~ i~::104"J~
,,,.._-' '[,=':::--! 112 ~,; '"
i ,.lItiLJ t:""'::] = ; '":,',,,.' L~~.
II 118
-
~
:
""
'57, '58
,c;' , .,
'5
17
18
'1 74
'-..
,3j
~ ,'"
.- mJ'"
Z~6Ji
L...
~ 5 7
'0 1.10, ".
"2 "In
01,,,,,
:,&1 ,2fLv/
, !'3':/
. ~~rJ'. ,
"'~~
.. '~~ ~~; "
\' '.
\ ~\
-',
" ,
i .
80
2
r<
16
__<:::AI t::::::'"
2'
J~~15 'Ei JJ' .... "
vlf=~:r~~~\;~~ ".. -:
,~~ ';~ "i~v/
61 ~~\ '~:~~<i~3S~
, ~ >;;:";~:.~~" \,:J:.
f~ ~t)~: ~~{,U~~::
, / Y..(77\~i-1
.---...-------.-... ~,\~~,! ,
li,::' "
,I. 2 " ';;,~i.' " ,; !I' ,,,\'
,"'::. . ~ Ii ./;' ;~--=l
i~ 13 ! Ii, '< ' ,\,::i ~~9 ,i2~
" iii.,:.}':'''~ \~~ __ "~?%;, ~~~~I
I ~v:,,~;~::\~~'~~\e;H::~A,\ ':i:: ~
1$ f 1,48; 135 36 ~ .r 1,,( -, ~4
,At'-;:;il fir:':; '\,,',=',,59
:: :: 56 I:: ".j~l3':I,\ ."
'!: '::~='if~,? .;f<F ," 7411 t'"
":: ;r"l>6 ,;;,,',
,.,j
"'0<;.}.
17 ..:f\
',.,,'
A'::"
'c
53
82
.;
\::t.~>
~, /j~:
;:'-(,,';:C/O \:~~\
(~<;). c \~
(;\
,
CITY LIMIT AN
NEIGHBORHOOD BOUNDAi~
\
MAP
78
77
y::
'. ,_.
J
: ~ '
I
: I
! i ! ,~"oc -.
~~~-=."-=-,~":~~ CITY LIMITS
: .
~,
i::::zt I
___ NEIGHBORHOOD R()
SMALL NUMBERS INDICATE BLOCK NUMBERS \-,ITHIN
NEIGHBORHOODS USED FOR REFERENCE IN
5i1lilw (Bmmunity R.:;newij! pf(lgr~m
Slllin~, KJilm
Proi~rl U{I, K~ilH,
Plepmeu fur Ci1V iiI hlil1~, Kilnm,
bJ CHI Sldl, 1963.
'"".==
/
+
SCALE;
/
I
w
25
W()()'" 20;;;:;' 3000'
i"
r
6
Thil ~re~mlilJ(t d Jhb W;$! ilMndiltlf ~ided lhr()tl~h ij hib:ral qr~ilj
lrem the Ad$j~Il(e: tdrn1nislr;:l1it1f, of lhe j)~partml';l!1
of H{)u~il!1J a!d Urbil!1 De:vdollm~!1I, &ulnorizei by 5edkm 405
,II" HOUlinQ Ail of 1151.
,
,
I
i'\
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
YMCA -------------------- Membership.
YWCA -------------------- Membership.
Boy & Girl Scouts ------- Membership.
Kansas Power & Light ---- Delinquent accounts.
Salina Water Department - Delinquent accounts.
Retail Survey
A thorough search was made of all available records as to sales
and origin of sales in Salina. The population of Saline County was
from January 1, 1968 County enumeration and for other counties
of trade area from agricultural reports; retail sales from 1963-
1967 Census of Business, Bureau of .Census and Kansas Sales Tax
from Department of Revenue; number of households (persons. per
household); agricultural reports; and median income from Bureau
of Census. The trade area was identified from analysis of news-
paper circulation, store charge-account records, Kansas State
University buyer's preference survey of 1963, "license plate",
"customer", and "businessmen questionnaire" surveys and returns.
The "license plate" survey performed by the Consultant in
July 1968 was a 7-cycle count of license plates by County of origin
at selected retail business locations, and the counts were recorded
as follows:
Location No. of Auto Licenses Counted
Total Saline County
Santa Fe (Ash to Walnut) 890 535
CBD Parking Lot 10 700 658
CBD Parking Lot 8 640 532
Sears Parking Lot 880 673
Weeks Parking Lot 450 340
Welles Parking Lot 910 670
Sunset Plaza Parking Lot 780 670
Gibson Parking Lot 940 670
Total 6,190 4,745 (77%)
The "customer interview" surveys were conducted by the Consul-
tant at CBD locations and in outlying shopping centers. The 128
respondents were selected at random to satisfy a budget quota as
to age and place of residence. The interview process followed
a prescribed format of questions on opinions of CBD and outlying
shopping centers. The respondents were reported as follows:
-5-
Under 25
26 - 45
46 - 65+
28 (22%)
49 (39%)
22 (17%)
10 ( 7 % )
12 (10%)
7 ( 5%)
38
61
29
29%)
49%)
22%)
I
I
I,
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
Age ---------------Residence---------------
Salina Outside Salina Total
TOTAL
99 (78%)
29 (22%)
128 (100%)
The ratio of Salina and outside Salina respondents and the
ratio of age groups seems to closely resemble the average custo-
mers in the City, this condition permitted the results to be
considered representative. The selection of customers was ran-
dom and the time of day and day of week was varied to yield
representative answers of customers.
The customers' responses indicated a quite high level of satis-
faction with the retail facilities except for a shortage in variety
of lines of goods, parking spaces and poor circulation in the CBD.
Some dissatisfaction was expressed in the deficiency of store hours
and in clerk services in the CBD.
A summary tabulation of the findings of this survey is attached
in the appendix of this report.
Business, Industrial and Office Survey
Survey forms were prepared by the Consultant with review by
the Special Economics Consultant and these were mailed to businesses,
industries and offices with the request that the forms be completed
and returned to the Consultant. (The business questionnaire was
considered confidential, and the returns were sent by reporting
businessmen to Richard Kohler, special economic consultant, with
no disclosure of results to any other except in tabulation form
with identity only to summary of types of businesses.) The mail-
out and return on these questionnaires were as follows:
Type Questionnaire No. Sent Out No. Re turns % Returns
Industry 432 275 64%
Office 5p4 456 81%
Business 507 209 41%
The sources of address for the survey of businessmen were the
.telephone and city directory. On review of the non-respondents,
many were out-of-business, chain stores, home occupant operations
and cafes and taverns with only a negligible number of viable op-
erations failing to report.
-6-
I
I
I
I
I
II
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
-I
I
I
I
I
The purpose of this survey was to determine the attitude of
businessmen as to economic conditions and adequacy of public facil-
ities, to measure past change in employment and volume, and to
receive an estimate of business volume change expected in the next
10 years. The responses indicated a change in business volume in
past 10 years varying from a loss of 20% to a gain of 20%, and an
estimated gain in business volume in the next 10 years varying from
no gain to 50% gain. In general, there was a high degree of satis-
faction of the public facilities with the exception of the need for
more and free parking in the CBD. A shortage in certain fields of
trained labor was expressed. The office managers expressed a desire
for additional new or improved office space, but did indicate some
reluctance to pay additional rent. Numerous respondents expressed
concern over comparative goods business leaving the CBD and the
detriment of vacant buildings as to appearance and inconvenience.
Social Characteristics Survey
The social consultants (Drs. Shaeffer and Chambers of Kansas
University) investigated the quality of local agency services and
performed personal interviews with residents of the CRP neighbor-
hoods~ The social consultants assisted in the design of the
interior survey questionnaire and performed a quite thorough
analysis of the interior interview results which were tabulated
and cross-tabulated by use of punch cards. The results of these
findings are discussed in the social sections of this report.
CBD Building Survey
A special survey of the Central Business District (CBD) non-
residential structures was performed by the City Building Inspec-
tion Department in conjunction with the Fire Department inspection
forces. This survey reports the building area by usage and con-
dition of structures in accordance with the attached survey form,
"Salina CRP Study - 1968, CBD Building Survey."
Costs Survey
A special field survey of sample areas of the designated CRP
areas was performed jointly by the Consultant, an employed real
estate appraiser, and a construction contractor. From this survey,
the rehabilitation costs and value of rehabilitated structures
were estimated and tabulated. These values were correlated to
active rehabilitation projects in Oklahoma City, Kansas City and
Dodge City. From this survey and correlation, average values of
rehabilitation costs were established. Costs for spot clearance
-7-
I
and total clearance of certain areas were calculated from the assessed I
valuation figures obtained from the Saline County Assessor's Office.
Assessed valuations under the assessment ratio used at that time
were approximately 25% of the estimated sale value. Estimated
acquisition costs were calculated at four times the assessed
valuation plus 15% to cover 'unwilling seller' co~ts in acquisition.
Estimated costs derived by this method should be considered current
estimates only, as appraisals at the time of project actions may
.differ considerably from those made herein.
I
II
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
-8-
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I NEED FOR RENEWAL
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I SALINA COMMUNITY
I RENEW AL PROGRAM
I
I
I
I
I
I
I I
I
I
I
I!
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
~I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
II
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
NEED FOR RENEWAL
GROWTH AND DEVELOPMENT
Salina was founded in 1858 when a group of five men, known as
the Salina Town Company and headed by Wiiliam A. Phillips, staked
out an original townsite of 305 acres (bounded by North Street,
Ninth Street, South Street and Front Street) and named it Saleena.
The name later was changed to Salina. The Territorial Legislature
in 1859 established Saline County, incorporated Salina, and desig-
nated the City as the County Seat. (See the Salina Growth Map.)
Post Civil War settlement of the area and the arrival of the
Kansas Pacific Railroad in 1867 caused Salina to grow rapidly in
the 1860's. The purchase in 1868 and settlement of 13,000 acres
of southern Saline and northern McPherson Counties by the First
Swedish Agricultural Company of Chicago also was a great boost for
Salina. In 1869, 250 Scandinavians, mostly Swedes, arrived in
Salina to settle farm lands that had been purchased for them.
Salina quickly became the center of trade. and early industry for
the surrounding area. By 1870 Salina had grown to a population
of 918 and was designated a third-class city. By 1870 another
103 acres north and northwest of the original townsite had been
annexed. Today, much of the area is interlaced with railroad
tracks, commercial and industrial establishments and declining
residential areas.
Salina experienced its most rapid rate of population growth
during the next decade, reaching a population of 3,111 by 1880.
Introduction of hard winter wheat in the 1870's greatly affected
Salina's trade territory. Salina also received some spill-over of'
the Abilene cattle trade. Annexations during the decade totaled
106 acres, mostly to the west and south of the Original Townsite.
Salina continued to grow in commerce, industry and in resi-
dences at a rather rapid rate during the 1880's. The industrial
census of 1884 showed Salina to have many new homes, two wholesale
grocery firms, five agricultural implement dealers, three flour
mills, six hotels, ten grain elevators, five livery stables, six
blacksmith shops, ten churches and two schools. Salina Normal
University, later destroyed by fire, was built in 1884. Kansas
Wesleyan University was opened in 1886. St. John's Military Acad-
emy was erected on a 51-acre site on the'north edge of Salina in
1887.
-9-
The decade also was a time of further railroad development.
The Missouri Pacific Railroad was completed in 1886, the Chicago
Rock Island and Atchison-Topeka and Santa Fe in 1887. The McPherson
branch of the Kansas Pacific had been completed in 1879.
Annexation during the 1880's more than quadrupled the size of
the city to 2,338 acres. The population had grown to 6,149 by
1890.
Salina's growth slowed considerably in the next two decades.
The population had dropped to 6,074 by 1900, but had risen to 9,688
by 1910. Salina suffered a disastrous flood in 1903 in which there
was no loss of life, but considerable property damage. Industry
and trade became more firmly established in Salina with rehabilita-
tion following the flood. No additional land was annexed during
the twenty-year period.
Wheat belt prosperity of World War I resulted in a period of
vigorous expansion for Salina, and the population had reached
15,085 by 1920. Annexations in the decade added 182 acres includ-
ing land west of St. John's Military Academy, Kenwood Park, an
area south of Republic in the vicinity of Sunset Park, and an area
east of Fourth Street and south of Crawford.
Salina continued to grow at a slower rate in the 1920's, but
made almost an equal numerical gain as in the previous ten years.
The population had reached 20,155 by 1930. Annexations totaling
428 acres were made to various sections of the City during the
decade. .
Salina's growth slowed greatly during the depression decade of
the 1930's as it had during depression times of the 1890's. The
population in 1940 reached 21,073, an increase of only 4.6% over
the 1930 population. Only 45 acres were annexed during the decade.
Salina's growth was stimulated greatly in the war years of the
1940's with the opening of the Smoky Hill Air Base. The popula-
tion grew 24.2% in the decade to 26,176 in 1950. Annexations near
Salina High, east of Ohio and north of Greeley, and south of
Kansas W~sleyan totaled 145 acres.
Reactivation of Schilling Air Base (former Smoky Hill Air Base)
at the time of the Korean War stimulated unprecedented population
and physical growth of Salina in the 1950's. The population in-
creased 65% to 43,202 and the City increased in size from 3,128 to
-10-
I:j
I-
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
t"l=-- I -, ' ~]'
I SALINA GROWl I MAP~~ '
II ~ I ~
LEGEND ~/ ~i
I~ ORIGINAL ~OWN.. '''~'-f<
,
1~860-1950 Ii I
1~95l-1960 --l '
~N~ ~,-:~8 X/'If' Vc-, ,sf V '
v ( ~." 17
I j~j ~ ,~- (
r ~IJ~
r '-~~\fC, nl~l\ '~~~
I~?) r(\\ .ir':J.1!1 "</~ ' ",0
II I, I ../1
I~ ~
~--T
I
~r
~ji
{i;:;::.;': .....
W ST. R _ 7c5lmm ...
/~'<.:~: 'ff... ......
\ I' \ :TV~~
"''' '''' \ i~ ~.~ ~.~:~]~~~~
~ \~ ' .::.: ::: ::::::: .....
"~I ~ r ::::::::::.": ::::~
I L =~L....'=--.J ~ ':'-:r.J:~ 1.1.1.1. ~.1.1.1.
I \ V At.E::; c=c
i ~.-:\\:\f:;v./; ... . ::::E' t
'h ..... ....I.;..;;~ ::.:::::: :::::: :::: :::.;;;;ii : f:f~~
'U . ...... 'f:;' .......... .. ..... ...... :..:.:.:=....~ . <:: - ELK'S
~L~ : ~ : :;:>~ !!:H~~1: 0;~:i:l: ::: .~~~HsT!tr! 1:11 1..(C~-~~~: ~', b COUNTRY
l ,~~~<:~r~~. ....~:i~.~:~-=:\~ ".. I
" (I' t~;h ,\'- \ ):
. ,1\... .__ __ .:..::.:::::::::::::~: f-L (, -:::> \\
o 'J' =, ' ,~[ j:..::' : y:V-- i \\
,e I~~!~ ~ r ~:/ /;,,=~,~~,,\
~ ...~~{:: H] r\ t::: ':0:.-::';' I
" ~JjG::' - " ~"
iQl~ INet I . r=: ::j \..
~~;, h' -hWM I '. _
l.v}...J The pteparation of thi map was financially aided through a Federal grant
- : from th-: Renewal Assistance Administration of the Department
WI O...J of HOUSing and Urban Development, authorized by section 405
. " ...~o. . 01 th.!j Housing Ad of 1959. os om ended J)!!' )j
< W l' / 'o,:.,.,...~ 0 ,;,'" (
h_h'~ 7f -----"''''-----'. " , '-J' ~'.'" >"'--:--:"-:"--'1 s
r"~"~~ ... ;, ~ I ,f,~<~ .../'~~~ 1 J/
If (/. Q.::- ;"IIJ
) SALINA INC 1\" ."t . ,\ I .'''-..
INDUSTRIAL I {: ".r~\'''~':-:",--""",
PARr!. l\t, ....':;';:.-...-:.'~ :',. } '\) /'-
"" WUTlNGHOUat _ ' '-: ~,~- /~T \\ (
~,
:!3U:~~~~~~~~n
I
@
I
Il i
sJ
f~ / }1""1~0
17"]
~
I~ :, ~ 'C1~.
~
.....;,;-,
L7
77
~~~ '7/-
~_ --- _ ,YZ
~~'-/' ,,*
"',
.""-
I
o
I
, t:J,
'I~
.-
,."T'~!
\ : ii I
\1 II
I
1 ! ~~ ~1~:= ~7 I~~ ~
~ 1;;;-3 '~'!: .~~ ( ~
I / "",) I I ,
!"] 1---..
~ ~ ~,; J ___u___~
'-'- "0 ;7 :;7, /
)"
f/ T
T><Oo..1l\
, I
I
I' ~ ~
- !
(//
/ r
I
\
r--'
'IV
~ ~:1~1.:
(,~:-..:%
.. {r-..........,
~/ I
/
r,l
....... /t.?
(rIll
"
0'
r,..~<l'
- --
DIKE . ~
.u. ~ ~
~ /,-' ;
::::------- If 1r I
~~~/" /1
t( \.;.~....... l!
~::::; f-----r- I, --:.-=-_:-, '\ -
'~~'7J._l-__' \ /'~~1f'"
....,.. SEWAGE 1r
~~......::::: LEE TFl.EATMENT PLANT
~ INDUSTFl.I....L il &3~ \\
PARK ~"
~,~" ~ A~
I.kc<~ _ ~J j(
":PA"''');::-~\ ~ALINA
.. -'... -,,)! COUNTRY
; ,', -""")/.' ,--
....h ",::7/ ,.,"",~~~::~ I
"
/,;
A
//
/"
I,
'~'J
I,
/I
. ... .... . ~ r:
:~~:~ ::::.::: :'-::: ~I;i;!i:;!'~:~l!~;:;;:~ )
.::::~ ::~ ~.~;;;%:::::::I:::.: ::: .. /, -I-J
:::::i ::~ ..:..:..::~~::.....:::.: ::: ::. V'
... j/; ~ [H[lL~~~ ~ ~ ~ 5J I,
?; ;:'~. :::.::::~t:~f:8fm : )
...;.;..:.;...... .... .::::""-"-,::::::::: :
~: :::...tI\ I....... -:. ICEMETERY
:::: ::'1-1 II~, - L____...
J: ~~ --
).-
_,VI.
I [Qr11
i 11'1
il
III
! 1':1
iN
1~11
"'-...._...~ III!
"\ 'I li!I'
'. 'I
( I' l",
~1
· i:jl'
; 1III
II'
,W
~
I
I-
II
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
II
I'
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
5,602 acres. Most land annexed during the decade lay along and
to the west of Broadway, south of Cloud and east of Ohio in Neigh-
borhood 13.
The closing of Schilling Air Base in June 1965 had a tremen-
dous effect upon the economy and growth of Salina. The economy of
Salina declined, drastically, and expansion came to a virtual
standstill. The comeback as a result of an infusion of industry
and determination on the part of most residents has been impres-
sive. Salina has become known as "The City on the Move".
The population in 1968 was 37,652 not including students of
Marymount College, Kansas Wesleyan University, and St. John's
Military Academy living on campus or those from Salina in state
institutions.
BLIGHT CRITERIA .
The condition of structures, minority residences, vacant resi-
dences, social characteristics, pOlice-fire-welfare and other
agency data was surveyed on a city-wide basis, and an analysis
of the findings was performed. The results of this analysis clear-
ly described that Neighborhoods 4, 7, 8, 9, 11, 12 and 14 were
priority areas offering opportunity for rehabilitation and renewal
action. These neighborhoods were studied intensely, and the
findings are compared to indices for the City-wide area.
An exterior field survey of structures in Salina was performed
by the City staff based upon the following structural condition
blight criteria established by the Consultant:
Sound - Structures that had no apparent defects and appeared to
be durable for occupancy for a minimum of 20 additional years.
Minor Repair - Structures that apparently required little or no
structural repair, but did require repair to maintain value
and usefulness.
Major Repair - Structures that required structural repair and
substantial surface repair, but did appear to offer a reha-
bilitated life of 20 years, if so repaired.
Clearance - Structures that were deteriorated to.a degree that
it was apparent that reasonable repair could not yield a
structure offering a minimum of 20 years of useful life.
-11-
Bldg. Struct. Rating:
I
I
I
I
I
The grading system employed by exterior survey inspectors was
a numerical grading system as follows:
Building .Conc,.i tion: Very Fac-
Good Fair Poor Poor tor Def.
0 1 2 3
Foundation 6
Struc. Coat. 1
Exterior Walls 6
Roof 5
Doors & Wind. 3
Porch & Steps 2
Chim. & Trim 2
TOTAL
Sound
Minor Repair
Major Repair
Clear-Rehab.
0- 5~
6-19
20-40
41+
Improper Refuse storageOI
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
By rating each item, a numerical factor was calculated and the
structure was placed in the appropriate structural category.
The environmental deficiencies were observed in the survey and
recorded in accordance with the following form:
Environmental Deficiencies:
1. Unsound structures []
Substd. Size Struct.
2. Insuf. Setback - 20' []
Insuf. Side Yd. - 5'
Insuf. Back Yd.- 40'
Sidewalk - None-Poor
3. Inharmonious Land Use B
4. Drainage Problems
5. Deter. l\ux. Bui Iding
Junk on premises
Unsightly Weeds, Brush
and Tree Limbs 0
Unsightly Fence, Ma-
chinery, Vehicles
6. No Off-Str. Parking 0
Street · Unpaved
Deter.
congested
Comments:
7. Refuse Storage
Good Closed Contain-
ers
Open Barrels
Scattered Garbage
or Trash
Evidence of Burning
8.
Privy
-12-
.....
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
i I
I
II
I
I
Photos of typical structures identified by the survey in
each of the four classifications and certain typical environmental
deficiencies are shown on the following pages for record purposes.
-13-
CONDITIONS - CITY-WIDE
The corporate area of the City was mapped into 18 neighborhoods,
and. several of the neighborhoods contain,areas outside the City
limits. Alt tables and charts reflect only the areas inside the
present City limits. In addition to these 18 neighborhoods, five
rural neighborhoods and Neighborhood 24 (federally-owned Capehart
housing) are included to permit future update of this study.
County enumeration records for the 18 neighborhoods surveyed
(entire City) indicate the population to be 37,652 residents (1-1-68)
(excluding the students of the two colleges living on campus and
residents of state institutions). (See Neighborhood Population
table.) Minority group population totaled 1,139 .persons or 3.0%
of total population, and these persons resided in 10 of the 18
neighborhoods. There are a total of 13,988 dwelling units, and
the average persons per household was 2.7. Of the 11,860 residen-
tial structures, 10,221 were occupied by single families, 598 were'
occupied as two-family units, 187 were occupied as multi-family
units, and 854 residential structures were vacant. The total land
area occupied by residential development was 2,134.9 acres - one
family; 121.0 acres - two family; 36.5 acres - 3 or more multi-
family; 43.1 acres - mobile homes; for a total of 2,335.5 acres.
SALINA CRP
NEIGHBORHOOD POPULATION TABLE
------- popula tion------- --Number Family Units-- persons/ - - - - -- -- - - -- - - ---- -- --- - Popula tion - ---- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - ----
Neigh- House- -5 5-19 20-64 65+
bar hood ~ Minori ty ! ~ Minori ty ! ~ ~ ! No. ! No. ! ~ !
1 13 3 2.3 1 7.6 6 46.2 6 46.2
2 76 2 2.6 23 4.3 3.3 4 5.3 28 36.8 38 50.0 7.9
3 No Urban Development
4 3,112 581 18.7 1.208 179 14.8 2.6 354 11. 4 890 28.6 1.563 50.2 305 9.8
5 18 7 4 22.2 9 50.0 5 27.8
6 No Urban Residential Development
7 3.791 60 1.6 1.728 20 1.6 2.2 298 7.9 1.018 26.8 1.849 48.8 626 16.5
8 591 24 4.1 411 4 1.0 1.4 18 3.0 95 16.1 341 57.7 137 23.2
9 2.098(8) 359 17.1 885 (3) 114 12.9 2.1 158(1) 7.5 591 (3) 28.2 1.034(4) 49.3 315 15.0
10 155(17) 4 2.6 45 (6) 2 4.4 3.4 11 7.1 52 (6) 33.5 85 (7) 54.9 7 (4) 4.5
11 2.541 28 1.1 1.008 9 .9 2.5 233 9.2 678 26.7 1.276 50.2 354 13.9
12 3.938(14) 22 .6 1.717(8) 8 .5 2.3 334 (1) 8.5 970 (2) 24.6 2.134(9) 54.2 500 (2) 12.7
13" 1.493 458 3.3 62 4.2 531 35.6 795 53.2 105 7.0
14 2.152 (1) 56 2.6 594 (4) 11 1.9 3.6 314 (3) 14.6 784 (2) 36.4 1.022 (6) 47.5 32 1.5
15 4.018 1.523 2.6 331 8.2 1.028 25.6 2,245 55.9 414 10.3
16" 5.885 2.145 2.6 402 6.9 1.679 28.5 3.267 55.5 537 9.1
17 195 86 2.3 22 11. 3 45 23.1 82 42.0 46 23.6
18 No Urban Development
19 2.356 3 .1 707 .1 3.2 351 14.9 745 31. 6 1.215 51. 6 45 1.9
20 4.121 1.136 3.6 387 9.4 1.556 37.7 2.055 49.9 123 3.0
21 No Urban Development
22 1.099 304 3.6 134 12.2 407 37.0 549 50.0 .8
23 No Urban Development
24 No Urban Development
TOTAL 37.652 1.139 3.0 13.988 349 2.5 2.7 3.414 9.0 11,107 29.5 19.565 52.0 3.566 9.5
" Maryrnoun t and Kansas Wesleyan dormi tory residents not included.
( ) Numbers in parenthesis indicate persons and family units not tabulated by block in priority areas due to insufficient address.
Residents of State Institutions on January 1. 1968 not included.
Based upon population as of January 1. 1968 as secured by the Saline County Clerk's Office.
-14-
I
I
I
I
II
II
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
Residential Structure Ratings
Sound Residence
Maior Repair Residence
Minor Repair Residence
Clearance Residence
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
Environmental Deficiencies
Insufficient Setback
Inharmonious land Use
Overcrowding
Insufficient Backyard
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
The conditions of the reside~tial structures reported by the
survey in the four blight-criteria categories are as follows for
the entire City and for the selected CRP neighborhood areas:
CITY-WIDE HOUSING CONDITIONS SUMMARY
Neighborhoods 1,2,4,5,7,8,9,10,11,12,13,14,15,16,17,19,20 and 22
(August 1968)
Sound Minor Repair Major Repair Clearance 'I'otal
Single-Family
Occupied 6,774 (57.1%) 2,365 (20.0%) 925 7.8%) 157 -(1.3%) 10,221 (86.2%)
Two-Family 308 2.6%) 203 1.7%) 76 0.6%) 11 (0.1%) 598 5.1%)
Multi-Family 96 0.8% ) 59 0.5%) 22 0.2%) 3 (0.025%) 181 1. 5%)
Single-Family
Vacant 242 ( 2.0%) 268 ( 2.3%) 257 ( 2.2%) 87 (0.7%) 854 ( 7.2%)
TOTAL RESIDENTIAL
STRUCTURES 7,420 (62.6%) 2,895 (24.4%) 1,280 (10.8% ) 258 (2.2%) 11,854(100.0%)
SALINA CRP AREA HOUSING CONDITIONS
Neighborhoods 4,7,8,9,11,12 and 14
(August 1968)
Minor Major
-Sound Repair Repair Clearance
Single-Family 2,148 1, 853 594 128
Two-Family 191 174 58 9
Multi-Family 80 55 20 3
Vacant Structures 157 250 252 83
TOTAL (CRP Area) 2,576 2,332 924 223
% of Entire City 34.7% 80.6% .72. 2 % 86.4%
Population
Dwelling Units
Persons per Dwelling Unit
Minority
Total
4,723
432
158
742
6,055
51.1%
18,223
7,551
2.4
1,130
The residential and non-residential summaries for all neighbor-
hoods are shown in the following tables.
-15-
SALINA CRP NEIGHBORHOOD
HOUSING SUMMARY
- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - Occupi ed- - - - - -- - - - - - -- - - - - - - - - - - --
Neiqh. No. .! ~ .! Mi. .! ~ ! ~ !
ONE-FAMILY RESIDENCES
-----------------------Vacant--------------------~---
No. ! ~ ! Mi. ! ~ ! ~ !
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
994
87
500
57
724
957
452
573
1,335
1,738
45
517
1, 059
24
100.0
16
157
3
322
47
223
13
456
588
452
355
974
1,364
45
443
1,048
268
6,774
66.7
15.1
75.0
26.2
31. 5
38.6
21: 4
53.4
50.0
99.8
34.5
70.9
71. 9
95.7
77.5
96.4
95.4
57.1
2,365
TOTAL
10,221
888
.3
85.1
75.0
Percents are figured to the nearest tenth.
81. 0
58.4
86.5
93.4
84.8
81. 4
99.8
55.7
97.1
91. 7
95.7
90.4
97.4
268
95.4
477
535
35
154
18
197
294
161
207
225
48
7
29.2
45.7
167 16.0
4.1
87 8.3
17 1.4
1 .6
6 1. 0
8 13.1
6 .7
9 .8
.2
.4
.5
6' 1. 0
157 1. 3
SALINA CRP NEIGHBORHOOD
HOUSING SUMMARY
94
1
9.0
25.0
.3
27 2.6
86.2
43.6
23.5
26.6
29.5
23.1
25.0
120 9.8
4 2.7
117 20.2
18 29.5
65 7.6
66 5.6
45
15
36
2
57
39
1
456
15
14
3.7
10.1
6.2
3.3
6.7 27
3.3 13
.2 1
44.3 110
1.1 8
.7 4
18
1.7
15.7
15.1
11. 9
55 5.3
148 10.8
140 7.4
47
20
8.2 40
1. 8 20
.1
25
4
11
1
16
7
2.0
2.7
1.9
1.-6
1.8
.6
15 1. 2
5 3.4
18 3.1
8.4
.6
20 3.5
4 .4
12
4.3 12
.5
3.2
1.1
.2
10.7
.6
.2
11 1.3
11 .9
20.0
925 7.8
854
7.2 242
169
3
7
16.4
.2
.4
165 16.0
2 .1
3 .2
7.0
1.8
1.2
4.3
2.1
257 . 2.2
268
2.3
46
1
4
6
4
1
3
8
12
2
87
4.4
25.0
.3
4.0
.7
1.6
.4
. .7
1.2
.1
.7
I
Land
Area
(Acres)
I
25.8
I
155.8
11. 7
155.3
13.3
92.2
39.7
126.7
190.6
203.6
182.2
222.7
310.4
9.0
I
.1
111.9
222.7
I
61. 3
2,134.9
I
Total
Res.
Land
Area
I
nnn-n-n-TWO-FAMILY RESIDENCES------------- Land --------n-THREE-FAMILY RESIDENCESn--------
Area
Neiqh. No. ! ~ ! Mi. .! Ma. ! ~.! (Acres) No. .! ~.! Mi.! Ma. ! ~ !
Mobile
Land Total Home
Area Perm. Land
(Acres) Struct. Area
I
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
56 5.4
124 10.1
26 17.4
36 6.2
2 3.3
66 7.7
124 10.6
20 1.'5
130 6.9
39 3.2
15 10.1
22 3.8
33 3.9
77 6.6
17 1.3
89 4.7
1.4
.6
5.1 308
.5
.9
.6
2.6 203. 1.7 76
30 2.9 15 1.4
74 6.0 11 .9
7 4.7 4 2.7
5 .9 8 1.4
2 3.3
23 2.7 8 .9
35 3.0 12 1.0
3 .2
21 1. 2 18 .9
.5
Percents are figured to the nearest tenth.
TOTAL 598
.6
9.2
.2
20.3
3.8
5.9
17.1
11. 7
24.4
7 .8
55 4.7
.5
.1
35
5
2
2
10
.1
.1
64 5.2
21 14.1
6 1.1
.2
.1
3.4
21. 9
4 .3
14 .7
2 4.3
2.0
1.3
.6 11 '.1 121. 0 181
14 1.1
16 10.7
4 .7
4 .5
41 3.4
.3
.4
4.3
.2
.2
.2
2.9
3.4
.4
14
.1
.3
1 .3
1.5 96
.8 59
1.1
.2
.9
.1
.3
.1
C1.
SALINA CRP LAND USE SUMMARY
Commercial. Industrial', Public, Semi-Public. Vacant Land
Hi.
.3
.1
- 1.4
'14.0
.9
1,043
4
10.6
2.8
1.8
1,227
149
578
61
854
1,175
453
1,029
1,374
1,896
47
.8
2.6
.5
.1
572
1,087
.5 22
.2 '
.025 36.5 11,854
1. 0 281
Indus.
Land
Area
--public-- Semi-Public
Neigh.
----------------------Commercial----------------------
----------------------Industrial----------------------
3.6
o
)1.7 .0
1
2
3
.
5
6
7
B
,
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
9 100.0
8 7 87. ~ 1 12.5
Outside the City Limits
175 102 58.3 30 17.1 30
10 4 40.0 4 40.0 1
2 2 100.0 0 0
79 47 59.5 21 26.5 10
361 21 5.8 256 71.5 47
26 15 57.7 4 15.4 1
6 1 16.7 1 16.7. 4
49 44 89.8 5 10.2 0
105 91 86.7 12 11.4 2
o O' 0 .0
14 12 85.7 2 14.3 0
22 22 100.0 0 0
45 41 91.1 1 3
3 3 100.0 0 0
Outside the City Limits
10 7 70.0 2 20.0
21 21 100.0 0
Outside the city Limits
8 8 100.0 0
Mi.
17.1 13
10.0 1
o
12.7 1
13.0 35
3.8 6
66.6 0
o
o
o
o
o
6.7 0
o
953 457 47.9 341 35.8 99 10.4 56 5.9
10.0
7.5
10.0
1.3
'.7
23.1
C~.
Land
Area
19.6
30.4
100.0
79.2
13.4
3.'
38.8
39.8
10.3
..,
55.7
53.8
15 8 53.3 2
3 2 66.7 1
1 1 100.0 0
13 7 53.8 4
83 3' 3.6 47
11 9 81. 8 0
6 5 83.3 0
5 4 80.0 1
6 3 50.0 1
'0 0 0
o 0 0
2 2 0
o 0 0
o 0 0
6.'
29.4
10.4
2.2
2.'
1.8
6.5
408.8
-16-
13.3 3
33.3/0
o
30.8 2
56.6 12
2
o
20.0 0
16.7 2
o
o
o
o
o
56
21
C1.
20.0 2
o
o
15.4 0
14.5 21
18.2 0
1
o
33.3 0
o
o
o
o
o
24 1(..3 26
13.4
22.1
24.2
17.7
26_2
44.1
57.7
116.3
3.2
6.0
5 14.2 7
o 0
o 0
9 10.2 9 3.9
17 23.5 18 9.6
3 11.6 3 3.5
8 3.8 1 100.0
5 10.0 3 3.4
14 221.2 6 48.3
3 54_2 4 49.4
3 11.3 3 . 1.8
4 35.7 5 4.8
27 52.8 13 35_3
1 .2 1 1.0
16.7
39.4 2.9
20.8 28.6
531.6 86
Vacant
Land
14.0
54.1
35.4
67.2
15.9
3.0
28.0
34.5
38.2
117.0
88.0
5.1
'.5
12.9
79.2
926.3 2,507.3
24
24.6
51-.7
72.6
74.5
25.8
12.0
177.9
11. 7
I
2.9
12.7
186.2
19.9
99.9
59.7
152.5
229.0
203.6
182.2
226.9
334.9
9.5
I
I
15.5
129.4
224.1
62.3
43.1 2335.5
I
I
Total Non-
Res _ Land
Area
I
44.2
97.4
172.0
73.0
88.7
95.0
120.0
111.1
259.5
110.5
446.3
191.6
24.6
85.0
111.4
82.6
I
I
117.3
125.7
151.4
I
I
I
I
I
The selected CRP area (7 neighborhoods) contains 51% of the
total residential structures, 86.4% of the residential structures
identified by survey. as warranting clearance, and 80% of the res-
idential structures identified as requiring minor repair. Nearly
1/2 of the residential clearance structures are located in Neigh-
borhood 4. The areas outside of the seven CRP neighborhoods
contain only 35 "clearance" residential structures in scattered
locations varying from 6 to 9 structures per neighborhood, and
these scattered "clearance" structures are apparently a result
of ownership desire or original construction deficiencies rather
than a set of correctable blighting influences. These 35 "clear-
ance" residential structures do afford a blighting influence on
adjacent property; however, unaided actions are occurring that
will probably effect their removal. The concentrated bligh~ con-
ditions are largely confined to the CRP area (the north 1/2 of
the City). The blight in the CRP area is a result of age and
other deterioration influences, as many of the residences in the
non-CRP area are of equal age and have been maintained in a sub-
stantially more durable condition. The CRP neighborhood conditions
and blighting factors are discussed in detail in Part B of this
section. (See City-Wide Blighting Map)
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
To provide a general over-view of all the neighborhoods in the
City, a brief description of each is given along with the popula-
tion and land area. Several ~f the neighborhoods include area
outside the City Limits; however, the population, housing condi-
tions and land use discussed in the following include only the
values for the area within the City Limits. (SeeNeighborhood
Land Use Summary tables)
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
Neighborhood 1 -- Pop.: 13; Area in Acres: Res. - 0; Non-Res. -
19.6; Vacant - 24.6; Total - 44.2.*
This area is largely rural with new commercial development
near the intersection of U.S. 81 and Interstate 70. No current
blighting influences are reported.
Neighborhood 2 -- Pop.: 76i Area in Acres: Res. - 25.8; Non-Res. -
45.7; Vacant - 5l.7i Total -123.2
The area is vacant or rural except for several scattered res-
idential structures and highway se+vice busin~sses. An isolated
salvage operation provides an unattractive neighbor to the park,
but is not currently affecting other structures as to value or use.
I
I
I
* Area values for this and subsequent neighborhoods include.only
developable areas and do not include street and railroad rights-
of way.
-17-
Neighborhood 3 -- All area outside City Limits.
The area is rural except for new highway service business at
the. highway intersection.
Neighborhood 4 -- Pop.: 3,112; Area in Acres: Res. - 177.9; Non-
Res. - 117.9; Vacant.- 54.1; Total - 349.9
Neighborhood 4 is a neighborhood of medium to small residences,
bisected by two major highways of declining highway traffic (due
to I-70 and I-35 by-pass routes) with scattered business and indus-
try uses along the highways. A nuIDber of the streets are unpaved,
the area is deficient in park and school land. The area has ac-
quired a 'north-of-the-tracks' reputation, and the residential
units in this area are being purchased for $2,000 to $3,000 less
than comparable units in other areas of the City. The area is
severely blighted by numerous factors.
Neighborhood 5 Pop.: 18; Area in Acres: Res. - 11.7; Non-Res. -
37.6; Vacant - 35.4; Total - 84.7
Only a small portion of this neighborhood is in the City limits
and contains only a strip of mixed industrial and commercial uses
along old U.S. 40 and Ohio Street, with scattered rural-type resi-
dences. The packing plant, auto salvage and the dehydrating plant
are a deterrent to urban residential growth and do detrimentally
affect the appearance of the area.
Neighborhood 6 -- Pop.: 0; Area in Acres: Res. - 0; Non-Res.
21.5; Vacant - 67.2; Total - 88.7
This area is rural except for new industria~-commercial devel~
opment in the southern tip of the area near the'I-35W and Crawford
Street interchange.
Neighborhood 7 -- Pop.: 3,791; Area in Acres: Res. - 186.2; Non-
Res. - 79.1; Vacant - 15.9; Total - 281.2
This area is densely developed with older, larger houses, ex-
cept for the scattered livestock .sales and contractor's yards in
the extreme west edge of the area and the fringe of commercial and
contractor's yards along the north boundary adjacent the railroad
tracks and along Broadway (U.S. 81.By-Pass). A number of residences
are located on substandard-sized lots. Many older, large structures
have been converted to apartments with insufficient parking space,
-18-
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
-------------------
I I
I ! I ;/.-;~l
I rr~1: 1\ ,/~:f:.// I
I 1 1 . /);/~/ I
I : : // / I
I : : .-/~..., ( I
Ii! <;:~. / i I
I ! ' /:.;;// ' I
"~~1 //, /'
I :j / .'~--; /;,.#(::/ I
I . ,~-~
1. .' -.--..~;...+----:::. I I I
--.:::~~~....~~~~ . ~---',-:--' . ~ 1\ . I I I
,.'., r \ '-'1 Ii: I I I I
'" , , !' : I l,'i.' I
'''', , \, /! I .:5 I
~, \c=i I I I
\', // 71~~.'.1 ! I II I
I, \11 ..~/!/ In. I I i I
I '. /' .I" ' -......i,+t 'k, I I I
\ , \: //. " "i r+:~\;; I I I'
I ' , ~. . -n '\'-/' I I
' / 1 II.!' 'C/ i,
II, "\; 'I\~~~~~' ',- I
\ !/.,.=::, '. / _"'.-~~y=";"'~::."'''',,,. .......: -~__= "#' ..L ,='
\ ~/~.~,+ ~~~,~~L~,:~~:;:~J~1g!liI ,'=!--~L -== ~-~~'
" ~~~i:::;;?'/ ,I \'T"T'~r~~;t~~~'~~~!! ~ ,. ~/~~~ 'I
" I l/. II','L 0~tZ!.~~!~~ 5 . ~.ifF \l.
~ ,1 i 4 \1 ~1~J!j:~~~~\~j~~!;tjfj:;~ I -,--~~. -I " ... l~-=v~"'r. "',' _
. L.::1J~JA :i;i; "C~ ,'.; ,"or ;:;;;; ;],~ "" Iit~ j_.".,. d.'" L, . ~ ___......... \\\_
1/" '~\ vt!!j[I~tif,lf~~~~~~~~m~~~}tj~~i ---..... ._-".. "",""~.,'" '= !:~^5" s
f'i ,\\ ,l~.3.~.~~~~~~t~~JjaI11~.1 ~ ==--'-.::=' ML ! I PU'.'
/""lU?,~ ~ ~~...:I: -:;'i ~"''''l'''' --" I
, --. '--'-::.:. ~.. ).-in.:::::, m~ ".'0. x-i~Kl~ g~do;<'{'
:},,";..~~' ~ ~~x.x .~~5S-(:(~1
I ~ 'l/;~t ~ ;:\~~ m:~::;' ::];~
'; . ~<. ~:~~j ;,~:""......~==,.,.
"/ ~*~g;::3 . 10
, ' ~w;3S.5~'?-/
II "I ! '.'"'fT I S /
i'" 1
Jl,!i;.~' J[ I '
\ \\\\' . ' ',,,,,,_ .' j~::, I". Ii I :rli! i~Hiu' ~.I'...lll ~.!J.....j.'~ ' ~7
\ " i11:!111 ''''r- , '~;~ I :~ Jt!JII~LII 'I'~ ~P" & r
j \,~ ,. i[!T' I' ~HF - - ~ ... ;/// 0\1__." 111#
\\ I~! I, ~~i ;~F ~ i an:l ), J~~ I; -D L ;'#. _ !l~Y~jlll! C~i
\\h lit!? I. =" "~~-, ~I'I !I!! TJI~,;jJ:F J~~,~), i "'W~i
1 ;2: '=~~I: 1.I 11 lu ~ 4 l=>> I "'13 'n~
\ -- _6 r~' \L~~ ~~niP(~~~t ~ r li~' 1 \~uu
~ ~ . ("' :-=(-4l Y' .L I :" ~;, =: ;,~ ~. ';,l~~).!~,~ tm]
J\\ }-=L~1 A~/ 7'~.'1"" ~, ',I , [ I! .1 i! ':~,:,,::::--. m .'- "'=- ,y '" ,," ,
\ ,), I'""" ~~~jJne~~=f' = j .Ell1
I \\\\.-i'~~\~,lll'/~' ~~~llttJi1rrn~ JiWl ~:~ ~, i~" (~.---------.......r
\\\\;:. :.,) ~ ~!II'I! ~I !mT~Jr~'~Irm ~1
~~~ '~~O.~m~~l~~;W !;:~1 ~ Jt~'9u'~i~~!t \\
\ \\ \ " '-----1' ("""----j \Il'i, .;,,); 1"+,, , ;,,~,...... . : I
,\. \\\\ \ ,.Ii~s~j~lll&t\',\\ ( FE_.,..,.' 3,. ~,~~::~--
\ \~\'" 'I, '::=:-~)\~ Jr ~~ ~~~ d=-=~. ~' ~.:: if" ..;
\ \~\ \! m, r;=L, .'>;" :J,,"'" ,
\ \\~\"~\J :;-'~~: '~[~_ 'I 'I: i l'
\ \ \ ',' Ii \J' 'I .. FI' [ '1 f6 ~nm.'"
\\\\ i-- \\ ',"
\~' I.,:..",n
/; ~; .~ ~l,J ~ J J
rr"~ JQ I I
- J~"'L.."" ~" ~ -
~:~;;~ r!~; ~\, '" l~::::'
,.......-.
;~
~.
I
I
FUTU RE GOLF
~.JfI1
+l~=~
I
I,n=
,I
i
(
18
'1" V',\
,.:
..I
I ~~~~
'~~~\J[Jr,
\~
__' ,t:1r<, \, :.r.. m '-;::::A
<. ; ~ ~,~~~->~~
--
/c\
~/ 'f
=
,=
I. =
I' 1 :t~ ,i
i,Ii=(
'II
h
I~ I .~~
!' I;:;
li.'1 .~
i I ;:II( riE<.", = :~B'
" >=: 'c'''L., /1
': ':;'m ,f', (,'I' /,
;! / J~\
"1-. I ..... "7.. (r u ?, ./
;j;;:;i ~I .,,
'9,=mmm I I . I ',~.
! ,i-
1'::;::'~
.
~
I
,I :
/J':.
7; !
I
,
.. :
: I
I
,
~~J l~l
~~
\~\:
\,; ,
\\
\\' \
\
I ,- ,,:~~.,
'':// .-.:::z
"'"
~--'t\'"'i
1'~h
j~
1,-rr;~W
~: I
Ii!;';' b'l\
: i 1 'I t l; {' ,~b(D ~::~f
i ' 1 '. \~l~,,'
i i lie < c,/ '0
.. ... y; ;: =<~ ~,,\ -c.' ' '~"~< hM'~ &f' I
I ,,~~_;__::_'_~~:; -- Sillmd [ammumly Renewal P'fNJlilm
":;::;' - Salma Kanm
'S',d_".;. PrDJect No Kans R53CR
i~; Prtpawd lor Cl!y o/Salmil, KallsaJ
I F---~---- ': --= By BUCHER & WIUlS COIHultmg hgmeHs
/ :: Planners Atchlleth 19hZ
>,~.. ,~ I
I i
i !
i I
I ..._ Ii ",1 ~~:;
.; !f;cj; ,:~:~:'~ ~. k ..........~>;:""
.="~ ,;=' >,>:~:..l. L.-:
I ir""''''!'}~;2!., ."'=~ ;, i~
L,,;,: i ~:,t,> .J, .'
~ ;,~""';..,,<;"''.<<..:,~
;"7-;;;7""'1 [.;. .......! .,
.,., .1 ." .:,\f;l,"" ."j ,............
'(:jj, "........- '., ....."ir:
<om.!
CITY
WI DE
BUGH\ NG
CAPEHART
i
.
I
'jrJ
=
!>>F."
IrTIID~~
~ 200/0 OR MORE CLEARANCE TYPE ;\ IrTIID~~
m 500/0 OR MORE OF STRUCTURES IN \JEED OF
MAJOR REPAIR OR CLEARANCE
,lli;:~;:.'\;1 7570 OR MORE OF STRUCTURES NEEI
REPAIR OR CLEARANCE
Source, City, Wide Survey
!
fN/XfSTR:4i
--
e SCALE, .l..
500' 0 zoo'o" 3000 y
SEE C B D BUILDING USE MAPS FOR -
8
I'
'1
The prellara!irl1l 01 this map Welt financially aidcd IhrQllgh a federal grant
from the Renewij! Auill/1!lce Admillistralio!l of the Depiltlmellf
of HousinQ and Urban Dcvelopme!ll, authorized by section 405
of the Huusi!!g Act oj 1959, as amended.
25
I ..'
'. .,J
1
, f;
," I'
l!
LI 1. 4....,-
! r' I I
, i
.~
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
2
I
,
I
NEIGHB~RHOOD CO;:,;tTiON MAP ___~t8
NEIGHBORHOOD 2: ~. :~
.
I
II
/0
9/900
/'
&:;UMBERS ABOVE THE LINE INDI AlE PiR OF RESIDENTIAL
STRUCTURES IN THE BLOCK T/ AJ/ARE! SOUND. IN NEED
F MINOR REPAIR, MAJOR RE~Alh AND ICLEARANCE. RESPECTIVELY.
!uMBERS, BELOW THE LINE I~ ICATE TYPES OF ENVIRONMENTAL
~),.\CIENCES \ i
'\~SOUND OR SUBSTA .p SIZED! STRUCTURES
2 SUFFICENT SETBAC,Kj "lYARD. CPR BACKYARD,
OR POOR SIDEWiL \
i .1
3. I \, f-'~MONIOUS LAND\ U '
4. DR~f>>.,GE PROBLEM \ \ I
S. DET 1\J(~ATING AUXIL\A BUILDING, JUNK,
\\ t I l
BRUSH.~SIGHTLY FE MtCHINERY,
6. NO OF~ ',\.REET PARKll UN~AVED~ DETERIOR
OR COI'\ E'fTE:D STREEj'r \ I
7. IMPROPER, ,\EFUSE STO'''' E \ II ; /2
B, PRIVY \ \ \ \.'
\ \ \ ",j "
r-vJ
Scal. in f..,:
400
1... !+....I 400
,.. . ~~:. t::::"it! ......1 '......
II Ii ~".'~-
lit m
---1111 L--.
~I
In': !
: I
: i
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
c
z
o
\ z~
NEIGHBORHOOD CONDITIO~\> AP
NEIGHBORHOOD 4 ~
LEGEND
LINE INDICATE PER CENT C) ESIDENT1AL
STRUCTURES IN THE BLOCK THAT ARE SOUND. IN
OF MINOR REPAIR. MAJOR REPAIR ANt) CLEARANCE, SPECTIVELY.
NUMBERS BELOW THE LINE INDICATE TYPES OF EN~ONMENTAL
1. UNSOUND OR SUBSTANDARD SIZED STRUCTURES
2. INSUFFICENT SETBACK, SIDEYARD, OR BACKYARD;
NO OR F'OOR SIDEWALK.
3. INHARMONIOUS LAND USE
DRAINAGE PROBLEM
5 DETERIORATING AUXILIARY BUILDING JUNK WEEDS \
BRUSH UNSIGHTLY FENCE MACHINERY INOPERABLE HICLES
6 NO OFF="-STREET PARKING UNPAVED DETERIORATING
OR CONGESTED STREETS \
12.,ZMPROPER REFUSE STORAGE
B PRIVY
400
800
------~
~~
,,?// -<
"'/ / Q-:
2N7-I~-~J
i""2"IT67 ~I
, ~
~...~
nri
;z I ! ~Iiol
o 0 I ! 18!. 0 ~
I ( . 12~67i
!~.J \gJJ
1I. ., i3"
! 54. ~.. 3.:.. i. 6/j 22 :.'.
13. '0 i i 17! 0 !
. ,I,T:
"LJ~
xc
w
w
a:
u
(' I
X; \ i It
a: i . ~
.......... ... .... 'iiiiii'iOiJiI.".........~....~..'l.nmJ'F"'....'f,,' ~
r~~:1L ''''',--'m ~
___ ~................ .. i W .., _ t V' r ~
~ I S!Ei 1 R!~!.' ~~,,;, r.! :.:!.' ,~:~" Ii
., : I' 'I Ii ,I: ~ I
~OTIS' l__"__~ bJiJ ~ ~-Lj!
['20801 1/tl142 i61iffi "'7'lfm 1.17!.,f5Ol.50' f741.rI4l I" ']!06 I !
i 0 oll36'~1I !/3.! 61 :361101 ! ~I I~ ~ I
,,'.,,:! 1~/12..JI.~tJ'8 1'2~f8, J..,.'2 ~I' 711 : 'iiS~ 1/~5TI7~ 1'25678 ,
I/~ 1".1 i I 'U' 15.. j'~ I ". " ,
"'"-' ~ '--' J.iJ . idY.lL..J lMJ 1
~~~J j ~I'U~ :..'..... [J1
~,zJLJ le4i W-J
r;j
01 01
267 i
'f) ,
~- r'r:::l
I.. 15 62 I' 7' ..53 !..
! 23 P. 3~
i 235 I2n6 I
l,;;Qm iZ/J'---1
r;O-;;1Ir~6 !';1
1/6 o. 8 0 i
256711/21: 7 I
~o ,~u
~
[",I"
, I'" .
361:l:!'
I/~
. Ii "1
l.i:zJu
'-'.'. ..r_m~.
I oil'l .
~ ol2J~
'12567 ,
i ii !
~l~J
tili1
(3114
~LJ
;'ii[F67:
I/~'
k2;ff67 ~
l~jLj
r20~f6sl
I, '5
!/2567
391, !
ooln~
;' ~ll~a ::::1
i~! ~/~
I 3.c) ~
1t9! .I,J II
J1.P~
17861 i~i60i
'7 0, 13 J3 ,
I 23567 1 23,'l67 !
~j ~tj
r--1(..-.-.,
! Oi!68i
:~~fj
,!:1,
I
T-n
-.!----
r+------ '
i 0 \?21'
! 45i!,J3!
I. 12.f,567
"
l1~jL..J
no~
! ifl
lRJ 52 u
fOnts7;
I;;fr:!
bU
~...,~1.:
! I( i
15611 I
~~,J
.:-ol.l.sOl
'20'101
:23*,"7 ;
. II I
I~Jl J
~\......-
[.141..1220
! 5oHi.;
'V
I !! i
, '. 1
&tJ
['II 1'...I'~'~i". .
12 ~ ;1:5~
! ~
11) i! i
b ~n~Jl_j
1-""'.'.'"
1331,421
['I' ',.8
~~11
'I .
~rJij
rd [41-'1 [Ij-. [4.11.
W""rrO'/SOI
1/4;..(. 1~..f7\-.;j.
I [I ,I
t ii 74. :
J'3",:U A j
; 40401
20.0
! 3567 I
I 1
~
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
NEIGHBO
NEIGHBO~~
lEG E !'lID .
NUMBERS ABOVE THE LINE l~bl f PER CENT OF RES'DE~'TAL
STRUCTURES IN THE BLOCK ~~ T ~RE SOUND, IN NEED I!
OF MINOR REPAIR, MA.JOR R~P fND CLEARANCE. RESPE~I:VELY
:~;':~ERNSCE:ELOW THE LINE"I~,j C, .;,.i E TYPES OF ENV'RONMiN~L.
1. UNSOUND OR SUBSTANr?A! 0 $IZED STRUCTURES
2. INSUFFICENT SETBACK, is. JRD. OR BACKYARD:
NO OR POOR SIDEWAL"J. J I
3. INHARMONIOUS LAND U~E tl' I
4. DRAINAGE PROBLEM I I L--
5 DETERIORATING AUXILlA~yl ~UiLDING. JUNK, WEEDS.
. BRUSH. UNSIGHTL..Y FEN~ J"AJCHINERY, INOPERABLE
6. NO OFF-STREET PARKI~G: JN~AVED. DETERIORATING.
OR CONGESTED STREETS l!,.i
IMPROPER REFUSE STolR J
i II
tl
:Jx,i
ij.j
51 II
3
t I 102
Iii
! 1.'......"'..................'" ;s............"'...."'''''''..!....y-l.T..........''OH.....iT.l
~ j \ I I I LOUDAV s~ I I
S. PRIVY
.p"., /3 1.'19t,....1 ~. .7/
'06 . IQ.Q.
~jLJ ~
I,.. 56 44 i.,..... U'" c1"m
· 9-Q. 'i 0 OJ'
;257'i 15
~! ~
~~~". ~'" ~
~$l,o
I "..J '0
l~LrJ ['J iiJ
r-'-'-<r- -'] '---'--1
; i 3367
75250q . 00
3 6 ;! 1257;
. 'U
!~_.__._..Ji
Scale in fief:
Ihop.ope'cticncf'"i'lncpwc,linco<icI11Cidod'
ho," ,~. Ion.....I...";,,oo<. Ad..in;'''.';c'' of ,h.
oIHoo,incondU.b""O...lop...nl,ou'ho,i.odb.
cl ,ho Hou,ing Adofl959,o,o..."ded
400
400
1.liur....UiltJ....'IPlt9"..
jal~.. loll"
proit<Il<lK","RSJU
P""". I" (~I oj ioU.., 1""1.
b,(~, 11.H.lm
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
causing a blighting influence. There is a noticeable recent trend
to lower levels of maintenance and a minor loss of apparent sale
value. The area is deficient in park area, the only park area
being roadside parks along u.s. 81 by-pass. The two public ele-
mentary schools are quite old, except for recent additions, and
are located on quite inadequate sites. The major streets and com-
mercial uses bisecting the neighborhood have had a blighting-
influence on residential value.
Neighborhood 8 -- Pop.: 591; Area in Acres: Res. - 19.9; Comm.
39.8; Ind. - 44.1; Public - 33.1; Vacant - 3.0; Total - 139.9
The Central Business District (CBD) occupies a major portion
of this area with a fringe of residences. Many are of a multi-family
nature and are, for the most part, sound and in minor repair condition.
The volume of vehicular traffic and adjacent commercial uses has'
encouraged use by apartment dwellers. The condition of commercial
structures in the CBD, the vacancies, inadequate parking, lack of
beauty and adequate amenities and circulation describe serious
retail and economic blighting factors. While numerous new and
privately-rehabilitated improvements have been performed in the
past 5 years, the net effect is one of increasing blighting influ-
ences.
Neighborhood 9 -- Pop.: 2,098; Area in Acres: Res. -- 99.9; Non-
Res. - 83.1; Vacant - 28.0; Total - 211.0 (Values of the 138.86
acre U. R. proj ect Kansas R- 29' are not included in the above)
This area is occupied by an inter-mixture of industrial, com-
mercial and residential uses with the vacant area being near
North and ohio Streets. The residential structures in the north
half of the neighborhood are quite blighted as a result of industry,
lack of school and park, heavy traffic, railroad tracks and unim-
proved streets. This area includes Urban Renewal Project #2 (Kans.
R-29) .
The U.R. Proj. R-29 Project 2 comprises 138.86 gross acres and
contains 254 structures (216 residential and 38 non-residential
structures) of which only 30 are considered standard structures.
This area will be cleared of all (216) residential and 24 of the
non-residential structures, the area replatted, new streets and
partially new utilities installed. As this project is in execu-
tion, the structural and environmental conditions are not included
in the tabulation of Neighborhood 9.
The south portion of Neighborhood 9 is composed of medium to
-19-
large, mainly single-family residences -- over one-half requiring
urgent improvement to the extent of minor and major repairs to
confine the blighting influences.
A fringe of commercial uses along Iron Avenue (south border
of the area) has a minor blighting influence.
Neighborhood 10 -- Pop.: 155; Area in Acres: Res. - 59.7; Non-.
Res. - 225.0; Vacant - 34.5; Total - 319.2
Approximately one-half of this neighborhood (159.6 acres) is
in the City limits and is sparsely developed with large lot,
rural and suburban residences. A 100~acre City-wide park and
lake occupies about 1/3 of the City area. A commercial nursery
and a new manufacturing plant are in the area, and there are no
serious blighting influences. Only eight clearance structures
are in this neighborhood -- mostly rural-type residences.
Neighborhood 11 -- Pop.: 2,541; Area in Acres: Res. - 152.5; Non-
Res. - 72.3; Vacant - 38.2; Total - 263.0
All except 23 acres in the northwest corner of this neighbor-
hood lies in the City Limits, and the area is nearly all developed
in an urban nature. The east half of the area is mostly medium
to small single-family residences developed from 1890 to 1920 and
contains 11 clearance-rated structures. The central one-fourth
is developed by business along Broadway (U.S. 81 by-pass), and the
western one-fourth is developed with small single-family structures
(1950-1960) largely controlled by FHA, and a considerable number
of the vacant structures in the neighborhood are in this west resi-
dential area. The railroad tracks, the U.S. 81 by-pass, and strip
development along the by-pass constitute some blighting influences
upon adjoining properties. The aged and small-lot structures in
the east residential portion of the neighborhood also provide
blighting influences. The war-time type of construction of the
west residential portion of the area shortens the life expectancy
of many of these residential structures.
Neighborhood 12 -- Pop.: 3,938; Area in Acres: Res. - 229.0; Non-
Res. - 329.3; Vacant - 117.0; Total - 675.3
The central 270 acres are occupied by two large City-wide
parks (Oakdale and Kenwood). The residential area west and north
of the park area is a mixture of single and multi-family struc-
tures developed 1880-1920, interspersed with scattered commercial
-20-
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
URBAN RENEWAL AREA NO.2
RHOOD CONDITION MAP
NEIGHBORHOOD 9
LEGEND
LINE INDICATE PER CENT OF RESIDENTIAL
STRUCTURES IN THE BLOCK THAT ARE SOUND, IN NEED
C?_~~L~_<?,~~~~~.AIR.,~",.^~~JOR REPAIR AND CLEARANCE. RESPECTIVELY.
^ UM13ERS_BE-LOW-~..<rJ:i~:ErNE__1NJ2.IC~!E ___TYPES OF ENVIRONMENTAL
DEFt CI E NeE S --~_~~__~ - m_..._.". ^,-,,-~---""'"~----'-'--~
! ~"-""",-""-'-
1. UNSOUND OR SUBSTANDARD SIZED STRUCTURES
2. INSUFFICENT SETBA4=K, SIDEYARD. OR BACKYARD;
NO OR POOR SIDEWALK.
3. INHARMONIOUS LAND USE
4. DRAINAGE PROBLEM: _
5. DETERIORATING AuxILIARY BUILDING, JUNK. W~..
BRUSH. UNSIGHTLY..' FENCE I., .
MACHINERY, INOPEt'tflX(SLE VEHICLES
6. NO OFF-STREET ~,: ARKING'. 74W!
UNPAVED DETER;1A'TING
OR CONGESTED STREETS -+
a. ~:::PER REFusi STORAGE ,~\~
Scale in fut: "
400 0 1400 800
1.1i.. (0,".,,111 Ro....1 PI!""
1,li.,. ~..,,' I
P',;.rl ~" ~"''' ~SlCi 1
9,""'dl..Ot"II.Ii...K....,
b,CiIllt.H.19il I
'~'--, -.,'\,\
r-ll I i 0 10. ....
I 'i 1 I.Q..JL::.......
'36129 . 11754, L=~\ \ \.
!321'3~2901! ~\,\
I 25~7 ~ ~56~ i'/SA \\\,
I J'\' ~I i I 4020-3016\
1 ~ 1 I f:?~H~\ ,
[Sf. L~ ~ l/!~__.~ \ ... .
\"~\ I
~1~~1 5 3~'\\, \. I /'-~:
! 2 ~ ' 6'7 ~\\\\ I . -{ ...~
~tJ m______._\\~ \! ~ ~()~~~
~ 31 B. .~j 131313~-;l ['47~20-~-'-' r--~~l>l [f-4J'\;~~~" I . .....~'/ ii
~. 2.5.7._, ~. 2.3:5_7=],. ~_2c35.&.7" ~~.~. -3567~, ~. 256'7'=1,. 5O~.:t'.. ......~ 1 5
" I "\, I ,12 0 ,__ . .
!6S__~__.__.J ~~__j l~fJ.~ ,~~___--'-_~ Jl1A~.:_::::J'20A__"'; .el~~1.k:'L_..e.M.__._J 5.__~._
......111.11.1111.....111.111.........111.111...11......11...........111....11.11...1..11...11...........111..1""1'1'1'111111111'111"'11"'111"11111'1'11111""1111......1.11......11111111111......111111.111111111..1..11111111.....II.....I..........~
\--'1 r-rl [=-"'-----l C~] C~~] [----\ [=~=_~_~=] [_:j L' -. ( .. ~1 :. . .... ~ I"-~ r---~
~'<JJ ~_. ~ i"l'l r~l! i r--r-~ r-li----. IsrjuJ r Ii i ~ I AVE ,I '
Eo~~~~;:;:~~j"~:;~I~l:~~~:;~;~~::~':~~:~:~i:;~h::;.:~~!~m:ifd"OI ~ '00'
- ~..._----
I r~-~~=----
.:f-i - ..; ..;..; -
-
-
60/320 T
I
I
I
['~H NEIGHBORHO D CONDITION :
l ni I~,", ~ ABOVE INOICATE PER CENT OF RESIOENTlA~ :
;;) I S lSTR RES IN THE BLO THAT ARE SOUND. IN NEED I
~ IL li~~~~::'::::" ~::::^:,~:;::::::::::::::';;:~' / / ' JI
~ -~i~~~:::\E~:RS:~:;:' S'OEYARO, BACKYARO. / ./ /.;
Hi--~J'NHAR~ O~~ANO -~~. il ; /. .r~_____________
!:,_.~,0RA1bI~ DBLEM ~. /..
li.-.-.;....'-..DET..E.R..I..~~.."'. _ AUXIIARY BUILDING. JU~K, ~'
_jiL ~ _.BRUSH. U~\;~~Y F jNCE MACHINE...'}t.().\'- VEHICLES 23
~]Ir~~~:~___j C__._..__ _ -'-y -< ~<-,-~. ~I Wp~\Vl 'WN'" 'W8 .. ';O'"~ r~
............"......""_...."..."._"".."_........"..."......."..."........"",,,,....""......"."" "..." "-L-- U .~ eR'"'''' ~* II
..4:;::i"_'~"~~li~:---~8:---- j r)~~~~J~~~4
lo...'\:.....~.....~"... 1
1,li.., ~..,,'
,,,..<1110,(..,,,151(1
'....", I.. C... .11~;,..l....c
.,Cd, 11011. 1161
505000
:~:~.;::~:.::wna7~';.;:,:::.ld'~f,~;~~,~':'.~~ :fd,t~ ~:::~:..:~,.d".' .'""
:: ~:.~;:~.~"",.d Ay,;b:t,:S.;,.~:~.~~..":.d:;th,,;... b, ..,1;.. 'OJ
NEIGHBORHOOD 10
1-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
i i ~
'lS.2L ;
! 55 I I"
, ! '~
I 38 143 '
l"II~II''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''"II~I.'t,"'"'"1,I.tl''UllUIUl)~II',I',~''', UJUfIYjJ,UU" UUUIUl.ur,' ....?lUWIUllUUUJJ.I.u11lUJ11'f"", "f"
' 'i : ~YMI'U QJt , ! ! I / / Iii II I
'..,............J.... ..,i \, it ///, "loc:-c I I ! -I
T ::>;1 \ \ " / /, ,"~., ,I (%:,
NEIGHBORHOOD CONDITION MAP
NEIGHBORHOOD 11
LEGEND
I, .
\)1 130 II I
j L--.J
r"1"""'i""'"
, I I
~I; : N
'1 II '"
~II
Ii ~ I I, ,
" J L~ L_.J c.---'
""""""(""'~'L""'I~ I
156" 4, 42' ~, i
I 2 5 ~ \25J5 i II I
If 0 ~ If! ~i
,-~.- =
! ~
I '
~ '
kE~!d ! J
r-~i'i, iT" -~.' r", 'jj a--
, I' I I ,. Ii ,I ~
161r~ I I 454fL, 5 I 12!> I. JI!
l2....JL..-J ~_._- tJ'lj a
m,I,~ :;"" I
bJLJ W ~
'rm~'J"-""':"'!!!!!.'.!.!!!!."'F9"n:"'''''''''''nl
II I N I ~ t II
" t:l ' "': '41 I :
11 ..., BROWN I I I I I
I C-"'-' '
I ~, II : I
I, ~' i ii I: I
11.11......11.......11.....11.1111...........""""'"...........".""'14.........
i
I
eo 20
2356
NUMBERS ABOVE THE LINE INOICATE PER CENT OF RESIDENTIAL
STRUCTURES IN THE BLOCK THAT ARE SOUND. IN NEED
OF MINOR REPAIR, MAJOR REPAIR AND CLEARANCE. RESPECTIVELY.
NUMBERS BELOW THE LINE INDICATE TYPES OF ENVIRONMENTAL
DEFICIENCES.
,. UNSOUND OR SUBSTANDARD SIZED STRUCTURES
2. INSUFFICENT SETBACK. SIDEYARD. OR BACKYARD:
NO OR POOR SIDEWALK.
3. INHARMONIOUS LAND USE
4. DRAINAGE PROBLEM
5. DETERIORATING AUXILIARY BUILDING. JUNK, WEEOS.
BRUSH, UNSIGHTLY FENCE MACHINERY, INOPERABLE
VEHICLES
+
6. NO OFF-STREET PARKING; UNPAVED, DETERIORATING.
OR CO~GESTED STREETS
7. IMPROPER REFUSE STORAGE
S. PRIVY
1,li"Couo,iITR....,IP,og"m
l,h",KIO"l
P"jlCl<<O. K..lIl Rll(i
P"pmd lor C~I.I\,li", 10,,"
1,(itrll,If,llil
Scal. in f..,:
"""
400
BOO
n..pllpa'G'iGnGI'hi'''Gp''G.li.G.dGII1G;dld'hIGugnGhdo'GlgIG.'
f'a..'hoh.o"GI.l..i"Gn'O.ld..ini'''alia.a!'h.Dopa,'ml.'
alliGu.inga.dU,ba.Do..lapmo."aulhri.odb1,0<';a.oOl
al 'ho Hau.i.g Art al 19~9, a. "mondod .
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
II
I
I
I
I
I
I~
I
I
NEIGHBORHOOD CONDITION MAP
NEIGHBORHOOD 12
LEGEND
f1 ' t i .-- --.-~ ....- - ---.---~, ,-----.. -'" r" -,\\~:/'
'[ 'I ~__..O' h'__ - '_--..J I , ~--j ~.-. ...---- ~ l_~__ ! L.._ ~--':l'\" "'~ /-/' i
'! I l I I . ---II IR ':.--.....~' r'~-- ~ ~!~ I~_..--..'I : - /; ,
.......;................................................-.....'"nn.........._........1IliI.Ii..J..._.~..I. ... ._....._...._..........................".._~........_.............................................................l\....~
". -. -'~~/
[3;~~~7~ [~=7~~~ l-i.7:~.~.; Iff21i~~ ~6:-J25 I~~ 702 Xl3 6070~ ' -~ ;8321750~ ~ ---- ~ /
r-......[I[I .~~. [--lll[ '~ ["'-',r' I.2J,,,,,~ ~Q Il.........~.i .;:. J' 7
~ I LLL. -.c~ .. ...... .. ........ !? ..... ... ~ (3~YL .
~-=.~ r=~~ l;cJ~c.~ ~~ ~~1 ~~] ~'~" ~.
5~ ,~:~ ~~ ,r:' '~~~;;
[T~ ! 2 rl!'~ I~'<!~I / )"/! jf!;
;5r~t<J ',29..J.. ........" LJl!Lj ,. ...... .'
""1 ; /
~8~ /:/
~i 1/
/~i ~ (j
I ~I \ L, \~
[;;1 r~~ 'J\) 79
G>,-.. '~,_/:J,0'
( '(.lE:i;~;J \ '
NUMBERS ABOVE THE
LINE INDICATE
PER CENT
OF RESIDENTIAL
STRUCTURES IN THE BLOCK THAT ARE SOUND,
OF MINOR REPAIR.
MAJOR REPAIR AND CLEARANCE.
RESPECTIVELY
I // /1
.. L~___ _,/~/
------../
NUMBERS BELOW THE LINE INDICATE TYPES OF ENVIRONMENTAL
OEF1CIENCES
UNSOUND OR SUBSTANDARD SIZED STRUCTURES
2. INSUFFICENT SETBACK.
SIDE YARD,
OR BACKYARD;
NO OR POOR SIDEWALK.
3. INHARMONIOUS LAND USE
4. DRAINAGE PROBLEM
5. DETERIORATING AUXILIARY
BRUSH. UNSIGHTLY FENCE
6. NO OFF-STREET PARKING;
BUILDING, JUNK. WEEDS.
MACHINERY. INOPERABLE
UNPAVED. DETERIORATING,
IMPROPER
B. PRIVY
Scale in tut:
A
~o ~
1111........'............11.......11..............,..'.....11..1.111.1
- Th. p,opQ,,,'iQnal'hi'..ap ..o.lino.daUyaidod'h,ouGh o Fod.,,,lg',,.,
r--J : r....-....'-...... ..-~.............. Ad"';.........'.....D1..... O.._....Rl__._._u-..
I 1 ~ I :: " ~:,.:'"'g;;l::..T::.::'..".., ," "r" '"
Is! i ~ I !
,r I~~~, !
, I.jl 1T3~ I
.:; ! ~ I
1=,7J21 [83 .J '
i~:=;li~ ~ ~ till
:C~41: ~ ::',",'
me", ... J l~..,.
----I !~~=; i r.--------.....,
I~! ~
;~ ~ff~~O 7J;~s~3
!~
~I:
IS'88
--i : I....-_~--
r'-.i,;iir..........,T..H"..................H~.I......H..
.....; I
""
b8Frdd~\ ,-iddddol
Z-.-J \ \~l> T
ND!.~!L_J?g,~'(\ L.........."."'~[.J
i,~J::l !Ir?~~?f
, ~I 54 2 \ ! o! ,.. .
1 ~! ~~~~~:!1ff ~
I"'! I IWOOO !! I !,
51 0;;1, 56' 2 I !
L"'LJ_[.f:J'r[S7E:!.J?~ I~I >1'
f-- wfH'hii.'ref. Vx r'--~ :-.----'----..ll~1
>..I~!" !mooo! \ 100000 11"1 !
48 '>lli7~158 l, , <,. ,.' \~~~::::j I~ I ~,I 78
,~ f{X)~~d ~i.j" CL!'-1HUR;;~r ~.. \~..f; .,.., ~~~~S9 JJ~I
I~og ':",;~ ':'~(,~I ,. i ~.f~:~~
:,6~,?/ .........' :.t. '- () i
'666 , v/ /'-.", "', ,,' ,-~ I 1/00 OOO"~ ;;;)> r;' ,
,qUl: ,/ / ", .,-,~ . IL ',~ <,'(1:><, 1:;- i
~,,67 "/- ..'j.,fRE!;C;(;:1J,,, .RQ'!'~lL__~_.. ,..J . ,z"-'-L ~J~) 8(r;~gJ: Ii \
~ '-J ,.~w".~. L.._ .,>~ L~___ \~' ~
"1:1 ~ ('.-----------..J k h~
1 ~I ~ ,65$1 ...iJ.J, ,7..2", L~~BR[ ~~~, ._-\...!Z._--...~--../i___
.............I&........UIlIlI...............u.............&I...IIIIIII.................................'/...II..UUUIU..,U.IIII.....'.....U..........11..'II...........tllUlUU.!....................................................UIUU.IIUllU..............:',.~
h I ~i I I I 1 ; ~ ------- ~~- - --- ~-~ --~ ; I -.
"'.... , ~I "'II L{)c;/:y,,t,L.ff.. . ,__.~.... 1 ~....., _._. - .~. -I. II." _ _ _ _ _
,,,, fr~" .... ,
, , \"\........... " , ./
OR CONGESTED STREETS
REFUSE STORAGE
.00
400
1.Ii..C.u..il, h....1 p,..,,",
1.1i".h""
'"j,,1 110. h.", I:~J{I
~"""d I.. CO, .1 1.1i.., K..."
1,(il,ltlll.IIU
,
~
<::
~
'It
47~
14 7
12.36
V)
it
I i
~
::
II
II
l!
JLJL
772J
.Q..Q..
2567
7J 15.J
JLf2.... v-;
2356
90
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
uses with a number of blighting influences caused by the commer-
cial uses and a number of deteriorating residential structures.
An essentially undeveloped 80-acre park area (Indian Rock Park and
Smoky Hill River) occupies the east boundary area of this neigh-
borhood.
Neighborhood 13 -- Pop.: 1,493; Area in Acres: Res.- 203.6; Non-
Res. - 103.6; Vacant - 88.0; Total - 395.2
The neighborhood is predominantly residential except for Mary-
mount College, Gypsum Hill Cemetery and Salina Country Club located
at the north boundary of the neighborhood. The north one-third of
the area was developed in 1920-30, and the remaining development
occurred from 1950 to date. This is an area of continuing growth,
with large house~ being located in the eastern portion and more
modest homes in the west portion. The structures in this area are
well-maintained, and many were constructed after 1965. There are
no major blighting influences in this neighborhood. Nearly one-
half of the area along the north, east and south edges of the
neighborhood lies outside the City Limits and, except for the
Country Club are~ to the north, is virtually undeveloped.
Neighborhood 14 -- Pop.: 2,152; Area in Acres: Res. - 182.2; Non-
Res. ~ 19.5; Vacant - 5.1; Total - 206.8
This area is predominantly residential with a fringe of com-
mercial development along Broadway (U.S. 81) and Crawford. Over
one-half of the vacant residential structures in the City (436) are
in this area; however, only two of the structures were classified
as · clearance' . The residences were constructed in 1950-51 at the
re-opening of the Air Force Base by a group of builders under a
standard set of plans and a federal housing program for controlled
rent housing. These structures were rented for a period of 10
years and a number were purchased by private owners. On closing
of the Air Force Base in 1964, the majority of these privately-
owned structures were returned to FHA ownership. In 1968,
this was the prevailing condition, with the FHA offering the
structures for sale. The FHA has, during 1968 and 1969, rehabi-
litated and repaired these structures and has removed, by sale
to salvage firms, those structures not capable of successful re-
habilitation.
The City acquired from FHA a 3.3 acre tract and has cleared
the houses and developed a park-playground area for use by the neigh-
borhood residences. The area is well-platted into 60 and 70 foot
-21-
-22-
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
lots, is well-served by Sunset Elementary School and Centennial
Park, and most structures are being maintained. There are no major
environmental blighting influences. The use condition of 80%
vacant structures causes the area to appear temporarily unattrac-
tive.
Neighborhood 15 -- Pop.: 4,018; Area in Acres: Res. - 226.9; Non-
Res. - 80.5; Vacant - 4.5; Total - 311.9
The area is predominantly single-family residential with a
fringe of commercial uses along ,Broadway and Crawford (the west
and north boundary, respectively). The Sunset Shopping Center, ,
developed in 1961, occupies 7.6 acres at Broadway and Crawford, and
Sunset Park (25.8 acres) is located near the center of the neigh-
borhood.The majority of the residential area was developed during
the period 1920-1940. The area is fully and densely developed
with only 1.4% of the area vacant. Only 1% of the residences are
vacant, and there are 2.6 persons per household with 10.3% of the
population over 65 years of age -- nearly 'equal to th~ average-
for the entire City (2.7 and 9.5% for Salina). There are no ser-
ious blighting influences existing in the neighborhood; however,
10.9% of the residences qualify for m~jor repair, while only six
qualify for clearance.
Neighborhood 16 -- Pop.: 5,885; Area in Acres: Res. - 334.9; Non-
Res. - 98~5; Vacant - 12.9; Total - 446.3
This predominantly residential neighborhood was annexed to the
City dur.ing the period of 1880 to 1890 with the majority of the
structures constructed prior to 1950. Kansas Wesleyan University
occupies 23.9 acres in the southwest corner of the area and Salina.
High School is located on a 40-acre tract on the north,boundary.
The strip ofcornrnercial development along Crawford at the north
boundary provides a limited blighting influence to the adjacent
residences. This neighborhood is without park area; however, the
school play areas, large lots and parks in adjacent neighborhoods
limit the blighting influence of this neighborhood deficiency.
Neighborhood 17 -- Pop.: 195; Area in Acres: Res. - 9.5; Non-Res. -
3.4; Vacant - 79.2; Total - 92.1
Only the west fringe of this neighborhood is within the City
Limits, and the balance of the neighborhood area is in agricultural
uses. The existing d~velopment occurred after 1955. The flood
control levee forms the east boundary and designed interior drain-
-
-
-1[/ - - I.. ~ I~'" ~... ~ Ii. -
I ! ~ I II~ ~ I sll I '
_..fluWFOPlD LJ ~ Ii~ L_..:?J L.__---' L_
\A~'~'~~.1T:.........I.~~...;.~~.C~~~~......~...~O~...:~~................)
i ~ '{ \ ,3 ~ 1"<,.:
\ ~ . . I' ~II' ~ ~ W\ (3;~!7~/~"'" . <' ..1
I '\ ' ~"~456) ". ~~,.. "', '151.1
I 'v ','," >-' : I
I ill :~. - , . ~ "', ~. '~" <:d, 5 """"
! I !)' /~ ,,~'" "'~ "I : '
. 1451 . 345f/' ! ",,>~::::~,,\\.,,~ ~ II
I JI ~! I. . ~~~'~~~~\ \\:Jj: il
17 IJ~: I~'I' ~'" 5 '\\1/ \ 'Li.. II
~ ~ ,. /3 .' ,- .~~I\!.._J '-.t' w
'~ I~' i~! I,' ~;;>l,.. r.. .....-.~lli,.. r..~. nl
I I I ~I ' ! / 'i : !, 0: l-
I , . . .'. I.. '. I.. i.. i. '.1 II i','..
I i 11 ItLI i : ! , ! ! II I l/i
I 10::, I ~I I ~ i :tll i Ii, i .1
26 , 13 50 .. iTi~ '.. 434 10. ~ 1.lZ6Il I
ljtj, 5 5 ~~~5 'i 5 I 11: 25 ":... ~I'... i 25tJ'l. ..251.. '.
~ /;- :I i/8 JI: i~, I ~,i I II
~..,.._- I 'I 44:, Vii I ' I
1 36" /5 '-', I Vi, I O! I ' I ,
v.:5 7''--1 ~Ji~Qj 11vd i I I,ll..
>~ 'III
, I I,
iG?J lJ
'1'111111111""1111""1
\.
\
\
..
\.
\
..
\
..
\.
\\
~~
,\
~
\ \ \
\~ \
,\ \\
..
\
..
\~
\
\.
..
~
\ ( II. \~~ r~I""- "l
0,:\\ 1\ \ Iii ~. W \\ ~ri( II
,,\ '~~ /~ ~\ ! r---.:;;.;;-;5-... _..- .._- \\ \\. \\ ~\\ ! I ,
\ ,~- - '" I Cf(~~ AVE."') \\ -:0.. '\ ~.\ t:t'l ,
'\ "'-, !I!I! - --~ ~-- "'" -- ....~ 'v/, ~ j l
\ \ \ '- I ~ . . --'-;'617 T ~ -- '1 ~ ...... i$-"" \ ~II I
.. , '\ w 30 5 /y'1 '" 05. I ~ I I
~ ~ \ iii '-fiiA"'/l!EE. AVE. // '" .~ '-....;; ,
\ II': ~ ~-=;--'----::"-"'>.. '~ ....... ~)Lj- !
\ iii H..&....L h /' "': .... __ -_.-
~ \ w _. ~ 7 Vii I .... I' U -
\ ~ I I l&id....-._ _...A.~ (';::::- ~ ~-~ .... ,
1. .. I I '1 "'ll' Vi Mll... rT1 I ACORN C!R~
' NEIGH ORHOOD 14 '\ \ 'lw I I \ I I \ I 5 ~: 1321 C: C ----::-- ,," . ~
l END \ \ 'It. \ \ \ \3~ ~~ 100 C I""
NUMBERS ABOVE THE LI E INDICATE PER CENT OF RESIDENTI\L \~ '\' \, _ _ i \ \ I "7 :~\ Inn~~ III I ~ ~/E /' ""
STRUCTURES IN THE BL ~K THAT ARE SOUND, IN NEED \ '\ ,!t\, \~~\ \'5 \ \~T; "~j 1 ~'~ "
OF MINOR REPAIR, MAJO". REPAIR AND CLEARANCE. RESPECTIVEll.Y. ~ \ \ ...:\ \ '>'\ \ ~ \ I " .Jf2!2.. 1 ,,'P A....
NUMBERS BELOW THE. LIE INDICATE TYPES OF ENVIRONMENTAL~\ :! \ ~~\ 'lk '\ : ~illl '4/'\ . (
DEFICIENCES d \. I I < \ ~ I C) / I
1. UNSOUND OR SUB NDARD SIZED STRUCTURES '\ \ ~ \ -L ~ ~4;1 / /i. ( / 1
2. INSUFFICENT SETBA . SIDEYARD. OR BACKYARD '\ \ \.11.1 ~ 36 1'39 : ,Z ~ ~ I 1J'/....J I I L~
NO OR POOR SIDE ""~ ';,'11'"' . un'. I.~!'- II ...11 11111111 1.11111"'''11111111 1I...lii....:.. fun.nni'II.lIilll..un.~'lmhl ~-~ ---~
:: ::;'::~:'Op~:B~::D USE Ii \ r- \ ,~~i I . -~7:--r;f;~.I( ~II r-
s. DETERIORATING AUXILIARY BUILDING. JUNK, WEEDS, m . ~ 1 L.$L.., , vii$;' "\ "( ~
BRUSH. UNSIGHTLY FENCE MACHINERY, INOPERABLE mVEHICLES . . _ I ---" . \
6. NO OFF-STREET PARKING: UNPAVED. DETERIORATING.
-
-
~
34567
.~
OR CONGESTED STREETS
7. IMPROPER
REFUSE: STORAGE
I.U.I. (....ni... h....I'''''''.
1.111I.KulIl
'JlljI.fMo.llllllll3C1
Prl~ltIi for (l, 01 1I1i1l. lllIIS.
b,Ci...ll.fl,lm
a. PRIVY
Scale In t..t:
<00
:~:"t:~:~'oa~::"a~~'.~\:,:::o ~d'mli:i~~'~~'~~ :\d,~~ '~:~:~~,,::,od.'al .,an'
af Hau';"1 D"d U,bo" O...lopmon'.au'ho,i..d o..0,lio"405
of '''0 1<0."". ""oll.H.a,omood.o'
400 800
~I-
~ II
0-1 I L
I JDI
~I
I 1
J
Il
u
-
-
I
I
u..,j
OJ
i 9
..r.iiiiiii'iiffi..II....II...IIIII....II.I.
! I~IW' ~I
LJ! L-
""i'::';~'''''''''''''lnl
'I ~.,}-li-. 0 ~I.. 'II
. . , :' I
I Iii ,~i 1'.1..
I I... J':!I
kL._J W~! j1i
,.---...--....., -..-- . .'l: I '
, I I I , ,: I I
I I' I, I~~'---
I ! ! I ! 61 221~
181 1540 '83 13! liLQ ~
'-5 I 40 I I 1 i:
I !---Y-112.~
~~._...._JL1J~
!'-1~
, , ,:
i' 6522 I 1J /81~
,lLQ ! JLQ I~
, ! 21 i I I~
I II I 137 J'~I--'
l3.lL_____.J ~~_.J L..5T ~,
r---l ~ I
1511 1:\.
LLQ ~I :
I ~~
i ~~I
14~J~ L_
(-. . -.---.-------1:
~~/ ~1 voo ~-....>". 66 31 J 0 i ~
11 oJ i~ ~\ \ 2 7 ,:
.~J l.fJ{lOlr3 ,~.___ ,_ g{.J ~
(&72000) ;/n-~~;~----I ~
~-/2 58__.p.'!!.LL__rJ ~
!.-;;~~~--;~-;~-----11 ~
1..i.Q"'~\ 2 :
\QQ5..._J >Q!_-~ .~ ~
I.~~-~ \6J3i1. JJ " 1919 OO."iJ ~/;;e-;;-----......Jl:
IQ.....Q.. ~~3i ,2 ~'7/ 2
1~25__~'J l~__->/ 1:i,:".f,L_________..
,.1 [---I ri.~;;;;;_;I1, 18311"1.
"" h - 't, cO 0 "-
1.0),' 2 1 ~ i2::::
168. lMi '69 '
I lfW__----W ~
I ~ ~
I' \1
i II hi
L_L- .
.............111..........
I
I
I
I
I
'I
'I
YL___-::-.:..
I
I
I
I
I
I I
! I
L_-4
I
I
~
I
I
I
~
....
P"ie<t".I",llll:l)Ci
'r.,mi lor Cdl,l 101..., l...,
b!(i"'\I.H,'~
:,k:"'P;~:~':::".:'O~~t~;;:,:;::. ~:;/,"fi;:i~~'~:i~~ :\o,~: '~:;"o~~",::,.d.'ol .'.n'
01 HDu"nv gnd U,bgn Oo,ol.pmon'. gy,f,.'"od by ,.,"on ~OS
01 ,~. tloo,;nv A<t 01 19S9, 0' omono.o
/5
I
UUULJ sUl__Jr- H ,__!(~__Jl II J []~
I ~ Orr.':rrir'nri !'"ti.....................r..........'................-ir=..:rr:-~] ~AL'
I J' ~I"",,~., I ..;L.,: 1~2 .,,) 6, ~ SALINA III ~i;:D~Jl_,__=_2_0:R-::~.91~D~_JI__::_llr
il 5 'u7: !: I 2~u6 I i~ jil : ~ HIGH SCHOOl ~_ ~ J
I nj~ ~la · nlLJnl ~ ~-~ · ,,,} ~ I~:€. I ~-:J! u~
L. J'~I II II I .ll ~-51-~~ '11 K)()-O-O-O I ~I~ 'i
I r- i i"'~" II ~:;'~,! f:~11:> i ,fi ba.:iE:J I, ". -.. ;t~21 =, 1111=-' ]1 D[
I 1~1 1 i I: II : I: "'1~ d~g ~ [~g I b;'. ! -~ U I <{ - If
I lil.~-=I b_.J V' U ULJ rw~SON 112' ' [22 2' t2'J. I=- I "u" j': 'i
. LH.Ji[ I r-li 1 g i~:1Wi . ~ Igqi:P ~9.-ff 44 1, 31 ~ ~ I
,'--,. --"'=,','.61-26-130 ! ~. 38'. -3 I S6:li:. :'".,9 ,'" 6f,.'" 91 2 2 ~~.' - I [J n r;l ,
!, !=.I.'2356 i!~., 2356 ,2 5Ii.16~:", .1 tki, .',. '.' 5,.',7 . 5 , 95-5 - ... I
I i :tl~' i !I t I ~KJO-O J I' 48 -9/1_ i ~ 1;?5.-g I' I~~ :,~-g i:::~ !! C
. I ~~i I 'Ii i::! I ~:kf : II. ~ 1 ilOO-O-o~ LJ~ I I: ~
~I~: , ii' I 1 I '~I .11 ~ j I :"l: u:~ >'
'~I3S' 137 Ii! ~ I I~ h. ~~ VE 617 I 52 -
'1 -~- . ~ - ~-j A . ~ -
1- l5o=tiH6Ti [R 27 00 ' KJO 0.0 0 ~ \ 100 0 0 O~ rOO- 0-0 0 1 !
","~i ~,JL! 1....'~..._~ ~ ~~ i" ... i ~ '. j !
=-J!8S ~:Z:~jS ~~".:;-'-4'" I. ~~.Jllro<>= ~Y ,1
'I ~l r--S4:'S-2.1.enni :J L_' .JQQ::QQfL I 1000.0-0 I :
--~YLJ_~Ji:_i: ~.'.-__2..,.j-_':i ~:~ "~U5N" ~ j~ rl,.T.." ;,;;;;~ J ~ ;
. -- -- "'---"'k. __ 185 j 1!7...___ Lea I III
I~ ~~~ // ( r--100-0-&0-1; w:O:O:Oi i
IRWIN __--' ~ ~J_.J '/~ 95________.J ~__._______.J i
I ~A ~O:-~&OJ ~~y~~ ~4 94_-o.-........-.~...........-._O...-.._-----,_J I/~OO~-OO I ;
= c..__J~._ ~__.. .._._.--J .
~,.,,' .' r" l-fOO-~ [/OO:OiiO-l I
~: ~ i i *1 ~i' i
IC[~ i~~--=:~~=-~~J~8 -_. I fM I ~~lE~~JIl!
..~.~..~..~~~-~.~~~:..~..~!..,~.. rr.;..................~~..1 .......................k...........................d......~.................~..............~...........~~...r IT
I.'". C'''''''' ''''0 ,'..." ..".."....." ....., '1~' II ~ 7,' .vAR~ I t~ 1
1::::::,:::::::,:.:::::I.i.... :::::i~t;~:"o":~:,['J,,, 1.1 I) I' j I :NEIGHBO, HOOD C : DITIO~\\MA \ 'i
r'::.....::::"..:,..l....,::o'J:ro',::"..,..I..~,.,..o,.,t,1 II! I NElbHBORHOODlll ~. '\ =
~'t~:u",~"~.:~dcJ,:~'~'~..~::I:pd.."':~;,";~:~:,;;~~~:yD,:~~:';:~~ ii, ,I r lEG END I '-. U
~f lb. Hou,ing .".J 19~9, ". mund.d
I
,I
I'
I
I
I
I
NUMBERS AeOVE THE -LlNE/ INDICATE PER CENT OF RESIDENTIAL
I
STRUCTURES IN THE BLOCK THAT ARE SOUND. IN NEED
OF MINOR REPAIR, MAJOR REPAIR .AND CLEARANCE. RESPECTIVELY.
NUMBERS BELOW THE LINE INDICATE TYPES OF ENVIRONMENTAL
DEFICIENCES
1. UNSOUND OR SUBSTANDARD SIZED STRUCTURE'S
2. INSUFF1CENT SETBACK, SIDEYARD, OR BACKYARD:
NO OR POOR SIDEWALK.
3. INHARMONIOUS LAND USE
4. DRAINAGE PROBLEM
5. .DETERIORATING AUXILIARY BUILDING. JUNK, WEEDS,
BRUSH. UNSIGHT<LY FENCE MACHINERY. INOPERABLE
6. NO OFF-STREET PARKING: UNPAVED, DETERIORATING,
OR CONGESTED STREETS
VEHICLES
I
400
Scale in feet:
.
I
7. IMPROPER REFUSE STORAGE
S. PRIVY
400
800
I
I
I
I
i
6
!
6
6
6
a
i
I
!
I
a
i
I
i
15 .
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
'I
I
!~/
;:l/ / /
1::1::;;;::::,1 I !
.:./:.... I ,
if
, ,
, I
'"
, I
! ~ i
! I!
d\
,,~:r=~~, ~ \
. \ ~"~\
I "'\ ~
MAP \ \"\':"~,--""
\" "~::::::::::~-
\ \,1 \
\ RESID~N,,\IA\
C~~;~:....' ::::;::~<~~~'\. .
iIlES \ '\ //,r'---
"'RD, \ /1
\"""'.,
"""'-"'"
I
I
I
I
I
SUBS::NDS~;;YARD
S:~::WALK
RMONIOLlS LAND USE:
INHA F'f'lOBLEM
bRAINAGE AUXILIARY
4 DETER O:~::::TLY FENCE
BRUSH PARKING
e NO OFF-STRE':ET STREETS
OR CDNGE::::SE STORAGE
IMPROPER
eUILDING
MACHINERY.
UNPAVED.
I
""
s~;:
.,l..,.......
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I'
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
age ponding area adjacent the levee provides a potential blighting
influe~ce as does the large zoned, but only minor developed, com-
mercial area along Ohio Street.
Neighborhood 18 -- The entire area lies outside the City. Scat-
tered suburban residential structures, a 160-acre private golf
course, a 40-acre cemetery and an abandoned airport (being con-
verted into a public golf course) constitute the development in
this neighborhood.
Neighborhood 19 -- Pop.: 2,356; Area in Acres: Res. - 129.4; Non-
Res. - 44.7; Vacant - 72.6; Total - 246.7
Neighborhood 19 is essentially a young neighborhood (platted
in 1960), which was undergoing most of its development at the time
Schilling Air Force Base was closed. Virtually no development has
occurred since then, and the neighborhood is characterized by 25.4%
of the land within the City Limits and 67.8 acres outside the City
Limits being vacant. The neighborhoo~ is well-served by John F.
Kennedy Elementary School, built on an adequate si~e shortly before
the closing of the Base. The only blighting influences are a rela-
tively few inexpensively constructed homes of recent construction
that are vacant and not being maintained and a few older homes
built prior to annexation. Only six residences are of a clearance
nature. The neighborhood does need solution of ponding and minor
drainage problems.
Neighborhood 20 -- Pop.: 4,121; Area in Acres: Res. - 224.1; Non-
Res. - 49.8; Vacant - 74.5; Total - 348.4
Neighborhood 20, essentially an area of medium-priced resi-
dences, was developed in the 1950's and early 1960's: Development
is continuing at a slower pace and should continue to develop
along the eastern fringe and the southwest corner when nearly 133
acres- of prime, land is, opened to development. The neighborhood
is well-serv~d by a public elementary and junior high school, and
the second public senior high school is now being constructed in
the adjoining Neighborhood 22. Parochial elementary a,nd secondary
schools are also located in this neighborhood. The neighborhood
has no blighting influences other than a slight draina,ge problem,
and 99% of the houses are considered sound. The only deficiency
within the neighborhood is the absence of a park.
Neighborhood 21 -- This neighborhood is not within the City Limits
and is completely rural in land. use. Interstate I-35W will serve
as a barrier to development of this area, and extensive development
-23-
is not likely to occur until other areas on the periphery of the
City have developed. Limited development may occur along Magnolia,
as it has been paved and extended to. the Airport Complex.
Neighborhood 22 -- Pop.: 1,099F Area in Acres: Res. - 62.3; Non-
Res. - 31.5; Vacant - 119.9; Total - 213.7
This neighborhood underwent most of its development in the
early 1960's before the Base c+osed, but it is developing now at
a more rapid. pace than most other. neighborhoods. The neighborhood
is characterized by higher-priced housing similar to that found in.
portions of Neighborhood 13. Much of the neighborhood is platted
but vacant, and approximately one-fourth of the neighborhood lies
outside the City Limits. Construction of the second senior high
school in the northeast corner of the neighborhood should serve as
an inducement for further development. All residential structures
in Neighborhood 22 are sound, and the only environmental deficien-
cies are a slight drainage problem and the lack of a park in the
area. It is well-served by an elementary school, which is now
being maintained much below capacity.
Neighborhood 23 -- This neighborhood is entirely outside the City
Limits, except for a very small parcel of land with one commercial
building in the extreme northwest corner of the neighborhood. The
remainder of the neighborhood is rural and is not expected to
undergo urban development until Neighborhoods 13, 17, 20 and 22
undergo further development. No barriers to development exist in
the area, except the necessity of an interior drainage system sim-
ilar to those in other areas of south Salina.
Neighborhood 24 -- This neighborhood is entirely outside the City
Limits of Salina and consists of rural land uses and the Capehart.
Housing area (Schilling Manor). The residences in Schilling Manor
are owned and well-maintained by the Federal Government. It is
assumed that Federal ownership will continue for severaJ years;
therefore, private development will not take place in this neigh-
.borhood in the foreseeable future.
Neighborhood 25 -- Neighborhood 25 is entirely outside the City
Limits, but it is vital to the economy of Salina as a developing
industrial .area. South Industrial Park of 80 acres was opened as
a part.of Salina's economic come-back following the closing of
.Schilling Air Base. Salina Development, Inc. has a.160-acre
industrial park which is not developed. Gradual industrial de-
velopment is expected to continue in the area as it is close to
Interstate 35-W interchange and is served by a railroad.
-24-
"'
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
.....
~
It.
....
~
'-"
I
.J.;tP.!+'iN
_ '-~JO!,r~ IN
I
'r- --
I
I
.....J "
I
I !
L___J
. !
I
I
~ I~
v'I !
I
:::),
~
.,..
I
I ;:.................~..:~...!..;l;r.. .
I ,II "-
.~ "f- ~_.
I !jD. ( ) I III L
.~') -'_.~: if\ ",
11 I( JaJ)Ji Ji~ I' NEIGHB~RHOOD CONDITION MA
:1 . ~I ~E1GHBO'HOOD 19
I Ii: NUMBERS ABOVE TI-<E ~,:: E':D~CATE PER CENT OF RESIDENTIAL.
I ' 'STRUCTURES IN THE ',BLOCK THAT ARE SOUND IN NEED
II :, OF MINOR REPAIR MA-{OR REPAIR AND CLEARANCE RESPECTIVELY
I I. ! t 1m NUMBERS BELOW THE l.;-INE INDICATE TYPES OF ENVIRONMENTAl-
I ! 'DEFICIENCES '\
] C5 1 t' 1 UNSOUND OR SUBSTANDARD SIZED STRUCTURES
1 Q: . r ,I 2 lNSUFFICENT SETBACK} SIDEYARO OR BACKYARD
'II... 'I: II' 1':40 OR POOR SIDEWALK
3. INHARMONIOUS LAND USE
I I 4. DRAINAGE PROBLEM ~
I'~. 5. DETERIORATING AUXILlf"RY BUILDING. JUNK, WEEDS.
BRUSH. UNSIGH"f:LY FENCE MACHINERY, INOPERABLE VEHICLES
II )'1); I,'. '"0 occ~'"m e^".'~", ""eAO" om",o"",""
I II /. OR CONGESTED STREET\S
/' ; I i 7. IMPROPER REFUSE STORAGE
I / 27i 2
./ 8. PRIVY
. i I / ~51 ..
~' ,), /' ;' ~ ~i I S"I. '0 too'
I / .;/ / ; JP I 400
/ i i I ,I
~
, h,'
i ~
I <I
I '\,
'51 1t1
[~!::G
I
52
I
I
1
t-
O
i
i
o
e
400
BOO
I'll." (.II...~I 1......1 Pr.....
1.1i",ho'"
P"1t<1 10. l..."RIJU
Pr.,..,i to! (it! oflolio" I....
he"., mtl.l'Ho1
'h. p'.~n'"'i." of .h;, ".0 .a' 1'''"",;011, oid.d .h'OUR" a ,.d.,.1 g.O"'
h.... '" '.".~al "''''".n,. Adm;";",,,';"" .r ,~. D.po""o.'
of HL,,,ing ?nd U,bonO...I.omont..,,'ha,i..d by..,'ion405
Oflh.Ho""nvA".f19S9,.,o..ond.d
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
Ii
.
I
Scale in fnt:
1 '1' ;=~~~] l-~~=--; :,-,
I 1_ --------J '___E __ , L_ _____1, ___ _ J
" .,.. "","""111111"1111'1'11'111111111' .................11111111...'"11............11.....11.11....111....11...111111111111,1.1111...1..111.111111111111.11111'"......11........111.................
.!I.III..IIII.I.lllfl.~~I~I!~:.;.; I'.il- ~. j- ~~ .1 --0 - - ! :,.', ~I.-r 4AA R~ "" --- -, - "84.8';~ - -: - 87-0-/J-0 --. Ir' 95-~.-6.2~O 1 \ -. o--~\ \ ---- 1
100-0 100-0"' W'O I 100'0 1 ,/00- I ' hi ~...., 2 3 5 6 7 ,5 \ ,/00, \ \
..JtSL .~ i 'M ,IQ-Q I .Q:Q. . ''''I L \ \,0'0 i \ , !
I 6 ~' I ,"'6'" k..j I I! -"" \ 'iT ~ \ i
I II J I 18-1AM r., '\ \ \ ~ \ J I
I I 1 ! i i Li:!Yt:'W__......._._._ ^ j \ '\ \ \ II \A,.) \ /2
I Ii, t i I. . . . C---KiFi;i'7;'7;--' i \ \..... ... -- L .~~. i
II I~ '11Jy ~ i. LQ..'.()F!C;.i:!~..SCtiOJ2~ · 5 i "', . \ iScM".&.5lL M1 i
,-, --' ll,.1{t,t'-t4Q, ! 'S~Cl?ED hEAP; [!~___&t",.._j I I i \. I. 'IT. '\'.
[--"-1 r--11'- '298S-J6"'i ,: jl/qf-if i , . ~
1 /oq-o I 1/00-0 i '/O(J-{) j 2 I' i
!.Q:.Q. . I.Q:Q. i i..Q:Q I' I : l' i ! L ..,
, Ii: I SCHOO/.J ' I I I
III " !tE5~,k> ~;~;>~-~" 11;;"t'. ,:=.. l~ ~ ~L ~VE J 'E C
i \\~.~-o ""I' ~;'~~I il.==-..... -.----( '~rO!'"-- -, ., usu, ':-"1 I "'" I i :1:
1J\' thll::moR ""H !~j l~ \\' \ ~ ~'Io'o--:_""""'o~in , " I I ~
\ ~ I I ~ \ \ 100-{) \ . , l.J J .
= .1.\ 1.I-iISCHOOL SITE . \\01 :~-~ 1..38. il 139...... I.f. OR~
!~II ' '. \\'t l.. ~1'.1 /'
. "(i . I \ \ ,-<' . r
~II ' i \ . \ \ ~f"oo-O-O-O-~ il ~I
~2! ~~9_ ~ IAY'I!L.. \'1LJ l~L__ k;--~J i i
;", II';"-::-:~:: _S \i-.;~ I i,;;.~, I ""' I : ""-, ! ,~, I "" SO HOOL /,0 /1 ~
R-HOOD C'ONi)1TI0N-MA'P-' -0.\ \::0 i ~ I' JLQ.I.Q:Q 0-0 ~c(>iK ir= ---
, \ I"" 1 l I ! I GROUN~S./0~/~~~~61 ~ 0
\~ ' ~/ 1 I' // ~~- ~"':t. If
5f) ~:_- ~ ~/.. 11";~:{~\~~lt - (
?\\\~ l/:}o r ~ ~// /~~!1~ '\~; I
\ 'f : 0-0 \:::;1- 57 'O~~'~ ~.,
\~ ~{..~ :)\"\.55 <~O~'\ ~/O~'O ~ ,.~<> \1;:/ ~\~ 14 JtNQ ~
,SIDEWALK -, I '\\:~ v-: ~ ~ftl. '\ ~" ~-- =
:~~::D USE '1~'~v(j2 6t.< Ig:!CP 11 /~) "2~P;~'\f!;J~-0-~11- i I
:+L:UX;~':;: :~~~"::R:U'::P;::::E VEHICLES ~~~ il / ~; /' \"" '-,~-----, il ~ \
Elf PARKING UNPAVED DETERIORATING \! ~~ 't.-\t: 100-0 -:- \:-lJ r---l i I ~
:t:Y:::::GE V\, I: IgqO~ /1'\ I?J-g 70 '>y 2:9. \ ~: iii, ~'Y/
r \ \ '>..~ / (. ~ ~ loo-O'O-O~.A 11 ~! Ig~"t ~~!i'f'f
, ~\ ~,/ .~~ M'I ," IJ'[I
~400 BOO G' fJ4.... I It!' ~ ~ 100 J' I' '\' I I~ .
. \ '~I' IJ~ ~..". Q; f:ij I
,..~'~.I"'lilII"I'!Il!iI.,.., _, · \ CW -"",u1-Q,:. 10 "'-- <) '-----, I @ i<ii
~::I::I~:I:I'''''im mlini ,\) ,'~ ~ ~' ~ . I ~i 1 ::1 i
. .2 .,,,,,,, ,,,'" " ,.,,, ,,,'" \ lJ /',-1'- <" <> I '\~' .1 '
"i.~.IIII:~~~I.\~,~I.~~:~....'II.....1 -~ -l ~""d'~ \()! - __--' ~._ __ ~~ - _-' 77 - ~__ J .7.2_ ~~ _-' ~L- - L
r - II..I...U.III..III.'I..I...!-..III.!,!,~..!.II..~!~III.!!.!!!!.!!.~IIII....III~I!!!.!..II ........... I I I . II ........11....1111.........1111....11.....""'"......"'11'''...'1111 .. ........ II
I ,,: : 1 It' '-~H4RT- - '-- ---, 7 (f ------,~r'tTT 'T\--- Ti--- :
i 1 v). i.1 .---, --.-.~.s -7: !... ........ .......~..l""""...~""'''''......''''t''''......''''''''....... .......
~ ~' , ,i~. ~ ( ----~--':-<-:, / \ ( II I \ \ I OO;'''r:mM
f-' !!! Zi I ''''>~./ i i I S; i \ \ l~ r~/fV .......'-1
._-_._--".~ 1_
:-
I~
~;'~3'~=
''''~1' I
.,&'L, I '
NUMBERS-ASOrE t T1E LINE INDICATE PER CENT OF
STRUCTURES l--~~ I I tt BLOCK THAT ARE SOUND IN
OF MINOR R~A\ AJOR REPAIR AND CLEARANCE RESPECTIVELY \
<11 \
NUMBERS BEL.:Q>'1' I E LINE INDICATE TYPES OF ENVIRONMENTAL
DEFICIENCES ~! 1 l
UNS91i"~~ b ~UBSTANDARD SIZED STRUCTURES
_..... I I
2. INSUFFICEN! SETBACK SIDEYARD OR BACKYARD
I
NO OR POp
LEGEND
3. INHARMONIQ
4. DRAINAGE P
I
S. DETERIORA~I
BRUSH. UNSI
,
6. NO OFF-ST~
OR CONGEf
IMPROPER R
B. PRIVY I
400
-
-
1
_ _ _ _ _r\ _/"<_
· , ,_,_, 1_'- , . ._, 1_' . "!\\i',~~/ ~~1+~~~~L
hd i", \ ~~. ~'~.
'fliU't!.!IU'fliUUIIIUUHiilliUUIUUlununUlunUUluunUIUlununUUI.UUI-;;;UI~I~1I /' , '<
-'1 ! - -\ r;oo.~~l r;oo~o 1 ~5-":'~""""-::- --- -- H_~ -7 \ /
i h!..Qc.Q. i '0-0 ~ l._~:~R7 100'0'0-0, . t\
I. ">' , ~ _ r l'
~ 1 . ~I ~! r-..-lr~~~:~:~~ / r
"i '4 c;,r I \....1.,8 In; ,1J
i :;;:~?:J ~J7 '-~.' . ,.j::flOO-orl,
I~b'_,~ ~~! '<'~d'''~::,'~ ,,)~v/~itt
r-., ",.)6 " "-", i ;f'i'i<..'.
1100-0 ~! kJO.~ r I-~-'"~'~~"'~'-~/ vi
l 0-0 ~r lQ:Q.~, 'I' "':.>. Afj<:,) /Kf/?;P
IA ~r ,-,,' 24 100-0 '.,.,~; / ~
.. v,' I' "1r '<~)?~O"_,,-/ 125
~""~ ~,r... ~-..<~/ ''--",41/
1 '" 15,rf i ~"" "'<:-"'1~/) /,,~ '<"C:
I /?""'>'"'~~-~',,~~J) ''',-,:::~._,,-.., /1 /f '~:~:~~
122~ ~ l...?.3~ .>- 1.#.6!f2fl:Q:Q:Q '')
~, / i'<::', /' /,,<>."f./.:s
I -','. j'! ',." / "
r '. """./ / loo-e/'" i "'-. ....J
12/ ....",. /34 0-0 ....) , ~,._,.
.,MOp ~"'-'::-- 1 !<>. "
-.~"" t;;/V / ., -"" f "', ',,- ,
r____ .~O ",/ "-, "", I~.'" '\
'I' ",--==)..., (~'::.<' -<"-'~ \
I . 100-0-0-0 / /' .,.... "', :;: I
!J3 _// "'1 i "I
~--~ (a s: !/oq-O I
\~ '!:':! !.J2....Q j
\f1'
-
-
-
I
r
KJO-O-O-O
~
I
~,
I
NEIGHBO
NUMBERS ABOVE ::~i'l'~
STRUCTURES IN THE LO
OF MINOR REPAIR, M OR
NUMBERS BELOW THF,LI
ORHOOD 22
G END
PER CENT OF RESIDENTIAL
DEFICIENCES
K THAT ARE SOUND. IN NEED
REPAIR AND CLEARANCE. RESPECTIVELY.
E INDICATE TYPES OF ENVIRONMENTAL
:3.
ST NDARD SIZED STRUCTURES
SIDE YARD. OR BACKYARD;
LK.
USE
78
UNSOUND OR
2. INSUFFICENT
DRAINAGE
17
li.lD&MaUUlU~".!UWB BI:!nS)IIUI UftlUUII unul TUI'II MN II
BRUSH. UNSIGHTLY FENCE MACHINERY. INOPERABLE VEHICLES
6. NO OFF-STREET PARKING; UNPAVED. DETERIORATING.
OR CONGESTED STREETS
7. IMPROPER REFUSE STORAGE
e. PRIVY
Seall in feet:
400
400
800
i.b. ~.n"'I, '".,~.j P'w."
;,Ii".(..,,,
~,;?>" h ~"''' ~IJa
,,,..,,,; 1"('1 ,I),".",l",,,
I, U, \,,!i. ~m
-
-
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
Neighborhood 26 -- This neighborhood is entirely outside the City
and is completely rural in land use. This area is not expected
to develop until other areas within or surrounding Salina develop
or within the time covered by this report.
Salina Municipal Airport and Industrial Complex Schilling Air
Force Base was closed in June of 1965, and much of the approximately
,
3042.5 acres of land and faciliEies were deeded to the City of
Salina as an airport and industrial complex. Other parcels of
land were deeded to the State of Kansas for creation of the Schill-
ing Technical Institute (now Kansas Technical Institute) and a
Vocational Rehabilitation Center. Another parcel was deeded to
the Salina School District to establish the Salina Area Vocational-
Technical School.
At the time of the City-wide building survey in the sUmmer of
1968, approximately 841.8 acres of land, exclusive of the airport
proper,. were under the jurisdiction of the Airport Authority. The
Kansas Technical Institute had approximately 218.4 acres; the
Kansas Vocational Rehabilitation Center approximately 50 acres;
and the Salina Area Vocational-Technical School, 44.3 acres. See
Ownership Map.
The Salina Airport Authority was established by the City of
Salina to govern the airport and land deeded to the City. The Au-
thority acts as coordinator of cooperative a~tivities by all
agencies owning land at the complex. Excellent cooperation is
experienced among the different agencies involved. The Complex
is zoned to provide for orderly growth and development.
Activities at the Airport Complex provided employment for
1,975 persons at the time of the City-wide survey. Governmental
agencies employed 428, including 172 Army personnel stationed at
the Fort Riley Sub-Post maintained in conjunction with Schilling
Manor, a housing area to the east of the airport and outside the
City of Salina for waiting wives and families of servicemen serv-
ing overseas. Industries at the Complex employed 1,513 persons
and business establishmen~s employed 34 persons.
Much of the land owned by the Authority and not used as an
integral part of. the airport is mai~tained as an industrial park
with facilities leased to more than 40 businesses and industries
for manufacturing and warehouse facilities. The Kansas Highway
Patrol .Headquarters and the Saline County Maintenance Yards are
also leased from the Authority. The Kansas National Guard and
-25-
the Fort Riley Sub-Post facilities are leased from the Kansas
Technical Institute.
. Building conditions on Airport Authority land range from ex-
cellent or sound to deteriorating and in need of major repair.
They also range in size from less than 100 square feet to several
thousand square feet. Construction types include metal, frame,
brick and concrete block. As many of the buildings are not func-
tional for the present uses of the Airport Industrial Complex and
have limited durability, a need to'clear and redevelop the land
will arise in the years to come. The qualification of this
activity under any future Urban Renewal prpgrams is questionable.
Other landowners at the Airport Complex have similar buildings.
The design, size and durability of many of the buildings do not
'make them functional for the various activities undertaken by the
agencies. The Kansas Technical Institute has .numerous barracks
that are deteriorating rapidly. As there is no demand for so
'many barracks, several showing the greatest deterioration should
be removed.
A program of fixing up and painting of buildings should be
conducted throughout the Complex to make it more attractive. Some
painting and fixing has been undertaken already. A program of
removing buildings that are deteriorating or are not functional
should be undertaken by all landowners in the years ahead. A
determination as to qualification for assistance through Urban
Renewal will have to be made at the time a clearance program is
undertaken by each agency.
The Airport Complex has been an effective inducement for new
industry and expansion of existing industries. It is reasonable
to assume that the Complex has reached-approximately only half of
its potential land development. Most of the functional buildings
are currently being leased by the Airport Authority; therefore,'
further development will depend upon the ability of the Authority
to clear non-functional buildings, construct new buildings, and
lease them to industries.
The Air Field, constructed for long-range bombers, provides
excellent ai~port facilities for the City of Salina~ The 13,330
foot runways provide landing ano. take-off capabilities greater
than most airports of cities much larger than Salina.
-26-
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
1
I
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
. ....--6------0--
~.. "...j~'-.-o""""'~"'~--o--o'~"""""'~"--,,--"'o.~J.L.,,--.,,- . "0--0-
-.J.~) )l~......~.~-~.....,.....,-~_.,....,..,~ -- j~l ~~L
0- .... -, ~---t}O{~j{l:C}l~~C)O{~:OoOoG)o 0 0 C~ --=
'" '_l>---
}
!
"-
'"
11 E. !r1'-~ ~ lEi ~1- :11~
~ "'"
.~_l(..~'" i
--,----'-'--~-~ I
'" ........----.....~.;_IIII-__I
P'''j.,tNo. KonlO' R5JCR
Pt."oredlo.Citv01 Solino,Kon..",
x.loin ,..,
OWNERSHIP MAP
by Cily 51ofl.1968
lEGEND
~ KANSAS TECHNICAL INSTITUTE
rum KANSAS VOCATIONAL REHABILITATION CENTER
D SALINA AIRPORT AUTHORITY
_ SALINA AREA VOCATIONAL-TECHNICAL SCHOOL
-----------------
<<
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
FIjTu f
18
The prepafalilJi! ul !hi~ ffii:1P 1m linandaHv ailh;cl thfOllgh a federal grant
lrom the Renewal Assi~leJltC Admini:ilralioll (If the Departmenf
()f HOI.Hi!'lg ,l:1'iG Urban OevelupmMl, iluthorized by ledipl'l 405
the \{OlJl\\,V.l tel i9S9, a~ amtlldd
25
\
\
\
\
\
_..R1SlWIJAL..II~ TV
D NO RESIDENTIAL STRUCTURES \
E!HII 1-5 STRUCTURES PER ACRE \
_ 6-8 STRUP'.IRES PER ACRE U
~ ': u;, MuRE STRUCTURES PER \ACRE
Source City - Wide Survey \
I
3000' 1,
~'
I
I
I
I
SCALE;
}tiillil Community Renewal Program
~dHnil< KaI1Si:15
hc\td h Kaf,m QSK~
. PreparedlorCily Salilla,Kii'nm,
'l (ill 11,1i. lib!.
,
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
Summary of City-Wide Blighting Conditions
Blighting conditions and situations that contribute to blight
are. present to some degree in most sections of Salina, but they
do not exist to the degree that Community Renewal Actions are war-
ranted in the 20-year period covered by this Community Renewal
Program, except in the seven priority areas (Neighborhoods 4, 7,
8,9,11,12 and 14).
Many of the blighting conditions and situations causing blight
in other areas of Salina can be rectified by stricter code enforce-
ment, improved minimum housing standards, neighborhood park
improvement, improved street and traffic patterns, improved zonlng
and more effective planning.
I
I
I
I,
I
I
I
I
I
Certain areas of the City will require urban renewal treatment
after the 20-yearperiod if the decline is not arrested by stricter
code enforcement pertaining to housing and environmental factors.
The limited residential section in Neighborhood 10 will need spe-
cial treatment if the expected demand for industrial land does not
eliminate the residential blight now present. Areas in the west
half of Neighborhood 16 will require Urban Renewal treatment in 20
years if steps are not taken to reverse the decline. If City
actions are not effective in arresting ~blight in Neighborhoods 2,
15 and 19, limited Urban Renewal Activity will be necessary in
these neighborhoods. If private and FHA actions in Neighborhood
14 are not effective in rehabilitating or removing substandard
housing in the neighborhood within the next 20 years, renewal,
action will be required.
Neighborhood and City-wide pride should be nurtured to effec-
tively arrest and reverse the decline within the previously men-
tioned neighborhoods. An effective program of this nature with
strict code enforcement will reduce or eliminate the need for urban
renewal projects after the 20-year period covered in this study.
Residential Density
Overcrowding of residential structures in Salina does not
present significant problems except in isolated areas mainly in
Neighborhoods 7 and 11. (See Residential Density Map) .Most lots
in Salina were plotted sufficiently large to meet modern minimum
standards of approximately 6,000 square feet I2er one-family dwell-
ing unit. Mos,t lots in older sections of Salina range from 40 to
50 feet in width and from 100 to 200 feet in depth. Only along
-27-
Santa Fe are a significant number of lots 25 feet wide. It is
only in Neighborhood 4 that a large number of lots are 40 feet.
The most common width of lots in older sections of Salina is 50
feet.
Overcrowding, as a rule, does not occur as a result of insuf-
ficient original lot size, but because portions of lots have been
sold off for construction of additional residences. This is espec-
ially true in Neighborhoods 7 and 11. Often it was a corner lot
that was subdivided, leaving houses on tracts as small as 2,500
square feet. Also, there appears to be an inverse correlation of
the size of the house and size of tract, many of the larger houses
being located on substandard-sized tracts. Some" of the larger
homes constructed on small tracts have common driveways and gar-
ages for adjoining residences.
Overcrowding is no problem in newer areas of Salina, because
most lots are 60 to 75 feet wide. A few do lack adequate depth.
Minimum lot size for new construction is 6,000 square feet.
Minority Group Residences
"Minority group residences", as used in this report, indicate
residences occupied by families having heads of the households who
are non-Caucasian. It does not include familie~ having one Cauca-
sian parent. Negroes, Mexicans and Orientals are encompassed in
the definition.
Minority group residents constitute 3 percent of the population
of Salina, there being 1,139 individuals and 349 family units.
Minority groups reside in 10 of the 18 residential neighborhoods
within Salina, but 99 percent of them reside in priority neighbor~ "
hoods. (See Minority Housing Map)
It is difficult to determine unequivocally why segregation in
housing exists to such a degree in Salina. Undoubtedly, it is a
carry-over from an era in which segregation existed to a high de-
gree in most cities. Reasons for continued existence of a high
degree of segregation-in Salina are difficult to ascertain. (See
the social characteristics section for a discussion of segregation
in housing.)
A study was made through data gained in the interior interviews
and 100 percent exterior survey of the City to determine if there
was discrimination in housing rent charged minority group families
-28-
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
"I
I
I
I
I
~-------------------
,-
-~"
d!
I
~
-:;::;
\
\
\
~,
~;~
Il~=,
I J
~.
;:::::
::=:
i
>,; ~
;:x:
i~-S
.~
! >r::
\ ~ ~
~;-i iT,
;C-I: v:
, "'=' CTU ~
I '/' ;
11 =
(oo.~_ i
-
~ ";
[I
[! 0
I 1 [,
l::~<r-i ! Cf li..t,
:"j l 0
!~ ,'-< Ir,.,
;;; " ~/
, l,y_::/
~ (,
,~_..,',.,' f:
Il
-
!~h
------=::;;;;;
_.,..,.,- ----~~,~':::-~----_.__.
, L. ... . (
<L11
_/<~ / ',- ,eM ;.~~3?-
i r'\ ~f/--
iI'
,
(F:Ci(c;cc;:;-:-i=C,<c/ ~ P=,
( ,'\
e
"
~'J!jf%j;:~ \\
livr
I !!
~~~\)
I, :
~ V --~ ',,-
j T H,","i.i'A.,l~"",~,"'i>.!.~,._,.!~J~l =
'i>'A' 'AA"A' Ai "!.AQ~----
~ j__~"A'AiA,"'L~ ,4(= ___
" I, '.J~~j11~iIRI !i>'= -,__
~ i _~ i~~--, ,,/U>....J 11 ,~I ~( - 5
i,JJWUJiL~I(~~1~~~i[}t ,_ .,J
'l,., " . iA...'.....~I,.'.'..'., 4.,..'.&.,-..'.' '~"'II!..A.','.i"""'i '"..,-.1.,...,..........,...... r r=:=:::-===~===;:- ~~
iU~J~1~~~1~i ,"",,,.,
ill1 IJ~t~L!\!,~~fl ,='
/ I':"; [-'~""'K 'l-T ('. t' )P
,Jj~;~'F!]~fJ~ f~' i [d~;~~ (~~~~~
!!ItN ~~~~~LW .,~
~ ~ , I
I ~~\~~' 1 ~
liJij~~t: Ii..
m iWi~':]~~~~rl~tE,
I '11TH q) -~ ~~ ~ "Irnl -~)~-
'L.LL~ ~, 'Jo\ ::-"illi~~ ~( .,
tr~(~J/j)J7( ,Ii ~ '~ i
~;~ .<>( J8!j>.1/ \ .~""
f': :~~~:::0. ~~~b=~ . \~~ j; \
. ~ I..~~-c,,;~~ ~ lJ
, li: ~ (.
):;
,
~
I
,
I
.--;;~~' I
,~.
I
=e,,,.,,,,
I
-
....,,-
"
'\
'\
:
51)1!:
I
I
I
I
I
i
:=
",
,>~/)
',,- ,
.;
A~
~" .. 'lJ! Ii! ~~;
-~~
l~~
B1
..=
.,
q
~
I,
, F-',
iD
-=
~
!]J
I :
-
jf.:: t;
lE'
6
(
Lt"
=,
Ir~1
i,.lk'~'E
l l:
,
,ct>J~Jl.
/.i
A
~
;
1
iJ ..1.1,
.~
I 'I
~I ,I
~I
.,
=;~
FiJ TU RE
COliRSE
~""'SC..x... ~==
.~-
;,
.....G:
c_\~ \ \
~~
'~X ~\\"
\' \\
,\
~~
J j
~=E I
::
T
I
~ !.t~
".('
J; '1",
Ii
:I:l:.:
'>c.
1,1
=1111
I """"~
~-:1 i
,'..,j
11i
%!I.
II
E
_~; ~~(17
)~~
.4f.~'
I~~~
~~~
-;::;:::-f' ~;;?
18
~~,,.u~'n 1
I
-
~, I
~TI
a~
r----
U'
(J, !/~ :Jf
ij
J Q .b~~
~
~\ ~~
'\~{~~
Cll t~~!~ L ~., "
Iii ~~'P'V~
il~ ~~L ~',,~ ' j
l'!"~ >"< t,.
" .;j'< ! ,,", ~1
<c. ,. ;.! ~L
,~ \
p-'7iif,"'" -"-
!=:<~~_. 1\ - .......... .Jj' .
I" (r~". . i:r'll k>=
....J
----i_A;; ?::~
'~..=;/
.,,,,j
., ;~~~~~
~~~;\ I'
,I
//; \~\\
\~,\..
21
'-\';
" ii! Ii
I",'!
~i""'''' /L
------J \~\ \~~~\
~/ \,' ~
,~ /:2\\
~'<~--'/ ,I
~.../ \~\ (
\\) .\
\
\
\
\
\
MINORITY HOUSING MA&
EACH T::;:::;~-;N~:.\\
LOCATION OF ONE MINORITY GROUP \
FAMILY RESIDENCE
Source, 1968 Saline County Enumeration \
\
\
,
I
I
I
I
,
__IIIlIItIlI!IIlI__~___
CAFt:HAR'I
/
I
j
ialina (ommunity Rell1Jwal PfOgram
Salina, K~l1m
hojetl No. K~llm RS3CR
Prepared lor City tit Sajjn~, Kallsiis.
bl (I!y \f.fl, 196!,
/ ~...
...-'~~
.......
INDUSTRIAL
SCALE,
'REA
The preparalkill ollhis map wn iinaMiaUy aided through a federal 9rallt
tram tbe Renew'll As~lstilllce Admlnislral!on ollhe Department
01 HOllsing afld Urball Development, aulhorized section ~C5
of fhe HOilsing Ad \II 1959. as ~mel1decl,
25
'0-
1000' 2000' '000'
,
I
I
I
I
in rela'tion to white families. No evidence was found that minor-
ity group families were being charged higher rent than white fam-
ilies for comparable housing. Minority families did tend to pay
lower rental payments and have housing of lower quality than did
whites.
I
I
I
I
Neighborhood 4 is the most heavily populated by minority groups
with 581 individuals representing 18.7 percent of the neighborhood
population. The minority group families in the neighborhood repre-
sent 14.8 percent of the families in the neighborhood and 51.3 per-
cent of all the minority families in Salina. The highest area of
concentration of minority group families in Neighborhood 4 is east
of Santa Fe, with 58.7 percent of the total for the neighborhood.
This is also the area of the most serious blight in Salina outside
Urban Renewal Project 2. Virtually all of the minority group resi-
dents in Neighborhood 4 live east of Ninth Street.
I
I
I
Neighborhood 9 has the second greatest concentration of minor-
ity families. They account for 12.9 percent of the family units
in the neighborhood or 32.7 percent ot all minority families in
Salina. Approximately half, or 169, of the minority residents are
Mexican. A majority ef them live within Urban Renewal Project 2
and are being relocated. Negroes constitute most of the remaining
minority groups in Neighborhood 9 -- a majority of them residing in
the U.R. Project 2 area.
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
Minority families in Neighborhood 7 account for 1.6 percent
of the families in the neighborhood and 5.7 percent of all minor-
ity families in Salina. All other priority neighborhoods have
minority families, but the number represents only token integra-
tion of the neighborhoods.
Vacant Residences
Vacant residences, as revealed by the exterior surveys, are
found throughout Salina. (See vacant Housing Map) In most areas
the number of vacant residences is quite low and represents a
normal situation. Vacant housing in other areas presents' problems.
Of the 854 vacant one-family residences found in the survey,
456 or 53.4% of them were in Neighborhood 14. Vacant housing con-
stitutes 44.3% of the housing within the neighborhood. Many of
the houses were taken over by the Federal Housing Authority when
the Air Base was closed and the families purchasing them "turned
them back." While many of the houses have been renovated and are
I
I
-29-
I'
I
kept up to a certain extent, there has not been a good demand for
these FHA-owned residences. The type of construction and materials
used on houses in the area discourage potential buyers. Most of
the houses are small two and three bedroom dwellings -- another factorl
dis'couraging their occupancy. Major repairs would 'need to be made
to 35.8 percent of the vacant housing in the neighborhood before
they would be deemed durable.
Neighborhood 14 can be viewed as a source of, inexpensive
housing for families being relocated. The survey revealed that
207 two bedroom and 37 three bedroom vacant houses were estimated
to have a value of less than $5,000. One hundred five (105) two
bedroom and 69 three bedroom vacant houses had an estimated sale
value of $5,000 to $7,500. The survey found that 12 two bedroom
14 three bedroom houses that were vacant had an estimated sale
value of $7,500 to $10,000. None of the vacant houses had a sale
value of more than $10,000.'
Considering the rent value of the houses at 1 to l~ percent
of the sale value', the rental of vacant houses in the neighborhood
should range from $50 as a very minimum to $125 as an absolute
maximum, with a majority ranging close to the $75 level.
Neighborhood 4 had 94 vacant one-family dwellings of which 46
were rated as clearance-type structures and 27 in need of major
repair. Thus only 21 or 22.4% can be considered available for
relocating families without major repairs being made. The vacant
housing in the neighborhood included about an equal number of
one, two and three bedroom houses, all under the $5,000 or in
the $5,000 to $7,500 price range.
Neighborhood 7 has no abnormal vacant housing situation with
only 3.7% of the total number of one-family dwellings vacant. The
neighborhood will afford little opportunity for relocation unless
the older and smaller families of the neighborhood are willing to
sell the larger homes they now occupy.
Nei,ghborhood 8 has a rather high rate of vacancy among one-
family residences at 10.1%, but numerically it is not significant.
Of the 15 vacant'. 6 were "clearance" and 5 in need o.f major repair.
Neighborhood 9 had 36 vacant one-family houses, which repre~
sented 6.2% of the housing.
-30-
and
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
-------------------
-.
---- ........-=~~:'- ....
.---_..~ :.::;;;;;
.;;, i ~~~/I
; / =1.== >";;; f/Y~ !
// .~r/-' F~~/ I
'Ii,// I
!. I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
!
j
J
/;/
III
\ ~\
\\\ /~
d~
\
ie/I
~
, I-
,
.
,
~~\
\
\\~ \
~:
=.,.
:::=L,
[~
E
';=:
~=:
';=:
;:"'0 ~
:~r
~
,
';=:
:::z:
;=co
'-
"I' ':ss
I ~l /
~-. I ~
.
p
:1
I [
I 1 i
~~~j i tr
\~"") l~. .
IiI'':!
----!... II !. : /~ (
I~~~/"../ ri'
II
~-
( !'
,Ii
i~
,,=,/ c,\;
.\i
. ~ ~)\J
.
.;
~:~~
:= ~!fig;/~\
1/ ...~
',,-
. 0 [I l:[rr-'
-.. .!Jr'i: [mG.;]' ::~c
) : '.. I"; 'U~lii
rfJ :.lJ !J ~ li 13J u[J ~l j c
r F:= :F 111 ~,: 'I'
""" '.
.)~i lJ! ! "\
!. -ITF; iT m, t,~ I:=r
,-"i :~u= t~:~, ,....
.
~4 ~ I ~jf/
J (~ 1~ ~~ r t >7~
1
Ii JI.:. ~ (/ -
. '-"" !' f-~.cc; ~ ~\fl,,",. 11:-# ,
o (:: ~ ~ =rl ~ ~ ' ,r ~~~~I Iii 'O>~ff~ :
n h ~ ~ . '~:11 \~,. f I
i4: ! il ~(~ Y j) ii' 13 -~~ -
. . D
;~ rnrr if:~:L ; .. ~ -----------.--.
l~........
i
~~....
.'c:>c;~~
...... .:
:'
.......c .,"
o 5" ../#~
,,~. i 'if=
.<
."",,g; \
-
'"'~'~N
.~...
.~
~;
i
J
I
I
I
I
!
~t~E ;:
'1:::1
_J: I.: OJ. .
~ ill innl
iBJW~lrli
Ii I ii I
'.LJl
: '= I LilliJ
Ji1
i' .
-f.- c.,,1i
~
/.0
:../ -,iT
,
I'i' ,I'
I
II
I,
J r .......J
iL1H
:3 I"~ '\::.\ .W(/:\.~,
-~ .. \,.~ (:<~;.~
- -;;-.:Jj~",,,::~~~':;.~~
.",. .:oi:". .....'
"i1' '. . ;'o'.'.'~ ..' '.\. \
t ':~'}.:
~o ~. ~ . ~
'::: ::I:~ :~.
~,. -............ ....
;--m\ . . ~
Llj~~.l
,..-.--.---.--e--i
I
10/,<
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
\
^ #'
...
I
I
_. -
I
I
I
I I
I
I
! I
I
I I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
(:"UTURE GOLF COuRSE
J
'"""" =-'-.c
:.m J '
I.JO=
I:
~
l ~ "4jjll~t
i l'
"'; i
" '=EII
il ,
- .
i
i
i
i
I
i
18
i
i~
~ .....
~I I/S LY
If
----; ,
J)
:.-...----.--.-r
~-~~~~!!"
[t;~;::;::;..-=-~::~~
'.--.---....'...............--.--.-.
~~,~F:~
1; ,Ii .',';.li;
,~\. ''\ \ ('
~
'"- -
"',
~
Ci
~ ..m:~ W
,
, ?
I /...--:::-
<:::1:' fe, '{
,
~"
~.
-,
.
..
,,,,,'
'~
;:. ,.~~~
~~/
~~.,
'm~ '.r~l:
)c. \\ \~F1N ~ '1
~ ~~,~ =.
-.~..:....~~;~tf~ R ; -
~ ~1"CS~;~~'i\~ 2
I ~~~i(~~~" <~ f'i!
!~~::;:,;(."...~I.l ~
. t<, .... :1
I)ii~ '111
L.J
-=--
>--:::--. /;12 ':
"""-/
!/<
~1 ~"1~'
\~~\ .i:l.....
~~h\
\~\,
,\
\> ~\
~ \~~\ ~~~\
~~~\ -7
\~ II
\
\
\
\
\
\
y KClRr1fU1mRr--\
. VACANT HABIT ABLE STRUCTURES "
. V ACANT UNINHABITABLE STRUCTURES \
Source, City - Wide Survey
+,
I
I
I
I
I
,
:':..
,..,
~~jr
~~J
CAPEHAR'f
I
~-;
Salifl~ Cummul1i!y Renewal Program
Smllna,Kanm
Projed Nt}, Kanm RBCR
Plepa!l~d fm lily d Sillll!d, Kall5iH,
b,Cil,SI,II,I9!8.
....................
!~
.../
SCALE:
ARFA
: i The preparation 01 thi~ map was finilllelillly ijded through a f~dmij! griml
; ! !rnm the Renew'll AnistantlJ Administration {If the Departmenl
{)f HOIl$itllJ illld Urball Oevebpmeot, dulhoflH:d by $lJdio!'! 405
of the H{)uilng Ad of 1959, as amtnded.
25
1060'" 20(i(j'" '000
l:i
I
i I
II
.-
I
I
I
Street Conditions
I
I
I
I
If Salina's streets were in one continuous straight line, they
would stretch nearly across Kansas from the Nebraska line to the
Oklahoma lin~ or 194.62 miles. The types of streets and mileage are
as follows: concrete, 104.16; asphalt overlay on concrete, 8.95;
bric~, 10.3; asphalt over brick, 25.16; asphalt, 27.1; and dirt or
gravel, 18.95. All of the dirt or grav~l streets are located in
the priority areas, Urban Renewal Project #2 or in areas of the
city not now developed. (See Unpaved Streets and Sewer Service Map.)
I
I
I
Salina is well-served by local streets, collector streets, ar-
terial streets and expressways. Local streets are those that
provide access to adjacent property and which carry local traffic
into the collector system. The collector streets, approximately
one-half mile apart, collect traffic from local streets and convey
it to arterial streets. They also serve the adjoining property.
Arterials are streets approximately one mile apart which serve major
traffic movements and inter-connect various sections of the city
and the city to th~ highway system. Service to adjacent properties
is a secondary function of these streets. Expressways are thorough-
fares with part or fully controlled access providing service for
long-distance traffic movement.
I
I
I
I
I
I,
I
I
I
Salina is admirably served by expressways: Interstate Highways
70 and I-35W. Service will be even better in the years ahead as
a four-lane highway is extended on north from the interchange of
the two interstate highways northwest of Salina. It is unique for
a city the size of Salina to be located near the intersection of
two interstate highways.
Relationship to interstate highways has been an important fac~
tor in Salina's advances in recent years in becoming a regional
industrial and trading center.
The length of the City of Salina north and south makes the ar-
terial highways running north and south extremely important in the
street system. Ninth and Ohio Streets serve the entire length of
Salina as arterials and connect the city with the interstate sys-
tem. Ohio Street, being of rather recent construction, is in
generally good condition with four lanes and a median for approx-
imately one-half of its length. Ninth Street, which is much older,
is in a deteriorating condition for much of its length. It also
is somewhat narrow and has many traffic impediments. Ninth Street
should be widened,to better handle the 5,QOO-7,000 vehicle per day
-31-
traffic volume. , An over-pass over the railroad tracks to the
north of the Central Business District area would greatly im-'
prove ,the function of Ninth Street as an arterial. u.s. 8l By-pass
(Broadway) is in generally good condition and serves weil to
shuttle traffic around the downtown section of Salina. Much of
the by-pass is four-lane and permits virtually unhampered traffic
flow to the west of much of Salina's development at 40 m.p.h.
I
I
I
Santa Fe and Centennial are the only other north to south ar-
terials of conseqqence. Santa Fe, being the main street of Salina,
serves as an arterial for traffic originating and terminating in
the CBD and Sears Center. Lack of streets around the core area of
adequate capacity makes it necessary for 'Santa Fe to carry more
traffic than it would otherwise. Location of businesses along
much of the length of Santa Fe would greatly hamper its utility
as an arterial if it were not for its width of over 60 feet. Cen~
tennial, the major arterial for traffic going to and from the
Salina Airport and Industrial Complex, is a two-lane concrete
paved street which begins at Crawford and terminates in the Air-
port Complex. Only two other streets feed traffic into Centen-
nial, and they do not impede the flow of traffic because they ter-
minate at their intersections with Centennial. The volume of
traffic on Centennial has become a problem since s~veral industries
have located at the Airport. The problem should be relieved some-
what in the future due to the recent extension of Magnolia to' the
Airport. Marymount Road will become increasingly important with
the opening of the Salina Golf Course and residential development
in the area. Its function will change somewhat from a collector
street to an arterial.
I
I
I
I
I
I
I.
Iron Street serves a large traffic volume for the CBD to the
east. State Street, a west connecting link to I-35 and a connec-
tion to old US 40, carries a modest traffic volume but is a most
important connection west of the CBD. Completion of a connecting
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
East and west arterials in Salina generally follow the origi-
nal.section lines. The northern-most arterial, Stimmel, is asphalt
surfaced and has limited use at the present time. Development of
highway service facilities near the interstate will increase the
future importance of the street. Pacific (old US 40) serves as
an important arterial in north Salina, despite the fact that much
traffic has been diverted by the construction of Interst~te 70.
Although the street is in various degrees of deterioration, it is
expected to continue to serve as a ,major arterial.
-32-
I
I
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
WTItn
,n
I' I
1'1
LlI/"
I 'I'~~;J-"l ) l III
, , I
ill! . I
! I
, ~==' l. -, 4.1;Jt,! I
I, l' "1("""\ '-"'-"'-"'l~'~~-.
" '1" '. I.'i'-> \""1
I (. ~:>--;.
i ' J~s~}L
..1: ~I~: ~: ;-:-:: ...
r'
,
Ii 11 j :r
";" .c:c
~ I :; :x
I ,i :s.~,
I,.: :. ~ ""~
I ,~~ .'-.
@cc-.J ' ' -L.._, [, (,-
_==== ~ .=L'!, .' ~::i '(.J U L! /)
! ;/': "
.....0. '1,.,1 r,' ,,~
~-'''''-, i' i I'~' '"
" I ,;=:}"' .",:',~
'.0\ ' .; Er, .:;:~~
: :, t ^' ll<
, ~ f" "'MW:f. ",,,,",
,: "'-
I I
I I
I I
I I
I ~~~~
I ,...- ./~//./" I
I ,-.1, ~"i ./,,/ I
II i 1 //;f-:'/
: : ".// /
I . . ..//",(
I J. LL;,-~#:f:f:f'Y ]I
I ' - _--.,;.;.-t-----' ../ I I!
- - -.".., . .. _J-.~~~----- "-'-"-'- I. I !:
"-, - .-" - ." ..........- -. j' I i,'"
_ ~ I---;;.;;...-'""""......~ - ---'\ -. '-.~~, : I Ii
" I \ ) : I '
"'\ \ \\\ ,,==0"/2! I ~
I.' / i\,~~- I ::
I : (~.. ' 1 Ii
\ I \ Ii" -.-i\h- 1 II
I' I \ l \ \ ' il r; . ,I Ii.' I
I ' Ii - - ,---a...... I 1 '
\ \ . ;f-_._-t f ""' U I
\\ '\ ~~~~.. /~ - - - --'~T'~~::r'Trr. ~~~-fF~ -~~~~~~-----: _.u_ - T~~" i
I'll __~r ~lrtl!lTGI~"'}-- . ~ " :~/ ~~~ I
1,1 = ?;;ffi/ ii ~'li/t!:~II"~1jJ-r 5 ~ - .... -- . ~~~~\ I
~)I j , !~,' i;~c 'lj~:lJ,:'J,~..!i'.~:,}J~'~~' - ~ -- " J <m, r-'I ~ .\)
, I, 4 I 1" , , T' ~''''-,' "---"'1-.'_'..__.._~~ - " \'1 II
I ' ,_:,'" i :'r.I~I~~"i_c.. :------ ...- - -=~ - - --'-c Ii 'l,i= --- r \--
/ I ~ 'l~:{C -i in II j i". LJ 4J.r:- ' .' 'L'.''''"'.,....., "= ! M
f' T :r:'F~!Im,r"il '~,'!I .> -......", .,,- , : I
I '.. ...::q. LL. I t= f.lj t~. j.,."k;.J'i J~""" . .....'L[, I !
/ .c-.. ~m~~~]l ~jf' _._.~- · - T
I !!- "1I1ml~~lg~'- 10. --1_ I
~ iI;[:or I! 11-, ~ ~ !'i~~_:g~~JJF1~- ~ ...;, ~_r-:-=-=--==!~ ':' I
:--r li! lidl J '/ I 'I~~ 1 ~~'~' 'lH R :v~ ~rV~'-"--if'j!l:
8=.1 'fi Ylr 14 !!! ,!!i~!-! - - --_-'vd,,"-_-_)1 ~
J j.J.J,JUL !~ ,., L~ 1__' , ' ,:f/':::>'~ f~l-'ri'< ~H"" ,
t:i JII Ii' .. _~' ~1; ~,""-d~ 'r'-'- 1l ,1'" c-J -~J, '~ -1 1 ~~ 1-.. f ~
i ._".._.1 ' I' ~i, r- ~ ~~7';-- \1 II:uL;l",b-!.;,~,~1 }I b/i;;w-~ I ,.__ Irc=~-=-,_ I i II
,;.~;:,1 ~, ."'~, J: ~?' 'j', ", // Ii' 'I ..~.~ t;li-..-~._- j
" i' : ji~l ;, ! I, ~"i':\~/j0\\/A_~J~:~ll~~! 4 qc-[ ~~ .~~_J[L~!--r-
\~ ~I I" ,II /<:::.:;;1' / /,!y / 'I ~-=~\ - 1;:"71-;;;:: -",- --v --1';:";;;;""--=--""'- [----'
\~ ) ! ll~.~! I ~, ' , ' ~"'_~;;;?) (I';"'/_JZ r~,,:~~~" )i'~ ~ ~~,~~~:i ~I
~\fZ" ,_,_,~('~"' ~II I' ~ ,1H::=- ~,:=~~~(,::~:,__a ::'-- / : 'l,,~l :~~l~LJ~~U QUi:l
",\ I_iT 'L~,~",,--)o\\\ rlr=-~.::jr, I ,'f ~?":o _LI-J
~"I I' I ~"i, i' - ~:~-~ '~~,,::,:,,~, ~r~:;;O~~':'~ , JiC--:-' /~r~: I~_......l
, 'I ~ I, i: ]~"i~?~:~Jl' ~ ~~I~!l
( I Ii ~ II , I '~!t------' ~~JUI'i! I I
- -"'l!'------"'"""'j;' ._IJJL~ / -
I \ ~;~' ;:: U iltWTJ~: =- !E1l~ n\ ~=------""--r : ,""" 0",' 000"" I
~" i: ll' 1~."';~'~JI.~.~ur=-~.C"=-.~~~;~~.~'" ~l'~"\:f;:'>' :;
a: i ~~ FC~ ~_~ ~L~! ~;;:Jt'"~~JhJI=~II:1 ii Ii! , ! \1;\~\ '~'-~~
I , ~'" ;,': , d; i'~' i~~l. ~"'4='.n l,'-:,.r=t" ~ \~\ ~, I
=' c..: ,'Itll-'I " ~~r~'" I, I!, I' I \\.\ '\
1- 1~1<m ~ 1\ ' I , 1'1' I" '1,,1 '-_-= \:'\ \\
. l/.~ 1~.1 _.L:,,_,,'~;~J~:~1::_~~[ ~=[~r !__Jl.:J \~1\ \\ ...-------1.
~\'> U> I..~;: ...:1 ,,- '),'. i" "-r' ':1 ! \, I II I
\ ..'~~ i;"., ~ E'.' ~,.,=-... ~"= ..: 9, "i1 i,. ;:'=-..1."'..... '.-..'.11 \'. \.' .)! I
'<\;, h~ ~-=.; ,r- "-I ill'" r'lF" .,.,~ i \ \ (f I
\ ..."' r- ,,-T -,,--.,';:"".ir-..,.....I ! , I II I
~ \ " , ~! l: ~H_, _"" . .... L..... ..J, --'~ I J I!f I
,\ rMI . i",,_ :_,6 [ ....j[=.. I j ! ( !! I
\~ S . ~" ! i ~~~~;~i' ~ "" \,jli~!li I ~~~~~~~.~~,/t/ 18 I, II
J '''I LJ ' ":,, ~f": 3"'" I;: I I
~ .~ ~~'~ : - ~ 1 :f/-~>"fil ! j
v,' .~.. ,.;- -: ~C~~'~!j ..I~'~U~ ::,,:-,\1.,..; _' '~",,"'I -rJi~\,., _ '=_', "J?:\:~~~\ L____',
,.(/-;,~~ "\\'. '-= r~:- "" \1 Z ,.. , -~ ;~~'11--~',=::" ' "~,
=/ / XI til.... i!"""1 c~'~.~ \\\, ':"'<'.::'0..''':0,-,, I
? ~;) t' "' .', ".~ :;;(j~, c~ ..... \:;." I
"~\~ I It~ ~ '~, I
\\':,\ : \ , I
\\, . ~:~ ' \ ,I: I
\~'\'\~ \ ....,i.;..j"..... I! ,\.:" . ------.-:,~~~:_-----__J
"', " cr.' :! '7"/9: ..,' -;;:/ \~ '. /'. \"
,\' \~;'::~ ~:::~/", ~ ; ~:PY~//1 . !? ,,;:;:1;,\,.' \:o:':--,,::,::::~~;
""~:c..~/:.:~,.</~ .".:' .:11 ~ :"'~~~~-::::f/'\. l!
! 'j:-~I :'\ ;;":,~~{ :h\ 23 ,X\ (,i,
, ~~ J1 ;;7:c"":'l Il;~i/"":"~j: '. '\
,,' :,,-""', ,,' ~ \
~ I_'=:mcw- ,F<T " t .'1' \
ii\=:,,::=\::::ir.Ji.. \ '.. UNPAVED STREET AND \
SEWER SERVICE MAP \
------------,
-.. UNPAVED STREETS \
AREAS NOT WELL SER~ED
BY PUBLIC SEWERS ,
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
,
lllIlillII\IIIl~~_____________1
1
//;
?
21
:
CAPCfiART
~ ,!
'" i
>~~;c
l~'r_
([
:,:
-
'-
'"
'Ci'" _ -;.'" =::.~
"';:..'".'" ."
,,'..
/ I
,
"
HCU"~ .... I
- ':~
Salina (ommllnily Renewal Program
Salina, Kanm
Projecl Nil. Kans. R53CR
Prep(jfl~d for City vi Salina, Kanias,
By BUCHER & WIlliS, COIIsultlng Engineeu,
Planners, hrthilech, 1968.
i!
f'-t{XISJ'PIAL
': ~/-:
::
,
...
I
I
I
I
I
I
SCALE:
SOUTH
I
..-....,-
i
I
/.
...~...:/./ i
The preparalion of this map was ii!1&ndally aided througb 11 federal gran!
from the Renewal Assistance Administration of Ihe Oepartment
01 HOllsing and Urban Oeve!opmel1l, authorized by secfiOil 405
of the H~liSilllJ Act of 1959, as amended.
25
I 0 or:r 2000'"
3000
!
,
+
,;
o~
,
i
,
I.
r; i'l
,
>'Yt$r",.r."OUst"
i
:
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I I
I
I
I
I
I
I-- I
________--.l
I
I
I
I
I
I
j I
i~\
: ~
1<
\
\!
\~\
~
~
I
I
I
\--~
'--~\
f~
r-J
,
AVE.
I
I
I
I
L_
I
I
1__-1
SALINA TRAFFIC VOLUME
1967 -69
__~~-:-.,_:u...
AV E.
~
'- '
( :j
r ~~)
I
I
,
~
00'" ST.
~\~ ~
ST.
5T.
STATE
I
10
16
I~
PARK
ST.
~
M
<
Z
5T.
~
';..98
.li~
[IlliJ
~
~
j.fLQN' AVE,
~
~
"
PRESCOTT
': RAWFORD
g
~ ~~
/,248" IJ~';"5 0
au>,;; 6".00 VI ST
Qzm
;~
~Z
il'.>4:i2 ~
I~
,I
~ __S.!?J~!!J'_?~?...._,..
~ ,~r.....,~-.._-.
j""
~I
~
~
PRESCOTT AVE,' ~
1-'
I I
,_.-J .L___j
j I
,
I
L_-,
I
I
I
,
~
~
"
I~
"
I
o
I
r
>
z
o ~
>
Z
~~
~0IJ
~
REPUBLIC
.~
--'
I
I~
bm
,
I
,
,
I
I
j
~
I
lfillIl
[jEll]
I
I
czm
>
< ~
~
cll:m
I~
~-
"
I
=
[]'E]
.
"
:=C2.illJ
~ ".''''0
I~
c::IrrJ"'CL~
mEllrnm
t=
I~
i
I
I
!Gill
[LgSJr.
WAYNE U!!J
~------
- ,
o
"
CROUPTON RD z
z
~
c
HAYES RD ~
r
>
z
RD
rS;-----~-- ...J
IZ.3( e/T'';''
;QJ I
o I
I
I
,
"
,
l-------L___
GENERAL JIM
\./'"-~./---;
I
'---,
I
LS---- - --~-
I
11
I~
I
AVE.
Ihoprepmtion olthjl",~pw,,!ina",illlliil.edtblouohof.de(IIQrlnt
hOllllh. ~e~.w.r A"ill.." Admi"llll!"" ~I rh llepl~ment
01 Houli~g and Urb.n O",lopm..t, ,ullloriled b, IeClion 4GS
RO 01 lho HO'I;ng A(t 01 19S9. iI.m!nded
I~
\.1,.. (.~~."t, 110"...1 ,,~.~
101'""1...,,,
'''~', No.I",,,,llKlI
p",,,,;t,,lit,.II.I,,,,,I,,,,,,
I
i I
I'
- -- --~
"
,
.
/
~
?~'c.~
~
S5()(}
^'E
@]
8500
2 6600
8000
7000
6 2300
5800
10000
9 4300
.'0 7000
II 9000
LEGEND
119671
1968
1969
+
I Scale in feel:
1600
o
3200
1600
NORTH ST.
_:- - --~
r-,
I I
I ,
I
I
I
I
'_____nnnnJ I
~!J!.'I.E'J: C.l us _~ .. _~ _ r:~~
L~_ _ _ _ ~_ __
~.~~~
~
~./.j5
'p
I ~
~
"
I
I
I
L,
I
I
."
I----~
4.?.JO
.
,,~'b~
5,
WE I L PL
&
PRE-SCOTT AVE
J1>
ST.
>
<
m
CBD TRAFFIC VOLUME
LEGEND
mf>
~ =
12 "00 5900
7800 2' S600
3700 P5 1900
i5 12.200 26 ,'J600
16 4000 27 6800
/7 4100 28 1/890
18 7400 29 5600
4250 50 5100
20 7/50 " "000
21 /5400
22 /5600
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I)
I
- -
i .rl ,i'I.": i,nri';:nn
. ! c It '01 I, i It:ll ! :
101 i! iu! 'I' j::J I!
H Ii i~i I 101 I' 'I'
'~ ~I: ~I~II II i~1 LJ~I II I
.' Vji'~ "'II;:.., Ii I.~i, 1;:..1 1'1' I
~ I ,~r Ii 1_1. .~ I I
, I' ; {I II I C> i 1'1 I '
~ . J' ~ I, i C>! g Ii !
"'t!fO'~4 ,if~G::AS p :'JL.J ~~~'471~~L~?)~~
r ..,. --, c: f, Tl .1'-"1 I, ---"l
1~ ~ 11 ! ~l .1 J
, J' CIVIC on, 'I i"" '0., I
L~.T_ ~ CENT!;.Q 11 ,1: ~ ~1::"4r:Jfl r I
; ~ 1)1 ~ ~III ~1~lllll
16 '7 ~~lJ~WU~~ J
'-54'-C-G-Asp. 80'-47'-C-G-Asp.
r~fr~ "'fr~ ::1:-1 ~i'l' il ~ll! ;--..
I r ' '" I '~I ' : ~ 1"'1 II
!... P II 'I J I II II I
ur P'~ :'7 ''''I'!I uj j'71 I! I '
- --l i. '7 u~ I' .': j''7: 1'1 . '
r~f j;:" i~!!1 i~1 .: ,:,,~ '
ct>l,- ,o:::t' !L.()' II I-WI I ,I,{)
1 ~I f' ;_1 i_II il Z5f U-'
I "f1" rl:21 1;; 101__1 J'--j
L-t ~ 22 ,"'~U 24 25
100'-67'-C-G-Asp. 100'-67'-C-G- sp
,.-.-- Ii r--lr---1 1
I, 1,I'iJ It ~ II i~I, I~
[ ~~I I~ 1 'I'~'W!II~! '1;1
II ,~ i~1 ~I, i ~II , ~I.
i J'~I li~ J~: g29 I~
I ....'26 "'~7 ",I -. iJO
L 80'=47,-'C'::G-Asp. 80' -47' -C.G-Asp.
~ I' r--'II~''''''''''''1 ~f"l".ni I ~r' f'i d-l
i" I Ie:;( ~ l! lc;i ~f
I i~ jil ii jjl I;I~
i ,,;, i~. ~ I: ,~i I ~i,
II ,f, I'~I :;1 Ii i~i g
~~_.j'" C> 3'L_J-~', 135
I ~n,80'-47rnDlC, -:r.~- n:
36 ~Wlj bLJ WU ~
nn:-Jnl~11 "
I ' ~II II I, , \
NEIGHBORHOOD B
r
I
I
I
l
C B D STREET CONDITION AND WIDTH
LEGEND
FIRST NO.-RIGHT OF WAY WIDTH
SECOND NO.-STREET WIDTH
C-CURBED
G-GUTTER
BR-BRICK
GR-GRA VEL
ASP-ASPHALT
CON-CONCRETE
+
Scale in feet:
400
o
400
800
SO~:'?,~n~~:~o:n~J.~r~~:~:.~~I:::~i~;~~~:~~O~'i~1~~~:~,:~~~~;:~~d e 10 I g .on I
of rhe HaUling A,r of 1959. oS amended
,Salina Com",unity Renewal Program
Project No. Kans. ItS3CR Salina, Kansas
Prepared for City of Salina Kansas,
Iy BUCHER & WILLIS Consulting Engineers,
Planners, Architects, 1969.
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
link between Ash and State (see Proposed Activities for Neighborhood
7) would permit Ash to relieve some of the traffic burden from Iron.
Ash would better serve as an arterial street than Iron, because
it does not intersect the very business core of the City. Iron
will continue to be an important arterial in the east part of Salina,
connecting with Country Club Road.
Crawford is the major east-west arterial, providing the only'
direct traffic route across Salina near its mid-section. Traffic
is impeded greatly by its width, number of traffic signals, inade-
quately controlled grade crossing, and its surface condition.
Cloud Street serves as an important arterial from Ohio to Cen-
tennial. Traffic is impeded by a considerable number of stop signs
and lacks adequate traffic control at its intersection with Broadway.
Traffic signals should be installed at Broadway to lessen the dangers
of attempting to negotiate crossings of and turns onto Broadway,
as well as expediting traffic on Cloud.
Magnolia now serves as an arterial connection to an important
County road approaching Salina from the east _. and to provide quick
transit to and from developing areas in south Salina. The importance
of Magnolia will increase considerably due to its extension to Salina
Airport and the completion of the new high school. Increased use
of Magnolia will necessitate improved control of its intersection
with Belmont Boulevard and the Union Pacific tracks.
Belmont Boulevard, a four-lane street with a median its entire
length, serves as an arterial connecting U.S. 81 and Ohio Street.
Traffic accidents in 1967 occurred in every portion of the
City, in differing degrees. The highest concentration of acci-
dents occurred at intersections having the highest volumes of
,traffic, indicating there are few intersections that are dangerously
out of proportion to volume of traffic.. Some of the intersections
having appreciably more traffic accidents than ethers were Ninth
and Pacific, Santa Fe and Pacific, Iron and Oakdale, North and
Broadway, Ninth arid ~uth, Sante Fe and Prescott, Crawford and
Broadway, Ninth and Crawford, Front and Crawford, Ohio and Craw-
ford, Santa Fe and Republic, Santa Fe and Ellsworth, Ninth and
Kirwin, Ninth and Cloud, and Broadway and Cloud. All of these
intersections except Santa Fe and Pacific, Santa Fe and Ellsworth,
-33-
Broadway and Cloud have fully operational traffic signals. Santa
Fe and Pacific has only a flashing red signal for Santa Fe traffic
and a flashing caution signal for traffic on Pacific. The other
two, intersections have stop signs for the streets having lesser
traffic.
The only other areas having significantly higher numbers of
traffic accidents are Crawford and Missouri Pacific tracks; the
Central Business Di~trict; and Republic and Union Pacific tracks.
A program of improving traffic signalization as reconunended in
the Transportation Study and "Manual on Uniform Traffic Control
Devices" published by the Bureau of Public Roads has been completed
with the installation of double signal lights for each direction
of traffic and increasing the size of the r~d signal light to a
standard 12 inches in diameter.
It would appear that there remains only a minor potential for
reduction of accident through street repair, intersection modification
and signalization. Many of ,the reconunendations for st:r.eet improvement
and traffic control made in the 1965 Transportation Study have been
implemented.
Water and Sewerage Services
Salina provides adequate water supply to nearly all sections
of the City. The Priority Neighborhoods are well-served with
water mains and ~ressure. Good water service in all areas reconunended
for treatment in the Conununity Renewal Program was an important
factor in determining reconunended actions. City-owned local
wells and the Smoky Hill River are considered adequate sources
of water.
The City maintains a sewer treatment plant in Neighborhood 10.
Most areas of Salina are well_served by sewer mains. Only a few
areas of limited need for service are not well-served. (See the
Unpaved Street and Sewer Service Map.)
Some problems are experienced in the northeast sector of
Salina as the storm water is fed into the sewer mains. Occasional
objectionable odors are emitted in the area, especially in Neighbor-
hood 9. Low elevation of basements in many sections of Southeast
Salina causes occasional backup of basement drains. Many homes are
equipped with shut-off valves to prevent backup after heavy rains.
The, South Santa Fe area experiences considerable sewer difficulty
-34-
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
after heavy rains because, the storm sewers empty into the sanitary
sewer system, which is inadequate to handle the run-off.
The fact that all Priority Neighborhoods are well-served by
sewer lines was a consideration in making recommendations for
Community Renewal activities to rehabilitate and maintain the
developed areas.
Refuse Collection
The City-operated refuse collection service is optional for
all residents of Salina. Residents may have a private hauler re-
move refuse from their premises or may haul their own to.the City
landfill without charge. The fee for the City collection service
of $2.00 per month for each residence is added to the water bill.
Private haulers charge approximately the same amount.
The City provides equitable refuse collection service through-
out Salina. The combination private and public refuse services
offered citizens of Salina are adequate. If any areas are not
well-served, it is not due to the inadequacy of services offered,
but to the failure of individual residents to provide for satis-
factory refuse storage and removal.
Storage of garbage in containers without fly-proof lids is
forbidden by City ordinance. City ordinance also outlaws indi-
vidual burning of refuse. The City-wide survey revealed evidence
of nUmerous violations of the ordinances in all areas of Salina.
While the survey indicated that junk, weeds, limbs, improper lumber
storage, other debris, and inoperable vehicles constituted much
more. serious environmental problems in the priority areas than in'
non-priority areas, improper refuse storage and indications of burning
were found about equally in the more affluent sections of Salina
as in the other sections.
Improper refuse storage and unlawful burning will .continue to
be substantial problems in Salina until the City and the Salina-
Saline County Health Department become more effective in enforcing
the ordinances.
-35-
-36-
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
Public Services
Fire Department:
Salina 'has a highly-efficient fire department with a fire
prevention and inspection section second to none in Kansas.
Salina Fire Department maintains three stations with a normal
force of 67 firemen, including fire inspectors. Heavy fire-fight-
ing equipment includes one 100-foot ladder truck with a 750 gpm
pump, two trucks with 1,000 gpm pumps, one truck with 1,350 gpm
capacity, one truck with 750 gpm capacity, three trucks with 500
gpm capacity; one truck with 300 gpm capacity, and one truck with
four mechanical foam generators.
Most sections of Salina are well-served by fire protection,
and steps are being taken to improve the service. Fire Station
#1 is located on the north side of Elm between Seventh and Eighth
Stre~ts. Station #2 is located on the north side of Minneapolis
just west of Santa Fe. A third station is operated at the Salina
Airport in the station formerly maintained by the Air Force when
the base was in operation. A fourth station was constructed during
the period of this study on the northwest corner of the intersection
of Crawford Street and Marymount Road to better service the devel-
oping area in East Salina. An airport crash-rescue and municipal
fire-fighting unit capable of pumping 1,000 gpm of water was placed
into service shortly before the publication of this report. This
unit also contains storage for 1,250 gallons of water and 150
gallons of liquid foam.
All alarms are received at the Emergency Communications Center
in the basement of the new Police Department Building. Alarms and
instructions are relayed through telephone and radio communica-
tions to the fire stations and the crews.
Fire Station #1 serves the area north of Crawford and acts as
backup for all other stations. Station #2 serves the area south
of Crawford on routine vehicular and grass fire calls. Residen-
tial fires south of Crawford are handled by both stations. Com-
mercial and industrial fires are handled by both stations regard-
less of location. Because of the greater fire hazards at the
. airport, men and equipment at Station #3 answer calls only at the
Airport and at Schilling Manor.
The Fire Department maintains excellent in-service training
-------------------
i
~
'::cini,=:-T~iT.
~ >>:' ':,.;;';;}
. '1T'.''"~ (:-::-41 n\ .
I.. ~L Uj.~) H
nT ,'TH"iIT "
. -._.., . ..1 __ ,L.,. T",
r;r;1~ i"l~,I)11 : I ,.IU 1,1
_'-' ~.".. mm. ~'. ,_ ,..u
.,iF6iii~r--:1 'i "'A
_",OlU~,~,',m,.l ",'~1 l"C:, '"~'.')'''
i I :,';:I'il!.,;; ~ I "A
\ '/ ~,I.'~. J,.:,_~.":,*,,,,: ! IL,
I--"~:-"I':--- . I: ..
l#/ I II, I, ~ ~ti, · ~ I,! i ~ ,I :' i
.J ~ ii1 ~ i \ ",..U ","' I 'I~ ~ ..
;2~~T'll=~~}f~lr 'I'JI ~~?Pt::~"# ~=',
I rTI! t !; 1 ~. ,r----6 :--.~l 11 ~_-V>~ Ii""
W:', '._~~~'M )" mF,'Jl:::4
'il1l11]1- ,'A I~~~ " ; A
_ .i ,/ /:;; I 'AI' ~ I I
'., ~ "I n
![JI"I It; J' II "~\\~I l
~-?~'llr'i~~511' p<, I.. /,~ Ll
L:1BorS~' J 1,1 !Jll ~ w i.. IA
~ : ,lHn; -- l" ~4d3@t!J= [I~. :riltl;a !-~. I~ "~i- A"
.. I" !LJfffin~~1 ~I ~~;'~~ I -~ (/ .. ~'".. IIJ-~ I
: jl J[ll[II;;~r 111' ..~i41 inL-,~a "1~~Tr.' :~'. 1 ,_ .__ II! J'Jr :
, I I ~l~All ~ '-~ l=n~li ...~~!~ ~}~ l'I-" h i~t:JI ,~_ ~d,. f I
, ~1" =~wr-~!~~lJ "I i A A::l1I1; W ~,~ ij1IJ ~;)) ..}i' 't -" ~I ~ 1
I I ~ . " A.O. -. ~ '. ..;;;;: ~ ~'~ -, I it II,~. '. . . ,=}jf,;~//~ ?~r. ,e..~;)1;. Ii '~1~; rr ~
1.._ ....:~~ i. I'~ ;: ,:.. 1~1; ~ ;;Jnrlf bJ .. ~ \)'" ,,:) li~
/~} "~~]I 'II[ I]JrnF~~~'-C" Ji~~";~ '~,;;r jJj ~/';/" ~ II ·
/~ ......... _~_M"'C. 1'1' "JC'Airn' r:::-. :'~'.~.."I ..l," :.! j~~':~~~J ~ I ~
/A . tTrT-~~r' ~ :..::: '-,'-' '.' ...~ .. W
~ .~rr' ,ni" IA.8Jm [Q~]lm',_ ,. .~".. ~ # ,'1iirri. ) 1~'
IIi... JJ.' .Ai. -IJ! b~ l'
~ /~ io; ill '1'4 .; =- ~ ~ il f:-' / ._m____........ i
c~\~\\\. ~!R,i:~ ,~:, ~&n '~~:~ ;.. ~I i
~\~ . _~- :}r ,,< ,~'~li: ~Hj~E! I )i
\~ · " i'-'6cd 'r i . 1= -. I I
I.' ! N! ~ \i "~-'"~ .-- ' F;?'
1 _. ,,,'~Jf.;ni <:::::f
. ~;:;. :~;"~', ~r~ ~
,. .,~ ~'~li \1 A A.. i
,,' JL'~ i,l
j
I ~::
(,
!'\'v;
.~
"'="; !J!' r~
i\fA
'~~;
i
i
.'
,
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
!
".----~:;:- ..---" .
_", _,_ _. __ _-,..,--"'-': 1_-- _ ,. _ _.
___""'" ~ ~r""'-=C' - - - .
.......
J~='~ ~p-
j// f~~/
..- ' ,--'''-, I ~-;>---
hr.. .
I:
.
--:/'
~~
\
I
\ I
~~~
,,/
,v6(/ ,
~1""""""'"
:d~-:
I
I 5
~
. ""; i
,"",,-
=
I
l\j !)/5
I
I
I
,
,e
~
4/
1 I
~~-'~::'-= "
,
1 '
I
,,1)
j
,A
I
I
I
__" I I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I I
I
I
I
I
- ---
I
I
I
1
un
\\
c:::::
\
6
~\I
rUTURE GOLF COUR,SE:
~
I-..~
~
i
I
'?'~.
.,,"- /?
-"---
I
'!
.g
~~.k,4
\'\'
\~ ~\
~~~\
\~'\
\,
,
-,
I
I
I
I
I
I
'. I
" \\ I
/f;:~/ . I \\ I
\\\---------
~\
--~
I(
I'
\\
\\
-.""""" '
.1'"
r
,0:
~
L//;
/ '
,0~
l,,- :
~:
:
,-,-,,,,-,,,,...,.'.,.,.,-'..... : ~
.
!
,
I
i i
-- I
I
I
.
~)~
,
\
\
\
\
\
~-~--------\
fiRE AND ACCIDENT MAP\
: ~~~IDENTS ~ \
SOU iCE. CITY ENGINEERING OffiCE \( \
AND mE DEPARTMENT RECORDS ,
SCALE: I
20W 3000' I
,
I
I
I
500' 0
,
I
I
I
:
I
. IiI ~J[ ~~,,\,:~ \(,/ i ~
I ~""-- I', \:-,-<'-o,i(:,': iJfr;~
: Il';:~~~)/ l:ff=~j:~ (f,'
i ~~! l\:<~\\~r!ii ~:=-:. ~I 111:.1
~ \,...,,. ',C.2,.2;...
:';'" i'l
· Jp'?i""Ei ..\.U.~.r~ I'.':":::'.,
I !) ::;~! .. ... ... ic, '~~f\ . ,,~
II
6
I
I~
I
:
/ I
YX/TH
A
. t: .r.t I
Sallna C()mmmli!'f Rel1twal P1llgram
Salina, Kinsas
ProjeclNo.KansasRS3CR
Prepared IOf City oj Salina,
by(Il,SI.!!,l!!!.
!
,
/.1
Ii __"
,;;Rffi
Thil pnWilfatlcm III this map WiB financially aided through 5 fedefill grill'll
lrorn fhe Anls1ill1ce Administration of the Oepartment
n\ \iml$\l'iQ Mfa \.hban Um:\o)1mt\'\i, \\\l\\Jmi!trl ttt\i~t\ 4CS
of the HOIJ$lrlg Act 1959, 1IS amendd,
l:i
25
I
I
,I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
,I
I
II
programs for firemen as well as informational and training pro-
grams for the public.
, The Salina Fire Department endeavors to provide equal amount
of fire protection for all parts of the city. Distances, street
patterns, and street conditions influence response time to differ-
ent locations in Salina. However, it is estimated that no part of
Salina is more than 3 minutes and 45 seconds response time from a
fire station.
The Union Pacific tracks separating Neighborhoods 'I, 2, 3, 4,
5, and 10 from the rest of the City provide limited impediment to
response time to those neighborhoods. The possibility of trains
on the tracks at principal street crossings to deny fire-fighting
equipment access to fires is a possibility not frequently experi-
enced. In more than 85 years of close observation by the Fire
Department, trains have not provided significant obstacles to response
time. They are considered a greater hazard to the safety of the
Fire Department than to the response time of the department,as
the Ninth Street crossing is not controlled by a signal man after
midnight --during a time when three trains are scheduled through
Salina. An agreement has been made with the Union Pacific Railroad
that engineers and brakemen will use discretion to either uncouple
cars on the train to permit emergency vehicles to pass or to move
the train on through the intersection if less time is required to
move it through.
Response time to all priority areas is equal to or superior
to the response time to other areas of Salina, especially to fires
in Southeast Salina requiring Station #1 response.
The priority neighborhoods are well-served by fire hydrants
and have pressure equal to that of other sections of Salina.
Police Department:
Salina has one of the most efficient police departments in
the Nation. The police force of 48 commissioned police officials
and 10.civilian employees is composed of three divisions: the
Uniform Division, Headquarters Division, and Detective Division.
The Uniform Division includes three details, a traffic section,
and three meter maids. The Headquarters Division includes the
Records Section, Communications Section, the Animal Shelter and
Ambulance Service (actually maintained by the County). The De-
tective Division encompasses the Criminal Identification Section,
Juvenile Section, and the Vice and Narcotics Section.
-37-
-38-
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
II
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
-I
I
I
Salina Police are headquartered in the new Salina-Saline
County Police and County Law Enforcement Center located in Block
23, Neighborhoo.J. 7. One of the outstanding features in the new
headquarters is a modern communications center that will handle
all emergency communications concerning law enforcement for the
City and County and fire calls for the City. All City-owned ve-
hicles used for law enforcement, inspection, and maintenance are
equipped with two-way radios and can be used to report emergency
situations to the center. Thus, nearly 40 vehicles cru~sing
throughout the city at different times of the day and night can
greatly assist in law enforcement and meeting emergency situations.
The Salina Police conduct an informational program for citi-
zens of Salina concerning traffic safety, juvenile delinquency,
narcotics security, better check procedures, counterfeit money,
and numerous other topics. Officers of the department spoke be-'
fore approximately 5,800 persons in Salina during 1968 on such
topics as a part of a continuing program to improve public rela-
tions.
The Department has within the past year fostered increased
interest on the part of citizens of Salina in reporting crime and
bringing valuable information to the attention of law enforcement
officials.
While over-all offenses increased in Salina during 1968 by
14 percent, the increase was substantially lower than for the
Nation. The Nation-wide increase in offenses was 17 percent, and
the increase for cities the size of Salina was 19 percent.
Salina Police cleared 72 percent of the total offenses re-
ported to the Police Department in 1967.
The Salina Police Department is well equipped to meet the
police services needed in all Priority Neighborhoods. Note that
the ratio of offenders to the population is approximately twice as
great in the Priority Neighborhoods as in other neighborhoods.
Thus, it can be assumed that the need for certain police servic,:;:.:c.
.~.n the Priority Neighborhoods is somewhat greater than in other
neighborhoods. The number of offenses committed in Priority Neigh-
borhoods in ratio to population is nearly equal to that of other
neighborhoods.
-
.... - - ~ - - - -'\,"-:~'-
..,--, ~ : / ~/
. . / .,./,
, ~ I,. /
I : : /~// / ;/
, : ./~/-;,'
I : !' /;;:;./;// \'
, J L_. /;:::-:>/
~. " ' . // /
, ! l.ul.,;;;;;;';;;;;~V
I ~- ~~~~~ -~ I
~~~--~ , ~ I
L~~~~~~ 1 ~
~~~~ t \ ~ I
~~~~ , .!
,---/ . \ "':: i I
, \ ) l I
I \ ./ l I
\ ,I
II \ \~.:j(! II
\ f" t \~~f ~
I'. .! . .... I
; /;/ i(~ :
I' /2~_,_l~ ! I
I / ;';ydJ?;\\ I :. I
, v///! .
I /
I
I
I
'" I'!
"," , '
"" I :
~ .if
"'" " !
"'~/
'" !
//t~
! ! ~
II! ~
// / ~~'"
Ii""'"
I,' / ,~
I , ,,~
'" .~"
i I ~.~
/,1 "
1.1: '"
, I '"
\ I \
\ ,\
\ \
\ \
\, \
\\
\ \\,
I \
\ \ ~-_._.
::-;:\, r .-- . .-.
\\\
\
,i
1
..
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
PRIORITY NEIGH
LAW VIOLATI
BY RESIDENCE OF
LEGEND
8:;:;:J 1.5
~ 6.10
~881 11.20
_ 21 AND OVER
SCALE:
3000'
+
oj lnh m~? WilS lbanclaHv !lined lhrouljh a
hom ih~ Renewal AHisiallce tdmif,i'ih~lmn (If D1!pddmenl
of HOllUM Urbim Del'lJb;:IlTltnl, by stdinn 405
d the rhu~ll)g Act of 1959, ~$ ~muldd,
gnM
-
-
..
I
I
-
-
-
-
-
-
- - - - - - - - - I-
I
il I
If /~~
i I :;;:~/
1\ /~>/
) ~;;7
,- i--- ~//I
III. /r!1
-,j "L....., ~~ ,
/:1 ~---~~-:!-___;;;;a~/ II
-.-.--/ I _---r.----- I '1
--.-.-.-. -~.... ".-'-. '
II , ~ I I ,:
1\ i ~ ,-! I 11
, 1\1~ , I I I:
'I ~! I II
I I;', l___.1 [:
, :("---~: 1~ I I
\ ' - . .--.....:-~1-..~~=--=lf:?~J..
I
I
,
II
'I
,.
i :~
I
r
,
----/
r
'"'""'~" =1
)
/
~d'/ ~t
, 1/
I, ;1 (:
.- :'~ -.<' ".
~" . ,-iIoif-ir-wo..'---1lrii
...___...J II
!J SUBDMSlQN
Ii
_ .;.:-,~_~~ti~~~~.=
Salina Community Renewal Program
Salina, Kansas
Projecl No, Kansas RSlCR
Prepared ~r Cily 01 Salina), Kansas,
by Cily Slall, 1968. '
-I
I
I
I'
----.--:L____________
II
I,
,I
?~
'000
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
School Facilities:
A sufficient number of elementary classrooms exist in Salina
to serve the present, needs and for several years ahead. Many of
the schools are operating well below capacity at the present time.
The present capacity of all elementary schools in Salina is 6,700,
while the enrollment of the schools on September 15, 1968, was
6,263. No significant gains in elementary enrollments are expect-
ed between now and 1974, with a peak of approximately 6,500 in
1971. The elementary school enrollment could reach nearly 7,470
by 1990 with a projected population for Salina of 45,000. The
school enrollment for 45,000 population probably will not exceed
the estimate, due to lowering birth rates. A few additional class-
rooms will need to be built before 1990 to replace old portions of
existing schools and to accommodate the slight increase in enroll-
ment. No additional elementary construction is planned for the
near future.
The seven priority neighborhoods are served by nine elementary
schools within or near the neighborhoods. (See Community Facilities
Map.) These nine schools had an enrollment of 2,560 on September
15, 1968. with the additions to Whittier and Franklin Schools and
the abandonment of South Park, the capacity is 2,640 -- sufficient
to meet the needs for several years. A projection of elementary
school population to 1990 in the priority neighborhoods indicates
that the elementary' : population should be 2,707 of whichapproxi-
mately 2,500 could be expected to attend public schools. The pro-
jection indicates a decline of 60 pupils. The major needs will
be to replace old ' portions of. schools now being maintained.
Stimmel, a small school with a capacity of 75 pupils in Neigh-
borhood 2, probably will be closed sometime in the future when
space is available at Hawthorne. The school is only one of two in
the district with pupils in more than one grade being instructed
in each room. Hence, the total capacity of the elementary schools
serving the priority areas will be reduced, but leaving the capacity
great enough to serve the needs of the priority neighborhoods until
1990.
Most of the schools are in good condition, except for old
portions of Hawthorne, Whittier, Bartlett and Franklin. 'Only Haw-
thorne is in serious condition. Extensive remodeling or replace-
ment of the old section will be required within a few years. The
others are not in a serious condition, but by 1990 they will have
exceeded their life expectancy and probably will need to be re-
placed.
-39-
Hawthorne Elementary, Block 66 in Neighborhood 4 an4 Dakdale
Elementary, Block 67 in Neighborhood 9, have learning centers de-
velopeq under federal title programs to better meet the needs of
dis'advantaged pupils living in their areas. An experimental school-
wide ungraded system was instituted at Hawthorne in the 1968-69
school year to aid disadvantaged pupils.
I
I
I
Salina schools have established a temporary learning center
in Neighborhood 4 with federal funds as a place where disadvantaged
young people can study and receive help with their homework. If
the center is successful, school officials hope it can be contin-
ued. A need for a center of this nature probably will exist in
the priority neighborhoods for years.
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
Roosevelt-Lincoln Junior High School, ~lock 32 of Neighborhood
8, serves all priority neighborhoods. The facilities at the school
are overcrowded at the present time. Relief for the overcrowded
condition will be furnished with the completion of the second sen-
ior high school and reorganization of the system to a K-6-2-4 plan.
A projection to 1990 of the enrollment in grades 7-9 indicates an
increase from 2,424 to 2,880. Since the main buildings at Roose-
velt-Lincoln are quite old, action will nee~ to be taken before
1990 to replace them. A determination will need 'to be made whether
to replace the facilities on site with ones of comparable capacity,
to erect a third junior high and revert back to the present K-6-3-3
plan, or to institute a different plan.
All senior high students in Unified District 305 are served
by Salina Senior High, Bloc~ 9, Neighborhood 16. The second senior
high ~o be completed in Neighborhood 22 in 1970 will serve students
in south Salina. The present senior high will serve all priority
neighborhoods and additional areas in all directions from the
priority neighborhoods. The facilities at Salina Senior High are
good and will serve well the needs of the priority areas beyond
1990, especially after the second senior high is built. The only
disadvantage of the present facilities is that they will not fully
serve modern educational techniques.
Recreation Commission Activities:
I
The Salina ,Recreation Commission has a year-round program of
activities for all age levels and serves the recreational needs
of all residents in Salina who wish t~ participate.
I
I
,I
-40-
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
'I
The Recreation Commission of six members employs a full-time
director, a secretary, and a full-time director for Carver Center.
Approximately ten persons are employed on a part-time basis the
year around. Approximately 270 are employed on a part-time basis
during the summer.
One of the mainstays of the recreation program is the summer
playground activities conducted on public school grounds, at Carver
Center, at American Community Center in Centennial Park, and at
the Salvation Army Community Center. Participation by youngsters
living in the priority neighborhoods is usually higher than those
living in non-priority neighborhoods. In 1967 approximately 48%
of those participating in the program were from priority neighbor-
hoods while it is estimated only 43.5% of those eligible lived
in priority neighborhoods.
The Commission sponsors baseball and softball programs for
boys, girls, men and women during the'summer. These programs are
believed to serve well the inhabitants of the priority areas.
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
Other special programs for children carried out at different
times of the year include swimming, junior and senior life saving,
swimming for the handicapped, tennis, summer movies co-sponsored
by theV.F.W., physical fitness tournaments, bowling, bowling for
the handicapped children, roller skating, camping, camping for
handicapped children, ice skating, coasting,. gym fun, Halloween
parade co-sponsored by Jaycees, square dancing and craft classes.
Adult programs sponsored by the Commission include basketball
for men and women, Jolly Mixers Club for middle-aged persons,
Golden Years Club, bus trips for American Association of Retired
People, and tennis.
The Recreation Commission maintains a recreation program at
Carver' Center, Block 38 in Neighborhood 9. It serves mostly mi-
nority group residents. Activities at the center include swimming
program in an outdoor pool during the summer, adult educational
classes, NAACP meetings, monthly birthday parties, teen dances,
"Stay Neat and Pretty Club" activities for women and ballet classes.
Several factors may influence the effectiveness of the Recre-
ation Commission in carrying out. its programs in the years ahead,
especially for priority "area residents. Many of the activities of
the Commission have been conducted at the headquarters in Block 35
of Neighborhood '12. The building probably will be razed when all
-41-
Parks:
I
I
I,
I
I
I
I
I
I
,I
offices in the building are moved to the new City-County-Board of
Education Building. A new location for these activities will need
to be found. 'Carver and the American Community Centers are locat..,.
ed within Urban Renewal Project #2. The American Community Center
will be closed or relocated. The City will need to determine,
before the completion of the Project, whether to close, relocate,
or leave Carver Center. If Carver Center is left where it is, it
will be rather isolated from residential areas. If the Centers
are relocated, they should be relocated in an area that will serve
the needs of the residents of priority neighborhoods, espec-
ially minority groups. Many residents within the priority neigh-
borhoods have identified with the Centers for many years and may
find it difficult to identify with the new center or centers if
established. Residents from .lower income groups sometimes are
reluctant to attend functions in newer facilities.
Additional park facilities are needed for some of the seven
priority neighborhoods. Neighborhood 12 is well-served by three
ci ty-wide parks: 'Oakdale, Kenwood and Indian Rock. The three
parks afford a wide range of recreational activities for the res-
idents of the Neighborhood and serve adequately the recreationa.l
needs of Neighborhoods 8 and 9. Other priority neighborhoods can
be considered somewhat deficient in park facilities.
Neighborhood 7 is seriously deficient in park facilities; the
only areas for recreational activities are the play grounds at
Whittier School, old Phillips School Site, Bartlett School, and two
small strips of park area along Broadway and Dry Creek. The
school sites are quite small and not developed to provide for the
park needs of the neighborhood. The two park areas are inadequate
in size and are essentially undeveloped. Acquisition of a one-
block area adjacent to Whittier and its development as a park would
be greatly beneficial for the neighborhood.
-42-
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I.
I
Neighborhood 4 is deficient of parks for active recreation;
the only areas serving this purpose are Hawthorne Elementary
School playground and athletic fields at St. John's Military Acad-
emy. While the site at Hawthorne is somewhat small, a lighted ball
diamond is located there and is highly ~tilized in season. The
athletic fields at St. John's are well-utilized by the residents
of the neighborhood during summer months, but use of fields by
the Academy during the school year limits their use by residents
.of the neighborhood~ Thomas Park, along Highway 81 north of the
I
I
,I
neighborhood, provides picnic and open landscape areas for those
desiring to use them, but the park is underdeveloped and not as
highly utilized as it should be. A small roadside park at the inter-
section of Broadway and North is remote to most of the population
in the neighborhood and is of little use to the residents. Heavy
traffic on both streets and the small area of the park limits the
utility of the park. The park should be maintained primarily as
a scenic park to enhance the appearance of the areas adjacent to
Broadway.
I
I
,I
I
I
I
I
No parks are located in Neighborhood 11, but most of the rec-
reational needs of the residents are reasonably well served by
Sunset Park. A small tot park is needed in the high density east
portion of the neighborhood to provide a space for small children
to play without having to cross major streets. The park could be
located on. the site of South Park Elementary School which has been
abandoned for school purposes. The park should have a variety
of playground equipment and open space for small playing fields.
(See recommendations for Neighborhood 11.)
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
Neighborhood 14 ~s served by the three-acre Centennial Park in
the extreme north portion, but the park is somewhat small, under-
developed and off-center from the major portions of the popula-
tion. The park should be expanded and developed to a higher
degree. (See recommendations for Neighborhood 14.) Sunset School
playground, located near the center of the neighborhood, supple-
ments the park facilities by providing open space for recreational
activities. An undeveloped park of approximately 1.9 acres is
located adjacent to Broadway on Block 27. Its proximity to highly
traveled Broadway precludes development for purposes other than as
a roadside or tot park. If used as a tot park, the park will need
to be screened from Broadway by a high fence to prevent children
from running into the street. Access should be from the west
only, and the park should serve primarily the small children in
the southeast area of the neighborhood.
Public Health Activities:
Public health activities ar~ implemented by the City-County
Health Department for Salina and Saline County under a board ap-
pointed by the City and County Commissioners. The Department is
staffed by 13 full-time and one part-time workers, including the
director, a medical social worker, three sanitarians, four nurses,
four secretaries, and a part-time health officer.
-43-
The Department has been located in the old Washington School
Building, Block 35 of Neighborhood 12. The Department is now
housed in more desirable quarters in the City-County-School Board
Building.
The Department promotes good health, through its clinics, in-
termittent home nursing, home visitations for health guidance,
group meetings on maternal and child health, family planning
counseling, and surveillance and investigation of communicable
diseases. Clinics are held on family planning, venereal diseases
and immunization.
Screening is conducted in the schools to identify those hav-
ing sight or hearing problems and those who may have tuberculosis.
The public health nurses also instruct teachers to learn to ident-
ify children having such problems.
The Sanitation Section of the City-County Health Department
has ,the responsibility of enforcing City ordinances prohibiting
unsanitary conditions and abating nuisances. Routine inspections
of food handling establishments are made and Grade A milk is in-
spected by the Department. Group training sessions are held for
food service employees. The department promotes improvement on a
neighborhood basis of environmental conditions affecting health.
The Health Department in its various activities appears to be
.adequately serving the needs of the residents in the priority areas
and can be expected to continue doing so under any future Urban
Renewal programs. The Department is conducting a pilot environ-
mental improvement program under a federal grant in Neighborhood
7. If the improvement program is successful, expansion of the
program into other neighborhoods throughout Salina is planned.
The State Health Department administers a tuberculosis clinic
1n St. John's Hospital in Neighborhood 9.
Welfare Department:
Saline County Social Welfare Offices are located in the County-
City Government Center in Neighborhood 8, near the heart of downtown
Salina. The office is staffed by a director, a case supervisor,
nine social workers, six clerical workers, and two accounting
clerks.
-44~
I
I
I
,I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
'I
- - - - ... - - .. ... - -
I , ,
. .
, .
I . ,
. .
. .
I . .
. .!
. ,
I . .
. ,
. I
I . .
" ! ..... "" ""If
I ~... , .'
,
.
,..
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I I
i' I
I I
~-~~~~~..~~:.~~.~
-
-
-
-
, :
Ii
1
i
I
I
~.~
-+..~
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
,
c ,"' MC' =1
I
I
PRIORITY NEIGHBORH
WELFARE
RECIPIENT
_ INDICATES BLOCKS
IN WHICH ONE OR MORE
FAMILIES ON WELFARE RESIDE
IOURCE. IAlINE COUNTY WElfARE DEPARTMENT
25
I
I
I
I -
I
I
I
,I
I
SCAlE:
+
3000'
Thl! prIJparali;;\!l 01 this map WIlS lillillldd1y clidtt! lhough it feUNal grMf
from the Renewal A!sislancc 'Aclmi[li~tratioll d the Departmed
01 Hmuil1g iwd Urban l)evel()~mel!L ill.lthoriled by SecliCll 405
tbe HI.HHi!'lg he! of 1959, as amelldl!d.
I
I
Additional personnel will be employed in the years ahead as
the provisions of the 1967 amendment to the Social Welfare Act are
implemented. The amendment calls for separation of public assist-
ance and service cases and hiring of sub-professional workers
(some from the disadvantaged) to assist in better meeting the
needs of welfare recipients.
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
The Welfare Department provides many child welfare and insti-
tutional services beyond the duties in the welfare program. By
Kansas law, the Department writes social evaluations of all persons
going to correctional or mental institutions. It also acts as a
parole agency for juveniles coming back from industrial schools.
An evaluation is made by the Department of the social environment
in the homes of those being paroled from penal institutions.
The Welfare Department conducts evaluations of foster homes
before ~hildren are placed in them. It also cooperates with the
City-County Health Department in approving day-care homes.
The Department has in recent months become involved in the food
stamp program and will become involved in the Work Incentive (WIN)
program. The program assists mothers receiving Aid to Dependent
Children to secure employment.
The Welfare Department has no basic policy in aiding~families
on assistance in securing housing. Freedom of choice is exercised
by those on assistance in securing and residing in rental proper-
ties. The Department does advise families on assistance that
certain properties are not suitable for that particular family.
The Department maintains and posts a list of housing available
for famili.es on assistance.
Since 85% of the welfare recipient families of Salina living
in their own homes live in the seven priority areas, future urban
renewal actions will affect a large number of them. Increased de-
mands will be made upon the Department to meet the re-adjustment
needs of welfare families, but the Department will be quite capable
of meeting these needs with some addition to its staff.
Kansas State Employment Security Division:
The Salina office of the State Employment Security Division
is located at Tenth and Ash, in Block ~3 of Neighborhood 7. The
office is staffed with eleven workers, including five job inter-
viewers.
-45-
I
The Salina office is geared to adequately handle the needs
persons living within the priority areas and the Salina region
persons in need of aid will avail themselves of the services.
counseling service is available for veterans, the handicapped
retarded, and those wishing to determine the type of work for
they are best-suited. Various tests are administered to help
termine the type of employment best suited for an individual.
of
if
A
and
which
de-
I
,I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
Referrals are made in connectibn with job training under the
Manpower Development Training Act. The office administers the un-
employment insurance progr~m for residents of the region. Labor
market information is kept current and is made available to the
public. An active file for job applicants is maintained to insure
continued efforts to place in employment those who are unemployed
or are seeking new employment.
Urban Renewal Agency and Housing Authority:
The two agencies are served by a common staff officed in
Block 8 of Neighborhood 8 near the center of the City. The Urban
Renewal Agency was founded in 1967 and the Housing Authority in
1969. "The Urban Renewal Agency staff is composed of an executive
director, relocation director, relocation secretary, bookkeeper,
secretary and attorney; the Housing Authority is served by a dep-
uty housing director assisted by the Urban Renewal Agency staff.
The separate five-member boards of each agency are shown on the
credits page.
I
The Urban Renewal Agency activities to date include comple-
tion of a IS-acre civic center project adjacent to the CBD that was
developed with City-County offices and a main library." The agency
is now 85% complete with acquisition of a lOO-acre northeast indus-
trial park project in the northern portion of Neighborhood #9.
" "
Relocation from these two projects, ~hich included many minority
race families, was throughout the City, and an adequate supply of
relocation opportunities was provided. The State Statute 17-47
authorizing urban renewal provides adequate statutory authority
to perform the intent and purposes of urban renewal necessary to
Salina.
The Housing Authority is presently operating a leased housing
program and 140 leased units are occupied (75% of the authorized
units). These units are occupied by students, Urban Renewal
relocatees, elderly and low income families.
The activities of these agencies in the foreseeable future
would include the implementation of the Urban Renewal activities
"-46-
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I"
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
resulting from the CRP study by only the addition of funds, staff
and adequate facilities to perform the assigned duties. A NDP
application for Urban Renewal activities in Neighborhood 8, CBD,
was submitted in April, 1970 and is presently under application
for federal funding. It is quite probable that the Housing Author-
ity will need to consider provision of housing for the elderly
and public housing for the low income families.
-47-
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
II
SOCIAL CHARACTERISTICS
STUDY
SALINA COMMUNITY
RENEWAL PROGRAM
I
I
I
I
I
I
'I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
GENERAL SOCIAL CHARACTERISTICS OF PRIORITY AREAS
The findings of general social characteristics given in this
section are those of the consultant in consent with Dr. Bradford
Shaeffer and Dr. Donald Chambers~ who served as social consultant
analysts in the project.
The Representativeness of the Sample
Data regarding social characteristics are drawn from two main
sources: the 1968 census of all Salina residents obtained in con-
junction with local tax assessment, and a sample of 302 residents
who gave data in individual interviews specifically for the CRP
Social Characteristics Study. Although the sample was drawn
randomly and precautions taken to avoid a biased sampling proce-
dure, it is still possible that t~e sample is not precisely repre-
sentative of the population. Thus, it is of some importance to
check the sample against the population, wherever that opportunity
exi't5 ts .
The proportions of various ethnic groups, housing size and
housing condition represented in the data of each priority area
are precisely those found in the population, as the sample was chosen
on that very basis. Within each of those categories, respondents
were chosen randomly. Age distributions in the total sample and
each priority area are not ~ignificantly different from the popula-
tion. In no case does the absolute difference of proportions between
the sample and the population exceed six percent.
The priority area samples are not representative of the pop-
ulation with respect to size of household in any priority area.
However, the direction and magnitude of the error is constant.
ALL PRIORITY AREA SAMPLES SERIOUSLY UNDER-REPRESENT ONE PERSON
HOUSEHOLDS AND OVER-REPRESENT LARGER HOUSEHOLDS OF ALL SIZES.
One reason is no males were interviewed; therefore, households
having no adult females were not included in the sample. In short,
the sample data cannot be entirely representative of one person
households. It is representative of characteristics of households
of other sizes. When com?aring one area relative to another,
there is no reason to think it disproportionally represents
-49-
households of one particular size more than others.
it is possible to test the representativeness of the
appears to be adequate with the above exceptions.
Thus, where
sample, it
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
One explanation for the misrepresentation of the one person
household may lie in data regarding rate of respondent refusal
to be interviewed. The rate of refusal is rather high for this
type of study and for the observational method used (structured
interviews). The refusal rate for all priority areas ranges from
zero to 33.7%. The distribution of refusals is not random. (See
appendix, Map #18 for refusal for all areas.) In view of the high
refusal rates and the significant under-representation of one person
households in the s'ample, it seems reasonable to think that among
those refusing to be interviewed are a high proportion of one per-
son householders. Three factor~ may have contributed to the refusal
rate: 1) Only female interviewers were used, so interviewing was
discouraged at night unless the interviewers were unable to contact
respondents during the day. 2) The interviewers underwent training
sessions, but were basically novices. 3) During the data gathering,
a hearing was helqinvolving Urban Renewal issues and an unfavorable
vote was held on a multi-purpose auditorium - civic center. Thus,
refusals may have been indicators of temporary unfavorable community
attitudes due to current public subjects.
General Conclusions Regarding Social Characteristics of Priority
Areas
-50-
I.
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I.
1. There are very large differences both between and within
priority areas in regard to several variables crucial to the Com-
munity Renewal Program planning. The-priority areas vary greatly
in respect to the proportion of housing classified as "clearance",
"major repair" and "minor repair". The proportion of hous~ng clas-
sified as needing clearance or major repair in all priority areas
is quite low, so large-scale demolition seems a very'unlikely
choice in most neighborhoods; however, spot demolition may be
indicated. Major and minor ~ehabil~tation seem obviously destined
to be the predominant goal for the Salina Renewal Program.
2. There is little correlation between housing condition and
age of head of household, size of family, rent or owner occupancy
or family income. This suggests that any renewal project will
have to deal with both male and female heads of households, with
large and small families, with landlords and owners, and with fam-
ilies of both high and low income. Data in regard to the total
population indicates that the priority areas have high proportions
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
of residents beyond child-bearing years and one and two person
families.
CORRELATION OF AGE HEAD OF HOUSEHOLD AND HOUSING CpNDITION
All Priority Neighborhoods
15- 25- 30- 35- 40- 45- 50- 55- 60- 65- 70- 75-
24 29 34 39 44 49 54 59 64 69 74 79 80+ Total
Sound 13 13 10 12 16 11 13 17 17 12 7 6 4 151
Minor Repair 8 13 7 7 7 6 8 9 6 9 3 5 7 95
Major Repair and
Clearance 2 6 2- 4 4 1 3 5 5 10 3 3 3 56
TOTALS 23 32 24 23 27 18 24 31 28 31 13 14 14 302
Sources: City-Wide Exterior Survey and Interior Interviews
I
MEAN AGE OF HEAD OF HOUSEHOLD
I
--------------Priority Neighborhoods-------------
4 7 8 9 11 12 14
I
Mean Age
49.7
52.8
*
55.9
48.2
48.3
34.9
* Sample too small to be representative
I
Source: Interior Interviews
I
I
I
I
PERCENT FAMILIES WITHOUT CHILDREN UNDER 21
4
7
8
9
11
12
14
% Without
Children
55.4
63.6
68.9
52.3
55.0
16.7
I
Therefore, whatever relocation takes place will have to in-
volve securing a substantial amount of housing for households of
one or two adults without children. In general, the data from the
sample suggest that about fifty percent of those in housing requir-
ing major rehabilitation and clearance can be so described. If
any relocation is contemplated, and assuming that this is the group
most likely to need relocation, renewal projects will necessitate
securing a high proportion of housing designed for such small
living groups. Clearly, three or more bedroom units are not a
likely resource for these people.
I
I
I
-51-
.-52-
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
3. Those areas with the largest proportions of housing re-
quiring either clearance or major rehabilitation are those in which
housing costs are lowest and ability to pay for replacement housing
is the lowest. The occupational level of the vast majority of
residents of the priority areas and those residing in housing re-
quiring clearance or major rehabilitation is that of semi-skilled
labor. Whatever program is fielded to improve housing must use a
strategy which can cope with low expectations of housing costs and
low expectations of earnings, both now and in the future. Further,
it must deal with a substantial number of residents who have less
than a high school education.
4. The Renewal Project must expect to deal with very great
resistance to any proposed changes in the housing arrangements of
the residents in the priority areas, especially in regard to relo-
cation outside the priority area. By and large, residents of
areas with the largest proportions of poor housing have been in
the neighborhood a long time. Both sample and population data
support this proposition~ In general, the areas with the most
deficient housing are not the areas with the most mobile residents.
No definite conclusion could be drawn as to whether it is by choice
or due to other factors.
Also, the residents of priority areas are not, in general,
dissatisfied with their housing. In general, those who live in
poor housing by Community Renewal standards do not evaluate it that
way. Very few residents of the priority areas anticipate moving
in the next year or so. As a matter of fact, to a 'slight degree,
the poorer their housing the less likely are they to wish to move:
However, this may simply reflect their estimate of their ability
to move.to better housing, for if one asks whether they desire to
move (rather than whether they expect to move), it is the case
. that the poorer their housing the more likely they are to wish to
move. This suggests that the Community Renewal Program may be
able to lower resistance to change by making certain that before
any renewal actions occur, the project creates the expectation of
the possibility of moving to better housing for those involved,
according to their own definitions of what constitutes better hous-
ing. The creation of expectations requires communication between
the renewal program and residents as a necessary condition. It
must involve communication directed at a specific target group; a
group characterized by low status occupations, low income and less
than high school education. Clearly, this is not a group who will
grasp messages pitched at other than a concrete level. The renewal
project will have to combat this initial attitude which has been
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I'
revealed by the social characteristics study -- that of not ex-
pecting to be able to move to better housing. Such an expectation
is, of course, well founded on the part of those who hold it,
since the circumstances of these people would not ordinarily sup-
port an alternative view.
It is true that some of the above attitudes are less well
entrenched on the part of the small number of residents who live
in housing judged to require clearance. Whi~e in general those
residing in clearance housing cannot be said to be more dissatis-
fied with their housing than those residing in other types of
housing, all or very nearly all of the residents of clearanc~
housing are quite dissatisifed with three particular aspects of
their housing: amount of room, closet space, and traffic noise.
Focus on these three aspects may reduce resistance on the part of
residents to relocation.
5. Salina has a small, but ra~her highly segregated, Negro
population characterized by the social problems commonly associated
with segregation. There is no evidence that this is due solely to
the choice ~ economic circumstances of these people. There is
nothing in the data to suggest that discrimination will cease or
change without massive efforts. In view of past experience in
urban renewal projects, it is likely that the renewal project will
reinforCe Salina's ghetto and impact its social problems even f~r-
ther unless specific measures are developed to avoid that. If
minority groups continue to be contained within the present ghetto,
the cost to Salina is continued existence of areas with the marked
social problems associated with segregation and continued existence
of a segment of the population with low aspirati9ns, both of which
are associated with the continued existence of blighting conditions.
6. Eighty-five percent- (85%) of all welfare recipients in the
city of Salina live in the priority areas. There seems little
doubt that any renewal project will avoid affecting welfare recip-
ients to a considerable degree. It seems appropriate to suggest
that this finding be made known to the Saline County Welfare Depart-
ment so that they might study the housing conditions of their own
recipients in order to anticipate the impact of the renewal project
upon their program.
-53-
-54-
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
Areas Needing Housing Renewal and Assigning Priorities in Regard
to Their Order of Importance
. A program to improve housing can be based on the proposition
that adequate housing bears a relationship to social problems
about which there is widespread concern -- neighborhood economic
deterioration, unemployment, crime and delinquency, .mental health
and racial segregation. Decisions about the need for renewal of
housing can therefore be based upon evidence regarding the rela-
tive proportions of deficient housing and their coincidence with
the social characteristics relevant to the above listed social
problems. It ought to be clearly understood that the relationship
between housing condition and social problems is apparent only in
regard to severely deficient housing conditions.* Accordingly,
the relevant data regarding housing cpnditions, social conditions
and the need for renewal is data regarding only that housing
judged to require clearance; at the very most, that judged to re~
quire major rehabilitation.
Areas 4 and 9 (and perhaps 8, though the data there is insuf-
ficient) stand out as areas in which substantial proportions of
deficient housing and some negative social indicators coincide.
To the extent that social problems and deficient housing inter-
act negatively on each other, then a program to ameliorate blight
in either of these areas should produce a desirable effect on both
social problems and deficient housing. However, these areas are
markedly different from each other, so that the immediate conse-
quences of a renewal project will be different in each area.
For example, in Areas 4 and 9, there are important proportions
of minority group members. There is also evidence that these are
relatively stable neighborhoods where neighborhood cohesion is the
highest among priority areas, particularly in Area 4. A renewal
project in either of these areas will inevitably involve some re-
location of residents. In regard to relocation, a renewal project
can justifiably move in either of two directions, where relocation
of residents must occur. It can offer a program which relocates
residents in the same neighborhood and justify it on the basis of
supporting the integrity of a neighborhood with demonstrated co~
hesion and stability, and all the benefits that would seem to
* Alvin L. Schorr, S1!ums and Social Insecurity (U.S. Department
of Health, Education and Welfare, Social Security Administration,
Bureau of Research and Statistics, Research Report #1, Page 31-2.)
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
imply in relation to the prevention of further social and physical
deterioration. Alternatively, it can offer a program which relo-
cates residents out of a segregated neighborhood and justify it on
the. basis that racial segregation contributes substantially to the
malignant cycle of low self-esteem, low living standard expecta-
tions, low motivation for economic mobility, low education, low
income and low ability to pay for adequate housing. Segregation,
of course, reinforces the factor of low self-esteem and provides
impetus for continuation of the malignant cycle. A decision for
or against either alternative involves substantial human costs to
the residents involved. Such decisions can only be made by the
people involved, for the type of human misery to be preferred is
not a question which can be answered by an objective approach. It
can only be answered in the context of a group or individual value
orientation.
The renewal project can opt to have non-residents make such
decisions, but only at the certainty of great resistance and
outright sabotage of the program itself. If the renewal project
secures the involvement of local residents in crucial decisions,
it maximizes the commitment of the residents to the goals of the
project.
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
The vehicle for such decisions exists already, in the form
of the Salina Minority Group Forum. The Consultants suggest that
the above dilemma be presented to the Minority Group Forum, and
that they be responsible for arriving at a decision in regard to
the matter. The only condition which needs to be met is that this
Forum demonstrate its ability to generate the support of the mass
of minority group residents and to. serve as a medium of communica-
tion between their constituency and the rest of the community.
This could. be done by assigning each forum member responsibility'
for representing the selected geographical area in which he resides.
As a starting point these representatives could contact a specific
minimum number of minority group residents of their area and so-
licit their views in regard to (1) the ability of the Forum to
serve as a means of presenting their views to the community-at-
large, and (2) ways and means the residents might suggest to alter
the personnel, structure or function of the Forum to better serve
that end. Given positive responses on the part of the residents,
then the Forum could move toward ways and means of eliciting com-
munity-wide discussion of the dilemmas discussed above.
The CRP proposal calls for an estimate of the pattern and
extent of racial discrimination in Salina in regard to housing.
-55-
-56-
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
In pursuin9 such a task, it seems an improbable strategy to study
discrimination in housing and not also consider discrimination
in employment opportunity. While the social characteristics study
provides data which maps the geographical pattern of racial segre-
gation and some of it correlates very clearly, it provides no data
in regard to the mechanisms by which racial segregation in Salina
has been achieved and is continued. In short, we know that segre-
gation exists and infer that it is a result of discriminatory .
practices. It is a reasonable inference, of course, based on all
that is .known about racial attitudes in this country. However, the
case for an allegation of discrimination can only be tested by a
thorough study of the existence of discriminatory practices. More
important, until such practices are described, it is not possible
to deal with them. It becomes crucial to the City to be able to
do this. If the City cannot do this, it is not able to defend
itself against the charge that renewal decisions pursue or result
in further raciai discrimination. Since an area of the City con-
tains a Negro ghetto, it is not an issue which any renewal decision
is unlikely to avoid.
While it might have been possible for the Social Consultants
to have gathered this information, two important considerations
were involved. The first is whether the resources of the CRP could
tolerate the amount of time and expense required. . The second and
perhaps most important is whether the data is best gathered by
means available to the Consultants. The best evidence of discrim-
inatory practices is available from those it affects-- minority
group people themselves. Therefore, the Consultants suggest that
the Minority Forum be asked to take on the responsibility for
gathering evidence in regard to the extent of discrimination and
the nature of the mechanisms by which it is pursued. The Consult~
ants view this as involving primarily the gathering of testimony
about this issue (not a systematic study) -- that is, the d~rect
documented experience of minority groups with di~criminatory prac-
tices in Salina. The crucial aspect will be the documentation of
such practices and it must involve names, dates, places and cir~
cumstances. It seems very likely that the State Human Relations
Commission and its Director, could materially assist the Fort;lm in
this undertaking..
Characteristics of Residents bfHousing Classified as Requiring
Clearance or Major Rehabilitation
1. There is no correlation between age of head of household
and housing condition. Tbus, any renewal project must deal with
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
householders of all ages whose families are in all stages of the
family life-cycle.
2. There is a low but significant and positive correlation
between the occupation of the head of the household and the con-
dition of the hou~e as judged by renewal standards. Thus, a
disproportionate number of those living in residences judged to
require clearance or major rehabilitation will have occupations
which are lower in status rank on an occupational scale with
seven major levels used in the study. The seven major levels are
as follows:
1) Higher executives, proprietors of large concerns and
major professionals.
2) Business managers, proprietors of medium-sized businesses
and lesser professionals.
3) Administrative personnel, small independent businesses,
and minor professionals.
4) Clerical and sales workers, technicians and owners of
little businesses.
5) Skilled manual employees.
6) Machine operators and semi-skilled employees.
7) Unskilled employees~
In fact, 64 percent of those living in "clearance or major repair"
housing work are semi-skilled or unskilled laborers.
CORRELATION OF OCCUPATION STATUS HEAD OF HOUSEHOLD AND
HOUSING CONDITIONS IN PRIORITY NEIGHBORHOODS *
Occupation Status 1 & 2 3 4 5 6 7 Total
Sound 8 29 16 27 27 14 121
Minor Repair 2 11 12 17 20 14 76
Major Repair and
Clearance 2 2 2 8 14 11 39
~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~
Totals 12 42 30 52 61 39 236
* Based upon Hollingshead's Occupational Status Rank
Source: Interior Interviews and City-Wide Exterior Survey
-57-
TOTAL
Own Rent Total
108 43 151
53 42 95
2.6 24 50
3 3 6
190 112 302
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
3. There is no significant correlation between education and
housing condition of those occupying housing judged to require
clearance or major rehabilitation. Forty-six percent (46%) of
persons occupying such housing are renters. Thus, a renewal pro-
ject must expect to deal with many landlords.
CORRELATION OF EDUCATIONAL LEVEL HEAD OF HOUSEHOLD AND
HOUSING CO~DITIONS IN PRIORITY NEIGHBORHOODS
Graduate, Grad. B.A. High Some Jr. Less Than Less Than No
Prof. Degree Work B.S. School High Sch. High Jr. High 7th Grade Response Total
Sound 4 6 19 53 26 10 21 5 7 151
Minor Rep. 0 1 9 39 10 5 21 3 7 95
Major Rep. &
Clearance 1 1 4 15 8 6 10 5 6 56
Totals 5 8 32 107 44 21 52 13 20 302
Sources: Interior Interviews and City-Wide Exterior Survey
CORRELATION OF HOUSING CONDITION AND
OWNER/RENTER OCCUPANCY
Priority Neighborhoods
Sound
Minor Repair
Major Repair
Clearance
4. There is ~ moderate correlation between housing payment
and housing condition.
CORRELATION OF MONTHLY HOUSING COSTS AND HOUSING
CONDITIONS- ALL PRIORITY NEIGHBORHOODS
$30- $50- $60- $70- $80- $90- $100-
$49 $59 $69 $79 $89 $99 $190 To ta 1
Sound 2 13 23 24 8 7 11 88
Minor Repair 12 12 11 12 8 2 1 58
Major Repair &
Clearance 7 7 5 4 0 0 0 23
- - - - - - -
Totals 21 32 39 40 16 9 12 169
Housing costs are mortgage payments or rents..
Sources: City-Wide Exterior Survey and Interior Interviews
-58-
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
Of those residing in housing judged to require clearance or major
rehabilitation, 83 percent pay less than $70 per month for rent
or housing payments. Thirty percent of those occupying residences
classified as clearance or major rehabili~ation pay less than fifty
dollars per month, while only 9.6 p~rcent of those residing in
housing judged to be satisfactory pay this amount.
5. There is no correlation between housing condition and
length of residence.
6. In general, there is little correlation between total hous-
ing complaints and housing condition. However, those who "live in
housing judged to require clearance express a few more complaints.
Sources: Interior Interviews and City-Wide Exterior Survey
Only 5.4 percent of residents in 'major repair and clearance' struc-
turesexpressed five or more complaints, while 4.1 percent of the
residents of 'minor repair and sound' structures expressed five or
more complaints. OBVIOUSLY, EXCEPT FOR THE VERY SMALL NUMBER OC-
CUPYING CLEARANCE HOUSING, RESIDENTS OCCUPYING POOR HOUSING BY
RENEWAL STANDARDS DO NOT EVALUATE THEIR HOUSING AS POOR OR SUB-
STANDARD. There are three types of housing complaints very char-
acteristic of those respondents living in clearance-type housing:
amount ~f room in the house, amount of closet space, and traffic
noise. While the study sample of clearance structure residents
was very small, their dissatisfaction with these items was almost
universal.
7. There is little correlation between housing condition and
expectation of moving, contrary to what one might expect. The response
to the question concerning their expectations of moving within the
next year is given in the following table.
-59-
CORRELATION OF HOUSING CONDITION AND MOBILITY
EXPECTATIONS IN PRIORITY NEIGHBORHOODS
Don't Expect 50-50 Chance Expect
Know to. Move of Moving to Stay Total
Sound 9 13 11 118 151
Minor Repair 5 6 14 69 94
Major Repair 7 5 7 31 50
Clearance 2 1 0 3 6
- - - -
Totals 23 25 32 221 301*
* One person did not respond.
Sources: Interior Interviews and City-Wide Exterior Survey
There is the possibility that one's expectation of moving is simply
an estimation of one's ability to move to better housing. There-
fore, the relationship between housing condition and desire to move
was also examined. There was still no relationship, in general,
between housing condition and desire to move, again contrary to
expectation. However, for those living in clearance housing, 67%
desired to move, even if they didn't expect to.be able to do so
within the near future.
8.' The incomes of residents of housing judged to require
either clearance or major rehabilitation cover all ranges. Nearly
18 percent of these people make less than fifty dollars per week,
while only 9.3 percent of those residing in sound housing earn less
than fifty dollars per week.
CORRELATION OF WEEKLY FAMILY INCOME AND HOUSING
CONDITIONS IN PRIORITY NEIGHBORHOODS
-60-
/
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
9. There is a low, but significant, correlation between ethnic
identity and housing condition~ Clearly, Salina's Negro minority
resides in houses of all conditions, but 48 percent of the respond-
ent Negroes live in housing judged to require clearance or major
rehabilitation within priority neighborhoods, while only 15 percent
of the non-minority group population do. This is not surprising,
since there is also a correlation between income and membership in
a racial minority and between income and housing conditions. A
,full 29.6 percent of the incomes of minority group members are less
than fifty dollars per week, while only 15.9 percent of white
incomes are that low.
CORRELATION OF ETHNIC GROUP AND HOUSING
CONDITIONS FOR PRIORITY AREAS
Oriental Spanish-American Negro Other To ta 1
Sound 1 2 6 141 150
Minor Repair 1 2 9 81 93'
Major Repair 0 3 11 36 50
Clearance 0 0 3 3 6
- -
Total 2 7 29 261 299*
* Three families were not identified as to ethnic group.
Sources: Interior Interviews and City-Wide Exterior Su rvey
10. This study measured "neighboring" behaviors by a series
of 13 questions similar to those which have shown considerable
,reliability in other 'studies. The assumption was that by measuring
"neighboring" behaviors, one also measures the kind of social bond
between residents -~ commonly called social cohesion. The concept'
as used here refers to feelings of r~ciprocal social obligation.
Where' residents have much of this feeling, one would expect that
they would have much commitment to shared values in the neighbor-
hood and would represent a positive and stable social feature.
Priority areas differ significantly in their resident res-
ponses to these question items. However, there is no correlation
between housing condition and their measure of neighborhood cohe-
sion or neighborliness. The neighborhood with the most deficient
housing (Neighborhood 4) is the area in which residents show the
most (and significantly greater) neighborliness~ Neighborhood 9,
which has considerable deficient housing, has residents who show
-61-
2. It is important to note that over 60%
Negroes in the study work at unskilled jobs.
white population works at such occupations.
of the employed
Only 10% of the
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
the least neighborliness. Since differences in cohesion seem to
exist, renewal proposals may wish to take them into consideration
in terms of the consequences of relocation efforts.
Characteristics of the Negro Population of Salina Priority Areas
1. The distributions of age and marital status of Negroes are
not significantly different from those of the rest of the popula-
tion.
On the other hand, the proportion of Negroes and non-Negroes
completing high school is not significantly different. The pro-
portion of Negroes and non-Negroes who have only a grade school
education is not significantly different. The picture becomes
somewhat clearer when the income levels of Negroes and non-Negroes
are examined. The median income of Negroes of Salina in the study
group was in the $50 to $74 per week category. While the median
income of non-Negroes was in the $100 to $124 category.
These contrasts suggest that Salina's Negro population is em-
ployed at occupations of much less status and earn incomes at
significantly lower levels than do whites. Differences in educa-
tion are negligible, so that condition does not provide a basis
for differences in occupational. status and income. The.:interpre-
tation of this data is that it constitutes considerable evidence
of marked discrimination against the Negro population in regard to
both employment and earnings.
3. The proportion of Negroes owning their own homes is some-
what less than that of th'8 whi te population, but is not a signif-
icant difference. While there is only a small number (7) of
Spanish-American respondents, nearly 71% of them own their own
homes, a proportion larger than Negro or white population. The
Negro resident appears to pay less for housing than does the white
population (47% paid less than $50 a month for either mortgage
payments or rent). That is not a surprising finding since it fits
the general picture of the Negro population as being more likely
to live in substandard housing as judged by renewal standards, and
of this group having less employment opportunity and less earnings
potential. The correlation between inferior housing, housing pay-
ments and family income has already been discussed. Forty-eight
-62-
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
percent (48%) of the Negro respondents live in substandard housing
as judged by renewal standards, i.e., judged to require either ma-
jor rehabilitation or clearance. ~nly 15% of the non~Negro
population live in such conditions.
More of the Negro respondents expected to move in the very
near future (17% of the Negro sample expected to move within the
year, compared to only 7% of the non-Negro sample). The Negro
respondents have resided approximately the same length of time in
their present residences as have non-Negro respondents.
The Negro respondents in the sample tended to have somewhat
more complaints about housing than did the non-Negro respondents,
but clearly, their housing is considerably worse as discussed
earlier.
There is evidence that Negroes in Salina live in a uniquely
segregated condition, confined within distinguishable geographic
boundaries within Neighborhoods 4 and 9. (See appendix, Map #4.)
Negroes do live in other neighborhood areas, but in. very small
proportions relative to the total population and confined almost
entirely to the Renewal Project Priority Areas. ONLY NINE NEGRO
FAMILIES LIVED OUTSIDE THE PRIORITY AREAS ACCORDING TO THE POPULA-.
TION DATA.
Social Characteristic Differences Within Priority Areas
I
I
I
I
I
I
Dividing the larger priority areas into somewhat smaller areas
and computing social characteristics of sub-priority areas yields
some pertinent data. First, there are wide divergencies within
Neighborhood 4 in respect to average family size. In the appendix,
Map 1 shows these differences. Please note the wide divergencies
between Neighborhood 4a .and the rest of the sub-priority areas.
There are very great differences between Sub-Neighborhoods 4a, 4b
and 4c in regard to the proportion of non-white population. There
is great variability with respect to the proportion of one and two
person families within Neighborhoods 11, 12 and 14. Police calls
vary similarly within priority areas, as do welfare recipient rates.
All these data suggest that "within-area variation" is a factor
to be reckoned with. While there are interesting and substantial
differences between priority areas, such differences may charac-
terize.only a part of the total priority area, or may, in fact,
represent only an average for all sub-neighborhoods within the
priority area which does not characterize any portion of the pri-
ority area.
I
I
-63-
y = [ 2m~(1-*)]
y = [(2 (1l39))(:~2 3;~~;) J 100
y = [ 2~~~ ~ 09 ] 100
100
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
r
MINORITY GROUP SEGREGATION INDEX
Neighbor- Number of Total Expected Minority
hood Area Minority Group Population Group at 3% Pop. Difference
1- 0 13 0 0
2 2 76 2 0
4 581 3,112 93 488
5- 0 18 0 0
7 60 3,791 114 54
8 24 591 18 6
9 359 2,098 63 296
10 4 155 5 1
11 28 2,541 76 48
12 22 3,938 118 96
13 0 1,493 45 45
14 56 2,152 65 9
15 . 0 4;018 121 121
16 0 5,885 177 177
17 0 195 6 6
19 3 2,356 71 68
20 0 4,121 124 124
22 0 1,099 33 33
Diff. 1,572
The segregation index is computed by the following equation:
y = segregation index
d = differences .fromexpected minority population at 3%
n = total population
m = minority persons
y = 71.16
-64-
I
I
I
The major conclusion it suggests is that all renewal planning
should proceed very carefully with its attempts to generalize about
.a total priority area on the basis of the data available. Rather,
it would be very wise to proceed with planning on a block-by-block
basis. Such sub-neighborhood variation will be duly noted in the
sections of this report dealing with the social characteristics of
neighborhoods within the Priority Area.
the
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
1. Two neighborhoods vary significantly from others in regard
to the proportions of the heads of households who are female --
Neighborhood 7 with 31% female heads of house and Neighborhood 14
with eight percent female heads of household. These proportions
are non-chance deviations from the mean proportion of twenty-three
percent female heads of househQlds found in, the sample.
PERCENT FEMALE HEADS OF HOUSEHOLDS
----------------Priority Neighborhoods----------------
4 7 8 9 11 12 14
Percent
28.6
30.9
*
26.7
25.0
16.7
8.6
* Sample too small to be representative.
Source: Interior Interviews
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
An important question is whether the large proportion of fe-
male heads of household in Neighborhood 7 is accounted for by house-
holds of older single women or widows or by a greater proportion of
young women with children and no husbands. It is apparent that the
average age of the head of the household in Neighborhood 7 is 52.8
years (sample data), while in Neighborhood 14 it is 34.9 years.
Further contrasts between these two areas are also evident: 63.6
percent of the families in Neighborhood 7 have no children, while
only 16.7 percent of the families in Neighborhood 14 have no child-
ren; Neighborhood 7 has the highest proportion of one and two
person families, while Neighborhood 14 has the lowest proportion;
and finally, only 29 percent of the heads of household in Neighborhood
7 are in their child-bearing years, while 75 percent of those in
Neighborhood 14 are in those age ranges. An analysis of variance
of the age distributions in all seven priority areas reveals highly
I
I
-65-
/
No. Children
2.68
2.75
*
3.0
2.71
2.63
2.77
2.72
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I.
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
significant differences between them in regard to age. This is
interpreted to mean that there are remarkable differences between
areas with respect to age. It is also worthy of note that the
incidence of divorces or separations in the priority areas is very
low and not significant between priority areas. IN GENERAL, IT
SEEMS SAFE TO CONCLUDE THAT NEIGHBORHOOD 7 AND NEIGHBORHOOD 8 IN
PARTICULAR HAVE SUBSTANTIAL NUMBERS OF OLDER RESIDENTS WHO RESIDE
IN HOUSEHOLDS WITHOUT CHILDREN, WHILE NEIGHBORHOOD 14 IS CLEARLY
A CHILDREN'S WORLD.
2. It is notable that family size among families which do have
children is rather constant throughout the priority areas (the
average number of children is 2.72 per family).
MEAN NUMBER OF CHILDREN IN FAMILIES
HAVING CHILDREN UNDER 21
---------------Priority Area--------------
4 7 8 9 11 12 14
All
Areas
* Sampie too smaLL to be representative.'
Source: Interior Interviews
The average number of children for non-white families is somewhat
larger, but whether this is simply a reflection of the generally
low socio-economic status of the non-white families is ~ question
which has not been answered. The fact that the average number of
children per family and the average size of family' is not highly
variab~e among priority areas tends to obscure the fact that there
are large numbers of one and two person families in some priority
areas. This has already been noted in connection with Neighborhood
7, but the fact that 92.2 percent of families in Neighborhood 8 are
so described should not be left unsaid. This is not a surprising
finding since Neighborhood 8 includes tbe Central Business District.
3. Priority areas do not vary significantly with respect to
the proportions of renters and owners. These proportions vary from
31.1 to 42.9 percent renters with a 37.1 percent average. Nonethe-
less, 37.1 percent is an imrortant number of renters and, since
there is no correlation between renting and living in poor housing,
it suggests that any Renewal project will be obliged to deal with
a large number of landlords.
-66-
I
I
I
4. Average housing cost does vary between priority areas to
an extent that is judged to be of practical importance. The
average housing cost is computed as the sum of the average rental
or mortgage payment plus the average utility bill. Such housing
costs ranged from 51 dollars to 91 dollars per month. Utility
bills tend to rise with higher monthly payment so the best esti-
mate of housing cost is one which includes average utility bills.
I
I
I
5. In general, the occupational status of heads of households
in priority areas is that of the skilled manual worker.
OCCUPATIONAL RANK HEAD OF HOUSEHOLDS
(Hollingshead Scale of Occupational Rank)
I
I
I
I
-------Neighborhood-------
4 7 8** 9 il 12 14 Total
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
l. Higher executives, propri-
etors of large concerns,
major professionals 0 0 0 0 2 1 0 3
2. Business managers, propri-
etors of medium-sized
businesses & lesser pro-
fessionals 1 2 0 1 3 2 0 9
3. Administrative personnel,
small independent busi-
nesses, minor profes. 1 8 4 8 8 9 4 42
4. Clerical and sales workers,
technicians and owners of
little businesses 3 6 0 4 4 8 5 30
5. Skilled manual employees 6 6* 1 7* 11* 12* 9* 52
6. Machine operators and
.semi-skilled employees 16* .10 0 6 6 12 11 61
7. Unskilled employees 20 5 0 5 2 5 2 39
8. Not employed or no response 9 18 2 14 8 11 4 66
TOTAL 56 55 7 45 44 60 35 302
* Median occupational rank
** Insufficient data
Source: Interior Interviews
I
I
-67-
'It should be noted that the median occupational status in
Neighborhood 4 is one rank low~r -~ that of semi-skilled worker.
Only 26 percent of the heads of households in this area are other
than clerical or sales personnel, skilled or unskilled workers.
Other educational levels follow this same general pattern. Over-
all, the median educational rank of the sample's household heads
fell in the category of having completed high school. The priority
areas do differ significantly among themselves: the sample of
heads of households from Neighborhood 4 contain none who have
gone beyond high school, though the proportion who have completed
high school is fairly high at 38.6%. .In Neighborhood 11,70 per-
cent of the sample have completed high school, and 60 percent in
Neighborhood 12 ,have completed high school.
EDUCATIONAL ACHIEVEMENT HEAD OF HOUSEHOLD
Some
Graduate Grad. B.A. or High Some Jr. Less Than Less Than No
Neigh. Pro. Degree ~ B.S. School High School High Jr. High 7th Grade Resp. Total
-
4 .0 0 0 16 13 5 11 7 4 56
7 0 2 5 19 9 3 13 1 3 55
8** 0 0 1 2 0 1 2 0 1 7
9 0 1 6 11 10 5 8 1 3 45
11 3 2 3 23 3 1 4 2 3 44
12 2 2 11 21 7 3 9 1 4 60
14 0 1 6 15 2 3 5 1 2 35
. TOTAL 5 8 32 107 44 21 52 13 20 302
** Sample too small to be representative.
Source: Interior Interviews
6. The priority areas differ significantly among themselves
in regard to average length of residence in present house. These
averages ranged from 3.3 years in Neighborhood 14 to 21.4 years
in Neighborhood 9. Note that in Neighborhoods 4, 7, 9 and 11,
the great proportion of residents have lived in Salina for more
than 20 years and in the same house an average of more than 16 years.
The above is all based on data from the sample of residents of
the priority area. The data available in regard to the total
population supports this: These same areas (4, 7, 9, 11) have
the lowest rates of new residents among the priority areas. (See
appendix for Map 7.) There is obviously much more mobility in
Neighborhoods 8 (the central business district) and 14 which tend
to serve as Salina's front door for new residents.
7. Ratings of social class of s~lf and neighbors reveal re-
markably little divergence between the two. The question has
routinely produced differences where used in many other studies
-68-
I
I
I
I
I
I
..J' I
I
I
,I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
across the nation. This result suggests a rather strong sense of
cornmon-shared fate among the residents of these priority areas,
and perhaps gives some indication of social cohesion among them.
Objectively, of course, many residents .~ very much alike in
regard to occupation, education, income and social status.
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
8. Basically, priority area residents in the sample do not
indicate that they are dissatisfied with their housing. They were
presented with question items which made it possible for them to
express as many as ten different types of dissatisfaction with
their present housing. The mean number of housing complaints for
the sample is 1.27 per respondent. This is hardly an indication
of peopl~ who are markedly unhappy about their housing conditions.
In fact, 70 percent had no more than one complaint, and 50 percent
had no complaints. Only 7 percent had more than three complaints.
It is important to note that in response to nearly every question
item, more Neighborhood 4 residents than residents of other neigh-
borhoods expressed dissatisfaction. The mean number of housing
complaints in Neighborhood 4 was 3.08, while the average for all
priority areas was 1.27. These complaints were in response to
question items regarding the house itself. Another set Of question
items tapped dissatisfaction with the location of the residence.
In fact, literally no one was dissatisfied with the location of
the residence. (The mean number of location complaints was .45
per person.)
I
I
I
I
I
I
9. The data from this sample indicates that only 8.3 percent
of the residents expect to move within the next year. This esti-
mate is based on responses to a question item which is similar to
one used in other studies and has been found to yield predictions
of actual rates of moving that are 92 percent accurate. Neighbor-
hood 4 has the highest mobility expectation rate -- 17.8 percent,
while Neighborhood 14 has the lowest -- 2.9 percent. Further, in
response to yet another question item, 74.3 percent of the resi-
dents indicate they are anxious to stay in the residence they are
now in. In general, housing condition has little or no relation-
ship to a subject's response to these question items, except for
those few residents in housing judged by renewal standards to
require clearance. Universally, they respond that they desire to
move. Clearly this is not the case for residents who live in
houses judged to require major or minor rehabilitation. PEOPLE
WHO LIVE IN SUBSTANDARD HOUSING BY COMMUNITY RENEWAL STANDARDS DO
NOT PERSONALLY EVALUATE IT THAT WAY, JUDGING BY THEIR EXPECTATION
OF MOVING, THEIR DESIRE TO MOVE FROM SUCH RESIDENCES, AND THEIR
SATISFACTION WITH THE HOUSE.
I
I
I
-69-
10. Income distributions are different between priority areas.
Median income in Neighborhoods 4 and 7 are $75 and $78 per week,
respectively, while incomes in Neighborhoods 9, 11, 12 and 14 vary
between $102 and $106 per week.
I
I
I
Neighborhood 4 is clearly the area with the lowest weekly
income. If one. considers the $3,000 per year income level to in-
dicate a poverty level existence, then in Neighborhood 4, approx-
imately 40 percent of its residents live at such income levels!
It is notable that Neighborhoods 7, 9 and 11 have only 30-36% of
their residents at such income levels and that Neighborhoods _12
and 14 have only 12-15% of their residents in these income brackets.
12. Of all non-white people living in Salina, 81.4 percent live
in two priority areas; Neighborhoods 4 and 9. If one divides up
the priority areas by somewhat arbitrary but obvious geographical
boundaries into 17 sub-areas, about the same 81 percent reside in
only four of these sub-areas. (See appendix, ~ap #3.) The Jahn
Index of Segregation measures the extent of segregation which
could occur. If there is no geographical segregation, the index
reads zero, if segregation is total, that is if non-white popula-
tion is' confined within only one area, the index reads 100.
Salina's black population is very segregated as its Jahn Index
is 71.16. One interpretation of this datum is that segregation
in Salina is 71% of its maximum. There is no reason to believe
that it is the result of anything other than either racial and/or
economic discrimination. There are black people who live in all
parts of Salina, but the proportions represent nothing more than
token integration. No data is available regarding segregation of
school children, but since Salina follows the concept of neigh-
borhood schools, there is no reason to believe it would not show
a similar picture to that regarding res~dential segregation.
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
11. According to the data available from the sample of respond-
ents in priority areas, 44 percent of all the residences' requiring
major rehabilitation or clearance lie within Neighborhood 4. The
lowest proportion of such housing lies in Neighborhood 9 (18%).
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
-70-
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
SPECIFIC CONDITIONS AND PROPOSED ACTIVITIES
IN EACH PRIORITY NEIGHBORHOOD
NEIGHBORHOOD 4
Structural blighting conditions in Neighborhood 4 are much
greater than in any other neighborhood. Of the 258 "clearance"
rated residen~ial structures within the city of Salina, 140 or
54.3% of them are located in Neighborhood 4. This number of clear-
ance houses represents 13.4% of all residential structures within
the neighborhood; while the number of clearance-type structures in
the entire city of Salina represents 2.2% of all structures.
Residential structures in this neighborhood needing major re-
pair accounted for 20.2% or 211 of the 1,043 structures. The 211
structures represent 16.5% of the major repair structures found in
the city, while residential structures of all types in Neighborhood
4 represent only 8.8% of all residential structures in Salina.
"Minor repair" structures number 526 and represent 50.4% of
the total residential structures in the Neighborhood, while only
24.5% of the structur~s in Salina were rated as "minor repair".
A full 70.6% of the residential structures in Neighborhood 4 ar~
considered in need of repair, either minor or major, while only
35.3% of all residential structures in Salina are considered in
need of repair.
It is interesting to note that of the 223 "clearance" residen-
tial structures found in the seven priority neighborhoods, 140 of
them or 62.8% were in Neighborhood 4, while the housing in Neigh-
borhood 4 accounts for only 17.2% of the housing in the priority
areas. Two hundred eleven or. 22.8% of the 924 "major repair'"
structures within the priority areas are within Neighborhood 4.
Only Neighborhoods 9 and 14 with 24.7% and 21.3%, respectively,
surpass Neighborhood 4 in having 20.4% of the total residential
structures within the "major repair" category.
The 526 "minor repair" structures in Neighborhood 4 represent
50.3% of the total structures, while the 2,332 structures so des-
ignated in all priority neighborhoods represent only 38.5% of
all structures. The 526 structures also account for 22.6% of
all "minor repair" structures in the priority areas.
Only 166 or 16% of the residential structures in Neighbor-
hood 4 are sound, while 42.5% of all structures in the priority
areas are sound. The sound structures in Neighborhood 4 account
for only 6.4% of the sound structures in the priority areas.
It is obvious that residential blight occur~~ in Neigl:1borhood 4
at more than twi'ce the rate for the Ci ty-at-large and almost twice
the rate as that for all priority neighborhoods.
-71-
The area to the west of Ninth Street and south of Broadway is
an area of varying degrees of blight. Nine of the homes were clas-
sified.as "clearance". A majority of the remaining homes were in
need of minor repair, with a few "sound" homes and a fe~iv "major
repair". Businesses and light industry are having detrimental ef-
fects upon the area, especially near the railroad tracks and the
major streets -- Broadway, Ninth, and North. It will be difficult
to maintain the area as a viable residential area without concen-
trated public and private efforts.
I
I
I
I
I
Most of the extreme blight in Neighborhood 4 occurs east of
Ninth Street with a high proportion of it occurring east of Fifth
Street. (See Structural. Condition and Location Map) Only five houses
in the area north of Broadway and west of Ninth were classified
as "clearance". Most of the residences in the area fall "into the
"sound" or "minor repair" category. Many of the homes in the area
are of relatively recent .construction. They are modest homes of
medium to small size. There. are a few larger and medium-priced
homes in the area that are well-maintained.
I
I
I
The area bounded by the Union Pacific tracks, Ninth, Pacific
and Fifth is approximately half commercial and half residential.
Twenty-five of the 97 residential structures are "clearance"~ All
but two of the others are in need of minor or major repair.
Much of the area,. except along Ninth Street and inunediately
adjacent to the railroad tracks, is transitional in nature. Abate-
ment of commercial uses, especially along Santa Fe, is now occurring
and is expected to continue. Redevelopment to residential use of
much of the" area except along Ninth Street and adjacent to the railroad
tracks appears to be warranted. The blocks facing Ninth and the
railroad tracks are expected to remain conunercial and industrial
in land use, making it desirable to clear the residential properties
from the blocks.
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
The area bounded by Ninth, Pacific, Fifth and flood control
dike has approximately an equal distribution of housing falling
into the four classifications. The houses in the area are almost
all small or medium and vary considerably in age. Some are of
"rather recent construction 'and are well-maintained, but most of
them are much older and vary considerably in degree of maintenance.
A rehabilitation and spot clearance program could be effective in
making it a viable residential area.
The area bounded by Fifth, Union Pacific tracks, Front and
Euclid has by far the greatest degree of blighting of any, area of
Neighborhood 4. Of the 280 residential structures in the area,
I
I
-72-
I
I
-I-
I
,
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
-,
I
I
I
:
I
I
i
'~~Mla!.I_.jt ~--'.f-..!.IlQ~ ~d~-~.!!Q~ ~~f~-'!-~ ~l_~~~~~~ItQ.F- ~:"'IL~_~-l~ ~;"':'~=-_:"'J..._:___Jl !LJIIII!'..~I
"
MILI'I
I
I
!
I
I
I
/
-]
In
n
- 11
n
f-j
[1
f]
[J
lJ
(
L
l j
[j
U
!]
r-;
-,
Ll
rl
'0M~'- ~r2r..
"sl2:]
'181-"-"-
..C8':IL:'
0c'
';0181- t iilse' ,~ 't!
,'.." 3~S" M
~0 t' s, .181
"181 /'l t8:1s" M
. ,.... M'
L'
.. ~ t8]s '
M0 181 , ,..'
.. -181
;~_._-~ ~...:- ~~ -. ! !-_--
'"4---- nu;' '"
.lllJ ..
.0M .
,. ~0
~---
...
...0
M
'M
...0
"0
..0
"I!J
! :._---~ ---- ~
.
.
M' ".0
.. '00'
M. .s.
121
S.lina Co",.."nity len..al 'rolrculI
'roject No. Kans. IS3eR Solino, Konlal
Pr.por.d for City of Salina Kansas,
Iy IUCHU & WilLIS Co.uulting Enginun,
Plonners, Architectl, 1969.
"" ,....lioo o/ai<.. ...Iio..'iaI~'" 111...,.. FooI..1 "",I
h. 1" 1.....1 w.."'. A...UIr.!io. 01.. 1Iopom,...
O/Ho..iot..jU.....o...t_I,OIIIkriI..r.'...lioo~l
0'"lioo<l"1<1 01 1'19.".....
F--------~-- -.---- ---------------------\
, \
I \
I \
I \
I \
I \
I \
I \
122 \
\
~ !lJM. , .oLl2l. llllM,
iZIS" "8.0 l2l.a"
St" ,.Sl8l. ,.s[Jl [ilL ., ,.81J1l ..
C8I L., ,.SI8I ! SS., ,.UJlI ISla " , .'" . ,,'I!
l!IlS " ..... aM :!i
S!SS '9, .Ma .M,. .oM(;2l . 8 -;Ye .. 'I21M'9 ~. 'I
~ss, .Ml1Il ~ ~ t;2lM, . at2:1 ~ ; I2IS ' -
IZIM. . '1%1 'MlliO ..121M' 'Ma
.M0::: "121M, , IZI. ,
~.M' .M~:<. .S9f, IZI. . , -., .L~ '
,
'" l8IL' ... : :a19 IZI
:t2~ L " "MlIl iii ,121M.. .8~~ ~~M" M"
~aa " ,SI" ",I~. ..1.) '4M[IJ
~.M" ~_s" ,.san ~.8" ,.sa as"
!!g' 07 ,..-. i2l I" .."
....s.. . '" .'" .M" ! sa.. ..a"9 .
as ..:M,,12:1 ~" ~ / Ib-::- ~ .. ~ 12I s> .~-l_l'" '" .~ ",!.llll
123
NEIGHBORHOOD 4
,
if
II RESIDENTIAL
~ SOUND
~ MINOR REPAIR
~ MAJOR REPAIR
_ CLEARANCE
. S SMALL
, M MEDIUM
L LARGE
LEGEND
COMMERCIAL & INDUSTRIAL
COMMERCIAL
INDUSTRIAL
SOUND
MINOR REPAIR
MAJOR REPAIR
CLEARANCE
2
3
4
'00 +
J
l ]
[]
[J
u
IJ
u
u
[J
j J
J
-I
,
,
I
1
1
I
I
I
I
:
122
123
/////T
.---.--.-1----------------------f~-~~-
I iT! ---------~~~~---------r= '\
r-------- --, " ~.-.. ,i
Fw~-:-:-J-...
l !
~~-~ K E'R
! L
PAR~
L
I'
-----+
121
Salina C.IIIlllunity I.n..al 'ralralll
Project No. Kans. .53CI Salina, Kansas
Pr.pcued for City 01 Salina Kons.l,
Iy BUCHER & WILLIS Consulting Enginnr.,
Plonnen, Architects, 1969.
r............tltlol...,...liIOO<io11llillMlIwooP.I......II".1
n. .. 1.....1 lsl_. ,....;,~.. 0/ lk hNflIo...
ofilNliog..dU....~ot.lrIIoriz..b-rlO[iHaS
,1',Iloo..,l.<I,119lt,Il.-.jtll
121
i
I
~,I
120
'1IIJ!iI :
: ,
',I;;; ,
"
,
" ,.
IfJ ,. "
,[8 'iII!I
.;::{, ~, 1Zr.'
~"I ..'
""~~"~' I,
",., '.' fB
'~I lU..,..~I';$I' ~
~,&, ~
.. '4 r- '" ~t I~ '" 4!o~
r&i~.Ja;jJm ~irl&irct1~~l ~~ '. fit
lmJIllU.J lRlI1Il1E LfJIiIl!l!j ~',
(L21"- . .
~-jJs"
00."
21" Ul]
, [SJM" 1".21
- 21." ".~
21S" "'21
~ 05" '.512']'
:.10]." o~21,
,~ .~ ,;t'
, 1':><1.' ;'21.
..
, [SJ. ' '1.121'
[ID. "'121
~ 21M" ".~
, 21M" -.121 ,
I8lM',
Q,
.~
,
, ... ~. . .~ - . ,I ---- --- ... " _
7'.-----,) i\H~-,:",...7)~,~,;-; J" r t::Ti\\"Q;:21:'I~,': co; H :-' -~;p,~.o.-"; .:fJt.~' "
/ ",X'j?4~/~! -: :': - ~-:ilii 1\ 1:=tJ r: ~ r~ :::
__...-- / f~~ )~:;1- "b~l' ": .'0 . --,: i : l?: :[~~' ;~-=-~_~ '0."-0
-/:>;}l1:\:\iCAOO' ~ " .. -I ~ ,;1h-' U!)9 '.' i Iiit
DEPP.T
"
I'
:"~-------..~~~,.~..~~"~'~--~~---.c:'~~-~~i
II r:;Ill..
/ ;0 II..
I ' U ~'
I ~l
o'
~----------L.'.."""""
Irl-----~--..."..,-------- -----___:..............
V ~ ---~ -----..__ .....,........
I 1 -,1
. ,
1
,
,. i
,
,
,
,
1
1
_. ._____._. ._._._._.___._._._____ _I-
GE C UR I 0
M
M il l t1 ~ 01 " M " Ii N M' LlI
IZI IZI IZI ~ IZI 0 IZI i') ~ ~ 0 If' 0
,~. ~:]tL'~'t..
T[:t;;t.~ .....[
M" I,.
, .'
0M~ "'!!:'I!
M" zos
,oM
III M" ,oM
'''M0 :
IZ!M" "LI8l.
0M' '"S
M. ..
" C4
I2ls" I2Is"
St" ,.8C81._
l8IL" '.5C81. _ e8.S'.
f1[JS ., oeMC8I.
e CBS ", ""... ~ .M,~
I2l M'
.M,
I2lM'
8M' '05121 ;
",0MII '.""
: 18I L" '''12l
;ti:2:lM" '''lSJ
~~ ~-12l
1;;:~l'I" ." ~12l'
1i2l. iii
:181.'" .sa ~
:,_5 > .8121 ;;;
;..., f~..
'" l8IL' "
:l2"iL" "M!!:I ;0
~.8 ., 7"'"
~~
!18I S" ..
..5,. .
I!!l" ''',.12];:,
- - ___ _______________\ _\_,_____c._________
f/------u---------- -- \ \ i
\ \ I
\ \ :
\ \
\ I
\ \,
\ I:
\ \:
\ I:
\ ~
\ ~
\ :\
,.21-
'M0.
_21M"11 I 8M" "eI21~
~ L81S". >fIjJ,l8I ~ l' ':! l8IJ.t!,. .1 2f!I.e:J ~
q;." l~~""."...~ !~~Ji'~'m
- , . ,I "L ....... _. ..
"M .. .~, .,., -, ! .. . '-JONIi
._..~..~ Ffrif"~
~ ,~ ~ ~~OO :~.!
-' .
" ,
!S.:: : ;n-;-~l.'~',
"t-~ . ,: ~. ' \>e-.i I:. _
. : ,. " ., '~
~; :; ':, L, "
21" "L
.... ..
.'0
'''0.
..
..
M
~ss ' .Ml][] ~
I2lM' ,
~. .M0:::
. SI5ir;,
.s. " :
,0"" .8~ ~
"
!!_S', ...!Sl
..s.:
12l~. ~SI2l ;
'~-
. ~ ,,,'
','
"'I'
.M"
~ "',GOLD N
:: !.
llllM.
..SI1l] EIIL.,
'. U:!Il , IJIlS"
.M
.<11I121- 8
~ 121M. i .11;21 :;;
lI:l -MIiil
"'121M, I
12l. ' I :
I
"
~ 121M" ~3'M" "
,S.', -SI2l .
~.s" , ..s 181
.if2I I" "
.M" ~:;
i~
~ NEIGHBORHOOD
STRUCTURAL CONDITION
MAP
NEIGHBORHOOD 4
,I
j
:i RESIDENTIAL
[I S I SOUND
LEGEND
COMMERCIAL & INDUSTRIAL
_ COMMERCIAL
,.
BELT
75
L1!l:I'
MIZ!,
I'
"8~" ,
,,111
--;w~ 0 '.I2:lM '.
: i21S ' -
",121M. -...
"". .
~.. ' .L""
~.. ~ 1M""
{ '.
,a.,. ,."11:I
.." "
.. ." "
1-.'It ~
.~ 12l,,~" .~.rm
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
only 25 or 8.9% of them are sound. One hundred three or 36.8%
of the structures are "minor repair",. 69 or 24.6% are "major repair"
and 83 or 29.7% are clearance.
Structural blighting occurs in Neighborhood 4 in other forms.
Thirteen of the 175 or 7.5% of the commercial establishments with-
in the area fall within the "clearance" category. This number
represents 23.3% of the "clearance" commercial structures in Salina.
Deteriorating auxiliary buildings, unsightly fences, inoperable
vehicles, machinery, junk, weeds, brush, privies, and unpaved streets
account for considerable environmental blight in the neighborhood.
The survey shows that 134 properties had deteriorating auxiliary
buildings -- 57.8% of the incidents recorded in Salina.
Neighborhood 4 accounts for 43.8% of all City properties where
unsightly fences, inoperable vehicles or machinery were found.
Junk was found on 261 properties, compared to 567 for the. entire
City. Twenty-two or 68.8% of all privies recor~ed in the survey
were in Neighborhood 4. Inoperable vehicles pose one of the
greatest problems in the area --some properties having several.
Weeds, brush, or tree limbs were reported on 308 properties -- 32.6 % of
incidents recorded for the entire City.
Unpaved streets are a limited environmentai deficiency in
Neighborhood 4; the 2.4 miles of unpaved streets being greater
than any other place in the City outside Urban Renewal Project 2.
Most other unpaved streets lie in areas that have not been devel-
oped.
Deteriorating sidewalks and absence of sidewalks in front of
many of the properties adjoining properties having sidewalks are
environmental deficiencies in many areas of Neighborhood 4.
Inha~monious land uses tend to provide environmental deficien-
cies in Neighborhood 4. Service businesses and light industry
along Ninth IS-tlreet, Broadway and Pacific tend to segment the neigh-
borhood and disrupt its homogeneity.
Neighborhood 4 has a few admirable environmental features.
Being one of the older sections of town, it is blessed with more
shade trees than some of the newer sections of town. It is well-
serviced by the City water and sewers. Some of the streets have
been curbed and paved in recent years and are in good condition.
Most other streets are comparable in condition to those found in
other sections of Salina. The neighborhood has no serious drain-
age problems.
-73-
,
-74-
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
Social Characteristics:
The average age of the head of the household in this priority
area is 49.7 years, intermediate in the range of ages in all prior-
ityareas (34 to 65 years).
AGE OF HEAD OF HOUSEHOLD
20- 30- 40- 50- 60- 70- Average
Neighborhood 29 39 49 59 69 79 80+ Total Age
4 9 7 8 12 18 1 1 56 49.7
7 7 9 5 15 9 5 5 55 52.8
8 0 1 1 0 0 5 0 7 65.0
9 7 3 5 8 12 5 5 45 55.9
11 9 6 7 6 11 1 4 44 48.2
12 10 9 12 12 8 9 0 60 48.3
14 12 14 6 1 2 0 0 35 34.9
TOTALS 54 49 44 54 60 26 15 302
The occupational level is somewhat lower than for other pri-
orlty areas --median occupational status is that of semi-skilled
laborer, but 43 percent of all workers are unskilled laborers.
This is probably a reflection of the low educational levels pre-
dominant in this area as none in the sample have gone past high
school, and the median educational level is the completion of
only partial high school training. This is not due to lower ed-
ucational levels .for the heavy Negro population in this area.
Negro educational levels are not significantly different than
white, although this area has the next to highest percent of res-
idents with less than a ninth grade education.
Fewer families in Neighborhood 4 have no children (55.4 per
cent) i the next to the lowest in all priority areas. Similarly,
relatively few are older than 65 years of age (only 9.8 percent),
the 'lowest of all priority areas except Neighborhood 14.
The long-term unemployment rate is low in this area relative
to other areas (11.6 per thousand). Such a rate is comparable to
Neighborhoods 7, 9 and 14.
Neighborhood 4 residents pay an average of fifty dollars per
month for their housing costs (payment or rent exclusive pf
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
utili ty bills) , the lowest of all priority areas. These residents
have lived in'their present homes an average of 11 years and in
Salina itself for an average of 23 years. Like. other priority
area residents, they are very apt to own at least one car and 35.7
percent ot Neighborhood 4 residents own more than one car.
Residents in this priority area have the lowest median income
of any priority area. About 40 percent have incomes of less than
$3,000 per year, a commonly accepted "poverty level"; however, 35.8
percent have incomes of more than $100 per week.
By far the greatest proportion of all of Salina's Negro popu-
lationresides inthis priority area. Further, almost all of the
Negroes in the area live in the eastern one-half of this neighbor-
hood.
There are a greater proportion of small houses in Neighborhood
4 than any other area. Fifty-seven percent of the small houses in
Salina's priority areas are in Neighborhood 4. Thirty-four percent
of all houses in Neighborhood 4 are small houses. It is of some
importance to note that residents of this area express more dis-
satisfaction with their houses than in any other area, and much
of this dissatisfaction is in regard to amount of room in their
houses. The proportion of those expecting to move is relatively
large (18 percent versus an average of 8.3 percent for all prior-
i ty areas).
Police calls by residence of offender vary within the area
from 4.5 to 8.9 per hundred, wider variation within an area than
is found in any other priority area studied. Sub-area 4c stands
out as having nearly the highest police call rate in the City.
(See Map #12 in the Appendix)
Neighborhood 4 has the highest welfare case rate among all
the priority areas -- almost twice as high as any other. (See
Maps #13 and #20 in the Appendix). While it has the second highest
school drop-out rate (25.8 per thousand population, ages 5-20),
it is not as high as that in Neighborhood 9 (27.2 per thousand).
While Neighborhood 4 has the highest rate of ordinary social
problem indicators, residents engage inactivities of'social
agencies who deal with such problems (fourth in rate of membership
for the YMCA, sixth in rate of YWCA membership) .
-75-
Neighborhood 4 has a significantly higher measure of the
neighborliness of its residents. If neighborliness measures cohesion,
the data suggests that neighborhood cohesion is significantly different
between areas and Neighborhood 4 is significantly higher than other
priority areas. While Neighborhood 4 has many negative aspects in
terms of its high incidence of social problems and deficient housing,
it also has a positive attribute in the form of a higher degree
of apparent social obligation between area residents.
Proposed Treatment:
Future urban renewal activities should include several actions
for Neighborhood 4 prior to, or in concert with, actions in other
neighborhOOdS. Opportunities for public and private re-use of
cleared land in Neighborhood 4 are good.
St. John's Military Academy has expressed interest in securing.
additional land for campus expansion. Clearance of Blocks 5, 6
and 7 (18.3 acres) would afford the Academy ample room for expansion
and would eliminate one of the most serious blighting conditions
in Salina.
Neighborhood 4 needs a neighborhood park equipped with play-
ing fields to meet the recreational needs of the residents. Six
to ten acres are needed for a park of this type. Blocks 13, 14,
23 and 24 would provide approximately 11.9 acres. While the park
would be off-center from the major portion of the neighborhood
population, other areas do not as readily qualify for Urban Re-
newal. The park and an expanded Hawthorne School site would ade-
quately serve the needs of the neighborhood without being remote
to the residents.
The Salvation Army operates a community center on the west
side of Santa Fe in Block 22. A need exists for replacing the
frame chapel with a new structure and to provide additional
room for their many activities. The southeast one-fourth of this
block will be "adequate to meet the needs of the Salvation Army.
Construction of the park to the east of Santa Fe will provide
readily accessible space fdr outdoor recreational activities
sponsored by the Salvation Army.
The social characteristics study indicates considerable
-76-
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
"I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I-
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
neighborhood cohesion in Neighborhood 4, as well as little desire
to leave the area; -therefore i planned Urban Renewal action encom-
passes spot clearance, rehabilitation of existing housing,
and redevelopment. (See Proposed Community Renewal Actions)
Relocation:
Relocation of families displaced by Urban Renewal Action in
Neighborhood 4 could pose some real problems without rehabilita-
tion of a large number of houses on present sites and relocated
houses. Due to the amount of social cohesion and lack of desire
on the part of many to relocate in other neighborhoods, it is
desirable to provide relocation opportunities within the neighbor-
hood. Only 48 vacant habitable houses existed at the time of
the survey in the neighborhood, and 27 of those were in need of
major repair. Only three vacant houses were sound. Housing cost
capabilities of Neighborhood 4 should be considered quite low, as
the average housing costs revealed by the interior survey are $50,
exclusive of utility bills. About 40% have family incomes of less
than $3,000 per year, the commonly accepted poverty level. An
even higher portion of the populatibn east of Ninth, where most
proposed actions will be taken, fall under the poverty level.
A high number of welfare recipient families are also living
in the area. Therefore, subsidized housing may be necessary in
relocation efforts. Furthermore, it is doubtful that sufficient
housing to meet the capabilities of displaced families can be found
in other neighborhoods, except in Neighborhood 14, because the
average housing costs in other neighborhoods are above their capa-
bility level.
NEIGHBORHOOD 7
Structural:
Neighborhood 7 is one of the major residential neighborhoods
in Salina, having 1,227 or 10.4% of the total number of structures
in Salina. The housing in Neighborhood 7 varies considerably in
types and condition. It ,and Neighborhood 12 constitute the two
neighborhoods having the/largest number of two and more family
dwellings. Many of the dwellings are large one-family dwellings
that have been converted to multi-family dwellings, but there are
a substantial number of duplexes. The 124 two-family dwellings
make up 10.1% of the housing, while the 64 three~or-more family
dwellings constitute 5.2% of the housing. Multi-family housing
in Neighborhood 7 accounts for 35.4% of all such hou~in~ in Salina.
-77-
-78-
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
Althongh only 21 or 1.7% of the dwellings are clearance, future
Urban Renewal actions should include Neighborhood 7 as a rehabil-
itation alld spot clearance area to upgrade a~d maintain the neigh-
borhood in a desirable condition. One hundred sixty or 13.0% of
the houses are in need of major repair, and 669 or 54.6% are in
need of minor repair. It seems reasonable to assume that many of
the residences will not be in durable condition until 1990 unless
they receive considerable attention within the next few years.
Several detrimental environmental conditions exist in Neigh-
borhood 7. One of the most serious environmental conditions is
over-crowding. Several homes were constructed years ago on por-
tions .of lots sold by the original owners and the results have been
insufficient side and back yards. Several garages on the back of
lots were converted to apartments during periods of housing scar-
city, adding to over-crowding. Many of them are not occupied and
are not being well-maintained. Some of them should be removed to
eliminat.e blighting conditions.
Other environmental deficiencies exist in varying degrees in
Neighborhood 7. Only 15 deteriorating auxiliary buildings were
recorded in the survey, as compared to 134 for Neighborhood 4.
Weeds, tree limbs, and brush are the most serious environmental
deficiencies, being recorded on 107 properties. Unsightly fences,
inoperable vehicles, and machinery are evident but not to a ser~
ious degree -~reported on 28 properties. Only 36 properties were
reported having junk on the premises, an insignificant number in
relation to the number of properties in the neighborhood. Only
three privies were reported in the neighborhood.
A major portion of the serious environmental deficiencies are
along Broadway, where deteriorating residences, deteriorating older
commercial buildings, vacant lots, littered with debris, and unim-
proved accesses to businesses have certain detrimental effects
upon the area. Debris of various types along Dry Creek to the west
of Broadway also has a blighting influence. The small houses in
Block 39 facing Broadway have insufficient setback.since the street
was widened, seiiously threatening the possibility of their being
maintained as desirable ami durable housing. None of the houses are
rated as "clearance". It is doubtful that the houses will qualify
under rehabilitation standards, because of insufficient setback and
lot area. Redevelopment should be undertaken by private developers.
Blocks 38, 39, 49 and 50 do have potential for commercial develop-
ment by.private developers.
I
~
~
~~
~~
~
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
NEIGHBORHOOD
STRUCTURAL CONDITION
MAP
I
l0 ~
I-_~t,~f}-~',,,:
I~ .
:~J;;;~~ :
'I!;2]L , UID__:
;-I2IL-----LQII.J:
}:~6a~: :
l~~0 :
;II2lL , MI2l. :
". 121M L[S]:
~ [S]s M[XJ:
~I q .,
~~~t L-i~~ !
,~~ ~ p:~~~' .:
ST ~ I
I
RESIDENTIAL
c::u SOUND
c:::c::J MINOR REPAIR
~ MAJOR REPAIR
_ ClEARANCE
S SMAll
M MEDIUM
L LARGE
LEGEND
COMMERCIAL & INDUSTRIAL
COMMERCIAL
INDUSTRIAL
SOUND
MINOR REPAIR
MAJOR REPAIR
CLEARANCE
<fJ:
5,jl _
fiiI ;,
iJ~-~_'_:-;MI2l
~:.M. <M[SJ ~
~.- - - , '-..1.4 [S] ~
;--6"MCSl;
~:---~ - .~:.,~ .:- ~
",'~ .
,,12lloo" ..M <Z1 .,
LI2l 0
NEIGHBORHOOD 7
I
2
3
4
~ I2IL
;'I2iM - fi7
;: l2'IM
~1-(2fM
~L~~-~~
~; ~ M_~
l~ ~
M[SJ ~
I
I. 0 M~ ~
I L[5] t
; ~'g~"':- i'-""~-;
~ ' InAf, ~~~ ~ ::,
''''~ l:;..., 'j,;'51:l.~"
I
ffZJ.~"-":.i!I\
!00il2l'--';']-':;-1
: LiM: L! !M~ ~
, '" i
'12l'.l.,'",I'"!L.I~ "
...~~,~
:~'~0'0:~;~ri'0'0'~ 12l, "rrnciJ-~ "~~.~ ";~~:~~1-1i '\ ,ffiWili1S~j:
M S'M' L't'~_! ~l!kIE.s. ~-l-M--M" rM--M-M-M- 'LaM! l' 'l:A'~'" IM~ tf-.1.--.,.- :
'.'..~;8. i4'."'I'..:,~');~';_::~!2lI2l.._~L '~;; :"..=.__: ._" '_: ;_;_..j;.~ ~,',:~,.~.,M,~~,~>s~-.,2~.~,_: W'--i" L[S] ':
t ~~ . i LI2I i' Sl2lM ,"Ll2Il2l~' ~ ; (S]L ,8 c" ~i~ '~/!l,s~€, 1':'-~'~~l"m~.:.'
~ ftf~ ;. c (~M M d~ .. ~ !"I5i:IL'" 1tl[S'].~ J '-MJ'" ~.,
L0~i~i~i~h;rnlM"Ml!8F. ,~--;, !" MI2l~ ~~i:'; "'-~, :",j~I2lIf!!..~8".""_';
'''' 7IL 1_n "'8 ~~ M. r~M "L0 ~ ~-----: " ;-:;-----1" ~. I2IM87-M[5]., MtIi
0___1"".----___ e 0M "....~ r' ~ I:8IM , M[Sj 1 .~IDL'". 'L~~J ~'~e1M' - "'_,~:
~ ~~ to M lBl ~ ~.i~~".f:ORS,l~ ) il
" .;' f_gJ'!1 'MCSJ Ii ~ (SJM :,. MrnJ' ;:~~~:~j~~~:' ~'{3)~~ I
a'0M30M[S]i~ tmlM '" MlZl'\ e~'?l~~;~~_ ;I~(IDMO 2MJ:S1
i---;;-LcID, ; rnlL . """, ,aID"" 'LI8l, ~~~~ :;:
i~:':'~: IE~~.~ :~:.:~~~i!: ~~ij l~':;:
t~. . ~s~ ~I2'lM'"MI8I~ ~lZ1M ., ". M[SJ" ~1[S]L,I~~~ ~~~MI'LI;
~~~:i-- M0 . ~:~ - -: ~ M . ~ ; ~~J~jl~ ~ ~~~,~ ~;:
- -'" fOI. ldCllMi~' :~ I ~~,~~~~~ ~~,. t.lf,W.",
- - "[3"IM,oL!;2'l~l:~I2lWl f 18' ~'ilRlL 1<M1ZI~ ~1'l2'IL I M'!SJ '
99M[S].",IIt[51M___";~~t!.-__ __ __ '!~, 'MJ:2l"'~;:I..BN;~T_a.,..e_:~
M0 ~lJffiJM"L[5];;'" , L 1) l\' z~\JlW)AOS 'z
M M ~& [IDM - - ~ ~L t; L L I ~-u ~L. 'ir ~ j~ ~~~~~ ~::';I (2IM' I 'MCSJ ",:z
~0~0~'lIl f,rnJM,',:L[ID;" ffiI~..\'1{iJI_"~~~t,,~[IDl '"~!?~i, .~:.
_____..._:.~.!::: 7~9~" ,...."'. 61~ ,,,~ t.;;;, ______ --~.-:~;_,.--i..J-
I
.
I
S.lina.Collllllvnity a.n..al 'to.to,,"
'roiect No. Kans. aS3C. Salina, Kanlas
Prepared for City of Salina Kansas,
Iy IUCHU & WilLIS Consulting Enginnrl,
Plannerl, Architects, 1969.
IM_.IitI.I,.;,..,."..",ioj~.iOod"r.,..IIII".I,,,"
~.. '" hot.lIl"w".. Afto~j'~IIio. of 1110 Do,orhH,I
oIlIoo'io'..'U...'Do,........I...IIIori,...I''''ti..lGl
.1 1INr Hotli"ld ,I 111'J. "._td
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
Social Characteristics:
Three characteristics of this area stand out from the sample
data: the highest rate of female heads of households (31 percent)
among all priority areas, the highest mean age of head of house-
hold (52.8.percent), and a relatively high proportion of childless
families (63.6 percent). Taken together, these data seem to in-
dicate a somewhat disproportionate number of elderly retired
people (particularly widows) in this area. Twenty-three percent
of the residents in the sample are widows or widowers.
The median educational level of the head of household is that
of high school graduate with 12.7 percent having more than high
school level education. Consi9tent with this is the fact that
the unemployment rate is comparable to other areas (8.7 per thou-
sand population). The area has a relatively high number of wel-
fare cases compared to other priority areas (68.1 persons per
thousand population), while the mean rate for all priority areas
is 44.4 per thousand. Median income in this area is not very
high ($78.50 per week), among the lower fourth of the priority
areas. Perhaps such an income level is compatible with the notion
that an important proportion of area residents are retired elderly
people.
Housing costs among residents of this area who were members
of the study sample, are relatively modest ($84 per month). The
residents of th1s area are plainly not newcomers to Salina or to
the homes in which they now reside. The mean length of residence
in Salina of Neighborhood 7 residents is 25.3 years, while the
mean length of residence in present residence is 13.8 years.
Fewer residents of this area expect to mov~ than was found to be
true for other priority areas (only 7.3 percent).
<':>0'
t'-'~ .
LENGTH OF RESIDENCE IN PRESENT HOUSE
Neigh.
Less Than
One Year
4
7
8
9
11
12
14
Total
8
8
1
6
10
10
6
49
1
2
561
624
000
112
622
11 5 4
15 6 1
44 22 14
4-
3 5
6- 11-
10 20
-
4 9 12
2 5 12
200
459
349
3 8 13
043
18 35 58
-79-
J,(I f
21-
30 31+
7
10
1
9
5
5
o
37
4
6
3
8
3
1
o
25
Total Ave.
56
55'
7
45
44
60
35
302
11.0
13.8
26.0
18.6
13.7
9.2
2.9
11.1
-80-
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
The. residents in this area seem quite satisfied with their
housing. The mean number of complaints was only 1.16 per person.
"Neighborliness" respbnses in Neighborhood 7 are near the average
for all priority areas.
Police call rates in this area are reasonably similar within
priority sub-areas and are within the same range of variability
as found within and between other priority areas. The rates are
somewhat higher than Neighborhood '12, but lower than Neighborhoods
4 and 8. (See Map #12)
Proposed Treatment:
Abs~nce of a neighborhood park, location of schools, and in-
adequate school s'ites constitute the major community facility
deficiencies in the neighborhood. . Whittier and Bartlett, the
only elementary schools in the area; are located close together
and somewhat off the center of population in the neighborhood.
Since the closing of Phillips School, the north section of the
neighbo~hood is hot well--served by elementary schools.
Whittier, with a 2.S-acre site, and Bartlett, with a 1.2-acre
site, are considerably below recommended state site standards.
Whittier School site should be expanded to include Block 99. Use
of Block 99 for expansion will add approximately 3.1 acres to the
site, bringing it fairly close to minimum recommended standards
for aschool.~he expanded Whittier School site should be equipped
to' serve a dual function of providing adequate playground space
and neighborhood park.
A 48-foot wide pavement connection of Ash and State Streets should
be constructed across portions of Blocks. 40 and 41 to facilitate th~
movement of cross-town.traffic and.provide traffic originating in
downtown Salina access to State Highway 140 to the west of Salina.
The connecting link should have controlled access with traffic median.
The project would necessitate clearance of ten residential struc-
tures -- four "sound", three "minor repair" and three "major repair"
structures. Construction of the connecting link probably would
significantly reduce the amount of through east and west traffic
on other streets in the area.
Spot clearance of the 21 "clearance" residential structures
could be accomplished under strengthened' code enforcement or
through an. Urban Renewal rehabilitation project.
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
Rehabilitation standards should be established and strictly
followed for preservation of a viable neighborhood. Rehabilita-
tion of the neighborhood would be enhanced by removal of a number
of structures to relieve over-crowding.
Relocation:
Relocation of residents as a result of community renewal ac-
tions should not present a significant problem, as much of the
proposed activity will be rehabilitation, not clearance.
Neighborhood 7 is adequately served by City water and sewer
lines and is well-serviced with natural gas and electricity. Few
improvements would need to be made to carry out an Urban Renewal
rehabilitation program in the neighborhood.
NEIGHBORHOOD 8
Structural:
Neighborhood 8, primarily a commercial area containing the
Central Business District of Salina, does have approximately 33.2
acres of the 153.2 acres of land devoted to residential'use. A
large portion of the structures have two or more dwelling units --
46 of the 149. Sound houses account for 52.3 percent of the
total; while minor repair, major repair and clearance residential
structures account for 34.3, 8.8 and 4.6 percent, respectively.
Most of the "clearance" and "major repair" structures are located
in a pocket north of Elm Avenue and in the core of the Central Busi-
ness District.
Inharmonious land uses associated with the commercial and
industrial establishments apparently are having a detrimental ef-
fect upon residences in Neighborhood 8, especially in the area
north of Elm Avenue.
Environmental peficiencies within the residential areas of
the neighborhood are rather significant. Weeds, junk, inoperable
vehicles and deteriorating auxiliary buildings were found on nearly
one-sixth of the properties. Inadequate provisions for off-street
parking were found in connection with more than one-third of the
properties. privies were found on two properties.
A total of 361 commercial structures are located in Neighbor-
hood 8. Only 21 structures were rated as sound, while 258 were
rated as in need of minor repair, 47 were in need of major repair
and 35 were in need.of clearance. (Seethe CBD Building Use and
Condi tion Map.)
-81-
/
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
,I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
A total of 83 industrial structures were found in Neighborhood
8, of which 21 or approximately 25 percent were rated as "clearance".
Most of the "clearance" structures 'are either small auxiliary build-
ings or located in close proximity of the railroad tracks and being
used for storage purposes. Only three structures were rated as
"sound", while 4 7 were rated as in need of minor r'epair and 12 as
in need of major repair.
Social Characteristics:
The data from the sample cannot bear upon the problem of des-
cribing the residents of the area because so few residents were
selected to participate in the study sample (N=7). On the basis
of other data which applies to the total population, it is appar~!
ent that there is a very large proportion of one-member families
in this Central Business District area. This area has the largest
percent of people over sixty-five years of age of any priority
area (23 percent) . Such a proportion is fifty percent higher than
all other areas in the city, except Neighborhood 7.
This area has rather high mobility as it receives a high
proportion of Salina's new residents. However, proportional
to total population, Neighborhoods 12 and 14 receive more ney;
residents.
The area does have a relatively high unemployment rate (15.2
per.thousand) which ,is consistent with its image of an area of
high mobility, high proportions of the aged and new residents.
This area has 'a relatively high welfare rate among all priority.
areas (49.1 per thousand).
Proposed Treatment:
Several actions should be undertaken in treat~ent of the
neighborhood due to the diversity of land use. Spot clearance
of the few residential structures rated as clearance should be
performed. Since much of the residential sections of the neigh-
porhood are considered transitional to commercial or industrial
_use, rehabilitation should be performed on .only those residential
structures in the southern portion of the neighborhood that are 'con-
sidered to be durable residence areas. The residences between .
Elm Street and the railroad tracks are not considered to constitute
a durable residential area under any circumstances; therefore,
the area should be considered having only commercial and industrial
-82-
':-- ~
~
II
Dil4.. gj
ill~,
IBM lliO ~
I
. mil t!I [11 ~"" ~ ~
lj- r~~-
I l__J
1
I
I
1-
[ID DI
co
Salina Community Renewal Program
Salina, Kansas
Project No. Kans. RS3CR
Prepared lor City 01 Salina, Kansas,
By BUCHER & WILLIS, Consulting Engineers,
Planners, Archilects, 1968.
NINTH
1illIJ.'1.'.'. f,;I bl m..... rn....... m fTl.... mil
OJ l~ ilillii .~. .~. !illJ LlJ. .
rn ..... .",'" .... ....
. i.... ~. tm.... . ~...
. .. .. ...1............. l3lJ I W.....',..j.. ".....
.... ..... ..
.... ...... ...
. ~"'''
m
ti
w
r71 r;j r:l ~
8!:lJ EJ liJ v,
EIGHTH
i-
[201
[illJ
SEVENTH
P"PKJIVG- L07
SANTA FE
FIFTH
>-
oc
oc
w
(!)
..J
::>
W ::;
~.
I~ .
Dm
.....2 ,..... ,~
~ ~ Wl tmJ.
FOURTH
laD D2J 0 []OU
c=J
D[;J ~
o m_
o
The preparation of this map was financially aided through a Federal grant
from the Renewal Assistance Administration of the Department
of Housing and Urban Development, authorized by section 405
of the Housing Act of 1959, as amended.
o
[JDODOOOo
o
ODD
f-
:::l
Z
..J
..:
:s:
[JD D DO D D
MEMORIAL
HALL
STREET
D
COURT
HOUSE
W
:::l
Z
W
~
~ Gill III
~. .~II~ mill
i
I
f-
w
w
0::
Iii
STREET
AVENUE
C B D' BUILDING USE AND CONDITION MAP
lIIll PUBLIC OR . SEMI-PUBLIC STRUCTURAL CONDITION
III COMMERCIAL 1 --SOUND
~ INDUSTRIAL + 2 - MINOR REPAIR
RESIDENTIAL Scale in teet; 3 - MAJOR REPAIR
P"""'I
'00 0 '00 200 . 300 4 - CLEARANCE
~IODO
o ODD
~
t-
W
W
~ lIT!lliJ
[EJ
STREET
I
~I
ffi]]
lli!lJ
!Ill
.~
][
I
I
L___
I
IJ
~
-ll
Ii
_ J
-,
I
,
1--- ----
I
,
t- I
l::l I
0:: I
Iii :
I
I
~-~~_-_~r~~~
: ~ -\.
1 \7; \
I \:it
l..-____ '___
:--1--- \ -
.1 \~
j \ \
l..___' ___I _____
,----------"f'i]----
: ~ ~ .~
l.._,~ _I' ---
r-, - - -
! ~ '
I '
I
I
l _ _____ _
-~ j !~. -~~ -I ri~-- ---1
1 I' - - ---
I r - - . . --
I 1
1 r.:- --- .-_.--
I 1
J ____~-------
r---- ----- --- --, -...
: ~:'
I I
I ______________'
-, -------
Zl
11.'
I
I
I
--- ,
__' __III
r-
,
1
- ------ --------"
I
I
I
I
I
II
o
[] 0 DO 0 ODD 0 ODD
I~ 6D~ Uo-W ~ t~~~~~~ ;~:~ [J ~I 0 Lj i';_.~ I ..,.~~~~ ~I~
I
I
I
Imi. [J[1 D []D
I. ~
L~ loCI 0
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
'I
o n 0 '0...'1 n
J L~ ....~ 0 0
o
ImJr=J
'I d [J ~ ~JUlU
o rJ o~tJ
NINTH
EIGHTH
SEVENTH
SANTA FE
,.
'"
I
The preparation of this map was financially aided through a Federal grant
from the Renewal Assistance Administration of the Department
of Housing and Urban Development, authorized by section 405 .
o' the Housing Act of 1959, as amended.
Salina Community Renewal Program
Salina. Kansas
Project No, Kansas RS3CR
Prepared for City of Salina. Kansas.
by City Staff. 1968,
+-
L~D
D
CJDD DO
COURT
HOUSE
MEMORIAL
HALL
STREET
CITY
B
LS
COUNTY
8/),OFED
BLOG.
STREET
~w _
. C B D BUILDING USE MAP
BASEMENTS
LEGEND
'~OFFICE
mBJ:IID INDUSTRIAL
~(":';"O:,~)~ APARTMENT HOUSE
_PUBLIC
_ SEMI-PUBLIC
c=:JNO BASEMENT
OR A RESIDENCE
~VACANT
~COMPARATIVE
w,m):::::N SERVICE
~ OTHER
Scotei"'..'
100 0
'" ,.,
I~ 110 0 boo 0 o~1 L__
t-
w
w
a::
In
---- r-- - - ---
I I
n: E
uJ~
STREET
I.~ 001010 DO 0
1- 1'1
] D10CJICJI
O[J Iqo-I ,D n
1
I
I
~ i i
i--- J L__
~ U::J lJli I ~ ,.. .
I {.iN em PAWNe B Ii Il ~ I :~~~~ c,,, PARKme
~ii~~;~~ LOT III I -tp ~ LOT ;~.:.:.:.:
fiFTH
[? 0 >-, [J D.ol)D U 0 0 0 0 ol 1IL' ~ I!I IWJJI I I U w "WIT -r:ml ~
J: 0 00 0 JI.:) ~'LI .}-l~ ~
~ U fJ ~ ID' I,J CJ I: _ ~ \ PARKlNe I J~
[] 0 0 [S [] [J 0 [] rl ['] ~ [J 0 D D 0 0 [J I (I lill[J ~ gm: -~ L-__ co' k~~-
FOURTH :::..----~
-~, #
I D (]L][LSJ ~ou D~~-c__WlJill ~%~
"
l il! QD _1'" LJ D II ~ I"" frn
. L _ ] DOC I ..... '" mmfl l---.uIJ I ,,_.. '" ] I ~
I[D~ I '" ".. '" 1 ~ U, "I ~ ":-:,IJ : [
[n-mrTlniIlUIRU _ =~.nll !~r-\J
AVENUE
~ 1................li...i....II~j I[J H I U
tt( tt, iIII: I H HH. ,
, "", ::::::::::::::::::::::::::':::::::':::::::11::'::::::::':':::::: ~
: ; · _I "l j:::J -- =- - . I - i II
~11 "--,,, =':""- r;:') r n IllJn 1 ~ 1 [l r ci.~ I
~~ ~ I
STATLER-HILTON D '" .:- '" \) ~ ~ ~~ r I J I J~ d \ ~ \\ I' - ~ \,
~~[ J L2J ~ 51 L, II. I / LJ -~\ ~---~~<:;- --- --T - 1 ~
~ illitiif i r- ~ _~", .~ ___~~ J Jj
~~ STREET--
~~l L Jf "j: _____un, :--- ~
,
~J UD 0 0
11--, 1
J
I
I
I
__J
j- ---
I
I
I
I
L
I-
I
I
1
L _ _
r--- -- -
I I
1,-'--.1 I r
'----" I to-
I rl ' a::
~-- ----\d-- ----\~ ~
r--- ------- --- -,
I [1. I
I .. I
I . _J ,
. I
I
1----------- --
I
I
I
I
r---- --- ---------,
I . ,
I I
I
I
I
I
~
11'?"l'--' lm
l~L8
t- r:;J
tf) ffi~~ rrr~ []
~' --
'.....1 ~
~.~.'~.: ~
tj-J t&3
I
.rill!~~ I\'l!mllln
r~ "l WI ~ III "'1
I ~:, l'~' "- > ,,,;
.. f(i!\i!1;j!:\1 ~l
I
I
Ig
D
~ [2j' [ill [2,J [!;lJ ill [@
~ 1m [J f@[i!0!rn""'," I
If . :'~) _ ' ? :~ .~f rig - ti:J >-
~ rn ~
I . I] = iIJ
, ~ -1
! . i) "" : . . ~~I _ "~.,{"'--;; :J
'Q:, f'('! rc;1 I;'), r9 10 r.<11""Y. r.~~ ~ :;:
J.:.G l.~.~d u~w s.:J l.U~rcl~
-'I [~-> -
I'. .....~..J
I
I
I
I
D~I
NINTH
i ~1l1 ~ In IU'~. IE' ~ ~ @j ~ I
" . [!!,~ ~[1J l'l !iiJ @ [[j gj l';J ~ ~.
EIGHTH
j-
[@'JJ
. ~f] ~
. ~ j;~
SEVENTH
o
[JDOOOOOo 0
ODD
@ .. rl;__ ~
. fa I ....... '"
SANTA FE
IIlJr'" . II
. ,""1' P''''N' ,."" [8?'j """"""""'"
. ~r~: - - lOT ~i~;~[ l~];j~\~\~[l;~; mmmm~mm
FIFTH
p.q 18, I~.',l", !~ r~'J d:1 ~ f;'7,1 m..,' rc'8 RI
G.j @1" '~~:r!~ ~ Lm ~ ~ w ltJ u
rn ~
I~ ~3
,....,'> ~'~- . I L.4J:::!J:il:I <(
Gill m [g ~ ~ ~ []I . ~.' ,..' ~
FOURTH
IGlJD2J ~DUDGJD~
[JD 0
DO
Do
D
COURT
HOUSE
~IDDO DDDD ~I
I
I
L__.
MEMORIAL
HALL
j- ~ (!J~' ~ [ill &ill , .
l::l 0
~ '~
rn
[2W"
111"
-,
Elm .
....J~~~ : ~
STREET
STREET
I
l
I
I
~i
_ J
STREET
AVENUE
I
~ tNJ IT:]'
=
I
I
__J
The preparation of Ihis mitp wu financially aided through it Federal grant
from the Renewal Assistance Administration of the Department
of Housing and Urban Deyelopment, authorized by seclion 405
01 the Housing Ad of 1959, as amended.
rID
c
(> J:
Ill.
<(
I
B 0
f - - - - - - ---
l.'l-l- \
-lfj rl- - - -: - - ,-- --;
1!:q: i~ ,.. ! em
I \'
I I . \ :
I l.. ___ ___--'
: :-- n_ - -no, !;;
I rtrrrTrm I J.:
I I UJ..U..O..D..r , l-
I ~-~-m------- _J ~.
r---- ----
I I
lit:
I Ii!: '
I . I- I
III J
J i- - - - - - - - -
,
,
,
r------ ,---
L_' .
i-I'
1
1 '
L_ _ ___1\
r-- ------- ---- -,
I RJUI I
I L1J:jjj I
I '
I
--------- - -- ,._____----- -----
.Jh.... T I ~ ~ :--------------~-~-,
~ J I I __
I I
I ____ ___~ .
BUILDING USE MAP
FIRST FLOOR
D VACANT
_ COMPARATIVE
~ SERVICE
~
~ OTHER
_ OFFICE
mmJJ INDUSTRIAL
W!m PUBLIC
_ SEMI-PUBLIC
t;~:,',;~~J RES IDE N T IA L
Salina Community Renewal Program
Salina, Kansas
Project No. Kansas RS3CR
Prepared for City of Salina, Kansas,
by City Staff, 1968.
+-
SeOI';nlu'.
'"
f---- ------ --------,
I I
1 I
I
I
1
J
10
t:; 0
10
I
NINTH
o
o
[JDDODDDo
DoC)
D 0 _ ~" gDDDDDOO DODD I
o 0 0 . ~ D [j[j DO 0 [] D 0 0 0 0 ~
[~~,' 0 0 D_" ' ~
o dO l]oc.l~
II ~J
I
I
I
I
I
D~sl
EIGHTH
iD
, DO
l~~
SEVENTH
- I '" ,-- '"'
SANTA FE
FIFTH
FOURTH
o Wj,,;, ,m U' 0
II ,~<
;::.'
D'"'' '----'-
q I ,<-- '"' ITffiTffil
=b lJ~,
.----
_I: """"",'~II
"
'}) ..
)S.
~gfi ,m pmw.
~''';;.;: ,or
l-
=>
Z
...J
~
U1t J
Dr
----:]
tJDD
00
~l DO 0 D t:;
c: ~. li
___..5l-ic=::J L]J ,0 [] In
~
fill:::;::::::::
_I
1 [II
,m '~"~'c
- 13~~~~
I O"K'"'
i
,
Iii, I'm 1:1
. I. PARK/Nt; . \
iaIlrJi
Dilllll; It~~i:IIIIIII:!I:I~J .~..
...... .....~, ,......j\1;~
~ :l ~, ...
~---j n'! \ "" = my CITy HALL
,MRKIIVG PANKf;W; ~
; Ii! <or m .r~
DD
D
COURT
HOUSE
MEMORIAL
HALL
STREET
1&
II
LIBRARY
(
STREET
~Ll 0 _
_1 ~1iL
AVENUE
~1__Mr I
[ M 1:::[111 I i~
STREET
L.rJ I .
m=mmm ,
~J
!
/,
r-----" m:n:ruu :
SJ
; 11,1
~J1D 0 0
o ODD ~I
r-
W
W
~ D
en
D ,0
STREET
I
L::
R~~i:DOOO ~
i Diu I Di 0 '
, ! ,'iO
I
I
L___
I r---- ---- -.,
n: ~! .
! I'~ 1
I ell I
uJ lu---
I
il, l-~m
lIt! I
'j :
__ J L u
~ --. i -
l I
I
I
1
L
r- =-
I ~ } I
I I 1
I I
I
L________
._.~ uo 0 0
-"'l
~ HII
m'j
!, I
!' : I [J
\~ ~~ ~ I "'1---
.\ - ~--- I
~~"--'= ~ ~ ~
l
--
.----
...".
II 0 ~ 0 0 0 0 ODD I
110011 0 0-1
I
I.
oDD.
I
I
110 DO OOOD~I
.I~ 0 [J 0 [J 0 U D I ~ ~ DO 0 LJ IJ 0 0 0
=>1 UDc;]lw
I DOll boD D U [] 1rJ I ~ [J D D 0 D G D
Lon _ cmaD
~ . -- ~ I
~ r\\\.-'- ~ ::::-.
---- STREET
I(]DD~ DLJO,U DuJDOI ;r- vl~lo: /4 ~~L L 1\ ~ l :~----------------' "
c::=J ~. _ ~ _ ~., / ~
The preparation of this map was financially aided through a Federal grant SIC R C B D B U I L DIN GUS E MAP
. from th~ Renewal Assistance Administration of the Depa,tment a ma ommuDlty enewal Program, .
of HOUSing and. Urban Development, authorized by section 405.
of the Housing Act of19S9,as amended. ~~~j::t~:~S;:nsas R53CR ~ SECOND STORY
Prepared for City of Salina, Kansas, ~
by City Staff, 1968.
LEGEND
L:=J NO SECOND STORY _ OFFICE
OR A RESIDENCE , m:mJlINDUSTRIAL
IB VACANT b;'",;,;c:,:j APARTMENT HOUSE
~ COMPARATIVE IIiIllllI PUBLIC
@~11:W.i:'l SERVICE _ SEMI-PUBLIC
~ OTHER ..,...,
"'"
u. i-
,~\i l
\~
\
-
.,
I
I
I-
I
: i .-'
".---- -----
------------ ----,
I
I
1
f
I
I
I
I
r-~---- -
", ~ I~r- -l- - -
0:: II
Iii II <
II <
t--r-,(,
~jl
h: ___1 ----"
I i L_
r=-:::-:- -
I
I
I
potential. Private actions within the 20-year program are expected
to eliminate most of the residences within the area.
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
Rehabilitation and spot removal should be performed on the
commercial and industrial structures within Neighborhood 8. Other
structures should be removed to provide additional off-street park-.
ing to meet the projected demands by 1990. Redevelopment of the
core area by private developers of commercial property should be
encouraged. Redevelopment of the transitional area southeast of
the CBD core by private multi-family residential developers should
be encouraged. (For more information concerning recommendations
regarding commercial and industrial areas in Neighborhood 8, see
the Commercial Sector Projection, Proposed Community Renewal sec-
tion of this report.)
NEIGHBORHOOD 9
Structural:
Many of the blighting conditions in Neighborhood 9 will not be
discussed in this report, because much of the blighting is in the
area covered by Urban Renewal Project #2 and will be eliminated
as the project develops. Exterior surveys were not conducted in
the area because of action already being taken to clear all resi-
dences and many other structures within the next few years.
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
Of the 578 residential structures surveyed in Neighborhood 9
outside of Urban Renewal Project #2, only 11 or 1.9% of them were
recorded as "clearance". "Major repair" structures numbered 143
or 24.7% of the total, while "minor repair" structures numbered
172 or 29.8% of the total, and 252 or 43.6% of the houses were
rated as "sound". The only areas of any consequence indicating
structural blight to a large degree are Blocks 41, 42 and 43 located
north of Ash, east of the Union Pacific tracks, south of Urban
Renewal Project #2 and west of the Smoky Hill River. Apparently
the presence of the tracks, mixed commercial and industrial land
uses, and the river are having a detrimental influence upon the
area. With the development of an industrial park to' the north,
th~ residences in the area will become more isolated from other
residential areas, a~d the possibilities of remaining an acceptable
residential area will diminish.
The vacant lot on the east portion of Block 43, with all of
its debris, presents one of the most serious environmental defic-
iencies of the neighborhood. Vacant lots in Block 2lA are the
only other areas of environmental deficiencies of conseq~ence.
I
I
-83-
I
Environmental deficiencies on individual properties are some-
what significant in Neighborhood 9. Seventeen deteriorating auxiliary
buildings were found. This is about twice as many in relationship
to the number of residential structures as found in Neighborhood
7. Weeds, brush, tree limbs, deteriorating fences, inoperable
vehicles, machinery and junk were also found at about twice the
ratio as found in Neighborhood 7, but not nearly as often as found
in Neighborhood 4.
I
I
Most other environmental factors in the neighborhood are pos-
itive. -The neighborhood is well-served by Oakdale Elementary School,
although it is located on an inadequate site of 2.6 acres. The
school has established, through federal programs, a learning center
well-equipped with audio-visual aids to better meet the needs of
children in the attendance area. '
I
I
Development of the industrial park in Urban Renewal Project
2 should enhance the attraction of the neighborhood for employees
of industries locating in the industrial park. Little new resi-
dential con$truction can be expected as a result because few vacant
lots are avai'lable for construction.
I
I
I
I
'I
The neighborhood is not served by a park for active recreation,
but it does have a pleasant park for passive re~reation along the
banks of the Smoky Hill River. Oakdale and Kenwood, the City's two
major parks, are quite accessible to residents in this neighborhood.
Streets in the area surveyed are all paved, in good condition,
and of conventional width. The neighborhood, except for the sm~ll
area east of Ohio, is not bisected by major traffic streets.
I
Spot clearance of several residential structures and a rehabi-
litation program are the major actions proposed in the area.
I
I
I
I
Social Characteristics:
All the data speaks for describing this area as one of rather
pronounced heterogeneity: an important proportion of young fam-
ilies, families with high school age children, and families of
older adults. While the average age of the_head of household of
this area is fifty-six years, reflecting the sizable number of
residents more than sixty-five years old, it also has a rela-
tively large proportion of children 5-20 years of age (28 percent).
I
I
-84-
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
While the median occupational rank is no different from that
of the total sample (semi-skilled worker), this area has more white
collar workers ~han any other area (30 percent) and proportionally
fewer heads of households who are unskilled taborers. The educa-
tional level of the residents within this area follows a similar
pattern. The residents within this area regard themselves as
middle class rather than working class to an extent greater than
in any other priority area. Fifty percent believe themselves and
their neighbors to be middle class, and nearly fifty percent regard
themselves as working class.
I
I
I
I
I
The area has a relatively low mobility rate and the lowest
rate of residents new to Salina. The mean length of residence in
the present home is quite high (18.6 years), the highest among all
priority areas except for Neighborhood 8. The range of mean length
of residence varies from three to twenty-six years among the pri-
ority areas. Further, this area also has the highest proportion
of owners of homes (69 percent), although the differences between
areas in this regard are not great.
Housing costs in the area are moderate ($75 per month as an
average). There are a relatively large number of people in this
area who use other than autos as a means of transportation to shop,
to visit their physician and to go to church.
I
I
I
I
I
I
This area has relatively high income levels with the highest
percent of residents with incomes of more than $125 per week and
the second highest median income ($102.35 per week). However,
there is an important proportion who have incomes of less than $75
per week (34 percent). The welfare case rate in the area is near
the average for all the priority areas, and there is a relatively
low unemployment rate -- 8.5 , Hwhere the range is 4.2-15.2 among
all priority areas (per thousand).
The residents of this area would'appear to have very little
dissatisfaction with their housing conditions. Of a possible 450
opportunities to complain, only twenty-three complaints were reg-
istered. The mean number of housing complaints was .51 per res-
pondent, where it was possible to achieve a total of ten complaints.
In fact this C!rea. (U~ban Renewal proiect No. 2 not included) con-
tains the smallest proportion of houses judged needing clearance
,and the least needing major rehabili tationamong all priority areas.
I
I
I
-85-
I
There are some rather marked differences within the area in
regard to some social indicators. If rates of police calls are
computed separately for the northern third of the area, it appears
that there are nearly four times as many police calls with respect
to the residence of the offender.' Similarly, there is almost
fifty percent more unemployment in the northern half of the area
compared to the southern half. The proportion of non-white popu-
lation is very great in this northern sector of the area -- 43
percent, compared to only .15 p~rcent in the south portion.
"I
I
Proposed Treatment:
I
I
.1
I
I
I
I
Neighborliness responses from the sample of residents in this
area indicate that neighboring behaviors are lower here than in
any other neighborhood. They are not significantly different from
those in Neighborhood 12, but are significantly lower than in
Neighborhoods 4, 7 and 14. If these behaviors are a measure of .
social cohesion in the area, it suggests that this area is charac-
terized by less cohesion than any of the other priority areas.
City maintenance departments need additional land on which to
expand the yard located south of Ash and west of the Smoky Hill
River. The area immediately north and across Ash (east portion
of Block 41 and all of Blocks 42 and 43) should be developed under
an Urban Renewal clearance program to provide needed landfor
expansion and compatible light industrial development. Rehabili-
tation and ,spot clearance constitute the remainder of community
renewal activities.
Relocation:
I
I
I
I
I
Reiocation of residents displaced by any Urban Renewal pro-
grams ,in the area should not pose much of,a problem, as the survey
showed more vacant habitable structures in the neighborhood than
residences that would be displaced by proposed actions. The in-
terior surveys indicated the average housing cost to be $75 per
month, which would indicate the capabilities comparable to those
living in Neighborhood 7, higher than in Neighborhood 4 and 8, but
somewhat lower than families living in other sections of Salina.
Relocation of families in other neighborhoods probably would
necessitate subsidized rental payments for some.
I
I
-86-
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I ~,'
, '0" '-, L
I ' I'J
I__~.
I
; c:J_, ~:~ :,;~: W~ 0J~1O:o~r;;: O~
'i ~ " o;d'o;-":' IT:;"
~ CJ ' i:'""D; .i- ~--_... -r-
t~..:: l' D ~ ;. gURV~Y[f'lJRB
;~,!:~U~i~~ I /"0
. 0 " I . D ~ ,,' 0 ~// 0
(O-;-IGI ,~ ,~,/
."', :-----------;-
!. " 00 ~.,D
:10 D ~D
~-o 0
;0" : 0 !:~D
;!D-'~~ -- D
:~6~' ~~ i ~.~
: -~ -" =,~ OO~ '",'~D,
I_~--,--,--
I ~-< ~:~B
L"9
~D
~-.g
'0
I C,'
lEi
'q ~, " , su~tGi;!S Oi ~m i:i 1""
"";I'~
ADD ....-J-.. R ..~
.~.. 'J E __ ----..
, , " ..............::-.~:- " .------/ -~ ----:--,',~.-
;, I' / // ""'';01' "0" '\
I I ~ _ C8lM IlJ, "','. .
:9: Q... +..r,//:,,'l,,~\Ol M[S] ~. ~ III .,1Il ~ ~k 181M \ .
c" r /, ~:~ 0" [I] ~ ~ 1ZI \ \
o /", ,>' i < .;,;~... Llm ,12lM :<m:' 'jl2l: :~ \
.. ,,-' :,,"l .:~ L8j; ~~ :~ ," ::~' l:~ ~:~: :~: .~~
"PLAT G /" /' '! ,; MIm ;'i!llJM MJ"" l_M MCIJ;~ iCllM '
.." RIVtR!SIDE ~m: _ MIII~; ~.III.. 5.0 l ~,\2'jS S-'~ ';:'t,
./ / H l!JM ,l SIlIJ ~ f, ~M MlBl1i-. ~ t8JM ~, t8Js
'. ' / :, ~ MIS] f ;:~M MI8l" ~ ~M ~:: ~ 08 ';~
": ~. '<:; l~! 5 ;~: !~; 4~ ;~; i ~j ., i~' :~j 4;~~;,
L1LLS \. 1, t8l.S M~; ~ 21M M~~. ft8!M M0'; ~,0M Mt8: ;:.~
, ~S ~ ~M- ~ l2'lS MlIJ t ;..,!Il~_ ... ~
J 0 ~SgSM M'SS[S] ~ ;~M III .. Mill L Mill W'MM!;gJ'i, it81M L M'LIII
'r:lODD @@. \ ',~.~!~ ~,!ilL!iI elM ..~,,~.IH1 0 0)11 ~~MIIl' ,""M~[!I~0~
)/,
/ / ,
/ " ~
<//' . s:/:8j,j::
/50 "MIIl,~
//' WI~Ii\lSf.
M[S] I.'
/ Mimi;
/ M,IIl,!i
/~,~WI?H',T,'i.M, M M M'M, L.ISl, '~
/,1) 0' <'1!U ~i'Ud~~1
,". <<~ ,,', ," 'u ,,~ '" "" 'h ",'
'~Mi
~ ~M '
~~M
tl2lM
~, !IlS
Ll2l
Ll2l
MJ8l ,
MJIl '
1lI~~~ ~
MSMM M.
~ lZIM
P ~!'!;Il
.! [l]L' . M[I] ~
~ 0M ~~1~
,;:: ,.~:~',i
~ ~L i 4 L0 ~
~;.s M~ J
:~: : ~i~l
M M M'M- ._,,~- -M8- <,
i,~~.~'~ ;~:,.~,
M!S] ~
M0 ::
M lSl ~
S[Sl ~'
M~ -
SJ><
LIJI]
M!SJ 3
M!SJ
MlSJ ~
,,[]I]M, .
,,[lJL ~
~'8."
~ \l[j S
~, 0L
f lI1M
~'~M
t :KM
t:~s
'; [J]M
~ [!]S
~8M
~8M
~URVEYOR'S
,M
:t~\Ji]M
~. iZfM
~ 0..
E [][1M
~'OO.. -
S'""
MIZI ~
5'0M
;~~..
'J8lM 52
~IIlS
~' lIlM
~~M
(\;215
'''l.MM !I
; J8l,:~~~
MtIJ ~;
MlZJ
LlII .'
MrIi
MlS]'
sl!<l
L""
USl
51'
53" Mia
,~ IIiS eo SE
;,' ~M M.0 :'
~. [)'JM M!..S] ~
'lSJS, :, I " M""
i10l.L~0:~ :
-----;;::-... '>C,' '-1/ '''~
Q- SW;
L0 ~
M0 ~
M. ~
LI:8:I 1
;~ !IiM
t~MM s"
',., ~~i~, ,~;,
;J,;C ~----:--:J~_ ----..----"" ~_-"",_-l<-~__ cr' I -Hr"~~.l" "~'i ,M <<F. ",' ,,,. ,'?< ", "~ ,'~t""
o ;, ~Ar~ 56 wa / ,~~ l,k~~'~~O!'~~~'. ~ ~ '1"
I I PLAT'L/ <<-.'" - ,"
/J~L-~. I I H~~~~~~:~f~ ~:':~,~ ~ ~.... ~
"'/_.:....:' -, ""jJlIJ :"_~[ii]~, [ii] IIJ ~ ~
/:-:.5~~:~~-=-~ ~~:~~~~ ~'~:~,~,~J6Q:~-~.~~~~:~'~.:':"~:~",, ". - ...,,,,. ,_. ;;_
Li"'1m ,10"5 '-1m : [.''''Hf' ~1i,'1llw,~10 6\ ~ fi . "I " <5JLlSI. ~ V1:eJ~'
--~- - -- :------L MILjL!~rM'IL IVIM L ~I o'1!"-DfiLf'L L
~~ ~!-~~~ f~!XJ . : ~~,CL. I' '1-"---. ~ ~_~f- ~'IXH.. 66 >
.,Im ,[Sll" 'tSl~'6ff';----;-" u~" ~--4-~
1:.__ -'""1 I~ ' ',I!llL' 'LJ21]
I~' - , I~ ~I 1M L L M c-t L M 'L
, I "i" 'ii Iill:l ~ ~LOCK,,~ ' [!JL I'J [!I' '~I
~.~J oT,r'..., .;--!r-'-z-=--. ~"'~
~"" ':;,",-;)~
<'1U~ ~\l!!SI'1
.. M M ~ Mo -,M S ~
~ _~,l:.62 2. i"8L 6'3 ---'-'-I..[S]~.,
Y!:iH ,::~: :E~; ',;;:.1!
'l2lL ,~,li",,;o 'iii-~,~,~,::~,"
'0~ ~'~-~0~'!
.(S]SMSMMM'
~'J21. ---c~
',ill: 0 " , . -I
.~, ~ ~.~~.0,~~i
<. ., ~ "'~ ou""'"",,,,:,,:
,~~v~M<~ <'1 .i~ 111
M III M' M 'g' M .... It
64
1'1[5]
M M
. . 69
I, ~7
I~~~
IZlM
LLMMM MY
1SJ00U0 n
NEIGHBORHOOD
STRUCTURAL CONDITION
MAP
NEIGHBORHOOD 9
RESIDENTIAL
LIJ SOUND
c;:::::=::J MINOR REPAIR
~ MAJOR REPAIR
_ CLEARANCE
s SMALL
M MEDIUM
L LARGE
LEGEND
COMMERCIAL & INDUSTRIAL
COMMERCIAL
INDUSTRIAL
SOUND
MINOR REPAIR
MAJOR REPAIR
CLEARANCE
2
3
4
+
Scilina COllllllunily l.ne.al 'ro.talll
'roject No. Kanl. 153CI Salina, Kanlal
'repared for City of Salina Kansal,
,.. prIli>lRti.. ,I iii, ...,." ~.."~II .~ed "'(>09" ffdo..I,,,OI
h,,1Ilc i..n,lllli~.."A..i,illr,Iio"ll"Do,omn"l
,I """"1,l1li u"" i..~."",.1. ,"""m..', ",1ioIl IOS
0(1" H,IliIl9 A'I 'I 1119,,, ,...d..
s~;~~8i'?s:;
M ~: ~
&EJ
PLAT 12
PLAT
'gj
I
I
I
I,
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
NEIGHBORHOOD 11
Structural:
Structural blighting is not highly significant in Neighborhood
11. Only 11 or 1.3% of the 854 residential structures are "clear-
ance" struct~res. Ten p~rcent of them are in need of major repair,
27.9% of them are in need of minor repair and the rest are sound.
Blighting is not concentrated to any appreciable degree. In-
harmonious land uses in a few cases are having detrimental effects
upon housing, but most of the deterioration appears to be caused
by the owner's failure to maintain the property.
A few commercial properties along Broadway are in a deterior-
ating condition, but they probably will be removed to make room
for new businesses.
Over-crowding is somewhat a problem, as it is in Neighbor-
hood 7. A few houses should be removed to alleviate the situation.
Environmental deficiencies are not significant in Neighborhood
11. Only six deteriorating auxiliary buildings were found. Weeds,
brush and limbs were found on 59 propert~es. Deteriorating fences,
inoperable vehicles and machinery were found on only 32 properties.
Junk appeared to be more significant than other deficiencies in re-
lationship to other neighborhoods. Fifty-five properties had junk
on them, compared to 36 in Neighborhoods 7 and 14, and 55 in Neigh-
borhood 12-- all having many more residences.
Social Characteristics:
The mean age of the head of household in this area is 48.2
years; there is a relatively low proportion of families without
children, and the age distribution is very similar in its heter-
ogeneity to Neighborhood 9. There is a somewhat higher proportion
of pre-school children in this area, indicating the presence of a
number of young families.
The area has the highest occupational level among all prior-
ity areas in the study. Twenty percent are clearly white collar
workers, minor professionals or managers. Neighborhoods 11 and 12
were the only areas in which any heads of household were employed
among the major professional groups. Income levels follow this'
general pattern. However, there is a sizable group with incomes
of less ,than $75 per week (24.4 percent). The area has one of the
lowest unemployment rates of all priority areas.
-87-
-88-
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
INCOMES OF HOUSEHOLDS IN PRIORITY NEIGHBORHOODS
Percent in Each Income Category
Housing costs in the area are third highest among all the
priority areas '($95 per month). There is a relatively low propor-
tion of renters, though still an important number (36.4 percent).
These residents are relatively satisfied with their housing con-
ditions, according to survey measures. There are very few' houses
judged by renewal standards to need either clearance or major
rehabilitation.
The ~rea has the lowest welfare case rate, and it has a,below-
average unemployment rate. 'Differences within the area are rela-
tivelysl:ight, although the western half of the area has many more
young, children and young families than the eastern half. Corres-
pondingly, the proportion of people over 65 is considerably less,
and the proportion of 3 and 4 member families is more than twice
as high in the west hal.f of the area.
Proposed Treatment:
As the structural blighting in the neighborhood is not con-
centrated, spot clearance and rehabilitation are the only actions
proposed for the neighborhood.
The neighborhood was served by South Park Elementary School,
the use of which was discontintied at the end of the 1~68-69 .
school year. The building was demolished and the ,site will be used
for a neighborhood park, as there is no neighborhood park in the
I
I
I
I
I
,
,,/
"
-'/
J/
/
.~
-1~'~1;-- ~r~~~~-: - ~ li~l" '~~(SJi;-'-'-'~~~'I:';~'l; ~,,-~~- :';-im.:.r;.~;r--.:ii!::~~~~" :~~~ -:;~:~~~~-:I'~r:~i1-~"
1-~t21 ~~ ~M M" lit ~ ': 'tot M lit IltM0 1;:; ," L L..12I !:. I M lit I L :;~ ~;~M-,t" ~.; I~_ L ",~ ~:;ii0M-M-" ~~ Iil.. -t~t~ ~
:":;'ciJl:!O<i'!ic~jj ,[!l.> , \ ~,IZlM.~~'E!l.-.'-ri'_i!cjJ.'--:-~.ij~"- '.S'ic~~_o_!'J.I;,~cl2!:&:.
tM1Zlk,1i2j..!'IIr'0' '1Zl. ..[l;]l ,[SJ.=IZl.. l.--~ - ~l'lZl. ,.s '~L LIIJ ~[I).'LIZl~
3.mki12l.4 . i(SJ.. 0.1Zl1: ;Sl'JlB!JI;:~:_~~,,:;[l;]. ,! MIZl~dIZlMI .'" ~-IZl.IO.~:::-=(ID.II-;;;-~'
f_"~I;:~.l?l~'_M.~ ;~M_ ~"[S]I: )SJM~;~~~IZl'; ,---,,-_!l .~~t~."-_:"'.~:~~_~_~~:I[SJM' ~
."",-[I)...(SJ :[S].' ..[S]t ,(SJ.:i:i3li~.I!!I,,:,[I). ' .s:"I8!~ 'LIZI'''IZl. ,.[S]' J[s]L 'LIZl'
.-A jo.lc I ~_ _ _ --j' "lS3M .0"t M~~ ------ .;;[S]M - .'[S]M MGIJ ;- .
,"1II1~~1;;;E::],,'..0' f0,., 0..004 t.[![]M:~I~' M" ~:~~_--':"'-:S"i.t011l I oM18 :---~-'}=L+-----..riJ.
~-..cDj: :'12lM" Mt8:I ~ I: fi:)..- ,,.(1) 1:: . [![JM'41E ~ ;~L .IE. ; [![JM . M[][J~:" i-i. ~[lJM ,[![J :,.l2'" .
. . . _ __., _ . ,f... [![]!IIMl5:J . -tal.. ~ - - fl-.l2I1! ' , L.[SJ~. ~ [SlM M[![J ~ [![1M M[][I
,~~~~a"M~ ~~M' lI>M0'; :[S]M~~~lZ'Il .l8Iit~~_~_M[![If~ M~~:~[SJ-; .
-~~~ "'"0.. M~ ~ ; ~M--;- -;;-M0~' ; (SJM ~Ij. :rmr:- --i~. 'i[!]~ > M- ;.C!D1It I . LIZI { !;~: 'M[S] ,! ~= 1 MI2P
-fi. - ~ ~ . :. - --, JZJ': ~3Sl : I M.:~:~ ~ - ;.- --- ;r~~ MI.SI .. ;___~.~l
~lrl8l::EM'Ml:Zl ;rmM~' "'M0-! 9M2 ~t-T;-M.).;;r:M ~~...~M 1......121; k"M!!,"M~ILL L[I]
,~~ ."". :~~ ; 1iJ..0 '~IZl: 'h' M .:,;:,. :~'~ '1!J00 ~ : .0! ?1Zl~~I,~0LI2I; ~01fj ~ ~~ ..:.~~ LI2I
i "'ORRI,ON ~.~ ./< n' . .1,,, "f ." - ~ a ~.. ,_ 'l;."?_4'5'''''''''7.,_~,,!;~lr, .~,1.
~w... ._.~ '_'.121 .i'.[S] I, ; ......~R.I5.D.~." MllID..~ :~'0"~0~;,iJt,1.1IiIIl;... ".~;;;...~~~'~il';;'~..:'::~ ~<2ii:ri;.m,I!, ..-i10 ff'~~!.
....m~~.[SlM..Ml"2I~ i~rmM M M(!J~ ."LM" ;MM.~~, .'!"_".'~~.~~!'l~~Ii(SJ" L M M!Zl~~~::: ",=~,;=:O-::=:-fiD
;- M0;"'~'-0MNM0 ~ ~ 0M ' . MID ~ ' 3'RD< ~_~. ~'I2IM ' ilhH~" S13Hi' ' . htl2! ~ "'-- -
.~ -;~~ ~.[i]M'oM~ ~ ~:-~-~'~-~~'~-cm~1~' (ei!A. --{.:'. - '~__;~~~t --------;-- ~~~ S'(I]M'- :F MElD: ~~ " _ ~
;~ ,:",'!.13.~, ,1Zl-.,I~. (SJ~ ,i8l.,,_0'1 . '~ ~: :;;t-:.;}'i~,,-m. ,QJ. .I,t .tsll ~~"N0T!:;'-:'or:.:iij----'r.O.m
~l ~;~I;<IZl.".IZl, ~~.,F,~[S]~ ,~u'~IVti_~t;~0h,0~~'iS.0IhlZl., ,KUtllf&l',IJL
~.. ~~'l2j~~'.[S]IIt'~~[s]\'~ ~t21M",r'.M~.~~ ~........,..' ~; (on",. .....- ..,- ~ ~.~.. ".:"":;':',:.,; n ~
n~. ~~:'[s]M-'.M(S]~ ~'lZI~'t"" [![j 1W."5~I"'GTON ~. Ion.....,,".'.........1 .".-",s"~'~...~.,. .-. ~-~.>,- .
, .~1SJ, ~'[S].".rm; i.p. ,:!P::~; ;.i:~,.'t"l"""',.. ..""...,",. 0;.;. :i',' .'....., 'l~:
",.m".., ,1Zl"~ .""""ji- ""..ll'I'''' ,. '..... .'......"". "3RD'-~'-
;1 .j" [S]. .[S]j' ,. ,.. ,-- ...'! "'.. . I' .. I. , .. -,.
',~ 1lI~'''~ "' .::1 ~llil..." '......(SJ..;; -~. -- ----, .."1.....'2' >.,...." ...lZl....... "..'.'.ESJ'". . . ' EOfI<).TI!tJ.
l : ~ '",... m ""~'. "':,::1Il 0 ADD ..[!]~.;:. ,..,.. .'_ ,_ _; ~i", .'on. '.___",--_ :,1.~II!-?~o..-A.pD__'___.__"
,~,., ~A'I<t.~'~!i;~~;~.~~~ 'I'~.~~~;~F~'.\~, ~;~!:'1~~ '.!~ '~lf~;::~~~) ~~;l;,~~~,J~;'
_ ., 0 oif#f'~,.~~ ~ 0.12.';' 000!!10~1!I~ _.01l1010~ Iicili" .1!t:m\!lIll-W'I2l"}IZl.l!Iil1!ll1!~11! .1Zl
. PAt.COlT 6'" #' ,,., 11, ,,,,,~ _ '.... /",-.. 'p ,,' .'. "6....... ...~. $.<' .u'''' ~." .V[ ~
\. ~~"~ ~.~'?~~"'~'~.[S] n-I2\.~""~J" ;~'~'~' l" ~-~' ~.0~"'-;'~' ~"~;"1" :~. 0'~~ID"~0";.1Zl ~.. 00~".'- T~:-
_ ~OU.Hlj ..!"MAR~~:'ieIMM" MlilM~ :;;fI....M_M ~~....!'~ :;~~~~~ ~...!.~-"'-. 1M LOIl
23 MCSJij'0" M[J]~'~IIlM SI3lM I M0~:[![JMfll M~.
!' : ,1Zl. J4_: 11lll. 'J5' .lIJ SIZl~__'- L__"-Illl' S[I). 7'.tsl! ![];J~~~-
M,[iJ~ ~[!]M, MCSJ) ~0M, M[S] :[1]" ,~" M!3J<,,~ Ef 0 :~~ 116 .M.~
M (S] '.: ~ (!]M M[SJ ~ ~ l1IJM M0 .. ~ LIlM M0... t2'1M I ~ ~S~ MCII ~
. N.[SJ: E [S]M ; lSlM , -~- ..ciJ ~ ;!SlM - 1-- -MrSl {~M --:- ~ 1-" :,8M , I .
M [J[] ~ a (XlM M[SJ [iJM M(I1 ~ ~ [IlM MlZI:': '",," I >- ~ 0 M 1 Lt2I
;MlZlL M Mi::u~ "MMM- -M- MCIJ- ~-[SlM~ M,iMMM[!) 1M1iMMM-11'--- ,- ~IMM"[SJs
. ~ 's. ~ UHll!I ~ .(]!J, "'!!!i!1!I0.oo, 1~~~L'0 < '01!11!!1!i 0'11
i M~' ",~_n'''' y,~ .12.;...." ~.,.
: "~:l j i~,'l-- :~' L~: ~:\ln:;J:!!!!p- ~~
':. ! _ M 0 , ,tslS , . .[JI] ~ '{l[l. , '. .tsl,
~~;~I' :i:: 0,: n:::: .~~H~~~ ::
c._ M~_1~l_~s. M~ L~_~!. .:_ _~ _ M.[B]~g;~ [JJ..' M[JJ
. M.8~;~0S M[S]I:;~[][]M ,M[S]~~il3JM,. Ml!J
~:p1f.L-. -'_I: ~[SJ ~1~ :ii.;--. -..--.-~,~:q!,::. .i'. .::,
~"'~ 1!I.~;'_:~,:_C~I___~:_[s]._{:~{~~__"S~~.~_~~1Zl
!:mr--
- -- -- --- -- - - -.- -- -- . -- - .-.- -- - ---- - - - - - - -- -- -- --. ---
I
i
I
I
I
-,,;:,---_..
I
I
/
/
/
/.<
./
/
/
/
,/
//;;
/' .
/
/
/
,
/
/
/
/
r-;:'
,
/
I
/~
" ~
I
I
~
:1
~
-------.:i'....:...--:
I
/
/
/
/
MOBILE HOME
PARK
I
,
/
/
,
I. : C-I~
.! ~.O~
I~ ~
HEb
'0,
!f"L,..r: Nu""
;
i"
_._._ ._._._.____._._._._._._._._..._ ._._._l'-:"'-.~~~._. _.:.._~_
L"'"
.tsl
.[S].
.(]!J
.121.
L[ID
."".
""
I M'*'M .
~l!Irn
I
'" ...
~~"l"ll!'O___________
1M__.IIn...,,_....,........f...~"...
k.....I....~lu""."Uaioilll_~...lIofomo...
.IH."i.I."'Urb.o.~.......I..'"'..,....,"'...1lI1
,I~. 1Ioo1i'1 A'I ~ 1111.., I~..d.d
NEIGHBORHOOD
STRUCTURAL CONDITION
MAP
I
Salina Ca",,,,unily R.n..al Pro,ra'"
Ptoj.ct No_ Kanl_ RS3CR Salina, Kania I
Pt.par.d for City of Salina Kansal,
By BUCHU I WILLIS Consulting Enllin..rs,
Plann.rs, Archit.ctl, 1969.
I
+
II
NEIGHBORHOOD 11
RESIDENTIAL
~ SOUND
= MINOR REPAIR
~ MAJOR.,REPAIR
_ CLEARANCE
S SMALL
M MEDIUM
L LARGE
LEGEND
COMMERCIAL & INDUSTRIAL
~ COMMERCIAL
~ INDUSTRIAL
I SOUND
2 MINOR REPAIR
3 MAJOR REPAIR
4 CLEARANCE
b
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
area. The kindergarten cottage should be maintained as a com-
munity center. The site will be somewhat small for a neighborhood
park, but playground equipment for tots and limited playing fields
can be maintained for older children.
Although there is no elementary school in the neighborhood
since the closing of South Park, it is well-served by Whittier and
Franklin Schools.
The streets in the neighborhood are paved and in good condi-
tion, but a few of them are somewhat narrow. The neighborhood is
well-served by utilities.
Reloc3tion will pose no problem in the neighborhood because
of the limited number of families that will be displaced by any
action.
NEIGHBORHOOD 12
Structural:
Residential structural blight is not significant in Neighbor-
hood 12. Only 18 or 1.6% of the residential structures are "clear-
ance". Ninety-two or 7.8% are in need of major repair, and 346 or
29.4% are in need of minor repair. Sound structures account for
61.2% of all housing. Structural blight is not concentrated, ex-
cept for three dilapidated houses in Blocks 16, 17 and 18. Busi-
nesses, the river and the railroad along Fourth Street are having
limited detrimental effects, but mos~ of the blighting appears to
result from failure of individual owners to properly maintain the
residences. Conditions of several of the businesses as well as
the residences qualify the area for Urban Renewal clearance.
Environmental deficiencies are not significant in Neighborhood
.12. Only 16 deteriorating auxiliary buildings were recorded in
the survey. Weeds, limbs, brush, unsightly fences, machinery, in-
operable vehicles and junk were found at a slightly greater ratio
to the number of properties than in Neighborhood 7, but to a lesser
degree than in N~ighborhoods 4, 9 and 11.
Neighborhood 12 is well-served by community facilities. While
only one elementary school, Gleniffer Hills, is located in the
neighborhood, it.is well-served by elementary schools in surround-
ing neighborhoods. Salina's two major city-wide parks, Oakdale and
Kenwood, serve the active and passive recreational needs of the
neighborhood.
-89-
)
-90-
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
Streets in the neighborhood are all paved and in good condi-
tion. Layout of the streets because of the location of the Smoky
Hill River and the parks does no~ facilitate quick transit from
one area of the neighborhood to the other.
Social Characteristics:
This area has a much younger population than other areas,
with 24.6 percent between the ages of 5 to 20. There are few
widows or widowers, though 55 percent of the sample were families
without children. The mean age of the heads of households in
this area was 48.3 years.
The occupational level of this area is similar to that of
other ,areas, with a somewhat larger proJ;>ortion employed in other
than laboring jobs. Nearly thirty perc~nt have incomes of more
than $125 per week, and over 50 percent have incomes of more than
$100 per week. There is no sizable group with incomes of less
than $50 per week.
Housing costs are the highest of ~ny priority area ($108 per
month). There are very few housing complaints. This, area has
many more large houses than any other priority area (22 percent).
There is a relatively low proportion of renters, though still an
important number (31.7 percent). This is an area of low mobility
in general, although it does house a rather high proportion of
new residents to Salina. The mobility desires and expectations
of the area residents in the study sample were rather low. Very
few houses in this area were judged to need clearance or major
rehabilitation.
This area has next to the lowest unemployment rate among all
the priority areas studied, a relatively low welfare case rate',
and only a moderate school drop-out rate.
Proposed Treatment:
Utilities w~thin the neighborhood are adequate for the present
and future until development takes place east of the bend in the
Smoky "Hill River and west of Ohio Street.
Blighting conditions in the neighborhood should be alleviated
mainly through spot clearance and rehabilitation of properties
that are deteriorating. High-rise apartments for golden agers
or other age groups should be constructed on lots'needing clearance
I
I
~_Iioool......"_,ill!.... .....1.-' ,........
....~_..ll".....U.ioisIr...............
.Hoo~."",",~,odoriIod.I_'~
............l<l..ltSt,.........
,MIIl i
," "'0
~ !IJ"" ...0
tel,," "'[I]!
"IIJ"" ...lJJ"
~ lIJM.." ooLIZl i
~."
~~
0i00~ ~"0'~ "~'~~:0j
. L L M I M L M L L' M L N -j
,121M , , SAL~~I'
.l>!l" . . . . ,"-.~
~. I2l .." . r ,< 8 r;;-~:
.. [![1M Ml2"l.tr1:
;' 181M ilo" ~.iZJ ~ ;
,,g.. i "121 !
~.121" 'j " n'M~~
0~ ' M~~~:
,~...I.
.. .. L ACo!:"" · l!r.!', I ·
~ ~ .~ . '" n.~lf I .
~,-,---,,,.,,H"J1 /.;;5','n.",,_",
""11-
OR... ..
" , . " . . I
. , . .. :
I, . : ,: ,: .
, .,: ," ", ~ ! ~
J., ,,.., '.~
/
/ 'fY,r
// r!"~
/
/
. / ;/
/ /
I .
/ f
I .
, / ;I
:_J '/
f
f
I
::L~~ :i"ll'~$;ii'~"~:D'{~!~;--ii' iJ~0 0.'''''1 ,:0' "".,m r.;:" :\;;;;;;';;";"1';;;;;:1
l___~',l.'::.l2! :!LLILL:" L :'["":l L ...... 12 'l.J~'l.J ILl 1LJ12l1o"'lI1lJ'l.J'QI'lJ
\121" ' "<.I!J ~ : ;.I!JL : ADD 4 ;ISlS SI2I I" L ... . L I .. : L ,L'. .. L L,
:f;~i~!' il=1h . r;~&.r,;;l ;;~ ~;~;; · ~~.~..:~:
~I' :,.~L 111/1: f> :r.:1s .L5' b "" .:'.,""12111: ~1Sl. "'11."", "SI2II2I,i,'.,;:;: r '~;,;
C~. :,~ :,~:" '~C>I@~! dt {~;;;~.oIC:':";, _:,0" ., '" "0...
~~y:- :.~::!~I~'I.~I"I~I~:'I~~i~;0i~. ;~~::.:l:J I~iilirlij:!; il:~~i;; ~ ~~ii [.0'
'"<'~..,I.. ."I'II~I"I":~I!LL~:" I :!~~IlI:~~'''1 ~~ ~..&I,.C>I,..~.,:~,i l..='''
~ iljSl~, I.;" :.~. ~, ~~i \'''''' . .
'~\i{J]:'I:'ri~::::I~ r~:,~!.:!~i;~dl: r~s', .;:!~i~~, !j'.r~iiiil
1..!~10,0,.i1'J !l!iL"?I~ ~,1!J.219.' .0..1~ 'I2IL"zi ".1211,,<00101 2'2".. : .
" DP-:~/"''; t" "'P~.C\'. ~'0\. 'oJ~_'~~~~ ~[lJM ~.po M[S]j:~~~~s'" 'o'ADD.,f~ -~~: [SJM,.
["-;;"r........'..,'..-.".. ,,121M "I" .121~ 'jJ. ~' "0. ~~- 1',0'
.:ii+'~i~~f'II~:IlI;I~ik11 j '-;;. ._1'11121._' "-"181,::, . 0 ~ ..tm,I~: 0."
.....1 "Ill,",s "~l ,~'GiI .0' ,,0. , ,. ,"" <," ',,' --1' .00..
~:121" ~7"~'~~:l '..:"o:.:...~:~',,':~./~- ;:/'~~~~" "--=--...~~"!:~:'
i~[3]~L :~;..~:l~~'!!~,ll~<~~ ~-~--" '\ \ \- .0:';~::
~ ~ 1M L: EPtAT-~di0~3~ )/'"1___' \ L ~~/~~ ~ \\\ \ \ 50 ~ i[S]Mn
o~ICl!i:IM I~ 0,0 I -M!:!l.~'~ y '"" ________ / / \" 8~ [SJM20
. *...,~ ~..~ ~ KENWOOD I ..
f' 00"'" P'""''' ~ . (", . /'/ '::'::1'" '^" I J- ..,,;,~, ,"'m;',
/ '0 /' L' ; ......d'k' _. ";'
,~I'l...f8,' ~~..0i1 . ~I (1/ ~ l'v~;: I l~; .~~ ' ..[11 [!ls,
~ ~..~ -.:0; ,~-j.JI /;} ( ( j" ,/ iL',2E~~'V~OI(: ;-(S]S ' .50 [S]S'
12I!t""~: V:.!5-"/ v( "::::.'. ~ \ //."~v<~'.:::~ ~:
!3E:~\~/ · //(~ 80 JI( \' /~{;<;;:\:~.; ::~Ji:
t~;::~: ;: :.!~; ?~ ';: ~!, . ~ .1".' ~. 4 . / ~ ~\)l\dll: /., \) \~0 / '1;;;~~~::::'3W ~~~::;~ .~;< '~-m-~ ..-~~-:':, '4;~t
: : 121. L 121 : ~ i I2IL LI2I I / ( / / / "\ (\ \) ,.. .. L L s: s,: ' ,;! ,; l' ,~~ ~ J' ~ "
!:~~~' !:~~~;: 8. 1i:..I: i .1 f {\;;~q; . (j, l V .,! "oo,~j:Ji;~,'r"j:',ri"@~iJij\I'
l~~~; ;;~::;, ~ ;~. ~:: ,-" 1\\\ ,~~1( /11](- . ~. mi &i~~i;~~j~;~:,\jki.:,~:
it.~! ;~;.;~.i~;;I; :~~; 1~~;::~",.,:~~~~ / Y/\.I i tJ ,~ 48 ~ E]~t~,~tt~f';~,7~:,~:j
'-1lfi.'L~; 'D, 1 "" ';,~.". t'(I]~, i' ''': 47 ",~,p / ~.~ 1 U .#" . ;'~ r-511' "'.(IJ..il' ~ ~ ~5lIl' or, ../'
l~:;'i.1SJ ; , ; , ,ail, 1&"1/1" I' '. .' :.../ ~ .... ~ tiP']'~ .~ /' ._--~ ~~ /,"----) , ;:J ';(""c!"""I,-L~..;'.i,"..'.~.'.l~..;'~'~ ' '.. - -:'~:,^ ;7D."J:'''.11 !
. ISJM ~~L I' "~,," iii "t :,~ ~ ~ 1i,IiI iii II . I!!I .----/ ~ --...........~__/- ;'iii L'..l' ~'. ~ .. -
~ ~E"~. 'eo, . .._." ::.. "...... -" ,. . p. ." ' ,'.1-.,. _2,-' J"~~-" ,...:!
,~L . .~, ~ .!.i~ir~iliil~il,;l.. / \~ HC~"';; ..."-~ ,...,
!~~;~;!l.f.._ "::'.;::~~~~:n~,~~I,.i:i:E":~L6..2l:'''-~I.."''.~,'/!\/ I; ~ t.i~ t5tSE !~;
, ,___,,_ .n, ",IZIL~, !'I/I 'II A <1jJ _n ,,~ >on "."{ -.' ," .." ..., "".
,..... .. ~' .; .w. , , 1/1.,'.'1,"',_ ',.IiI,,;,. ,i.. iI., ,~;:. ','., ..,'.'...<;......,'_~. \.
I::";:.,.. .,;... . . .. F .'''''~::'m";;''-= "- '-' ~;;"CC,~ ,,> ~ :,1"':': ' , .;.i :.h...
: i~@~O~T~ ; ~~ f~ ,~r;~~:~:~~R~. j~~: }:f,~tIF~W' ,;.j~~> It; f'~E;DA2LE p iL2 58 I;;~ ' '~~::f'" ~ :.'
jf~~':_:_: ::~-T::; !~~)l ~~~" 1:1~: *,~; :~q: :!:n~ .~'~ )1, ; ",,".m' 61 y :~:~~tBl{;4:l!EJ
, .. _, 0' "'I. ,~ ,.., .; ".. .~ ,.,. ..~ -'65 '.~, ; .- "~ " "\. .}~. ~ .. .
1 [3]. ! ~:; }~n_t,o_-~;.'.' ,.. ::n:: · .~ ,,~, .,~ 'eo,'~' .., .... 4." .. .".... ~(tJ..f,W .. . "
l~~ J ~;; l::~~~:, .":.:':: ::r:~::, ~:::'I~.:= li~i>~::. :~t~::~~: ~IP.J.",,~~ "Ji7I~"t;>l'fv~:~;;,.. ."''''''"'7.i/-;;;;;; :.~:~~~ ~~\\-~~;!
'00. ' LiIJ :,~-::t---- 1'& ... 1:-.... ,.-",..., "LI2I ;I!JL";" .. " '.:.\ \ 'L' 6 :'-', -------,,----------- ,', ,~,~ ..'~~'v." 7f; , .. \!I.\~\~y~,
t~: . ~__..LlZI_~ ~r-[SJ: ~'1.~~~." u:,,: it: ~ :....;. e1,,':_l2JI!J.M. i,:t:::: ;I2IS" :'~:;~ !--IiJL~~;L::~h' 68 5 ~ '~~ ,t,: ~ ~''-~'"'''' ',' ::'r . ~ 1:' "1~"o > \~S~t:"~ i~
1 ,.121;,[3]. S:,u..,,~ I'."ISJ.' " ,..u..' ,,',' 67, ) .... 1il,/ffllE!!ll2l'iii=, ~ -~ I ,\ij!' ;'3.~,:~....,;;:,_,:,;.,'~Vl,'..
l :: _ 1_ ~:_. d :: __' ~ . ,~, '. :~. !~. :Fu ;,;~~ :::, i ~-:t ::-. : ,---.. ~.. ~ ~ · ~., . :. .:, " '-~ ,.Jii:r tj.~" ~~ T ;':f!'!. ".-11"
j;'iIJ" '_L"~ J~[3]. ." . ;,i;~L ":..ikJ,,l:il: kj:.:: !.:ISJL"".[J]~.J""i~.~'....;~ .. .,~~.,;, ~;~,i.>:,.M~....."il~~7.5.'.. ~-
,r-I. _ 'h--.~L--L~ '. : '''lfI ,1(1]11 Igl,!2I". ".[I]!;s' '.. '1: ....,' , , , ,:2 "~ ,il :~L ..ciJ.1:c,"Er~I~J-:i['~ 11""""
.,i B-' ~I ~ "~'i. ",~ ~ ~I " AD'.__...__~'{(J.L ".~__";_.._:;_._JI!_'.,,.; __~_po__lr,I!-~-.:.., '~":" :: ,~ ; ',:~,:_,.'~' ::~L:':'c:,_:m~"'_""'2'070 .,~" rrg'l ,,' , ...:J"~"..il.." ~, '"
,._..___ _ _n u _ _I _ ~ . 7:l " :.: .-: hi:. ',.iii"';:;;:m~:'~'-I':::'I""J~:}~~~:::y~:j;11o~
_n_____. m_ ' ~ ; ADDI ': -,p'tt \~~~1 ~l~L~ ~ ~ ~lh~l~', o'~
~, :"'_~~: _ ~__ I ~~~I~J_~~" ;-~~ 1 'J~~~r_ '_ - jD___ ~=,_ ~_ ___ _ jl_ ~_~_ _ ~"~ __
I
\~.:::lC~
..I'
, . il.
15
I
I
I
I
S.nna Co..,..,tity ..n.wol Pro,rClJll
'roject No. Ka,'II. .53C. Salina, KanlClI
'r.~.,.t1 for City of Salina Kania.,
:1~~n~~I~~.rc: i:C~~~\~6~~n.u Iting Eng inun,
I
I
I
I
I
78
I
I
J:
"
t
NEIGHBORHOOD
STRUCTURAL CONDITION
MAP
NEIGHBORHOOD 12
I
RESIDENTIAL
u::J SOUND
= MINOR REPAIR
~ MAJOR REPAIR
_ CLEARANCE
s SMALL
M MEDIUM
L LARGE
LEGEND
COMMERCIAL & INDUSTRIAL
COMMERCIAL
INDUSTRIAL
SOUND
MINOR REPAIR
MAJOR REPAIR
CLEARANCE
2
3
4
I
-.-:... ..!.-_.->--~-,~-.- ~-
'00+
.ii.,,,,. ,
; ~
- ~ . ,.-.-.-. ::. - .~ .
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
in Blocks 16/ 17 and 18. Old Washington School is in a dilapidated
condition and is not suitable for continued use for any community
activities. It and the small frame building nearby should be de-
molished and the land used by U.S.D. 305 for other purposes. The
special education center located on the site probably will be main-
tained much as it is at the present time.
Relocation:
Relocation of families in Neighborhood 12 as a result of Urban
Renewal actions will not present any problem because only nine clear-,
ance structures were occupied. Relocation opportunities for families
are available within the neighborhood, and opportunities are avail-
able in other neighborhoods for families within the capabilities of
those in Neighborhood 12.
NEIGHBORHOOD 14
Structure:
Neighborhood 14 has residential structural conditions that are
unique, as the housing was hastily and inexpensively constructed
in the early 1950's; its durability is not what is e'xpected of
conventional housing constructed during that period. While only
14 or 1. 4% of the structures were found to be "clearance" in na-
ture, the number of structures needing major or minor repair con-
stitute serious blight for the neighborhood. Two hundred twenty or
21.3% of the houses need major repair and 330 or 32.1% of them are
in need of minor repair. A large portion of the houses will need
to undergo extensive rehabilitation to make them durable for anot-
her 20 years. Since 334 of those in need of repair were vacant,
and they were inexpensively constructed, their deterioration can
be expected at a faster rate than for conventional housing. ~ The
Federal Housing Authority owns most of the houses and has rehabil-
itated some. It has established a policy of selling for removal
those that cannot be reasonably rehabilitated or for which there
is no market.
Environmental deficiencies ',vi thin Neighborhood 14 are not sig-
nificant. Weeds, brush and limbs constituted minor environmental
blighting, especially around vacant residences. Due to the rela-
tively recent_ development of the neighborhood, deteriorated aux-
iliary buildings constitute no problem.
All areas of Neighborhood 14 are well-platted providing curv-
ilinear streets and lots of sufficient area. All streets are paved
and in good condition. All utilities are adequate in the area.
-91-
-92-
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
-I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
The neighborhood is well~served by Sunset School which is op-
erated at less than capacity, due to the many vacant houses in the
area. Centennial Park was established after the removal of several
deteriorated houses in Block 8. The 3-acre park is somewhat small"
under-developed, and away from the center of population in the
neighborhood; but it does serve fairly well the recreational needs
of the residents.
Social Characteristics:
This area contains the highest proportion of young familie~,
the lowest proportion of female heads of households, the fewest
residents over 65 years of age (only 1.5 percent) and clearly, the
most children between ages 5 and 20. Nearly 75 percent of the
heads of households in this area are less than forty years of age.
Only 14.3 percent of the families in this area are childless, the
lowest by a wide margin. Truly, this is the priority areas'
KIDDIELAND.
The median occupational rank of residents of this area in
the sample was that of skilled worker; the median educational rank
was that of high school,graduate. The respondents from this area
consistently identified themselves as working class rather than
middle class. Eighty-five percent so identify themselves, in con-
trast to only 50 percent in Neighborhood 9 and 43 percent in Neigh~
borhood 7. While Neighborhood 9 has a greater proportion of
respondents with incomes of more than $125 per week, the proportion
for respondents in this area is not much lower, and there are many
fewer with incomes of less than fifty dollars per week in this area.
This ~s an area which absorbs a large proportion of residents
new to Salina. Thus, it has the lowest average length of residence
of any other priority area (mean length of residence is 2.9 years,
in contrast to 26 years in other priority areas). The respondents
in this area are not all people who are new to Salina, for the
mean length of residence in Salina is 8.1 ,years.
Housing complaints in this area were quite low. The area has
the lowest proportion of housing needing major rehabilitation.
Housing costs are moderate in this area compared with other pri-
ori ty areas; the aver'age housing cost of respondents in the sample
was $100 per month, including utility bills. There is less home
ownership in this area (57.1 percent) .,' There are few minority
group residents living in this area.
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
The unemployment rates for this.
priority areas (4.2 per thousand).
school drop-out rates are among the
area are the lowest in all
The welfare case rates and
lowest.
Proposed Treatment:
Much of the action necessary to make the neighborhood a viable
residential area should be left to the FHA. Significant action is
now being taken through a removal program that eventually will en-
compass the sale of approximately 200 or more properties. If no
market can be found for other properties owned by FHA, additional
structures probably will be removed. Removal of the most seriously
blighted structures should change the image of the neighborhood
and serve as an inducement to new development.
The neighborhood offers many advantages for redevelopment.
Streets and. utilities are present and adequate. It is well-situated
in relationship to shopping facilities, schools, interstate high-
ways, and industries located at the Salina Airport and in other
areas. It is quite probable that the neighborhood could be re-
developed as .a viable neighborhood to adequately serve low to
medium income families as a durable residential area.
The only public action recommended for the neighborhood is to
expand and improve Centenntial Park, making a roadside park facing
Crawford. The roadside park will give visitors entering Salina
from the Crawford interchange of I-3SW a better impression of the
City than they now receive.
Relocation:
Renewal actions in Neighborhood 14 will not create any problem
of location, because many of the houses proposed for removal for
park expansion are vacant, and there is a considerable number of
vacant houses within the neighborhood. Neighborhood 14 should
be considered to have great potential for relocation possibilities
for those displaced by actions in other neighborhoods. . Care will
need to be exercised to avoid transporting a ghetto to the neighborhood
or allowing a ghetto to be created.
.\
-93-
.~-
\1:;-,
"
"./'
,K /;
~I-' :-"''"i;...'W<U.-_;~//J
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
,
I
!
_L._ "
Salina Community Renewal Program
Project No. Kanl, RS3CR Salina, Kanlal
Prepared for City 01 Salina Kanlal,
By BUCHER & WILLIS Conlulting Engin..,
Planners, Architectl, 1969.
~~ ';;:~:.~I~:~::. ';':':~::::': ~ fftn ....,
.I!Imiot...un..,~"",",;mIrr"di.,el
.1"0 hOg 1<1,11959 OJ .~.......
\
NEIGHBORHOOD 14
""=--~--"'----
I
RESIDENTIAL
[TI SOUND
~ MINOR REPAIR
~ MAJOR REPAIR
_ CLEARANCE
S SMALL
M MEDIUM
L LARGE
LEGEND
COMMERCIAL & INDUSTRIAL
COMMERCIAL
INDUSTRIAL
SOUND
MINOR REPAIR
MAJOR REPAIR
CLEARANCE
I
2
3
4
'00 f
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
ECONOMIC BASIS
FOR RENEWAL
SALINA COMMUNITY
RENEWAL PROGRAM
(I
,
I
I
I
ECONOMIC BASIS FOR RENEWAL
CITY GROWTH . . . .
Population Projections
I
I
I
Population figures for Salina, Saline County and Kansas from
1940 to 1967 were used in making projections of the Salina and
Saline County population to 1990.
I
I
I
I
During the period, Salina's population grew from 20,917 to
38,024 in 1967 for an increase of 17,107 persons or approximately
81.4 percent. This represented a gain at an over-all rate of
approximately 3.01 percent per year. Salina's growth was not
uniform during the years between 1940 and 1967, but the population
trends reflected the re-activation of the Schilling Air Force Base
during 'the Korean War and its closing in 1965. The population of
Salina reached a peak of 43,285 in 1963, then declined to 38,024
in 1967. The county enumeration in 1969 reported the Salina popu-
lation to be 39,013 and the preliminary Bureau of Census reports
on March 1, 1970, the Salina population to be 37,095.
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
Three projections of the Salina population to 1990 are made.
The lowest estimate is calculated at the Kansas rate of growth
made in the I-B projections of the Bureau of Census and reported
in "Population Estimates" in the Current Population Reports, Series
P-25, No. 326, February 7, 1966, published by the u.S. Department
of Commerce. The projection is based upon a population growth
rate of .76% per year and would produce a population of 45,000 by
1990.
The I-B projections are made upon the assumptions that the
gross migration rates of the 1955-60 period will continue through
1985 and that there will be a very moderate decline in the fertil-
ity rates from 1965 through 1985.
The second projection is based upon the extension to 1990 of
the growth line on a graph from 1940 to 1967. This yields an
average growth rate from 1967 to 1990 of 1.58% per year or a pro-
jected population of 52,000.
The third projection is based upon the growth of Salina from
1940 to 1967 in relationship to the growth of Kansas. In 1940,
the population of Salina was 1.0% of the population of Kansas;
while in 1967 it was 1.69% of the population of Kansas. By plot-
ting this growth relationship and extending the line to 1990, an
I
I
-95-
estimate is that the popu~ation of Salina will be 2.13% of the
Kansas population under projection I-B. Application of the 2.13%
to the 2,692,000 estimated Kansas population yields a population
projection for Salina of 57,700.
I
I
I
The rural population of Saline County, including those living
in the small incorporated cities, has not changed significantly
since 1940. The decline in farm population and the changes caused
by re~activation and closing of Schilling Air Force Base have
caused minor fluctuations. The downward trend in farm population
is expected to continue, but it will be off-set somewhat by settl-
ing in rural areas surrounding Salina. The rural population is
expected to taper off to approximately 8,000 by 1990. Thiswill
yie~d a total population for Saline County of 53,000; 60,000; and
65,700, respectively, at the low, middle and high estimates.
I
I
Salina has an airport that is equal to or superior to that
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
The low or conservative estimate of population for Salina
and Saline County is used in most esttmates in this report as the
basis for projecting the minimum level of service that should be
provided within Salina. It is quite reasonable to predict that
the population will reach or exceed this level by 1990. Popula-
tion project~ons for Salina of 65,000 to 75,000 by 1990 have been
made by some, but these levels of population growth do not appear
attainable unless considerable additional industrial development
is accomplished in the period up to 1990.
Geographic Analysis
Salina, county seat of and almost the center of Saline County,
is located 80 mil~s southeast of the geographical center of the 48
contiguous states and is the closest city with a population of
over 25,000 to that center. The junctions of Interstate Highways
35W and 70, u.S. Highway 81 and State Highway 140 at Salina pro-
vide transcontinental highway accessibility second to none.
Saline County is served by four railroads--the Union Pacific,
Missouri Paciflc, Rock Island, and Santa Fe. Salina is on the
main line of the Union Pacific Railroad and has daily passenger
service to Kansas City on the east .and to the west to Denver and
the West Coast. Daily freight service is provided by the other
three railroads by short connecting lines to main l~nes providing
service to and from both coasts and most other parts of the United
States.
-96-
I
I
I
I
I
VICINITY MAP -
I I~ ~I ~I~ 0 :1: ~I ,! :1: ~I ~ : _" . COUNTY ~I
I OTTAWA '-.." ..0.1 ; ::-:1-' '- .
'j ". "...."'., ),-:-~ ;r-irF""'n-'.~ '~['\f%.'~~ loA,:;;;: .-. 'L,~ AI';' P-.il\;."'? ;./: . ;"~J' ,.~~); '\\ m
I ,,. ~i\, t\ .l;i~ f;,~", :'/;1 /-i,' : ~{~\:It:". \'. 1'1,'1; .~ip,'t"-I7NJ~ ~@;< 'I~. ~'':'A.i Y' ,:':1 :,J1, '-~-'" " .~~' (I ((,;~ ..1 I;:
~ !:~;~7fI.:i;'~:;' ,~ff;f'~0>f;:~T ;;.; ';~~'~) ,:'~ r '~~1'\ f:, ~~/~,~~\~ ~~( ," "\~~'r il); (\'11"(" J'\~ .~ 'J rz: ~'~-=I; ("'!;. ro~,
8 rie"'.,- ;;:j ~ .~I, ;,J, ;J.k~ ~ l . c';, I /~ c' ( \ '''0: ''-:t, 'ci<\4 iJ'LA" "I. ":,-, ; ,-v'.1 ,~ ,,~",.I>. ':
1..t,I,', 0~' I 1'\'>"";' ,,'.1 0( '''\!. " "" ~"'Ar I',~'I' ~i;.j'. ;'.....1: f\.J " ~ . '"~ ~~ 'Il ~'...< ~~ !""\-..: 0'~ "11;< il. " ~1- " ll" 'V \ r/-;~~' ~;,V ~ N
I "'; ,V l'l~ 'j ~ ;~ )'.J-'!c jf . L.," C' rT ,':' ~,~ ,J~ '~, c':l':.,y ;:'; 'r; d \ iE ~~ '
~h~':"I,'\...J.\~-\ ":,.i < '~'IV/: ,'fil'," "IV" ~,<'X ':"~'c~ i1:.; '''''':3 ~~' ' :~.I.r{" ~';"" .' .~'-..
U ,., ~.~..,t.1' '.\f k''i "'" 'Ir~cf ~ "- u, '>' J" "'" .1 i '",\ ., ~~ .' ,.., 1~
r' Ji, ~I n_ ,r-\," < ,I'-~;" /' f'_'- " l"'l-" ,,0 ,.~. _ R ( f-;"" _ 'U/', !""'". - .. 1>>. ~ . " . 1'\ ~
~ 1,':-'\ ......-.~-:'t "~II '.---&;t. i.~ . I L I~' ,:;r: I'.~ '>1\:1'1,: .1.-:~T""": 1. ~\.;b'~ '~",. ~\ f-- ...: ~ :". " ~..,
I ro=." ,-/,8 ~=i','.,\. ""'. '-." t,"'"....."....J. .50:',('=," r"~"""""-..";M'~'" "V~" " ,-./il JI~>f>'),
"1.".1'" 'r ~",\ ','.\C!"'fc':J;,- ,( i.,/I 1.,P'..:o .,;v '1'r..:" , ..... --' n, h~ ..(',,~J' TU'
::: ;(r'Y..(. ~'..' .\..~.\.~~,,1.}\.\. i1,' 7:r.;~'..:r: y, !,\).\',\I7J'!i "lL,. ' I"'~'~" ~ ~. , '~$~'~, .,.~'.~ :~',.TOU
".~ "<.1:' .' . ."'ioi.r' t'<'~ ,...,!. '.' ~ ~ r;. ' " l-
i 'K ,\'~;j ".. '.' y ",,' ~_>- { '. ~ ..;:c c " ~ . . ~
.{. f,7 y'!- ~ \ ).,' ,,\',:c1 (\{A 1,1").", ~ " OJ' "-"'" 'J .' .'r !J., ,;:':\ ~ ' :J I )~~ 0
I ,/Y"\:);:j",.,',~L: :<\~k'71l:\:~-r :"~J{!-.'ff... .;.~"~ '\,: ;~:, ~~. ,". . 0" ..; ':'..:-,'" ,,' ,"~/, ,;>:. ''''",P. {:: :fl' U
n E2:~'~':r?' ''(>-:' ,'65;_ -:J;~,\,.t:;~j '~ ':'-1. ~\. : ';~"":~'j,"~<::" ," :1 SALINA J!.} ..~'[ ~~. fl ;\, \ \\'~.! j 3.'~ - '[.,/ ;"~':<:".t /;;~ ~
. .... I "0,:' f4.) ~ 1 i ,'Y''' .. '.'i . J. ,.. ,,'. I.
I ~'i~.'.~~j..l; V; ,:l~;c~:t,.:...'.'r:--~:~"~~I:{ ~'~~" 0 5 ~.:,;i; iC~ jr~ ~,:~yti: '~~.'~:.
U " . c :;\'\'C. ).J ,', I'dl:c( J I Y}' 1'1. ' i" t>iLL....' . .. .~J ' .', 1'1 .>,/ :D"'~"" ~ I r'><>~) )! .<>-, j'
i ,\~r'1)\ l,j ,'j} I'J:Y..() ii~, \1:',. ~"~'~. . ~,:Vll. ~ It.~ .~tJ;.;,;l ILl, r~t{~~':--'. /. )l,,;~' /~:
i.~("'Y:\ I ~ '\( , r:5';' \ ..~ :~\:1\1s:;;r . \;..... i1> H, /~.7J. \. '".. I ' '..' ,'f TU'
I :::. !>~..~.i'.'.>~~~\j..".' :~'II.~. '~.',.' :....... '. :rl\;\~ ~':)~ <~~ti'},'7.',.";^:I.:' :'i'-~,".~J).~!. ~'/; .',<~.r~ :~.'.:.'jl.',".';"~.;.~"'. :~'.'('~~~~~ ',';,r.,. ~ m
1,-"";', v;,.~ ~ I l ~ v ,::~H\.V J" ' ~ '\, ~.!. '. ,I'-\, , ;, 'J::' ,. ;~: ?:.<,. rJe"? ~ ;'';1 i"-\ .) c.- X ~:~ "'Y:;: ;!.\ I
w ,~5\ I' . f,' [:;:i v ;n~ .'\'\ '\ ,"J. .:'\?"} . .'. fl .'; _"".,t// /... I 'I .r", . "'''''''
I ~~..~. ". ,1""1 ?:') 10/0 ,A ~I' "-. '/. ')-.>'1 ~\~. I,"' ISo';, 1:0':-, ,\~;,
Tt~' :"'ii' \'~'~t}~:i;z/,~~~ ,I,,\j~-I=:: -~:;'r i/'~" .;,.:~K, :: .~;, A"!!J~'.'r'!'\I.\'rc~>\"~t~~~!I,,-:r~'" :', ~"(~i
2 \" ~ :1" :.'.,8 iii'f~~ J',~\~ It\.~~ ~;~), ">b.;;.~ fi~": ~"I~'),( :'~ ir'. i~:"" ~~,I :F\~ ~~(h . i~:W: di 'Ir-" (.,-,i, !{;
I i\\"~~ 1'~, '1-' 1.,L:'0 ,~}f:,).;1 ~'~'u~~ ~r:'...J":;'~~~I~(:", .h I, -\ . 'J"<- I"ZA4~;. 'll~Xi~ .;.-.:;. ~ \ ' 'H';c~~(~,;
i-f - >- '.;J.-" -~ ILClt;'lcl>. -fIR--; I!~~c :_~,~E ~-.:t:'t \" 1'\ "r" r."-,r.;~ . c J.-1j:. . ~ r .:1: }, -~_"~. ,.;,""'11 I, ,J){~-. ~itF -, --:..11..' ." ) ,...-
~-<".\ " ) ll':i I, ," ~:? v ~., .. r IL .~ i . .' ...,,' \' ,;~ ..~ '. .1 . \.
t ;:~~ ~L;', (;.'):J1l""~ \~:J;' ':.' ";'J 'vr:;..,; ',1 ;,/: \,.. ". ,:,: '9'~;;' \'. '~2:k r.~"; (t';.:' I.,':'.'" (~i.( 'i" T'"
~::: t!1_'c" ,.t":A....I,'y~.\.. ~:;,{,i,; ...:...,.:.;,'} ,':?',.....:,.:.ii. II"\' ."" ;\t,,6:~JI-l:<;J\.-ii ;~{ ."~ TOO'
n... ' 'V" \, . ". ",,' F/' f' . , 'c. 1''1 "';<. ~ A, 'j '\~ l' \. .;" "A"
I :v:~::"J - .;o.,jo).N~ f1i<-#t ) ,'\ i' J'.\ ~. :;: ,~ j)", I '.~ I,'~ "'.J.: i .1 ~''''.'" "'" "-~
!"'T,~,."'T '.,;\ .r',., .'. ...\,".')~ '~c-,\"~,'I.(;,~' "ii..:{2;u,IA..:/f."'.. y/ 'r,V~'" ,r;",i;'\,";.l',:::'C'<.
r\ .:".:,;; ~ , f,'j< -''';..7 riT i ' 'i d :;J;:",: BY+ i\'" ~'..' 1\;.~;':'~"" '/." \':!; ,[~ I' !,,~.'. '\. 1~"1' ,oF;" . "'i :;. ;;t,":\ \ ";, .';;' ,...,
,..., -i~~rl~1 . "~.1,"5;~\~~'~3 .~~ f\:?,ln~.),~,:J,': i~::--,,\; ~t.ll~;(;l; ",~i'~ ,:."i:' '"", ~f.Y~ ~) ,:,,,lI j~: ,~,,;;'f ),""}'; J.!{'I)j::'~
I i!: i '" ,:I Cr.. A}~ i' '.\ '/l," I <7;: -;~I :1 "".' 7' i. " :\.\, ". ~I~I~~ 1-> I ~~" /:"? ";i:~~': i;{: ~
l ~ 1:7' 'i' .Y>. 'I .'i_ ,"':;';1>'5' ~T3'it :,::.; !'-,.J-" ai')' '. "1~.l) /,(yi'l, ",' ,",y' .... ..",..,\-<:; .{J'. 8
j<;':c ;'?>~ w;..; (,:I ,:1), ~. ~/01:~ ~.;fr . "1' _5c i g: \:7 I. ~'/ ">.. l' \~~ ~I\-,;;y. \/"L: 7'i;: :, . .0.,';~ J,'\;; e",. 0
I "' ~~(~:">_':S fli. . .. .I:~.: ,;;;\~~,. :;..\:~~ ~ I~ '~i:;;: i~';;\;)v" in: . ." :1,(' ;C"?k. ....::e7'~~
TOO' ~:::;- ~~.CIV' l ! J"1 ;\':r, 1(:(.....:l;ll~ ?I<~ :.I', y)'(?' ~~:~1.:)~ '(,;JI.).,'''~.... '--f~ .J::::i .2'.;r(~.L:;i ~~~L~L ,:l"t,,; ~..; . .'\\~" ","\:r/):,.. T'"
I~ MCPHERSON ~I ~I~ . / ~I~ ~I ,// ./ " ~I~ ~I :1: COUNTY ~I "7~/01-
00
I
1969 POPULA TION-48,7 46 SALINE COUNTY
AREA-720 SQUARE MILES
I
The preparation ollhis map was financially aided through /I Federal grant
Irom lhe Renewal Anillance Administration ollhe Department
01 Housing and Urban Deyelopment, authorized by section 405
ollhe Housing Act of 1959. as ~!'!ended.
I
I
I
I
I
of any city of comparable size. Its 13,300 foot long and 300 foot
wide primary runway; 10,000 foot long and 150 foot wide crosswind
runway; and its all-weather instrument landing systems enable the
airport to handle any aircraft now in commercial use. The airport
facilities are currently being used for crew training on commercial
aircraft including the B-747 super jets. Frontier Airlines provide
daily service (two flights each way each day) connecting with major
airlines at Kansas City and Denver.
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
Central location, excellent highway service, excellent rail
service, and superb airways service make Salina a top-notch
transportation hub of the United States.
Salina has many other geographic attributes. Being located
on the banks of the Smoky Hill and Saline Rivers, it has excellent
water resources for residential and industrial use.
Salina is located within an hour and a half travel time of
a half dozen multi-purpose water reservoirs that provide excellent
recreational opportunities.
The four distinct seasons, characteristic of Salina's climate,
afford variety for residents as well as promoting general good
.health. Almost constant gentle breezes assure air relatively free
of pollution.
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
In summary, the geographic position of Salina, in almost all
respects, is conducive for continued growth and development.
LAND USE ANALYSIS
Existing Land Use
Residential Land Use Analysis:
A complete analysis of residential land use was made through
the 100 percent City-wide exterior survey performed by the City
staff during the summer of 1968. The summary of land uses for the
City are included in the Summary of Residential Land Use Table.
A block-by-block summary of land uses is included in the appendix
of this report. The Residential Land Map was compiled by using
data gained from the survey and building permits issued by the
City of Salina. Land uses are also discussed in the summary of
,
-97-
each neighborhood in the City-Wide Condition section of this re-
port. Since existing residential land uses are so graphically
illustrated in other sections of this report, a detailed descrip-
tion of residential land uses is not included in this section. A
summary of residential land availability foliows.
I
I
I
1. Zoning may be changed, making available for commercial
and industrial development, lands that are now consid-
eredavailable for residential development. Conversely,
lands now considered available for commercial and indus-
trial development may be re-zoned to make them available
for residential development.
I
I
I
It is difficult to calculate accurately the amount of land
available for residential development within the city of Salina
between 1968 and 1990 because there are several factors that are
diffic~lt to predict. Some of the factors are as follows:
3. Vacant areas may not be attractive for residential devel-
opment due to inharmonious adjacent land use.
I
I
I
I
2. Some areas now zoned for residential development may not
be developable due to poor drainage, other geographical
factors, or improper platting.
4. There may be a change in housing trends such as a trend
towards more multi-family developments.
-98-
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
An estimate of the amount of land available for residential
development was reached by computing the amount of platted land in
vacant lots and the large tracts of vacant land in developing res-
idential sectiohs that are considered available for development.
Consideration was given to existing zoning for residential, commer-
cial and industrial usage. Approximately 266 acres of land,
according to the survey, are vacant in developed residential areas
and can be considered available for residential use. An additional
275 acres of land, exclusive of existing streets and other public
lands, are located on the fringes of residential areas and .can be
considered available for residential development.
Six thousand square feet is set as the minimum-sized lot for
single-family residential construction; therefore, approximately
seven housing uni~s per acre can be considered maximum developm~nt.
A more realistic figure would .be approximately four per acre, as the
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
}I>.
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
1
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
"
II
I
-I
~
I
I
:1
I.
!
-I FUTU RE GGLF COliK3!::
i
i
!
I
!
I
I'
I
I
i
i
I
~-------i
I
!
18 1_,
LJ
I
I
I
I
I
'-,-~ , --I~
t- '0 I
\ ~ ~I \ (\) \
'\ " l ,i !XI" I
~\j,1 I, ) '-. .......//\.,\"
u,~."" .e 4-~ '~ I
~~=-~-~~\ ~\_-------~
1,/ '
/, '. . \
/ \ \~\
~ ?\r1
~~;:f/ \~\ (('
\~ \\
\
\
RESIDENTIAL LAND MAP\\
LEGEND \
[8lli Residential land Prior to 1957 \
~mlmIil\!IIlI/;\lll:llID_~GlIlIIIC!Ill~IIIBlICDIl!ll/liIrI;\\lIlllll:llllll:l_"\
[:ill 25-74 Per Cent Developed
Since 1957 \
IIIIllIIIIrn 75-100 Per Cent Developed \
Since 1957 \
~ land Available for Residential \
Development ,
SCALE: ~ "
3000' V-
,
I
I
,
Salina Community Re!lewal Pwgram
lanna, Kansas
Projt:c!No,KanmR)3.(R
PrepMedJilrCltYllf5aJina Kanus,
b"el;y\I.II,l96!
The preparation ol lhh map was JiMl'lcially aided lhll)IlQh a Federal gran!
frllm the lh:new~j Assi$fm1Ctj Admi!ll\lralitlll of the Department
of Housing and Urban Developmen!. ilulhoriIl!O by seelio" 405
Ilf Ihe H{\IlSill1j At! of 1959, iH amended.
I
I
I
average density of one and more family residential development
during the 11 years that building permit records were secured for
this study was 4.2 dwelling units per acre, exclusive of streets
and other public lands. Since most of the land considered avail-
able for residential development already is well-served by streets,
schools, etc., it is reasonable to assume that desirable develop-
ment would approximate four per acre. It may drop some, because the
trend is construction of higher-priced housing. There is a significant
correlation between the cost of housing and the density of development.
I
I
I
I
Approximately 2,164 housing units could be constructed on
the 541 acres of land available for residential construction with-
in the present City Limits of Salina. Considering an average of
three persons per household, the housing units could accommodate
approximately 6,500 more residents than are now being housed.
However, approximately 38 acres can not reasonably be expected
to be developed unless rehabilitation and spot clearance action
is taken to improve the neighborhoods in which some of the vacant
lots exist. The present surroundings in these areas requiring
rehabilitation discourage new construction.
I
I
I
The land available for residential development within the
City, the number of vacant dwelling units, and the redevelopment
programs recommended in this study will provide adequate housing
opportunities for a population Of more than 45,000 by 1990 with-
out annexation dfadditional lands for residential use.
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
Residential development adjacent to the City will undoubted-
ly encburage City officials to annex additional residential lan4;
however, they should be cognizant of the need for fuller utilization
of land than there has been in the past.
An entirely accurate figure can not be obtained concerning
the amount of land cleared through residential demolitions from
1957-1967 to obtain a net gain in residential land use, because
not all persons wrecking housing obtained permits. A study of
the demolition permits did indicate that at least 23 acres of
residential land were cleared during the period, most of it being
reused for commercial and industrial purposes.
Approximately 605 acres of residential land, exclusive of
streets and other public lands, were developed from 1957 to 1967,
while the population of Salina grew approximately 2,300 or 850
family units. This represents only 1.4 family units per acre of
developed land, a highly uneconomic use of land.
I
I
-99-
i
I
I
I
! .
At the ,same rate of development, 2,225 acres of additional: land
would be needed to accommodate a 45,000 population by 1990;. It
is interesting to note that at one time during the period bf 1957-
1967, the population of more than 43,000 was accommodated py
somewhat less residential land than is now in use. '
I
I
I
Considerable vacant housing in Neighborhood 14 and the vacant
apartments in older sections of Salina are indicative of the sit-
uation ih Salina where fewer families are now housed over an
appreciably larger residential area than was the case seve~al
years ago.
I
I
I
I
The emphasis in the years ahead should be placed upon insuring
more economical use of residential lands and redevelopment of ex~
isting residential areas.
Commercial Land Use Analysis:
The 100 percent exterior structural survey performed by the
City staff~during the summer of 1968 was the main source for the
commercial land analysis. The findings are recorded in the sum-
mary of. land uses for the City in the Summary of Non-Residential
Land Use Table. A block-by-block summary of commercial lapd uses
is included in the Non-Residential Land Use Table in the appendix
of this report. The Commercial Land Map was compiled by u~ing
data gained, from the survey and building permits issued by the
City of Salina. Due to scale, the commercial land use in Neigh-
borhood #8 is not shown on the Commercial Land Map; see thb CBD
land use map for commercial land use in Neighborhood #8. Commer-
cial land uses are also discussed briefly in the summary of each
neighborhood in the City-Wide Condition section of this report.
As the current commercial land use is so graphically illus~rated
in other sections of this report, only a summary of present conditions
and analysis of future needs is given in this section of t~e report.
I
I
I
The amount of land available and required for commercial use
for a population of 45,000 is difficult to .calculate due to sev-
eral factors that may influence commercial development. Some of
them are as follows:
I
I
I
I
1. Zoning may be changed, making available for commer9ial
use properties that formerly were zoned for residential
or industrial use.
I
2. Land .now zoned and being used for commercial use may re-
vert to residential development due to changing traffic
patterns on streets.' This may be especially true with
highway service busines~es.
I
I
-100-
I
I
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
FUTURE GOL~ COuRSE
I
U@
1._______.
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
1.1
I
I
I
I
L---r
I
I
I
I
- ---I
"if;
j
\~,
lli8
II1lll1IIIIII
~
~~ \
COMMERCIAL LAND MAP \
\
LEGEND \
:.o~.:~~.~_
land Used 1957-1968 I
Zoo., C~m .";olLoo' A .0;lobl. I
I
I
I
I
I
--_J
SCALE:
+
\
i,
II
~ ~:'
~:,
Ii
11 i
'iY- ~~~
,-L f
I,
! . J ]I
_J"'''-1O''~lr~-''''''-''-.r.!
II
.:.....:....~~U_ ~ 'M
)alina (ommllnily Renewal Program
Salina,Kansas
Project Ho. ~ansas R53CR
Prepared for City 01 Salina, Kansas,
hyCilySI.II,196!,
The preparltlon of tins map WIS finandallr aided through a Federal grant
from the Renewal Anislance Adminislralion ollbe Oeparlmenl
of HOllsing and Urban Deyelopment, authorized by section 405
of the Housing Act of 1959. IS amended.
! I"
I !i
~ii
,I/i : I
/1; Ii!
il :1
,APIA
I
I
I
I
--1----
L
-,.--------
500 (l 1000' 2000', 3000'
21:0
.. l-
t
'I
Ii
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
3:, Chcirtglhg; edorlomid factors ~hdbusi:h'ess {trend~I'wiJlI greatly
. i irtflue:ri:c~ thei atnoUht. of land 'needed:'foi!-'cominer6iai devel-
opment.
4~ . The density of commercial:d~velopment will have consid-
erable bearing on' the .amount of lahdneeded.
5. The volume of retail sales achieved per square foot will
greatly influence the desire for commercial land.
In 1968, 407.4 acres of land were being used for commercial
purposes. This represented 8.4% of the land within the City ex-
clusive of streets and'aJ,.leys. In 1963, commercial lands accounted
for only 5.6% of the land. In the same year commercial land use
accounted for only 3.7% .of the land area of Hutchinson's developed
lands exclusive of streets and alleys. A typical city over 25,000
population has approximately 4.5% of its land, exclusive of streets
and alleys, devoted to commercial use.
Taking into account the population and the amount of land within
Salina .in 1968, exclusive of streets and alleys, a projection of
needs for development for a population of 45,000 can be made. Total
land needs would be 120% of the present land needs if the present
ratio of population and land use is maintained. Considering 6% as
a desired level of land used for commercial purposes, Salina would
need only 348.6 acres of commercial land -- 58.3 acres less than it
now has. A higher-than-typical percentage of land used for commer-
cial purposes can be justified because of the proximity of two
interstate highways and their six interchanges, and the fact that'
most of the service areas for the interchanges are within the City
Limits.
Approximately 80 acres of Salina's commercial land is devoted
to CBD and shopping center type activities. The remaining commer-
cial land uses are closely related to highway type services.
From 1957 to 1967, building permits were issued by the ctty
of Salina for cOITmercial development of 143.7 acres of land.
This figure does not include construction that occurred in certain
areas prior to annexation. Also, no accurate account of demolitions
can be made to give an entirely accurate picture of the net. commer-
cial.land use gains, because not all persons obtained a permit to
wreck a building. A study of the permits did indicate that at
least 4.1 acres were cleared, but no rec6rd of type of re-use was
obtained.
I
I
-101-
Frqm 1,957 to 1967, the population of Salina grew ,by ap-
proximately 2,300. The opening of the two interstate highways in
close proximity of Salina has undoubtedly contributed appreciably
to accelerated commercial land development.
If the ratio of commercial land development to growth of pop-
ulation were to be maintained to a population level of 45,000,
approximately 495 addi tional'acres of commercial land would be
developed. It is highly unlikely that commercial land development
will continue at such a high pace, nor is it desirable for that
much land to be developed.
Considerable evidence of fragmentation of the business com-
munity is apparent. A decline in commercial land use, is; not:iceable
in i\Ieighborhood 4 along North Santa Fe and Pacific Streets and' in.
the. Central Business District (Neighborhood 8). At the same time,
other areas are developing commercially at a fast pace. Steps
should be taken^to reverse the trend in the Central Business Dis-
trict. (See recommendations on the Central Business Di strict. ),
The decline in commercial use of land in sections of Neighborhood
4 probably will continue. Redevelopment in the future for resi-
dential use, of ,some areas now partially used for commercial purposes
or vaGant business buildings is possible and desirable'. (See Recom-
mendations for Neighbo:r:hood 4.)
An ef),timated, 184 'acres of vacant land in Salina is zoned for
commercial development at the tine of the survey. Use of all of
this land by the time the population reaches 45,000 would brinq
th,= commercial land use to approximat,ely 100.2 percent of the, estimated
t9talland needs for that population.
The City should be very judicious in approving rezoning of
residential land for commercial use until a higher density of
\ commercial developmen,t is achieved. future urban renewal project::;
should not be viewed, as a means of shi fting residentia'l areas., to)
commer~ial use unl.ess it, i-s impractical for them to be. viable. res-
idential: areas. Urban renewal projects in the future should,be,
viewed as vehicles to revitalize existing commercial areas. (See
recommendations for the Central Business District.)
Industrial Land Use Analysis:
The main source of'data for the industrial land use analysi~:
wa$ the 100 percent survey of the City, during the summer of 1968.
The findings are given in the summary uses for the City in- Summary.-
of~Non7"Residential' Land Use Table. A block~by-block summary of
-102-
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
industrial land uses is included in the Non-Residential Land Use
Table in the appendix of this report. A brief summary is included
for the different neighborhoods in the City-Wide Conditions section
.of this report. The Industrial Land Map was compiled by using
data from the. survey and from building permits issued by the City
of Salina. Only a summary of the current industrial land uses
and an analysis of the future needs is included in this section
of the report, because of adequate coverage of land uses in other
sections of the report.
A number of factors must be, considered in projecting the
need for industrial lanq by 1990. A few of these factors are
listed below:
1. Level of activity by public and private agencies in,at-
tracting industry or expanding existing industries.
2. Type of industry that is attracted or expanded.
3. The desired density of industrial development.
4. Economic trends ovei which the. local agencies may have
Ii tt1e control.
The economy of Salina has become much more industria11y-
oriented since the closing of Schilling Airbase. Closing of the
base caused Salina to seek diversification of its economy and to
provide greatly expanded facilities for attracting industry. The
former airbase should continue to be a drawing card to attract
new industry.
salina has been in a favorable position over the years in
the percentage of land witllin the City used for industry. Indus-
trial lands within Salina in 1963 accounted for 5.8% of the total
land within the City while industrial lands in Hutchinson ac-
counted for 5.35% of the total. A typical city of 50,000 had
5.65% of its land in industrial use, and a typical city over
50,000 had 6.1% of its. land in industrial use. In 1968, Salina
had 6.9% of the land within the City Limits in industrial use.
By using 5.8%, the 1963 percentage, as a basis for project-
ing Salina's industrial land needs for,a population of 45,000,
only 5.3 acres of land would need to be added. However, in the
survey conducted in conjunction with this CRP study, industrial
leaders indicated that they had a need for 8.6% more land within
the next 5 years. Projecting these needs over a 22-year period,
approximately 125 additional acres will be needed by existing
industries.
I
I
-103-
Development of Urban Renewal Project #2 as an industrial park
will add 84.9 acres of industrial land.
In 1957 approximately 350 acres of land within the City of
Salina and the immediate vicinity were used for industrial pur-
poses. In the ll-year period of 1957 to 1967, approximately 1,004
acres were developed for industrial use, almost all of it located
outside Salina proper. Much of the additional industrial land is
located at the Salina Airport Authority complex, and a considerable
area is available for further development. It is difficult to
determine the ultimate potential for industrial development at
the Salina Airport Authority complex. Most of the desirable indus-
trial buildings are now being utilized. As the demand for more
building space at the 'complex increases, steps probably will be
taken to replace undesirable structures with structures more com-
patible to industrial uses.
Several industrial firms acquired large tracts of land at
the time new facilities were constructed to permit future expan-
sion and have .not fully developed their tracts.
It is reasonable to assume that more intensive use of exist-
ing industrial lands and development of the Airport Industrial
Complex would satisfy industrial development land needs for
several years. Approximately 2,600 additional acres of land in
Salina and the immediate vicinity are now zoned for industr~al
use. Much of the land is in close proximity of excellent transpor-
tationfacilities, and a considerable amount of this land is not
sui table for resident.ial development due to natural and man-made
features detrimental to residential neighborhood development.
The amount of land available for industrial development is ade- .
quate for indust.rial development needs far beyond a population
of 45,000. Therefore, public and private agencies should not consider
future urban renewal.projects as sources of industrial lands unless
lands needing 'clearance have no other desirable potential use.
Also, the County and City should be cautious in zoning additional
land for industrial use in the future.
-104-
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
- - --
-----
1---.--
I
1
I
U@
"
INDUSTR IAL LAND MAP
hl~na Community Renewal pf!.)gr~m
Salina, X~nm
Projed Wo, Kanm RS3CR
, Pfell~l{ld j(l1 (fly (If S~!iJla, Kams,
b)CHvStafl,1958.
LEGEND
!0m Industrial land P .
__ rlor to 1957
.oJ --
land Used 1937-1968 --.-;...
I; ~ Zoned Industrial land Available
I SCALE: .
i
I
I
3000'
The preparalioll oj Ibis map WiU finanrlidl .
frQm fft~ Renewal AHisliUlrt Admillitlratia,Y illded througb 11 fedual granl
01 HIlIHlIlg and Urban Devebpment, iuth 11, (Jf the f)tP~rtmenl
of the Hm.aillg Ad of 1959, u amel1derl.Gf!llld by set:ll!}fi 405
';"";--::"" - .~
'~~,-=w. .-~,.,."=
.
I
: F.jTURE GOLF COURSE
I
.
I
.
I
I
I
I
.
I
I.
1.._------.
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
.
I
I
'-'"'II
I I
I I
I I
I I
I ;
: II
[-----f
I
I
I
I
__----I
-- -~~~-
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
FUTURE LAND USE
The 1963 comprehensive planning study described a suggested
land use for the City and adjacent area. This future land use
plan was reviewed, revised and approved by the City Planning
Commission. This plan shows land use for a city of approximately
100,000 population, or nearly three times the present City. The
unusual features'of the land use plan are a rather large area
and diverse location of commercial land use; the large, confining
area of flood plain surrounding much of the City; the north and
west border location of 1-70 and 1-35; the present additions of
industrial land in the current U. R. Project #2; and the civilian
development of Schilling AFB. ,Each of the proposed renewal activ-
ities was tested against the proposed future land use plan and
found compatible.
UPDATE PROCEDURE
The proposed renewal activities are suggested for a 20-year
period, and considerable change in physical arrangement and attitudes
can occur. The changes with time can revise the urgency for certain
phases of the work. It is desirable that the findings of the study
be updated periodically to provide a timely guide for urban renewel
activities. The design study which developed the process for this
study was framed around the capacity to maintain the data in a
current condition on the following subjects:
Land Use-(Annual Update Recommended)
The complete City land use area survey, performed by
City staff in 1968, was recorded on detailed survey sheet.
It is suggested that these data be placed on punched cards,
recording Lot, Block, Neighborhood, Area and 2 digit BPR-HUD
code. This record is to be updated from building and demoli-
tion permit records. It is also recommended that the I" = 200'
plat sheets of the existing land use maps be updated annually.
The future land use plan should be reviewed and updated
annually.
Structure Record-(Annual Update Recommended)
The initial structure record can be tabulated in the
following detail from the 1968 field survey sheets by Lot,
Block and Neighborhood:
-105-
-106-
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
Residential
Number of dwelling units
Type of construction
Size -- large, medium or small
Number of stories -~ basement, 1st,
2nd, 3rd
Commercial or
Industrial
Floor area for each floor
Number of stories
Type of construction
. .1': : I
Fire, Police and
Health Occurrences -- These data can be
tabulated by Block and Neighborhood by
categories of occurrences and summarized.
Population
There is now no dependable, continual, automatic reporting
of population counts for update use. Annual census counts, if
performed by the City and/or County, should be recorded on a
Lot, Block and Neighborhood basis and a tabulation prepared
annually.
Assessed Valuation
It is recommended that .the County identify the tracts in
the City to Lot, Block and place on punched cards for mechanical
billing, and this would permit tabulation of assessed valuation
for small area analysis.
Building conditions,' inc6me levels, occupancy, welfare
and other service clients, vehicle ownership and opinions are
subjects which are not now possible to update and require
current survey to determine. The mapping of these values has
been performed to permit the update of these data as individual
surveys are performed.
-------------------
. ~.~~~ ~
~;/ir
,.-....-. -'
- - ~.. -
@
I
,
@
5 LINA
ANSAS
-t/ .-
j
::
'"
"
II
"
"
"
"
"
'I
'i
::
.'
t
;;
"
,.
s;jY.._l.l
-l
,
r.
~
'\
N
~+
u,~g (
--. ---1. )
.. /~
~
ZONE
I
,
L_~_
,
,
I
L.uT-
I
I
,
I
J
]
SCHILLING
I I
@+---- J 1 L J: 'r
I CLL~R I
L~~J (
""'-- .
INDUSTRIAL
35
AREA
~
EXISTING LAND USE
+
;..cOI'inh'" __....____
000 0
~
1000 2000
LEGEND
I RESIDEN.TIAL
- COMMERCIAL
- PARKS
IN DUST'RIAL
- PUBLIC & QUASI PUBLIC
~ URBAN RENEWAL
PROJECT KAN. R-29
/"/
,,~'---'--
(
,m-r
: I
t....... _.._._--t--._,....~,.".,,--.~
I
I
/'
I (;}
0)
12
~
U
tr
lONE
r ....
-
-
-
'-
-f"'.
j
-
-
-
-
,
_i
1
-
-
-
_,c\_ _
l.....q.~ 1
I'"
," I I "
.
.,'", I I
! I / "
p,
8 I I w
j'" I.
I.
I I'
I I
I I .,)
I
/1\ I I '-
':,
~.
-:-
j:l
{'
('o .....-
"
J
,
"'</rt.'
,'~", ,
\
o
r~' ..,'/
,.,"
"'j
'> ~
. '-O'J. ;:.-('1' I
'H t '''i''I."
,f\'
/ '-:'
:SA L"t ~JiJ'i
,- '/\ "/ ") ~ /
:;.." ,. ",,'ll,l d.' i " ! 1>I:Jp ..." ~ 'J"
) "" ',.<' ''C;\ \'... ..... /'" /
;,j r / (, , ,,\ "", /' '.. '
./
"1/
I
,
...'lii
.'
'0'....7
cr-
=
"-~i
LEGEND
)'
1:
c=J
EXISTING RESIDENTIAL
-
-
-
~
PROPOSED PARKS & RECREATION
AIRPORT
/
'"
..............
..............
. . . . . . . . . . . . . .
..............
..............
..............
..............
..............
..............
RESIDENTIAL (60,000)
RESIDENTIAL (100,000)
EXISTING ELEMENTARY SCHOOL
COMMERCIAL COMPARATIVE GOODS
.
NEIGHBORHOOD CONVENIENCE
.
L.:.=J
[..................~
........IIIIIIItII'
PROPOSED ELEMENTARY SCHOOL
COMMERCIAL HIGHWAY SERVICE
~r4~~:(t$~~
,:t):St" _'t...(:i,~S(
EXISTING JR. HIGH & HIGH SCHOOL
PROPOSED JR. HIGH & HIGH SCHOOL
EXISTING PARKS & RECREATION
-
INDUSTRIAL
ARTERIAL STREETS
FLOOD PLAIN
('
~U(~tRI Willi)
""""""_'NO_"'~......".^OC~".".
It'l ,...,mll.... II "III., w.,llmclln, 114" III!I'I~ I ,",..II!I~I
Iroll llM.u,.,1 AUIJIIlCt "",Itllffl!iot ,fllM Dt,ln...1
,flltllllltl"~I.DmIOOllttl.l".0I111'hleo;lIto.105
It.. ""lilt ill It ltSt, " .."'"
I.
I I
II
I
I
I
I
ECONOMICS .
Employment
Employment patterns and levels in Salina have shifted consid-
erably in recent years, reflecting the closing of Schilling Air
Base, the diversification of the economy, and the comeback since
closure of the Base.
ESTIMATED ANNUAL AVERAGE
SALINE COUNTY EMPLOYMENT
Source: Employment Security Division
Salina, Kansas Office
5,000
3,000
,
i : i I. :
t ' I I ' .
-~---+. ....------t----- --- -r-----t----- .-.-;t
I I I_--~~
---t---i---j---+~~~t ' ~
------------r-----i- ------i-------- -' T---;------+-
Iii : I
I I .
, . I i
------------- -t-------------J--------->..------- -- ~---
j l.~ :
! j r
I I
----.-.~_.-----+----- I
---+--4--
~ i I
_~~_._____l_-----_______+__-,-
I I
I
+-...
I
,
I
I
I
4,000
500
1961 1962
I -
i I I
I ~ i
: -. --- - r - - - - -~:.--
-+--
-
-
,
n.-----t-
---.r
i
!
I
!
I ~-----
1- ---
,~
I
I
I
-- t ----
I
I
i
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
............. ..
2,000
..
---
-----~r. -
...
...
....
......... -----
~ ..,.............
1,000
..-.-.....-.-.
1963
1964
1965
1966
1967
1968
-----___ Government
- - - - Wholesale - Retail Trade
Manufacturing and Mining
--- Services
.............. Construction
--- --- Transportation and utilities
------
Agriculture
---
Finance, Insurance, Real Estate
-107-
19,500
19,000
18,000
I
I-'
o
00
I
17,000
16,000
15,500
1961
ESTIMATED ANNUAL AVERAGE
SALINE COUNTY EMPLOYMENT
Source: Employment Security Division
Salina, Kansas Office
Civilian Workforce
Employed
Non-Agricultural
1962
1963
1964
1965
1966
1967
1~8
-------------------
I.
I.
II
I
I
I
I
The Saline County workforce in 1968 reached a level approach-
ing that reached before the closing of Schilling Air Base. The
average estimated civilian workforce at the time the base was
closed was 19,100. It was 18,725 for 1968. It is estimated that
18,525 were employed when the base was closed and the average for
1968 was 18,400. It can be assumed that the rapid upward trend
in employment will level off somewhat, but the employment in 1969
should exceed the employment prior to the closing of the Air Base.
A gradual upward trend can be expected in the years ahead to
follow somewhat the upward trend of urban population in Kansas.
Agricultural employment in Saline County took a drastic dip
in the 1950's, but it leveled off in the 1960's. A continuation
of a slight decline can be expected in the years ahead, but probably
at a slower pace than for Kansas and the Nation.
I
I
I
Other employment trends reflected the impact of the closing
of Schilling Air Base, with most of them making a good recovery
to former levels by 1968. Construction employment has not made
a comeback, although construction activity has increased in the
past two years. Undoubtedly, the shift from residential to non-
residential construction and advances in technology have offset
increased activity in this field.
I
I
I
I
I
I
~I
I
I
Spectacular gains have been made in manufacturing employment
as a result of the all-out effort of Salina to secure industry
after the Air Base was closed. The manufacturing employment should
continue to rise but at a slower pace.as Salina's economy contin-
ues to diversify.
Employment in service occupations has risen rather constantly
and did not reflect the economic impact of the Air Base closure.
This upward trend follows national trends and is likely to continue.
Employment prospects are good in all sectors of Salina's econ-
omy in the years ahead, with only minor adjustments being exper-
ienced from time to time.
Income.
Personal. Income:
The per capita income for residents of Saline County has in-
creased significantly in recent years and is expected to increase
considerably in the years between now and 1990. To gain a true
-109-
picture of the relative changes in per capita income, it is nec-
essary to compute the per capita income on a constant dollar basis.
The 1960 United States Census indicated a per capita income of
$1,828. Converted to 1967 constant dollars to take into account
inflation, the per capita income was approximately $2,064. It
is estimated that the 1963 per capita income had increased to $2,620
in 1967 constant dollars. By 1967, the estimated per capita income
had increased to $3,100. It is estimated that the'1990 per capita
income of Saline County residents will increase to $4,140 in 1967
constant dollars.
Manufacturing income:
Kansas historically has been an agriculturally-oriented state,
but in recent years ,manufacturing has become a more dominant fac-
tor in the economy and now surpasses agriculture in economic sig-
nificance. The trend toward increased importance of. manufacturing
in the economy is nation-wide, but Kansas has lagged behind other
states in industrial development. The result has been a drain
upon the State's pool of well-educated and trained young people.
Unless Kansas accelerates its industrial development, this drain
will continue.
Until recent years, Salina has lagged behind most larger Kansas
cities in industrial development. Between 1950 and 1960 the pop-
ulation of Salina increased 65%, while the industrial employment
increased only 27%. Since the closing of Schilling Air Base, sig-
nificant strides have been made in industrial development in Salina
and the economy has become much more diversified.
No recent figures are available on the value of manufactured
products in Saline County. u.S. Census figures indicate an in-
crease in the value of manufactured products from approximately
8.3 million in 1950 to approximately 15.9 million in 1960. Since
1960 the Salina employment in manufacturing has increased from
approximately 1,800 to 2,850 in 1968. CC?nsidering the increased
productivity of workers and the increase in employment,. it is
quite probable that the value of manufactured goods in Salina
has increased significantly since 1960.
Westinghouse Electric Corporation and Beech Aircraft Corpora-
tion opened manufacturing plants south of Salina and at the Airport,
respectively, since Schilling Air Base was closed. They have con-
tributed greatly to the increased employment in manufacturing.
Beech Aircraft's employment has stabilized around 1,200 and the
Westinghouse employment is approximately 300. While predictions
-110-
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
concerning future employment at Beech Aircraft are hard to make,
it would seem reasonable to predict that this employment has a
strong growth potential. The outstanding success of the Westing-
house plant to date should insure a growth potential.
Salina provides an outstanding opportunity for educating and
training young people for employment in industry. Salina has,
for more than half a century, had the advantage of having two fine
liberal arts colleges -- Kansas Wes leyan Uni versi ty and Marymount
College -- to educate young people. In recent years an area voca-
tional technical school, Kansas Institute of Technology, and the
Kansas Vocational Rehabilitation Center have been established at
the Salina Airport Complex to further enhance Salina's enviable
position for training employees for industry.
Salina, through continuing efforts to attract industry, should
be able to capitalize further upon this ready pool of well-trained
industrial workers.
Agricultural Income:
Agricultural income of Saline County has remained quite con-
stant over the past ten years and is likely to remain rather con-
stant in the years ahead. The minor fluctuations have resulted
from changing farm prices and differences in crop yields.
VALUE OF PRODUCTION ON SALINE COUNTY FARMS
Source: Farm Facts, 1958-1967
Published by Kansas State Board of Agriculture
Year Field Crops Livestock Total To tal, 1967 $
1958 $ 8,485,160 $3,953,280 $12,438,440 $14,378,884
1959 7,624,540 4,610,280 12,234,820 14,008,869
1960 7,523,480 3,895,120 11,418,600 12,891,599
1961 9,285,540 4,111,110 13,396,650 14,950,661
1962 8,833,750 4,536,080 13,369,830 14,746,922
1963 10,082,360 4,653,160 14,735,520 16,061,717
1964 7 , 478, 030 4,706,430 12,184,460 13,110,479
1965 8,138,300 4,343,030 12,481,330 13,205,479
1966 7,629,950 5,392,910 13,022,860 13,387,500
1967 6,295,210 5,775,250 12,070,460 12,070,460
Average $ 8,137,632 $4,597,665 $12,735,297 $13,881,257
-111-
While the total value of farm products in Saline County has
not changed significantly, the total number of farms and the ave-
rage value of production by family farms has changed rather sig-
nificantly. In 1958 there were 1,212 family farms with an average
production value of $10,263. The family farms in 1967 numbered
895 with an average production value of $13,487. No.figures for
gross income (value of production, government payments, home con-
sumption, and rental value of farm dwellings) are available. There
has been an increasing gap between gross income and net income
due to increasing costs of production. Much of the increase in
production costs can be attributed to increased mechanization and
higher machine costs.
While future agricultural income of Saline County is likely to
remain rather constant, the agricultural related income will pro-
bably increase somewhat and the relative role of agriculture in
the economy of Saline County will decline due to estimated increase
in industrial and service-related activities.
Bank Deposits
Bank deposits are an important indicator of the economic cli-
mate of a city, but they must be used wlth caution. Used as raw
data, they do not take into account inflationary trends. Constant
dollar computations need to be made to make them more realistic.
The deposits in Salina banks are reported as follows in current
and 1967 dollar values:
BANK DEPOSITS (MILLION S) Salina 1967 $
pop. Dep. per %
Year Current $ CDI Factor 1967% % Change 1000's Person Change
1950 32.0 83.8 1.389 44.4 ------ 25.5 1.74 -----
1955 33.5 93.3 1.248 41.8 - 5.9% 32.4 1.29 -25.9
1960 47.5 103.1 1.128 53.6 +28.1% 40.6 1.32 + 2.3
1965 62.0 109.9 1.060 65.8 +22.7% 38.7 1.70 +28.8
1967 78.5 116.3 1.000 78.5 +19.3% 38.0 2.06 +21.2
The Salina Bank Deposits show impressive gains in total deposits
and deposits per person as evidence of a potentially strengthening
economy.
-112-
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
Assessed Valuation
I
Another indicator of the economic position of a city is the
assessed valuation of property. This indicator must be used with
care, as the assessed valuation may change rather drastically due
to reappraisals or annexation of land. Assessed valuations do
not take into account inflationary trends. The normal deprecia-
tion on property has been more than offset in recent years by
increased values of much property due to inflation, but this is
not reflected in assessed valuation until a reappraisal is made.
Increased costs of governmental functions in recent years generally
have not been met by increases in valuation, rather by increases in
mill levies.
I
I
I
I
A comparison of Salina's population, assessed valuation, as-
sessed valuation per capita, mill levy for 1969 and local taxes
per capita with other first-class cities in Kansas is interesting.
Salina ranks sixth in population, fifth in assessed valuation per
capita and seventh in all other categories, being in a position near
the median of the cities considered. A reappraisal survey was made
of assessed valuation during 1969, and these results are not avail-
able at the time of this report. The State legislature imposed a
'tax list' on all cities and this will be a restricting condition
for Salina and all other cities.
I
I
I
I
I
COMPARISON OF ASSESSED VALUATION AND TAXES
FIRST CLASS CITIES OF KANSAS
Rank Rank Total Rank Local Rank
196B Rank Assessed Assess. Val. I City Mill Local Total Local Taxes Local
~ ~ Tanq. Val. Val. ICap. Capita Mill" Levy ~ Mill Levy Levy Taxes ICapita Taxes
Atchison 12,B49 16 $ 17,036,136 $1,326 7 39.1131 3 10B.BB95 B $ 1,B55,056 $144.37 10
Coffeyville 17,462 14 17,996,100 1,030 17 34.2300 B 111.9500 5 2,014,663 115.37 16
Emporia * IB,104 12 31,261,073 1,727 4 29.1570 15 91.7670 17 2,B6B,735 15B.46 B
Fort Scott 9,786 17 12,544,296 1,2B2 B 31. OBBO 13 97.3490 16 1,221,175 124.7B 13
Hutchinson 40, III 5 55,117,651 1,374 6 33.5000 11 106.5BOO 10 5,874,439 146.45 9
Junction City 17,462 14 19,334,397 1,107 12 32.7300' 12 106.7600 9 2,064,140 llB.21 15
Kansas City 168,958 2 174,327,575 1,032 16 71. 4000 1 IB6.3040 2 32,477,925 192.22 2
Lawrence 31,705 7 56,727,351 1,7B9 1 33.B400 9 101. 4100 14 5,752,721 IB1. 45 5
Leavenworth 27,B76 9 29,92B,436 1,074 13 36.5120 4 125.2059 4 3,747,217 134.42 11
Manha ttan 23,547 10 40,834,385 1,734 3 29.6000 14 99.9700 15 4,OB2,213 173.36 6
Overland Park 73,641 4 78,332,551 1,064 14 17.5510 16 IB9.3430 1 14,831,720 201. 40 1
Parsons 13,215 15 15,390,739 1,165 10 35.6070 6 106.4620 11 1,63B,529 123.99 14
Pittsburg 20,487 11 21,750,032 1,062 15 36.0040 5 102.6600 13 2,232,858 10B.99 17
prairie Vill~g.e 30,430 B 35,369,097 1,163 11 9.7490 17 162.3200 3 5,741,112 IBB.67 4
salina 3B,110 6 62,717,11i 1'"; 646" 5 35.2BOO 7 lU9:io'oo'--T-'- '6.84B, 712 179.71 .,..
~---_.._.- 131;"si's""-T-'160;"090, 473 1,221 9 46.7700 2 104.9BOO 12 16,B06,29B 127.50 12
Wichita 2B2,3Bl 1 497,95B,466 1,763 2 33.7720 10 109.4600 6 54,065,337 191. 46 3
* All statistics on Emporia are based upon 1967 valuation and 196B taxes. Statistics on all other cities based upon 196B asses-
sed valuation and 1969 taxes.
I
I
I
I
I
I
-113-
I
SALINA
ASSESSED VALUATION
(in millions of
dollars)
Reappraisals of
property in Saline County,
completed in 1970, may
greatly change the assessed
valuation picture in Salina
but reappraisals in other
cities will be similarly
influenced, and the rela-
tive position of Salina in
comparison to other cities
will probably not be
changed appreciably. The
graph adjacent indicates
the growth in assessed val-
uation of Salina since 1950.
1950
30
1965 .1968
1955
1960
Tax delinquencies are not an outstanding problem in Salina.
A high proportion of tax delinquencies are on property in the
south part of Salina where lots were bought for speculative pur-
poses before the Air Base closed and have not yet been developed.
Tax delinquencies are not significant in the priority neighbor-
hoods. (See the Tax Delinquency Map.)
Building Permit Values
An important indicator of the economic health of a community
is the value of building permits that are issued by the city gov-
ernment. The value of building permits must be viewed with reser-
vations, because of the impossibility to issue permits that
reflect the true value of the construction. This is especially
true when a number of contractors are involved and some construc-
tion is done by private individuals. Also, inflationary costs of
construction are reflected in the .raw dollar value of permits.
The value of building permits in Salina since 1950 reflect
the,upward and downward trends in the nation's economy, but more
importantly, the value reflects trends in the Salina economy
-114-
70
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
60
50
40
-------------------
~
~C"Y
(f:.1 ~ ~
II 2i,
"--l'~"" 'I
'Lit!] ~ r1 ~I[
,- F ",Iii 1!::: ,lli/m:, l[lAl J.' : 1~l1
ii~--- F+" Ii I~ _,) ~ I I, ,lJl1
--.- " '
.. II, . rr(i I H · I
- i-' I i~ 11,; 1m i~d~~~i
Ii. ~I J ~ -- .~- -~I Ii 11:'jIJj IIL~1=~~ 0:, ~~l":==
\ . I (r~ I IJm I] ~lli Y'lffi -~~))
~\ 6./ i~ (Jil:L,'" 0, '/;~~~1t~:'
~\ \~, \.J ~!:' "., '".,~",
, : II Ii ,I . 1,_ Ii ., ~\\~..::~~~::~; cc 1
\,\~ l~~~~"- R~lm~~.~ ~. ~ i
C_'\ J.~ i """" I ,~ ~~= I
\\.\ I ~~ ,..Lc ~.., "~' ~ " I ~.,i ;! ~ nliw'- --,~ I
\.\\ I ' ".... L-c j:; , - ,I~..._ _
\, \ \ 1L .'(' ..:, -- I .,~~I
\\ \\\. L ~,n!-::;- .9 ,I
\' ,~I. j ~ IF";;:::; I ~I
\' ~\ '; ~t!..",._. " 'i ,il 1: l' "
~~. ':,: [,'
· \ \' I r
1
,
!,l~i
---..' -" -...... ..., ,..-
, !j-~ - . /~ ~P'I
//'- ~~_~/ I
-...........- i-/,Y--
,-..i------- -----".." ,1(/...
[~1i Ii
"
- /i~
,-"'~C:':::<-=!< ".='2 ,!\~II
<- / .' f ~u 1\)
7--=="
.., ,. _"m'
'''...........
k::::=",,+_<
.r~V'
.
I
- : ~~J~' ~;;:: _' ': '~:l ·
L' j . i. n,-, ' ,- Ij', .. .~;" ."=
I I' ; . i . I . ...~ ~
#> ..'--.J,~ ",_ J _ "~' _ ~._ ::::::="
i~ ~t '!. . .1 . 'ii Iff It ,
. -- ~"" ii .~ ~_~-~; :__!J ~:, . ~~~:.I~! :=--=
,: ,.,,1"" 1.11 GC itl
. _J " ' , T.' ...c. u' :.1_, .
ill":" .t,'i!iil.n.
, iJJu. , .~ . " UU I .~ ~,il
~. i~: L'J ,ll:" 11"1 fI I ~-:i 1",1' i r~1 I '.
ju ,...1._, .. _ J,.. . l.d. _ 1 ~:::.:.
. J~Cm li-~' JJ~[ ~I]!;~l;~
" u L~. ,::- - ~i[r ~(~ ...,.,.
JU llJ~'1 111 CJ C~i =u:~
rr;l~m ii.,
I i.~c~J
f/
';
.1._
I
(
...._._.m....._
\
\\
~
~\
-#
~
~
,1 f
'11<: I
11(= ::=:-,
I:
I I
II ~
II ~
. I ;J
II I =:~ ~ ~'~'i"-
il (=' l-)
: ;;c
Iii' I: ~~
I I: ;:r
li:I'g flM.~ Ie,
==;(~.~ ; g ,- .'
! I: /'
. ~I
! "I I'
(~>>---I ! i I.
1":r lp
: 1 I I n i:
j : II "
1 : II
: (: ~ "
....~~:~: 'f:1 ifr)~ _~ '.
, ~,,~
'", '
_. .. ,U~ ",:
I I '
I
~- --
lJ
E:=~E
t~f==l
--""- c:;, \,
, ' ;;:i'i
I ,...
cC
.~.
~.=-
~
~...-
.JQ
.....
;/j; ~~;
r=/~
.E:1~
- - - ~ . ,,"~ . u _
\~"\
\~\
I:'
",:"",. ,
\\ '
"~~
~.~.,~
'"
._,,,
I I
i. ~
\~ dt
,~= '~~~~~~):~ .'~"
~ I'
~
//;
'['l~B~~? ''';:-;;
:1 '1;:,;./)';1
'"",c,/, J
'''CC>
~
{)t i\
21
, i
'i
I
,
"
I I
,
,
:a
..,
'(,~i '-'1 -
,~;r: .;, ....-l 2;
L.i
>
-.........-
4:::~ I
iJ
SalinaCcmrnunilyRenewalPtogram 1/
5.lina, K"sa, "I" -03';;----."," /"
Pwjett No, Ka[j5a~ R53CR /
PleparedfM CjjyolSalir,a, Kania1,
by Cily \lill. 1968. ; j / !~..~~~""=='''' AllfA
1___
i : The pr~parajioll ollnls milp WilS fill;lI!da![y akii!d tnlOl1gh a federal grant 2 5
!rum the Re!lewal A1sistiltlCe Administralion of the Departrnen!
ill HO!i~inq und Urban Denlopment. authorized by 5H.lioll >105
;:! 01 the H{ju~il1g Act vi 1959, u amended,
"" ,
-~
L I I
, :
. j'
Ii
t,
0,
I'
I
II
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
1
I
I
I
I
I
-v ..~::~__~
~
,
-- .
,..
.... :,
.-
. 5 ~-
j- -- ~.....
'.
\ I
I
/;~
,\
Ii!
, +=
~
- ^
,.._..~_\ =
I M~S"
: ."
I
I
I
/
~
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
" -1===.
7
,,",,,..
, "
.......J ,"==~
""-
-,
I
I
I
10 I
~.::k
I ,J /
~.?~P
/, /1
. // /
I~' /////
tJT:'fr Y// ^'j\ll "'.. Ilt# I
:.:=: I /W~~)~....i! IliIl~(; :
/~: Jffb~= I
!.l (t:? '13 -. ~~ '
":) ,\J (
I
I
I
1P=
b,
]
r-'
;
I
I I FUTURE GOLF COuR.$E
~"', :
(,;~ II !
'~~ II :
"", I
'~\ I
~ I
\\ .
~ L_______.
II I
~ I
~ I
II I
L) 18 l
_<,f'-'/J- 1/1 I I
I (/f
, ul
! HI
r7 ~.~\'\ L__
---CC-" /'L:' '\'R I
!-.-.:cc_/ ' W~"":'1:::.';o'::::l' I
i ''1, ' f! \ ,J I
I "" dJ
) "~,~f1:;;:j I
", ~ I
_-- . - ~~_ - .. _h_.=1
1~\ I
\ IX \\ I
''J'I \\ I
---~-------_....
" \\ \
\ \\ \
\ \\\
\~
\\ I(
~ \ ((
\ \ \\
\
\
\
\
RIORITY NEIGHBORHOO~
~lIlIIIWlIIIilll!l:lm!llllllll!llllll!lflilllillllllllllll/lllllll:lBlllIIlI:II!I_CI!II:Il!l:IJ__~
TAX DELlNOUENCIES \
\
EACH DOT REPRESENTS ONE TAX DELIQUEN\V
ON REAL ESTATE WITHIN THE BLOCK \
1 SCALE, "
~ ---
\( 3000' I
I
I
I
,
;=; ~ .
,,=.fY
~.. .
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
FUTURE GOLF COURSE
18
Salina ((Immunity Renewal Pwgraffi
SaUna, KallHs
PwjHt Mll, KilJ1S,U R53CR
Prepared fef CITY SaliM, KM1$iii,
blCil, 19b1.
. CONSTRUCTED 1957-60
o CONSTRUCTED 1961-64
l::. CONSTRUCTED 1965-67
\
\
\
RESIDEI~n9~L CONSTRUC,ION
LEGEND \
.,S,J' ,MJH;l'!' .i&.WSWI:l...Qt;lJ;..l;l.D~ &.-l
CONSTRUCTED WITHIN THE BLOCK \
\
\
\
\
,
I
I
I
I
I
I
+
10URCE. CITY Of IALlNA BUILDING PERMIII
SCALE:
The preparatioil ullhisrnilj)wilsJjfianclillly airledfhfuuyh a fecrHalgmlf
hom the Renewlil b.btanti; Mmilll5trahoJ1 of Oepaftmelll
oj HOlJ$i!l9 allrl Urball I}e'tl}!opmmll, authorized by sedicfl 405
01 the Housing Ad 1959, ill amended,
25
,
I II 1,1
I
I
,
I
I
as a result of re-activation and closure of Schilling Air Force
Base.
9
-
SALINA BUILDING PERMIT VALUE -
-
-
IN MILLIONS OF DOLLARS -
- 8
-
-
SOURCE: CITY BUILDING PERMIT RECORDS -
-
-
-
-
-
- - 7
-
- - -
- - -
- - - -
- - - -
- - - -
- - - -
- - - -
- 6
- -
- - -
- - -
- - -
- - -
- - - -
- - - - -
- - - - 5
- - - - - -
- - - -
- - - - - -
- - - - - -
- - - - - - -
- - - - - - - -
- - - - - - - -
- - - - - - - = 4
- - - - - - - - - -
- - - - - - - - -
- - - - - - - -
- - - -
- - - - - -
- - - - - - - -
- - - - - - -
H - - -
- - - - - -
<lJ - - - - 3
.r:: - - - - - -
- - - - - -
.j..J - - - -
- - - - - -
.0 - - - - -
- - - - -
- - - - - 2
- - - -
- - - - - -
- - - - - -
UJ - - - - - -
tyl - - - -
- - - -
~ - -
- - 1
-r-i
r-1
r-1
<lJ
:3 0
Cl
0 r-1 N ('V') ~ I.t) \.0 r--- 00 0\ 0 r-1 N ('V') "" I.t) I.D r---
I.t) I.t) I.t) I.t) 11) I.t) I.t) I.t) I.t) I.t) \.0 I.D I.D \.0 \.0 I.D \.0 I.D
0\ 0\ 0\ 0\ 0\ 0\ 0\ 0\ 0\ 0\ 0\ 0\ 0\ 0\ 0\ 0\ 0\ 0\
r-1 r-1 r-1 r-1 r-1 r-1 r-1 r-1 r-1 r-1 r-1 r-1 r-1 r-1 r-1 r-1 r-1 r-1
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
Residential construction reached a peak of over $6 million in
1952, following the reactivation of the Air Base. It peaked again
in 1959 at approximately $4.7 million and at almost $4 million in
1962. Residential construction slumped in 1963 and 1964 and came
to a virtual standstill in 1965 at one-half million dollars. It
rose somewhat in 1966 and made a substantial comeback to approxi-
mately $2.8 million in 1967.
I
I
I
The value of non-residential construction has followed pretty
much the trends in residential construction. Radical departures
occurred in 1962 and 1967. Very little non-residential construction
occurred in 1952, Salina's peak year in residential construction.
I
I
-115-
-116-
I
I.
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I.
The value of $6 million of non-residential construction in 1967
was approximately ,twice the value of residential, and it constituted
the greatest dollar value of construction of this type in Salina's
history. Construction of governmental and industrial buildings
during the year accounted for much of the spectacular increase.
Construction of additional governmental and industrial buildings
within the next few years is expected to continue at approximately
the same pace and then taper off somewhat as the antiquated buildings
are replaced. . .
An .important trend has been observed in residential construc-
tion in recent years. Few houses have been con~tructed at a cost
of less than $14,000. Most have ranged between $15,.000 and $20,000
and upward. This trend is a reflection of the increased cost of
construction and higher interest rates. This trend will limit the
opportunities of families with moderate or lower incomes to pur-
'chase new h01J,sing. It will also limit the number of newer rental
properties made available by private enterprise for lower and
moderate income families.
RESIDENTIAL SECTOR PROJECTIONS . .
The exterior survey performed in cqnnection with the Community
Renewal Program produced an estimate of the total number of living
units in Salina, but it w~s impossible to determine precisely the
number of dwelling units in each of the multi-family structures.
The 1968 field survey shows there. to be 10,221 single-family
structures, 598 two-family structures, and 180 thr~e plus-family
structures. It is estimated that there are 13,750 living units
in the City. This compares favorably with figures gained through
other surveys. This housing inventory includes 767 one-family
structures, including sound,' minor and major repair condition
structu:r:es, and approximately 100 units in duplex and multi-family
structures are habitable and vacant.
The housing supply in Salina is' quantitatively adequate .for
several years. The 1968 field survey results show there are
approximately 1,675 living units in Salina in need of clearance
or major repair. Approximately 1,270 families in Salina are
residing in structures requiring clearance or major repair.
A projected population of 45,000 by 1990 will create a demand
for 2,721 additional dwelling units in addition to those now
occupied. The 1968 supply of 510 vacant and habitable structur~s
(242 sound and 268 minor repair) reduces the estimated net need to
2,211 additional units to serve the estimated 1990 housing demand.
It is difficult to predict attri~ion of housing for a period
of over 20 years. The degree of maintenance performed, demand
for commercial and industrial space in areas zoned for these uses
but now occupied by existing housing, fires and other losses are
unpredictable changes that can measurably affect the supply of
housing. .
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
The housing supply, attrition, demand and need is estimated as
shown in the following tables, based upon a populatio~ growth from
37,653 in 1968 to 45,000 by 1990. The number of occupied and
vacant residential structures were determined in an extended con-
dition survey in 1968. The attrition estimates are based on the
prompt loss of all clearance condition structures, and two esti-
mates are made for attrition of other residential structures:
ESTIMATE I Maximum probable attrition with no public urban
renewal rehabilitation program. This assumes
that 11% of minor repair and 100% of major re-
pair condition residential structures will be
lost from the housing supply by 1990.
ESTIMATE II -- Minimum probable attrition with an aggressive
public urban renewal rehabilitation prog~am.
This assumes that none of the minor repair con-
dition residences and only 14% of the major
repair condition residential structures will
be lost from the housing supply to 1990.
The attrition estimates assume, under both Conditions I and II,
that F.R.A. will remove 200 of the "Indian Village" houses in Neigh-
borhood #14 and that 124 of the remaining F.R.A. structures will be
used by the relocatees from Urban Renewal Project #2. (The dwellings
in the U.R. #2 area were not included in the residential structure
inventory as they were programmed for prompt clearance.) While it
is likely that some residences will be lost due to commercial and
industrial development, this number is considered negligible in the
over-all housing supply.
In this housing analysis, the conversion of structures to dwell-
ing units was. made by applying the County census report of occupied
structures and number of families to yield a value of dwelling units
per structure adequate for this study. The following values describe
in considerable detail the estimates of housing need by type.
-117-
SALINA HOUSING SUPPLY
RESIDENTIAL STRUCTURE SUPPLY - ATTRITION ESTIMATES
1968
Sound Minor Major Clearance Total
Repair Repair
A. HOUSING STRUCTURE SUPPLY:
Occupied 7178
Vacant ' 242
2627
268
1022
257
171
87
TOTAL SUPPLY* 7420
2895
1280
258
B. 'HOUSING STRUCTURE ATTRITION ESTIMATES:
10,999
854
11,853
558
11,300
300
11,000
1,000
10,000
average maintenance of residences)
Other Attrition NET
FHA URA#2 Other URA PRIV. SUPPLY
200 124** 0*** ~-
200 124 0- 0---- 10,976
000 0
200 124 ~ 0-- 10,676
000 0
21iO 124 ~ 0---- ~
I.
Maximum Attrition (no subsidized rehabilitation program &
, Attrition due to physical deterioration
19,68-73 Loss 0 0 ' 295 258
73 Supply 7420 2895 985 0-
1973-78 Loss 0 0 300 0
78 Supply 8420 2895 685 ~
1978-' 90 Loss 0 315 685 0
90 Supply 7420 ' 2580 ~ ~
II. Minimum Attrition
(Progressive rehab. projects
(A) (B)
o 20
2895 1260
O. 30
2895 1230
o 130
2895 1100
1968-73 Loss 0
73 Supply 7420
1973-78 Lpss 0
78 Supply 7420
1978-90 Loss 0
90 Supply 7420
258
~
o
~
o
~
and, induced improved main. on balance of structures.)
278
11,575
30
11,545
130
11,415
~QL~
o 0
~~
2--.. 2--..
o
o
11,251
o
0-- 11,221
o
o
~
o
11 ,091
* Supply as per field survey by City forces in 1968 does not include residential structures iri U.R. #2
which are scheduled for early U.R. action demolition.
** Reduction in supply to satisfy relocation of 124 families from UR Project #2.
*** U.R. actions are equal to or less than assumed physical attrition. All residential structures
removed for other development are replaced into housing supply by relocating existing residential
structures to new site and rehabilitation.
A. Assumes rehabilitation 100% effective on minor repair structures.
B. Assumes rehabilitation 88% effective on major repair structures.
SALINA HOUSING ESTIMATES
DWELLING UNIT SUPPLY - DEMAND ESTIMATES
Demand Supply Need Excess
Year Pop. Families pop./Fam. (C) I(D) II(D) I II
1968 37,653 13,988 2.7 14,130 14,800 14,800 (67 0 ) (670)
19.73 39,300 14,600 2.7 14,750 13,900 14,300 850 .450
1978 41,000 15,100 2.7 15,250 13,550 14,250 1700 1000
1990 45,000 16,700 2.7 16,870 12,300 14,100 4570 2770
I.
II.
(C)
. (D)
Housing supply based on maximum estimated attrition.
Housing supply based on minimum estimated attrition.
Assumes 1% normal vacancy rate as a stable condition.
Dwelling unit - residential structure conversion estimated as per
the following:
Total StructuTe Supply, 1968 =
Clearance Structure Supply, 1968 =
Total Habitable Structures, 1968 =
1968 Families/Occupied Structure =
Est. No. Dwelling Units, 1968 =
Occupied Dwelling Units, 1968 =
Normal Vacancy @ 1% =
Dwelling Unit Excess over Demand =
Example:
-118-
11,853 Structures
(258)
11,695
x 1.27
14,800
13,988
(142)
670 Dwelling Units
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
MEDIAN FAMILY INCOME - MINORITY AND TOTAL
I
u.s. Median Family Income Salina Median Family Income
1960 1970 1990 1960 1970 1990
1960$ 1970$ 1970$ 1970$ 1960$ 1970$ 1970$ 1970$
Minority 3,233 4,250 6,516 11,,050 3,810 4i973 7,270 11,800
Total 5,620 7 ,'4 0 0 9,867 14,800 5,660 7,400 9,870 14,800
Minority/ 57.3% 57 .. 3 % 66.2% 75.0% 67.2% 67.2% 73.5% 80.0%
Total
I
I
I
I
NOTE: Median family income from U.S. Census converted by Consumer
Price Index 1960 = 88.7 and 1970 = 116.3 median family income
values.
Underlined values are estimated. Percent 1990 minority is esti-
mated on 1960-70 U.S. trend. Estimate of Salina median family
income based on U.S. trend. Assume minority median family income
will not keep pace with rapid past Salina rate of increase, but
will only increase from 1970 to estimated minority value for 1990
for U.S.
I
I
PERCENT OF FAMILIES BY INCOME LEVELS
TOTAL AND MINORITY - SALINA AND U.S.
I
I
U.5. Median Family I neome Values Salina Median Family Income Values
Total Minority Total Minority
1960 1970 ~ 1960 1970 1990 1960 1970 1990 1960 1970 1990
60S 70S 70S 70S 60S 70S 70S ~ 60S 70S 70$ 70S 60S 70S 70S ~
-2 ~ 131
2-) 21. 7 16.5 8.0 0.0 15.5 ~ ~ 0.0 149 11. 3 9.0 0.0 18.6 24.1 13.0 0.0
)-4 13.5 23.0
4-5 20.3 13.3 10.4 6.0 ~ 21. 0 ~ 9.0 281 14.6 12.0 6.0 E.:.i 25.3 21. 5 13.0
5-6 8.6 89
6-7 23.7 15.8 11.8 4.0 -~ 17.3 ~ 14.6 258 21. 0 14.3 5.4 5.0 29.9 28.0 24.0
7-3 2.3
8-9 ~
9-10 20.0 24.0 19.9. 11. 3 ~ 13.9 ~ 26.1 19.4 25.7 21. 0 13.0 0.0 12.8 17.5 23.2
10-14 10.6 18.7 26.8 38.1 4.2 8.1 _l1..cl . 31. 7 9.2 18.1 24.7 37.7 ~ 4.3 12.0 24.0
+15 3.7 11. 5 27.3 40.1 0.0 3.1 10.9 18.6 2.6 9.3 19.0 37.9 0.0 3.6 8.0 15.8
Heuian 5,620 7,400 9,867 14,800 . 3,233 4,250 6,516 11,050 5,660 7,400 3,810 5,000 7,270 11, BOO
Fafilily
I
I
I
* U.S. Census records; all other values estimated.
I
PUBLIC HOUSING ELIGIBILITY BY FAMILY INCOME,
F,AMILY SIZE - LOW INCOME AND ELDERLY .
I
Family Size:
1
2
4
6
8
10
I
Current Income Limit
Proposed Income Limit
$3,400
$4,250
$3,700
$4,625
$4,600
$5,750
$5,000' $5,400
$6,250 $6,750
$5,800
$7,250
I
-119-
I
I
SALINA HOUSING ESTIMATES
DWELLING UNIT ESTIMATES BY INCOME LEVELS x , f I, ~
Income
Levels $0-3,000 $3-S,000 $S-7,000 $7-10,000 $10-lS,000 .$lS,OOO TOTAL
% D.U. % D.U. % D.U. % D.U. % D.U. % D.U. % D.U.
1960 11. 3 14.6 21. 0 2S.7 18.1 9 i3 100
1968 ~. S 1260 12. S 17S0 lS.6 2200 21.9 30S0 23.4 3280 17 ;1 2448 100 13,988.
1970 9.0 12.0 14.3 21. 0 24.7 19.0 100
1973 7.7 1120 11. 2 1620 13.1 1910 19.6 2860 26.6 3900 21.8 3190 100 14,600
1978 S.4 830 9.6 14S0 10.8 1620 17.8 2700 29.9 4S00 26.S 4000 100 lS,100
1990 (A) 0.0 6.0 1000 S.4 900 13.0 2170 37.7 .6300 37.9 6330 100 16,700
1990 (B) 9. S 1610 12.S 2090 lS.6 2600 21. 9 36S0 23.4 3900 17.1 28S0 100 16,700
1990.
CONDITION: Elderly & Middle Higher
Low Income Income Income
o - SOOO S - 10,000 + 10,000 TOTAL
A - 1990 1,000 3,070 12,630 16,700
1968 3,010 S,2S0 S,728 13,988
Net Change * -2,010 - 2;TIO +6,902 + 2,712
I
B - 1990 3,700 6,2S0 6,750 16,700
1968 3,010 5,250 5,728 '13,988
Net Change * +69D"" +1,000 +1,022 + 2,712
I
I
I
I
I
I
Condition A _ Escalation of median family income based on 1970 constant $ and in accordance with
trend, 1933 to 1970.
I
Condition B _ No change in median family income from 1968 to 1990 (There is no reasoned basis
'for condition B'other than the most critical possible condition as regards low ano
medium income housing needs.
* Net change is (-) decrease or(+) increase in demand of dwelling units for each income category
from 1968 to 1990.
I
It is notable that an aggressive rehabilitation program is esti-
mated to retain 1,800 of the present dwelling units in the housing
supply by 1990 and that these will be lost from the housing supply
if no rehabilitation program is performed.
I
I
The retention of residences by rehabilitation is really quite
important to the housing supply as these units are irreplaceable
within the cost range to satisfy many of the families of Salina.
Further, the public-supported rehabilitation process offers a de-
gree of subsidy in the form of both grants and long-term financing
that is critical to many medium to low income families. Rehabili-
tation also reduces the deleterious effects of decaying property
values and does permit retention of normal residential. density to
'maintain a use of the public facilities in each neighborhood --
sewer, water ,school, park and others,.
I
I
I
I
'The provision of the additional 2,770 dwelling units (Condition
II) will doubtless include a mix of the following:
I
New single-family dwellings;
units; mobile homes; public
and moderate income
new apartment dwelling
housing - elderly,- low
I
I
-120-
I
I
I
I
In the past twenty years, the majority of the added housing
supply has been the construction of new single-family dwellings.
The sharply incr~ased cost of such new construction yields a cost
of seldom under $20,000, which excludes a large sector of the pop-
ulation from new home ownership. New apartments have a similar
cost experience. Mobile homes have increased markedly in the
percent of new homes. The warrant for public housing is a matter
which has received considerable attention in the past twenty years;
however, there remains an increasing number of persons who live in
substandard structures because of lack of money to provide adequate
housing. Subpidized housing in some form appears to be a contin-
uing demand.
I
I
I
I
In summary, the preceding tables describe a rather wide range
of housing demands which vary with the conditions assumed. If no
organized rehabilitation program is performed (Condition I), there
is a need to provide 4,570 additionil dwelling units to adequately
serve the population of 45,000 estimated for 1990. with an aggres-
sive rehabilitation program (Condition II), then 2,770 added
dwelling units are needed to serve the 1990 estimated population.
This variable is controllable.
I
'I
I
I
Another variable is the constant dollar value of median family
income probable during the next twenty years. (This value is af-
fected by the continuing trend of increased productivity made
possible by increased mechanization and not affected by inflation
of dollar value.) The extremes of probability are for median
family income to continue to increase at the steady rate that it
has over the past 40 years, and for median family income to stay
at the present constant dollar value for the next twenty years.
I
I
I
I
The percentage of families estimated to be in each of the
income categories (see Percent of Families by Income Levels) is
admittedly without sound statistical basis and was projected by
reflection of past trends which appears to yield believable, though
remarkable values for 1990. These percentages by income level are
applied to estimated number of families to permit an approximate
analysis of housing need by income level.
I
It is interesting to note that under the most favorable prem-
ise -- Condition II and Income.A -- that the added housing need
between 1968 and 1990 is 2,770 dwelling. units and that there will
be an increase of 6;902 families in the over $10,000 constant
dollar median family income. The over $10,000 median family income
is gen~rally considered capable of providing new housing without
subsidy. This condition is desirable and is believed to be
achievable. The statistical projection, under this premise, that
I
I
I
-121-
0.0% of the families will have an annual income below $3,000 is
not likely to be fully experienced, especially among the elderly.
There is a present need for 150 low income - elderly dwelling units
and, while this need under the above favorable premises will not
likely expand, the need for these units is current and durable.
Under the most negative premise -- Condition I (no organized
rehabilitatton effort) and Income B (constant median family income)
-- the following would appear likely for the period 1968 to 1990:
NEW HOUSING DEMAND, 1968-1990 (CONDITION I-B)
Income Levels
Number
of
Dwelling
units
New Housing, 1968-1990
Non- Partially
Subsidy Subsidized
(Private (Medium
Finance) Income)
By Types
Fully
Subsidized
(Low Income
+ Elderly)
Added Residents:
+ $10,000
$5 $10,000
$0 - $ 5,000
1,022
500
50
1,022
1,000
690
2,712
500
100
540
Replacement Housing:
Minor Repair (315
Structures)
Major Repair (1,280
I
Structures)
Clearance - FHA (200
Structures)
Clearance - Other
258 Structures)
Vacant (1968)
400
1,630
200
298
( 670)
1,858
200
1,428
230
TOTAL NEW D.U. DEMAND -
(Condition I-B)
4,570
1,772
2,028
880
The two actions that are necessary'to create the most favorable
Condition II and Income A are contr~llable by implementing anaggres-
sive and durable rehabilitation program and by creating an economic
climate by taking those actions necessary to provide financially
rewarding employment. These two actions are mutually compatible
and attainable.
-122-
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
Analysis of Housing Need of Minority Groups
The survey of 300 families in the priority areas (those seven
neighborhoods which house about 50% of the total City population
showing the most potential for improvement through urban re~ewal
activities) indicate rather clearly, as described in the Social
Characteristics section of this report, as follows:
* 74% of all residents (minority and white) in priority area
expect to stay in present home.
* 35% of all residents (minority and white) in priority area
live in clearance and major repair condition housing and
have incomes of less than $74.00 per week.
* 30% of the residents in major repair and clearance condi-
tion housing are minority.
Segregation in Salina is predominantly a result of income levels, as
minority persons now reside in 10 of the 18 neighborhoods.
The average minority family size was 3.3 persons per family
(1,139 persons ~ 349 families) as compared to total population fam-
ily size of 2.7 (37,652 persons';' 13,988 families). The minority
residents of Salina total 1,139 persons in 1968, or 3.0% of the
total population.
On the basis of a growth in population from 37,652 in 1968 to
45,000 in 1990, the minority population will (on a continued basis
of 3%. of total population) increase from 1,139 to 1,350, a gain of
211 persons. This population gain will, at 3.3 persons per dwell-
ing, require added housing for the expanded minority population of
65 dwelling units in the 22 forecast years (1968-1990) . This value
does not reflect a complete view of the housing need. In addition
to the housing need for new families, there is a need to provide
replacement housing for those structures lost from the housing sup-
ply by condition attrition. vVith an active rehabilitation program,
it is likely that 180 presently occupied "major repair" structures
and 171 occupied "clearance" condition will be lost from the housing
supply, 1968-1990. The interior sample survey indicated that 28%
of the major repair structures and 50% of the clearance structures
were occupied by minority families. This would increase the prob-
able need for added minority housing, 1968-1990, by 136 units to
yield a total need for 201 added minority dwelling units. The
units are included in the total housing need previously described
for the entire City.
-123-
The probable u.s. and Salina minority median family incomes
are shown in the table Median Minority Family Income for 1970-1990
and would yield the following income capacity:
Low-Income --
$0 - $ 3,000 ( 9.0% to 0.0% = Ave. 4.5% x 136 D.U.) = 6 D.U.
. $3 - $ 5,000 (12.0% to 6.0% = Ave. 9.0% x 136 D.U.) = 12 D.U.
Medium-Income --
$5 - $ 7,000 (14.3% to 5.4% = Ave. 9.8% x 136 D.U.) = 13 D.U.
$7 - $10,000 (21. 0% to 13.0% = Ave. 17.0% x 136 D.U.) = 23 D.U.
High-Income --
+ $10,000 (43.7% to 75.6% = Ave. 59.6% x 136 D.U.) = 82 D.U.
TOTAL = 136 D.U.
These 136 dwelling units represent 5% of the added housing need
under a favorable projection premise (Condition II-A) for the City
for the 1968-1990 period, as compared to a minority population seg-
ment of 3%. This condition should receive the attention it deserves.
COMMERCIAL SECTOR PROJECTIONS
Salina has historically, and does now, served as the dominant
commercial trade center for the northwest quarter of the state.
The Salina trade area for goods'and services .is a 13-county area
extending from Salina 35 miles east, 80 miles north, 80 miles
west and 20 miles south. This trade area was delineated on the
basis of .100 customer interviews,.5,000 car license plate surveys,
newspaper circulation, KSU retail trade study and store charge
account records. The 1967 trade area population of 112,315 in
the 12 outlying counties was predominantly engaged in or affected
by agricultural operations and 48,228 in Saline County (Salina)
were engaged in a mixture of industry and agriculture. The trend
toward fewer farm unit operations is expected to cause a decline
in farm and small city population. From a detailed study of each
county in the trade area by the Consultant and the Market Analyst as
to population, buying habits, traffic access, per capita income and
an analysis of competing trade centers. The trade area population
and production of retail sales to Salina were estimated on two bases
for 1990 (Conditions I and II). The Salina Trade Area Map and the
table, Salina CBD Trade Area Retail Sales Estimate, describe the
resuits of this analysis.
-124-
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
.- ...... ...........'
----.~.,_.~ ...'_..-
-, ~/--_. -- -
", {/
-
-
-
/
'I
'/
;
\
\\\\
/~'
~
~,\
'\
~~l
!
c;';~]1
;',~ii .;::~
'I ~!
1:_
il S
i "'-
': I~
,irl~
'L' ;I'
i ' ~:~
! I ~JL
: I:':
--~ i, I. '~
i\"
-T"7: :'"
;f;f~-I ' I "
",q'
I! '0
~
i :.'
" ", .
~ ,'~" ~ 'J'~ 'r17'
" " "
" ,
" , '
" ,,: I
" : -.,
'\
,
');, ......~I
,I. ~
"',' ~,'
.~_.~
,\,' :'
.~.J. :F" ~
'.
'.
....J
-
-:
-
-
-
-
-
-
..,
! \~ ~=l~_:
,/
..............,./
.........',..,.
- "'"
\1
/::;##
,~~../
/11
,/
2
:/Z~:
!. \ // - il'}\)
---- ""t ,y :
-, Id,
-- """.~fi. 'w,.' '
__ ri,iF1 :-nn--- .'
.... J_ .... LL
'\, iT r'j., I'Lli
~ ! .LL_LJ .
c., ,'h''l;li 11"I[~II"i"Ulj
I--:::".'~r I" J :i
\ 'T':" ;.~r8'~n:nlrii'
,.:88 ,.~. ..~;;; lr~; ,: 'J..L Uti,.]! J-I!
.... .. " ,I :' ".
....._\,. ".;tJ 1!l,lU ~ ~ "
c\ . V;;' L, ~.... . ""': $ ;:::'.', ~'-, '= :~' ,-., .-. ~
v' i'.: .J';(.:.diAL_J ':'__:--:: .lit., ~
JLI. _ ~j~~.JU~J<?__
FT'1"1 ..,
ri II '4 'I~~
J~g .S,:
~,-
I
-'-
3
,i"
_I-
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
!
-
-
-
;,_'l _
/;:::~, i
..~/~II
-~~.
\
j
_5,.'1~
...,
~ ' -,,,'" I
o~r i // i i
.A.: : '" ____ "
liL' ._J
.'~:~ ~[~~+
.'~ "'II'-KII,T ~}.c= I
~ wt ~P~0)
.- ''=i;//;V()f\jf 'if' i
I " ,/",'/ "#:
h~ I.;, I J :'
!. .
. -- I),
'i i ~I --- ...... i'" ,!J>:
, I ; """",,"~ "~<c. ,'-~
ITI i -
I I
J
.~
i ~ '. ~. I. ~ i ~: !:: ~ ".;:
j/..~>.~ i ~'l: :.;, .~ .:;l:'~::), ~j~ I-i'j~
, ~":'LL_ . .. . ,( \;
\i, -4 :=~ ,':--' ___:. ;:::ii,ii, "~'! '~ill : ... j'
"'-'4,L,_ .1..31,
;11 1 I, -- ,': ' .'
11_~ I ~ . i~!L........, .........
-"~: .L tmE ': ... ,. \\ ",\
I . ~
I"'" k.... .. ......
,-_.
.:, 'u ;;'M'MI ~C"\' C '''~'Fj
:::-_," ,: \ f'"
'E,ll\ ~ J~
...-
\ ;~--:y .;J;:~;~ 74::l~
I._._.......__.;~, ,\L, .[~
~ I,
""", :
I
il.'~
-irT;j~ I, I, i~.IIJI
,I .
':1 '}' I~ ;~.~
":i 'llI~lli
~I. II 1[~)I"
~' I' E:'lIj~
, I
'-'\~ l~l ~/ i \i:
L \L. ~..;: 'h II!
\~ \\', J
..~
li==.-"
IW' ,
L
1,1
I :
JJl 'll
IJ I,
6
.
Ii.
.,.
- .,.
,iw
,.""."""
-
/;;
//
/
...- -
,
, trtlliw"g
! .Wi:,
: ."._ .k.l
"'jl~I~Fj-~:11 ~
:1' u, . .
]'. .....!,.14:til ' :1
I ':1:.
-.
I
/.
/.
..--;i
\ ~
",.".,=
..,~~.,
,-""== l
.,1 "u,./
" J'''''-'/ /;/
-<
...-/ .:
~ \~ ~11~
~\
\: '
Ii ",\ jl;;:m;
"if/if': ~"'"'f'
~' ~,"~'
{~L r~~'
,~_"}'~:;,J\':]
" l
'~c>-': ~, i.~
i
1
',,,-t.,,;' "
'. .; ili;, ",'1'/ :: I
i, " '%,<!l'\.i.::':":.
:, Mii,~rD4
ii in~;~J[~jll
',--
\)\'
I
i
I
d:':."1' I
I,
i~
! ! /.:~
,,/
SaliM (VI:'!fll\lllljy Rcnew%1 hOQfam
Sidl!ld, Kansas
Projul Mo, KanHl.
Prepared !or City d S~l;na, Kailm,
'I (:Iy 11,11. 1%1
I
/;(- I
i~ ,/"",/~f {: The jHl1pmlkm o! tMi map was ihlal1dally aided IholJgh 11 fednai grilnt /
"",} ! ! fmm the Renewitt AssisJdtlte Arlrnil1l5!rafiol! c! l~(' Oe;;artmelll I
of Housing Mid UrO;,w De~c1{1pmen!, duihorized by sefiio!l 405 !
oj lhe HQl!~il1g: Act ot 1959, as affilJ!\Ged, !
!
:
I I:
5 I I
I
! I
II
~
--"""""
I'
p
I
I
'-!..,,~
I
I
--~- I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
"'.. t
r
i
~ ~
....!......." -~ "
^,C. '-.:l,l:
.._- r
I
. DI5
I
I
I
I
I
-
\ ~"
.. ;..,
=AA
OMMERCIAL BUILDING CONSTRUCTION
':,
/.
!
~=_. .
I N D U S T R I A L B UI L DIN G C (~~ S T R U C TI 0 N
1957-1967
o CONSTRUCTED '.6
o CONSTRUCTED 1.6,
b. CONSTRUCTED 1965-6:
SCALE,
~
r~
')//l gW" If#
-~ ~ In ~~::l~;
"") h
<~), J 'lit3 rfL~~ f
",ft~ : \Ii~ J ~, ~I I
// . '~~f I ~ ~~~ lj][]n~IU
I]). \ II ~iJrr.=:
i ) ~
.~,. Of:
~UTURE GOLF COuRSE
,,'
Ii
18
.<'
"'--';>"(" [EF';"
, : j
A;' :f/(;;;
.,./..". i,<:;:;ii"',,:::,i,!'c.J:"'1!
1957-1967
. CONSTRUCTED IS
. CONSTRUCTED .~~
... CONSTRUCTED 'UI
500" 0
'0 Q(J'
.......
\
3000'
I
I
I
I
SALINA C R P TRADE AREA MAP
I
I
~~= I ::::'~ ~ ~:::~ II "=:: i.i')\.I.;[ifl.t{$..~1*l;"j;::~-1~;:'i
I I ..........,..........).... .' ........-!-1 ~ ~c 1i 1$ Iw,
. 'l-' T -j-- -t.::?:?{?>:;.~~;~;:{:~~~/~t?~/}\:;t ~,:;.~ . Nm ISHAWN'~ '-. -1dfJQ~
WAU.ACE cOG^, I GOV' I TR'GO i "US (~V'v.i"'...,:..:::..:::.:.:.~.:.::i):: L. _.._j W . u t....__.-IOOUGcAS"OHN'
I . i ...Lr-......L-\.__~L?~?YFf.Ff~flS?:TMORR'~J-J\ 0"0' \-~~~~l.:~~,
GREELEYIW'CH"AI SCOTT! LAN' I N'S5 . RUSH I BARTON 1'--"-"~1""'~0 I T---- ; LYON l_-j. \---
I ,j i I' ~"""'-"'" ! R'C' \ .",,"~ i MAR'ON i CHAS' l \. r--:?~ll--
.........--........-1 _..._.._.._..._..._....__......._.._!.___~..', L....______ ..., ! ~v :.! .J.COHf.Y \ Qv.,~ , UN.N
I " PAWNEE 1 t--------.-L-..,..---L-, J j'-"-- i ..'" 1
-1:"':;'o~ '[XEARNY flNNrEY-l HODG'MAN r-.J I I HARVEY r--'T 00 r--7t--- \,,----
.. \i !__.________ 1 STAffORD I RENO L-..._____...1 \:f'!1 cPO ; Al.lEN BOURSO
..:.~~.~.T.~~.!.:~:~:T:~EU 'Ii GRAY 'Ii 'ORO 1=:R~-p~ATT .1;I"....__....._....lL.lWGW'CK \ BUHER \ i-~_JI ~:~s:t,:s~J-,,~~Q
Hi ", .! KIOWA I KINGMAN 1--' . , J ~.
--t' ~ , -C._....11--1---1 --l_':K_J~t--- r~-;;:
MORTON STEVENS SEWARD! MEADE CLARtoI:! COMANCHE I BARBER 'I' HARPER II SUMNEfl II COWLEY \ vQv'" \ ...JJ II LAB€.Tlf. \ ,,-,q.O+'
I' I Ii' I v...t-: \ C~ 1-"
I . Ii. d'. '..- ' v
$HERM,f<N
CHEYENNE
I
I
I
I
I
I
.. PRIMARY
TRADE
AREA
C.F77:1
SECONDARY TRADE
AREA
I
TERTIARY TRADE
AREA
I
I
The preparation ollhh map was financially aided through a federal grant
lwm the Renewal Assistance Adminhtralion ,01 the Department
of HousinQ and Urban Duelopmenl, authorized by section 405
of the Housing Act of 1959, as amended.
Salina Community Ronewal Program
Projoct No. Kans. R53CR Salina, Kansas
Propor.d for City of Salina Kansas,
By BUCHER & WilLIS Conluhing Engineers,
Planners, Architects, 1969.
I
I
I
I
-
-
I
I-'
I\.)
U'1
I
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
SALINA CENTRAL BUSINESS DISTRICT TRADE AREA RETAIL SALES ESTIMATES
SALINA CRP STUDY
1969
SOURCE OF SALES (Millions - 1967 $)
population
Per Capita Income
Total Income
% to Retail Sales
Generated Retail Sales
% Done in Saline Co.
Sales iri Saline Co.
% Done in Salina
Sales in Salina
.% Sales Salina CEO Type
CBO Type Sales Salina
% Dime in CBD
CBO Sales Salina CBD Type
1963 1967 (Condition I) 1990 (Condi tioD II) 1990
Saline 12 Co. Other Total Saline 12 Co. Other Total Saline 12 Co. Other Total Saline 12 Co. Other Total
Co. Co. Co. Co.
47,800 114,265 - 162,065' 48,228 112,315 - 160,543 57,000 103,744 - 160,644 66,000 103,744 - 169,744
2,620 - - - 3,110 - - - 4,140 - - - 4,140 - - -
125.2 223.9 - 349.1 150.0 236.7 - 413.7 236.0 312.5 - 548.7 273.2 312.5 - 585.7
68.1 68.1 - - 53.9 53.9 - 53.9 45.0 45.0 - 45.0 45.0 45.0 - 45.0
85.3 152.5 - 237.8 80.9 142.0 - 222.9 106.3 140.7 - 247.0 122.9 140.7 - 663.6
100.0 4.9 - - 100.0 4.0 - - 100.0 4.0 - - 100.0 10.0 - -
85.3 7.5 * 92.8 80.9 5.7 * 86.6 106.3 5.6 * 111.9 122.9 14.0 * 136.9
96.5 96.5 - 96.5 96.5 96.5 - 96.5 100.0 100.0 - 100.0 100.0 100.0 - 100.0
82.31 7.24. - 89.55 78.07 5.5 - 83.57 106.3 5.6 - 111.9 i22.9 14.0 - 136.9
63.6 63.6 - 63.6 63.6 63.6 - 63.6 63.6 63.6 - 63.6. 63.6 63.6 - 63.6
52.35 4.6 - 56.95 49.65 3.5 - 53.15 67.7 3.5 - 71. 2 78.2 8.9 - 87.1
34.0 34.0 - 34.0 34.0 34.0 - 34.0 34.0 34.0 - 34.0 34.0 34.0 - 34.0
17 .8 1. 56 - 19.36 16.88 1.19 - 18.07 23.0 1.2 - 24.2 26.6 3.0 - 29.6
* Leakage from Saline Co. is estimated to equal the trade from outside 12 county Trade Area, plus or minus 4%
Condition I _ 1990 _ Most conservative estimate - based on 4% of 12 Co. trade vol. (lowest of recent record) Salina pop. est. 48,000
Condition II - 1990 - 10% of 12 Co. trade in.Salina Pop. of Saline Co. - 66,000 and Salina - 58,000
SALINA CRP STUDY
CBD SALES AND BUILDING AREA NEED ANALYSIS
Type of 1967 Retail Sales 1990 ULI Commercial Building Area (Sq. Ft. )
Commodity Salina CBD CBD Sales Est. Sales/ Exist. Attrition Durable Demand +Excess Demand +Excess
$1,000 % SIn ~l,UOO Sales Sq. ft. 1967 U.R. 1967 Supply 1967 -Deficit 1990 -Deficit
Apparel 3,132 5.9 80 2,516 13.9 3,772 40 63,113 9,513 53,600 62,900 9,300 94,300 - 40,700
shoes 542 1.0 61 328 1.8 912 45 14,020 14,020 7,300 + 6,720 20,300 6,280
Dept. 9,018 17.0 59 5,322 29.5 8,153- 50 113,100 2,500 110,600 106,400 + 4,200 163,000 - 52,400
Gen.M~rch. 10,545 19.8 13 1,370 7.6 3,949 45 40,460 2,500 37,960 -30,400 + 7,560 87,800 - 49,840
Jewelry 638 1.2 100 638 3.5 914 60 18,060 18,060 10,600 + 7,460 15,200 + 2,860
Drug 1,807 3.4 63 1,136 6.3 1,687 60 18,800 3,000 15,800 18,900 3,100 28,100 - 12,300
Eat & Drink 3,822 7.2 10 370 2.0 703 50 43,000 13,475 29,525 7,400 + 22,125 14,100 + 15,425
Other Retail S,213 9.8 71 3,696 20.5 5,535 45 121,333 6,360 114,973 82,100 + 32,873 123,000 8,027
Hardware 847 1.6 68 575 3.2 837 60 15,750 6,290 9,460 9,600 140 14,000 4,540
Grocery 14,553 27.4 3 392 2.2 363 120 5,445 5,445 3,200 + 2,245 3,000 + 2,445
Furniture 1,341 2.5 51 690 3.8 1,105 50 48,836 48,836 13,800 + 35,'036 22,100 + 26,736
Appliances 1,690 3.2 61 1,037 5.7 1,661 65 24,950 4,500 20,450 15,900 + 4,550 25,600 5,150
TOTAL 53,148 100.0 34 18,070 100.0 29,591 526,867 48,138 478,729 368,500 +110,229 610,500 -131,771
Notes: Est. of Sales in total from 1967 Sales Tax report for calendar year
Est. of Sales by type from prorata to Bureau of Census, Sales Management and Sales Tax Records
Est. of Sales in CBD from prorata of survey of total sq. ft. of Bldg. area each type sales in City.
ULI Sales per Sq. ft. - Urban Land Institute estimate of average sale per sq. ft. per year in shopping centers - 1967
Comrnerc ial Building Area 1967 - from survey of commercial area in CRP Study
Est. 1990 Sales based on Condition II, CRP Study, see table "CBD Trade Area Retail Sales"
The '1990 I' estimated conditions are considered to be quite
conservative with the 'projection that the 12~county outlying
area will decline from 112,315 to 103,744 due principally to the
increase in size of farms while Salina is projected to increase
from 38,000 to 45,000. The condition '1990 I' is also predicated
upon Salina continuing to secure only the present percent of the
12 county (4.0%) and Saline County (100% of total) retail sales
generated.
Condition '1990 II' is predicated on the same 12-county popu-
lation and a 58,000 population for Salina.with all. of the increase
in trade generated from the 12-county area run~ing to Salina (10%
of 12-county generated sales) and all of Saline County trade to
Salina. In estimating 100% of Saline County generated sales being
done in Salina, it is to be recognized that about 4% of Saline
County (Salina) sales 'leak' to other trade centers and that a
~ike amount of sales run to Saline from outside the 13-county
trade area. The principal source of the increase in estimated
retail sales is the predicted increase in average per capita in-
come of residents in the trade area from $2,348 in 1967 to $3,013
for 1990. This gain in per capita income (total personal income 7
number of persons) is based upon the consistent historic growth
trend (converted to constant 1967 dollars by consumer price index
to remove effect of inflation in devaluation of dollar values)
from 1930 to 1967 for counties,. State and U. S. Condition '1990 II'
is considered. to be attainable; therefore, these values have been
used in sizing commercial facilities and improvements.
Most of the retail sales in Salina prior to 1~53 were per-
formed in the Central Busin~ss District (CBD). In 1967 it was
estimated frQm a thorough survey of all existing commercial build-
ing areas and the degree of activity in each retail place that
approximately 34% of the comparative goods (shoes, apparel, depart-
ment, jewelry, drug, grocery, etc.) sales were performed in the .
CBD. The remaining 66% of such sales in 1967 were made in the
five outlying shopping centers in the approximate proportion as
follows:
Start Location Approximate % of 1967 Salina
Date Shopping Area from CBD Comparative Goods Sales
1960 Sears-Weeks ~ mi. south 20%
1961 'Gibson Area 1 mi. west 11%
1955 Elmore Area ~mi. south & 6%
~ mi. east
1953 Kraft Manor 2 mi. south 9%
1963 Wells Area 2 mi. south 20%
Total Outlying Shopping Centers
66% (34% in CBD)
-126-
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
.1
I
I
I
To cause.the gain in CBD retail sales from $18.07 million in
1967 to 1990 Condition II of $29.6 million will require a sub-
stantial improvement in the attraction and capacity of the CBD for
performing comparative goods sales. The present shopping centers
are rather widely dispersed and offer near the desired level of
services --air conditioning, parking, promotion and convenience.
The CBD is operating substantially below the desired level of
convenience and attraction. The basic ingredients of a viable
CBD must include, among others, the following:
The dispersal of comparative goods stores from the CBD to out-
lying shopping areas has, to a considerable extent, been due to
the lack of the'CBD area to provide satisfaction in terms of the
above ,criteria. To assist in the development of this thesis, a
series of interviews with customers (structured quantitatively to
get responses representative as to age and sex) and a questionnaire
to every business operator was solicited. From these sources, the
following responses were frequent in the tabulation of responses:
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
*
A range of goods and quality situated in a compact area
for walking convenience.
Adequate and convenient vehicular access and circulation
routes to and around the CBD.
* Adequate parking facilities within an acceptable walking
distance at a reasonable cost.
A set of attractive conveniences, public and private, that
cause the shopping trip to be pleasant and enjoyable.
Customer sales services that exceed the minimum required
by the customer.
Social and cultural exhibitions and occurrences that
cause the customer to 'want' to attend the CBD.
A program of informative advertisement that creates a
desire to shop in the CBD.
*
*
*
*
*
Customers desire pedestrian mall to improve walking circu-
lation and improve appearance.
Customers are disappointed by vacant stores and 'dead' or
non-shopping areas intermingled with shopping places.
Customers require a substantially higher level of customer
sales services.
Customers desire a wider range of goods and shopping hours.
Customers desire a better vehicular access route to CBD.
Customers desire a more adequate supply of parking.
Business operators expressed a concern for lack of parking
and for vacant buildings in the CBD.
, Business operators, in general, conveyed a doubtful attitude
toward substantial private improvements to CBD business
places.
-127-
Business operators are very concerned of competition of out-
lying shopping areas and several are emphatic as to the
need for more and 'free' customer parking in the CBD.
Business operators have doubt as to effectiveness and bene-
ficial gain of expanded store hours.
A retail market consultant, Mr. Richard Kohler, St. Louis,
, was retained to offer counsel in the structure of the process of
evaluating retail sales! the surveys and to analyze the findings.
Mr. Kohler concurred that the CBDis operating substantially below
the potential current level of retail sales, that the sales in
the CBD could be substantially increased by improved retail .plant
and services and that the estimated potential sales of $29.6
million is attainable by 1990 (a substantial increase over the
sales of $18.1 million in the CBD in 1967).
It was judged to be quite probable that the trade area to the
north, south and east was not likely to significantly expand. The
trade area to the west, however, is capable of considerable expan-
sion of area; however, the total number of persons in'the expansion
of the trade area to the west is not great. The expansion of
r~tail tr~de in Salina.has a considerable potential through in-
crease of percent of generated sales in the 13-county trade area.
It was estimated in 1963 and 1967 that only 4% of the generated
sales in the 12 counties outside of Saline County was performed
in Salina. It is quite likely that an improved CBD can attract
10% to 20% of the total generated sales in this l2-county area.
The retail sales and the development of. the CBD is now being
depressed by the deterioration of CBD buildings and the lack of ade-
quate CBD plant. Sin~e the correction of these factors involves
clearance of blighting elements, this area is eligible for urban
renewal consideration. This position is further substantiated by
the impact of commercial structure deterio~ation on adjacent resi-
dential areas. Depreciated CBD retail services and facilities have
an adverse effect upon all property values and the general benefits
as to being a desirable place to live. The need and potential for
group and apartment residence around the CBD is considerable.
A detailed field survey and analysis of the building condi-
tions (see CBD Building Use and Condition Map and CBDBuilding
Use Map - Basement, First Floor and Second Floor) shows only a
minor number of structures are warranted for clearance by reason of
structural conditions,but that a majority of the structures are in
urgent need of rehabilitation. Many of the peripheral structures
around the core of the CBD are not suitable for CBD-type commer-
cial usage and therefore are not considered eligible for rehabil-
itation clearance by reasons of type-unsuitability. These unsuitable
-128-
I
I
I
I
I
I.
I
I
,I
I
I
I
I
I
'I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
structures are subject to neglect and subsequent deterioration due
to lack of early demand.
The use of vacant first and second story CBD buildings and
peripheral structures for office purposes was considered a poten-
tial, and a survey was made of all offices in the city. The
returns of this survey fell almost entirely into two rather ex-
treme categories of opinions:
1. A desire for newly constructed space with adjacent parking.
(Since downtown building owners were unwilling or unable,
to provide these conditions, then an outlying location was
desired by the respondent.)
2. Respondent was not well-pleased with present office quar-
ters, but was unwilling to pay more than present rent.
Considerable relocation from CBD office to new outlying office
has been performed in the past five years, and the returns indicate
this trend will continue unless office space is improved substan-
tially in the CBD area. This relocation of office space from the
CBD to outlying areas is at the expense of customer convenience
(central location) and often affords incompatible land use mixture
when interfaced with residences. A potentially blighting influence
occurs in the new location and a definite blighting influence occurs
in the old location due to abandoned, vacant space in the CBD.
.1
I
I
I
il
I
I
I
I
The loss of assessed valuation in the CBD due to relocation,
the loss of central-location convenience for combined office - shop-
ping customer trips, and the blighting effect of vacant structures
in the CBD qualify the CBD for urban renewal treatment.
The outlying shopping and commercial centers, except as noted
in Neighborhoods 4 and 7 (Specific Conditions in Each Priority Neigh-
borhood) have minor blighting influences which are now, or in all
probability will be, treated by private-sector actions.
-129-
INDUSTRIAL SECTOR PROJECTIONS . .
I
I
I
Projecting industrial building space heeded by 1990 is quite
difficult due to the many factors already discussed in the Indus-
trial Land Use Analysis. No completely accurate figures are available
on the amount of building space now being used by industries. It
is also difficult to determine how much floor space has been added
by industries in the past. However, an estimate of 1.5 million
square feet within the last 10 years can be made through a review
of the building permits and the amount of space acquired at the
Salina Airport Complex.
On the basis of 63.5% return on the industrial questionnaire,
it is estimated that 3,389,644 square feet of floor space is in
use at the present time. Of the 217 answering the question con-
cerning plans for expansion in the next' five years, 75 indicated
plans to expand, 139 did not plan to expand, and 3 did hot know.
Those planning to expand, expressed a need for 460,350 square feet
of additional space. Assuming that those industries not returning
the questionnaires were equally likely to plan expansion within
the' next 5 years, an estimate of 729,921 additional square feet
of space would be need~d by industries. A projection of needs for
the 20-year period on the same basis as the projection for the 5-
year period would indicate a need for"approximately 3 million addi-
tional square feet of floor space.
I
I
I
I
I
I'
'I
The need for additional industrial building space is clearly
much more critical than the need for additional industrial land.
Many new and expanding industries are expecting and receiving help
from cities in acquiring industrial space through industrial rev-
enue bond issues. Salina has begun to aid industries through this
process and should be expected to continue to aid industries in
the future.
I
I
I
I
I'
I'
I
-130-
I
I
I
I
I II
I
I
I GOALS FOR
I COMMUNITY RENEWAL
I
I
I
I
.-
I
I
I SALINA COMMUNITY
I RENEWAL PROGRAM
I
I
I
I
I
I
GOALS
PHYSICAL ACTION GOALS . . . .,
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
The consultant::; assisted the Citizen's Advisory Committee in
establishing goals for the Community Renewal Program. The Housing
and Neighborhood Improvement Sub-Committee approved the following
goals relating to housing. The Downtown Sub-Committee 'vorked with
the consultants on, goals related to the CBD. The findings and recom-
mendations are included in other sections of the report.
A. Housing conditions in Salina should be upgraded, and
blighting influences that tend to downgrade property
values should be removed through clearance, rehabilita-
tion standards recommended by the Citizen's Advisory
Committee, and strict code enforcement by the City.
B. Every family in Salina is entitled to an opportunity to
live in housing that is healthful, conducive to happy
living, pleasant, in pleasant surroundings, and adequate
for the size of family.
C. Adequate parks and recreational areas should be located
within a reasonable distance of all neighborhoods so that
families and children will have suitable facilities for
leisure-time activities.
I
I
I
I
:1
I
ECONOMIC GOALS
A. Public and private actions should be taken to correct
ecbnomicconditions which prevent families from having
sufficient income to acquire safe, healthful and pleasant
housing. '
1. Discrimination in job opportunities should be ended,
insuring all persons with job opportunities commen-
surate with their qualifications.
2. Action should be taken to raise the job training level
of many who cannot make significant economic advances
because of ,their low job training level.
I
I
I
3. A means should be provided by which those who are unable
to make substantial economic gains have an opportunity
to acquire suitable housing.
-131-
B. The public should be made cognizant of basic economic in-
formation relative to housing.
I
I
I
C. Properties capable of being upgraded should be rehabili-
tated to spread the tax base and cause the area to be tax-
. paying rather than tax-consuming.
D. There should be cooperation by governmental and private
agencies to promote the economic well-being of Salina.
I
I
E. Steps should be taken to insure that all future Urban
Renewal Actions are sufficiently funded to insure that
continuity in the program can be maintained.
I
I
I
I
.1
I
F. Various housing programs should be fully investigated to
determine suitable means of providing good housing for
families of low or modest income.
SOCIAL GOALS
An important dimension Of Urban Renewal. is the improvement of
the social conditions of those citizens living in the areas affec-
ted by Urban Renewal Activity. Without this social improvement,
the physical and economic benefits of such a program would be only
a partial gain for the community as well as for the people affected.
There is some evidence .that improved housing does have a pos-
itive influence on the social situation of people affected. Im-
proved housing, when the housing is severely inadequate, is known
to have a high correlation with the health of the family and the
attitudes of the individual family members concerning their own
worth and their worth to society. This in turn influences the
attendance and performance at school or work and thus the economic
resources (or potential earning power) of the family and the oppor-
tunity for it to function independently. By improving housing
conditions, an important step may be taken in breaking this malig-
nant cycle.
I
I
I
At the same time, it is also necessary to bring other social
services to bear on the families affected if this 'improvement is
to be of lasting benefit. It is through the cooperative efforts
of the existing social services and the Urban Renewal program that
community attention can be focused on the areas with substantial
amounts of inadequate housing and make a concerted effort to elim-
inate the interrelated problems of poverty, inadequate housing and
racial segregation.
I
I
I
-132-
I
I
I
I
I
A. Families living in any blighted area should have a voice
in determining what actions are to be taken to correct
the situation.
B. In future Urban Renewal Actions, families should have
several options in deciding where to relocate.
I
I
I
C. Care should be exercised in future Urban Renewal Actions
to prevent the increase of arid to abate segregation pat-
terns unless minority group families choose to remain in'
a segregated association.
D. Care should be taken to prevent transporting ghetto con-
ditions from one neighborhood to another.
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
E. Steps should be taken by social agencies to upgrade
housing and environmental expectations of those who now
live in substandard housing.
F. Steps should be taken to instill neighborhood pride in
housing and surroundings.
G. Care should be exercised to avoid destroying strong, nat-
ural and desirable neighborhood cohesion that exists in
certain areas.
H. Opposition should be vigorous to proposals, public or
private, which would tend to cause blight or add to blight
that exists.
1. Efforts should he made to educate families concerning
property maintenance to insure that those who' move from
s~standard housing will be equipped to cope with their
new housing situation and to maintain their housing in an
acceptable manner.
J. Lines of communication between governmental agencies and
those who are affected by future Urban Renewal Actions
should be kept open.
K. In making decisions concerning future actions, the welfare
of the majority of those affected should guide the deci-
sion making at the same time that the welfare and opinions
of the minority are respected.
L. No actions, public or private, should infringe upon the
dignity of the individual.
I
I
-133-
N. Residents who will be most affected by future actions
should be given an opportunity to help decide the level
of improvement to be accomplished.
I
I
I
I
I
I
M. Race, creed, economic status, and station in life should
not favor one group over another in administering future
actions.
~
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
-134-
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
II
RESOURCES NEEDED AND
AVAILABLE FOR RENEWAL
.
.
:.:.:.:.:.:.:.:.:.:.:.:.:.:.:.:.:.:.:.:.:.:.:.:.:.:.:.:.:
.:.:.:.:.:.:.:.:.:.:.:.:.:.:.:.:.:.:.:.:.:.:.:.:.:.:.:.:.
.
.
SALINA COMMUNITY
RENEWAL PROGRAM
I
I
I
I
RESOURCES NEEDED AND AVAILABLE FOR RENEWAL
SOCIAL RESOURCES . .
(By Dr. Chambers, Social Consultant)
I
I
I
I
When evaluating the social resources available for renewal, it
is important to recognize that the problems to which Urban Renewal
addresses itself differ in some ways from the problems approached
by the existing social agencies in Salina. The social agencies are
directly concerned with the provision of recreational and educational
services, income maintenance programs, and mental or physical health
care; Urban Renewal is directly concerned with the elimination of
blight and thus is more concerned with changes in housing, employment
and segregation patterns.
I
I
I
In viewing the role of social services in dealing with these
problems, it is helpful to be aware of the fact that these services
follow two approaches to providing services. Traditionally, social
welfare services have existed for the purpose of aiding those less
fortunate members of society in reaching a minimum level of existence.
This residual approach to social welfare views society as having
responsibility for compensating for breakdown of the individual,
family or the economic system by providing services when these systems
have failed to keep the individual or family at, or above, the minimum
level. Thus services based on this residual concept have established
goals of bringing these cases of failure up to some minimum level
of living.
I
I
I
I
I
I'
I
I
I
A second view of social services argues that society is res-
ponsible for enhancing the lives of the people served. This en-
hancement concept assumes that all people need some form of aid
in developing their fullest potential. The goal is not in helping
all people reach a minlmum level, but is focused on each person
developing his own capacities.
The American social welfare scene involves a combination of
these approaches. ' Some programs such as public assistance, treat--
ment of the mentally ill, and remedial education embrace the residual
concept. Programs such as social insurance and most recreational
services carry the enhancement conception. It is useful to recognize
that enhancement services are needed in all parts of communities
and should be somewhat equally distributed throughout the community.
However, the residually based services must particularly be brought
to bear in areas of the community where there is a high incidence
of social breakdown. One would normally expect to find a high
-135-
incidence of social breakdown in areas selected for Urban Renewal
activity and therefore, the residually based services are most likely
to be involved in cooperative working arrangements with the CRP.
I
I
I
To adequately assess the availability of resources and the
need for services in Salina, a major study of the local social
welfare system is needed. Such a study is.beyond the scope and
resources of this project, and thus only very general evaluative
statements can be made. In viewing some of the services provided
by social agencies, it is clear that the residual services are
given in greater amounts in the priority areas than in other parts
of Salina. For example, although roughly one-half of the Salina
population resides in the priority areas, 84% of all recipients
of public assistance live in those areas. Further, in relation to
residents of Salina receiving psychiatric care at Topeka State
Hospital, it should be noted that Neighborhoods 4, 7, 8 and 9
show substantially higher rates than is true for the remainder of
the City.
State Hospital
Clinic
9
34.
15
48
12,
20
3
19
5
53
o
25
44
199
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
NUMBER OF RESIDENTS OF PRIORITY NEIGHBORHOODS
ADMITTED TO TOPEKA STATE HOSPITAL OR TREATED
AT LOCAL MENTAL HEALTH CLINIC IN 1967
Neighborhood
4
7
9
11
12
14
Total
TOTAL
43
63
32
22
.58
25
243
I
I
I
I
I
I
The services of the out-patient mental health clinic show an
even distribution with one-half of the services used by the nearly
one-half of the City's residents living in the priori ty ~reas.
These services represent a combination of the residual and enhance-
ment goals of social welfare services. Neighborhoods 8, 9 and 11
do show a slightly lower utilization of these services than is
true for the other neighborhoods in the priority areas.
The enhancement services do not show the desired even distri-
bution throughout the community. In general, substantially fewer
of these services are being provided in the priority areas than
exist in other parts of the community.. For example, the activi-
ties of the "Y's" and scouting groups show only 1/5 to 1/3 of
-136-
I
I
I
3
I-
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
<~~:-~L 'm
- - - - ,.. - - ... ... - - -)\.""~/-
I : · / //
: ,! /~//'
I ~ <: ~/'
I l! i /;#' ~/~\ !
! ,t </ /~ \I
I ! I. , ! /::f~>'/ I
I } I L__, //-/
I :'" /": ,-~_/'~ ,,//-,"
/!. '$~J,~~~J/
I ~~~~~~~~~._..: --~~-_/-" I
- L--~--~~-~~~ i i I
. .,""'..,--- .' t. I I
~..-.~ - -- -\ I'
I$@~~~ -"-".- - f ':' ; I
" '";' I
I " }! I
I " /2 : I
\ ! "" /;>,\! C "\<>\"j{ ! I
,i \\ (/ ,l/ ! ,:~ ' ! I
~ ',.j/ i \, ii t
I ; ,,\, /.Z!: " ; I I
, \ '\ I., \ / ':! -.-. ! I
',\\ \ '> t',u/.'t~_
I \ ~/:~~ ~- - T Ii
II ' T=. e' '.;. 'I
II \ Vt:;~~>;;~~:~;f~)J~;./i ,I --= ,,'~' ,~J i-,' ~dL
, . ," ,1 ' '~~]I\m
~ 1,1 ~,~~'[-' 'I -.' 'I ',~,:i
~ ! ! -, '. ! I"~. '"
"
III ~ ! J",~lliJ;T!~-i' -~
/,/ ~ "if> ~I riU-:'J, '~';ll I,),. ' !'*'~, ~
11;1 ',- ... '/.{I 'f ~1 ;;,;;;m -, %. .
f I. ~'", cJ: _,E U ., , 'e
III~, ,1J~~ iTrl.J, J I ,"
I,I"~& ~_mmmm' _ ,// i ill.l~ f I~ I ii~, ,
\\1\ " I [1111":"1' ::., .... · J~:,' ;
\\\ I . C" . 'I :!f"i - -1-'.- i
h\ I i,ijE Fr"!!,'-r I,ll], _ i:!; .ct JJ,: ' /-?
J \ \,-- .."././///- tiI'~i ,.B il~il" ......;i~- !/;;"ml~ II L!~_~ i ~/ 'J0/.M,,,,,,- Ir~
/\\ ilii ii jjUJ~ 1~...Jcr;: .!-~-!'l":ilil I ~. il 11\:~Jlf~
~ : ~ III ..mm..:'"::~' .". -Jl 't.:J ....! ,::,..Y -u :-+1i _,,! ,,-.Ji Iii i';':7~=/ ~~{[ f
6 i I )11 ~ I,e: '~;j /!f ;" 13'" ~ ,.
\\ \__\,/ ~- I I.~ ;, .r- -I HH' ~fJ i-_ .\'~ ~~~~ !',1~i/t\rlJ i:~ ffiJo ]
, .~ ,., II r'll! ~_lll~~'1,2~~;~~~<<'"' , e
. . .'I"Pl~I'mm jl..- - ~,? --------.-......-~' ! ClH,,, ,W """
Li\:~'~~'~~; ., I '~. J:' r~_~) ,. " 'c\~?"'~ !I i
\~ ' i _.~ ~ I ..,~ I ' ~ i~ ii' I,: JJ \\~\ l
\ \ . ~~~: ~ .li 'i ... I' ,..!i}tJ ...."m>. _ . ~. \~,,\ L______.
,'"A.. .1\C,. ...,,_!"'KY' 'I, \\\ i I
" LrI.J~' ,:=-+ .,; ". ''',,7'',\ ! ". \\ (I I
.......:, '. " 1 ,'L~', "~::_~I I)), I ! I
...... J,J.~ 17.l G'/ 18 L l
,~ I c:~~/i' i?~~ ' ,I i .!.ilii":'i~s~t _ i~lv~~:,' : I,:
lli=' .~i',[1 .I-I~~~~ "~___
'1F' -b.~~'Pi: ,e:--.TliF'\"'I\ '" '";. ~,~I . ..n '" ~,'.
;::17. ,--',~,/:~I\~:.~"" l"X \\~ (:;;'" ,C,' <! il, ;,,\,,~::: '''''',; 1
, .~\]gi~,:-- "'"~,:J:.~.';;~ (~II~"~~;; ~ji\~i\\~ I
, \ \ :1 \ ,,':: i \ ~\, I
:\\\ >'~\ I
. \ iLIU~\ ,?: : I
.'r-- I=~------!~ // ~i_________1
\,' I)' ~ i~~1;,~: ,;:' ;!~ ,/' : > ~\~~\
: II i"~ ~~:\:'C::~:;J:m'f\.~'~{\; : 'I. I,," ''''.\ // · \ '>>
j .' l ...... ... ..../ I. ;- -~J""'-~ { .. \\ (i
---------;1' Ilr~AJ!;t:.~~~~~~l PRIORITY NEIGHB~:~O:D
I.. I \
/ ! I Ii lur.
t:. *i' I mmCO' 1~1--- ----fl'IT.1tftt-ittAtf11-CttE11 MAP
'II~ , I EACH DOT REPRESENTS ONE CLlE~T
, I ' I RESIDING WITHIN THE BLOCK WHO~
' ._ __ I RECEIVED TREATMENT AT THE CEN RAL
I I ~ ! W)T', KANSAS MENTAL HEALTH CLINIC DRING
; " / I - I THE YEAR OF 1967 l.
1__../ L/ju--- ,I I IOUi~E: CENliAL ~A~~~E.MENTAl HEALTH ClINIC ~ \
I I /!' 25 I l0' 3000 I
; // I I
; " . i,' I I
The pnlpMalilJn of tn!) map was fifl~llcial!v ~icled tnrr:wgh a federal graM. i..
imm the RZilewill Assishl!te Mminblratiolt ollne Oe!mtmelll " ' I
d H,UI;'! '" Uri" D,'tlopm"t, !Vlior;,,' ly sed,on d05 " , /.' ! , I
oIllo Umlol ul 1959 ,m,dol. ;, /:.1 : I I
I ji ~ L
! )~~~~==~===~illmllmlf1ffjitJm.~.~~~WfiffffMff~" ~~~~=I/WIIlIm=IIfflllIl'I'IlI_==_GIIIlIIII\IIII__'
-
-
-
-
I
I
I
I
!
-,i
5 ~
,
"'. L "
l)"CC\"""i"'! r ".'~"-- f -
-'--, =t ~ ......
'. ,..o."......"'-=: li~' D,
r , , i
'~i ....... ........ ...''': , :1,
:.
4/,.- /-:"c'
.. ~.
~.
.. "
't ~;;"_"
i
, : ;;;,.,:,,["'\'
,i 1i5
i ..~.
i I
~
!'
,I : [I>:;
i l' >'1
I 1 >;
! I >:
, I.>:
., ..~~
I J'\
;'!: I ,<~.<1 /
j~ftl' (' (
'. ".~' ,..
. 'ft",,_. :
I" ?-'
i: I r :\.
I ' i p"
,
.. //d,
/ '.'~
" ~
~
r~, __...m,;.' :.
.,J ,':
..' .. .C':< e,
,: j:0' ,,~::;; ':~.;
.'" 'L ~
.j ,.. ;.:.;
hlmn Communijy Rl1newa! Pfogr~m
Salinil,Kai1m
Proj"c1 ~o, Kallm
!arCiiyoJiillfiit,
br Lilt StaB, 19M,
.~
"
~
: ! i
'",
'.'
'. ....;' . .. :
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
their membership living in the priority areas. These services
are somewhat fewer in the sub-units of the neighborhoods where
there are large numbers of minority group members -- particularly
where services geared to the female population were involved.
There is also some indication that there is a paucity of, services
geared to the older citizens living in the priority areas. Al-
though little data was gathered concerning the distribution of
services of the Recreation Commission within the priority areas,
it is evident that approximately one-half of the services are
utilized within these areas. (See Maps 14-17.)
As a means of bringing social resources to bear on the areas
selected for Urban Renewal activity, it is recommended that pub-
lic and private agencies focus ,attention on these areas in the
next few years. This might be achieved by relevant funding bodies
(e.g., United Fund, City Commission, County Commission) building
an incentive program for Urban Renewal activity. For example,
assuming that the United Fund increases its goal by 5% each year,
it could give each agency a 3% "cost of living" increase and hold
the remaining 2% for agencies with program expansion or develop-
ment in the Urban Renewal areas. This would help the enhancement-
based agencies to equalize their services in these areas and give
the residually based services an opportunity to bring greater
resources into these areas. As the Urban Renewal emphasis moves
from neighborhood to neighborhood, it would then be possible for
all services tc? give priority to program expansion and development
in the target areas.
Therefore, it is clear that the CRP must be prepared to deal
with social problems and social services only indirectly related
to the housing problems of Salina. However, if these major social
problems are to be approached realistically, a comprehensive
attack will be necessary. An attack on inadequate housing thus
identifies a con~unityproblem, and all appropriate resources
ought to be expected to give priority to serving these areas. The
importance of such a coordinated effort to solve these problems
was clearly stated by George Bernard Shaw in the following way:
"The ol,d notion that people can keep to themselves,
and not be touched by what is happening to their
neighbors, is a dangerous mistake... Though the
rich end of town can avoid living with the poor
end, it cannot' avo~d dying with it when the
plague comes."
-137-
Public and Minority Forum Opportunities
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
IN THE FINAL ANALYSIS, THE NEEDS OF THE PEOPLE CAN BEST BE
DETERMINED BY THOSE PEOPLE LIVING IN THE COMMUNITY. with a body
of citizens who truly represent all parts of the community (geo-
graphically, ethnically, and economically), a reasonably accurate
indication of need can be obtained and appropriate services to
meet those needs developed. The .above material suggests an out-
line for evaluating services based on their residual or enhance-
ment goals. The Minority Forum appears to be a group of citizens
representing such a sub-group in Neighborhood 4 and 9. ,The con-
tinued activity of this group should offer the significant
evaluation of the resources needed and available for renewal.
The Citizen's Advisory Committee has played an effective role
in making this Community Renewal Program study. The Consultants
met with the Committee at the very beginning of the. study to re-
view the procedures to be used in collecting data and received a
number of constructive suggestions. The Committee also helped to
inform the public concerning the nature of the study.
Reports were made to the Committee during the data collecting
phase of the study. Beginning in January, 1969, a series of
meetings were initiated with the Citizen's Advisory Committee to
secure its review of and recommendations concerning the findings
of the Community Renewal Program. The sub-committees held a
series of meetings 'with the Consultants and independently to work
on different facets of the Program. periodic reports were made to
the parent Committee by the sub-committees concerning different
aspects of the Program.
I
I
I
-138-
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
The sub-committees continued to deliberate until mid-October,
1969, when they submitted their findings to the parent Committee
and the Consultants. The Citizen's Advisory Committee, in its
meeting of December 9, 1969, formally adopted the recommendations
of ,the sub-committees and Consultants concerning actions that
should be taken and programming of priorities. (See the resolution
in this section.) Recommendations or summaries of recommendations
by the sub-committees are also in, this section.
The Consultants requested that the Citizen's Advisory Commit-
tee present evidence that the Committee truly represented the
citizens of Salina and especially minority groups. After evalu-
ation of its membership, the Committee reported that it did'
~epresent quite well the geographic areas of Salina, a cross
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
NORRIS D. OLSON
CITY MANAGER
AREA CODE 913 823-2277
FIFTH AND ASH STREETS
P. O. BOX 746
cSatina, !J(anUt:i 67401
COMMISSIONERS
DONALD D. MilLIKAN, MAYOR
lEON l. ASHTON CARL R. RUNDQUIST
ROBERT C. CALDWEll WilLIAM W. YOST
October 28, 1969
Bucher & Will i s
Consulting Planners
P. O. Box 1287
Salina, Kansas 67401
Attention~ Mr. James Bucher
Dear Sir:
In connection with the CRP Survey, you requested a statement as
to whether the Citizens' Advisory Committee's membership was truly
representative of our population in Salina.
Our membership roster indicates we have members of minority groups
actually in excess of their percentage relationship to our total
population. Furthermore, two members are ministers of the black
race which should, by virtue of their profession, reach many of '
the 1200 to 1500 minority population; a third minister has a con-
gregation of Spanish Americans; and two members are recreation
directors of centers used almost entirely by minority people.
Other members are housewives, laborers and members of practically
every profession but architects.
In view of our membership and the close association of the three
ministers and two recreation directors, it is felt our Committee
has a broad base of community representation.
.~.
, Chairman
Cit i zens Advi sory Committee
for Community Improvement
P.S.
The Codes and Code Enforcement Subcommittee feels the Chamber of
Commerce and City of Salina should proceed to take action with
respect to city sign regulations. Frankly we feel the business
community should get involved in what personally affects them.
MEMBE:,"
KANSAS LEAGUE OF MUN
NATIONAL LEAGUE OF (:i'''-!E~:;
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
section of vocations, and minority groups.
mitted by the Committee chairman.)
(See the letter sub-
A series of questions was asked of the sub-committees of
the Citizen's Advisory Committee con,cerning the findings of the
consultants, level of services desired, and actions to be taken.
The sub-committees answered some of the questions directly and
others indirectly through their recommendations submitted to the
City and the Consultants. A list of the questions asked the sub-
committees is included in this section.
The Citizen's Advisory Committee is organized and functioning
adequately to serve as a public and minority group forum in future
Urban ~enewal projects to be implemented under this Conununity Renewal
Program. The Committee is equipped and is quite willing to hold
a series of neighborhood meetings to inform the public concerning
proposed projects and to act as a forum for expression of desires
and opinions of the citizens most affected by proposed actions.
Report of the Neighborhood and Capital Improvement Sub-Committee
After making a tour'of some of the neighborhoods in question
by several members of the Neighborhood Improvement Sub-Committee
and further review of the survey facts presented in the CRP
study, it is the committee's feeling that the study very ade-
quately and impartially reports the conditions as they exist.
The Committee would like to make the following recommendations
in regard to the respective neighborhood~.
Neighborhood 4:
Area A (CRP Blocks 5, 6, 7)
It is proposed that this area be totally cleared and that
the land be offered to st. John's Military Academy through Urban
Renewal for future planned expansion of the school. Those dwell-
ings which are of sound structure and could be moved, if the
owner desired, should be moved to another area. The relocation
funds of Urban Renewal may be of some assistance in doing this.
~
Area B (CRP Blocks 13, 14, 15, 23, 24, 25)
This area (CRP Blocks 14, IS, 24, 25) has been proposed as a
public park in the CRP study. The committee wishes to make the
-139-
following changes and recommendations: that the proposed park
site be moved one block west to include Blocks 13 and 23 and that
there be total clearance on Blocks 13, 14, 23 and 24. The de-
veiopment of a public park in this area is vitally needed. " A
blighted area would be removed, property values should be enhanced
and a feeling of civic pride should help to revitalize this sur-
rounding area. Blocks 15 ~nd 25 should be totally cleared (pri~
vate development) for low-cost housing.
Area C (CRP Blocks 15, 25, 16)
(
This area should be 'totally cleared, except for sound struc-
tures, and be made available for low-cost housing. Since the
length of residency in, this whole neighborhood for home owners
is quite high, it is felt that they may like to relocate in or
near the same neighborhood. A desirable residential neighborhood
and a nearby public park should do much, to attract people of low
income to this area. This area might be attractive to those low
income people who are employed in many of the new businesses lo-
cated on 1-70 and u.S. 81.
Area D (North portion of CRP Blocks 11 and 12)
This area was proposed for clearance and possibly used as a
buffer zone for St. John's Military School. The Committee feels
that spot clearance would be more feasible and that it remain for
residential use. With spot clearance and the close proximity of
the public park, it is felt that there should, be little blighting.
Additional Area
Although not specifically mentioned in the CRP study, the
Committee.would like to go on record as recommending an additional
area in Block 22 south of the ~alvation Army property (L?ts 2-16)
for clearance. It has been learned that the Salvation Army would
like to expand their facilities so that they might be able to offer
a wider variety of programs for "the disadvantaged in the community.
If this land were available to them through Urban Renewal, they would
be willing to purchase it and embark upon a building program. We
feel that this ~ould add greater stability to this neighborhood.
It is the Neighborhood Improvement Sub-Committee's feeling
that the Neighborhood 4 project is essential to Salina and that
it should therefore be given top priority so that work might be
-140-
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
started as soon as possible. After the master plan has been pro-
posed and accepted, the committee would be willing to meet with
neighborhood groups in the area to explain to them the proposed
plans and to answer questions. This entire area meets the re-
quirements for actions under the U.R. program. There is consid-
erable blighting in the area which exceeds the minimum 20 percent
required. Two well-established institutions, St. John's Military
School and the Salvation Army, have indicated an interest in and
willingness to purchase adjacent lands, if it were available to
them through U.R. Expansion of St. John's Military School will
help the economic growth of Salina. Expansion of the Salvation
Army program will allow them to reach more of the disadvantaged
persons so that they might be aided in upgrading themselves.
It is further recommended that spot clearance be carried out
in Blocks 34, 35, 45 and 46 in order to rehabilitate this area
and prevent further blighting. It is also proposed that serious
consideration be given for the future expansion of the Hawthorne
School site by annexing the east half of Block 65 and closing
lOth Street from Grand Avenue to Woodland. Such expansion would
provide for a much-needed recreational area in that part of the
community. There is no urgency in this latter proposal, but it
should be kept in mind for future planning.
Blocks 71, 72, 73 and 74 should be cleared and developed for
residential use. A buffer zone should be established along the
south edge in order to make the area more desirable. There is
little evidence at this time that this area will be utilized in
the near future for co~~ercial or business purposes.
Neighborhood 7:
Spot clearance should. be conducted throughout the entire
neighborhood in order to prevent further blighting. Emphasis
should be placed on rehabilitation and elimination of over-crowded
conditions.
The Committee agrees with the CRP findings that a connection
of Ash Street and State Street be constructed near the Missouri
Pacific tracks. This would serve as a m~ih east-west artery from
the downtown area and would be advantageous when a downtown cultural
and sports center is established. We can see. no need for .immediate
action at this time.
The Whittier School site is inadequate. None of the adjacent
-141-
blocks qualify for Urban Renewal at this time. The Committee feels
that some thought should be given for future expansion and would pro-
pose that when the proper time comes, Block 99 immediately south
of the school be cleared and that Spruce Street be closed between
Phillips and Baker streets. Spruce is not a through street and
this action would probably cause the least inconvenience to the
residents in the area. We see no need for immediate'action at this
time.
Neighborhood 9:
Although only the south half of Blocks 41 and 42 qualify for
Urban Renewal, the Committee feels that the total area needs resi-
dences cleared in order to prevent future blighting. The north
half of these blocks would be isolated from other residential areas.
With the surrounding lands used for other than residential purposes,
we would see a rapidly deteriorating area. This land should be
. held by the-City until some appropriate use can be made of it.
Spot clearance throughout the neighborhood and along the river
is desirable.
Neighborhood 11:
This neighborhood should be spot cleared and rehabilitated.
The Committee recommended earlier in the spring that the City
should negotiate with the school system for a transfer of property
after all salvageable materials have been removed from the school.
The City would then raze the building and develop a small park or
playground area. This transaction should be instituted without
the transfer of funds, since the City would bear th~ expense of
razing and clearing the building.
Neighborhood 12:
Blocks 16, 17 and 18 should be cleared and the area developed
for apartment type dwellings. This location might possibly appeal
to the senior citizen who wants to live "cloie-in".
Neighborhood 14:
Centennial Park should be expanded to include that area
fronting on Crawford Street. A roadside park might then be estab-
lished, creating a'more aesthetic appearance to visitors as they
enter Salina.
-142-
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
'I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
Findings qnd Recommendations of Downtown Sub-Committee
The Consultants presented findings concerning the Central
Business District and suggestions tq~ possible treatment to a
joint committee of the Downtown Development Committee of the Salina
Chamber of Commerce and the Downtown Subcommittee of the citizen's
Advisory Committee for their reactions and recommendations. After
a series of meetings, a questionnaire was sent by the Subcommittee
of the Citizen's Advisory Committee to its members to gain final
reactions to proposals. A summary of comments of the Subcommittee
follows:
The Subcommittee was asked by the Consultants if the facts
as presented accurately represented building conditions, vacancy
conditions and estimated current sales. The Subcommittee was
unanimous in expressing the opinion that the facts had been accu-
rately presented by the Consultants.
The Consultants asked the Subcommittee if the four-block
area from Ash to Walnut and Fifth to Seventh as outlined repre-
sented a logical core area of the Central Business District. A
majority answered that it was logically the Core Area, but some
of the committee members believed it to be too restrictive. One
member of the Subcommittee believed that the 200 block on South
Santa Fe was also in the core area, but because the buildings were
newer and parking was available, it should be excluded from proposed
treatment. Two other members expressed the opinion that treatment
should be much more extensive and that restricting the area of treat-
ment placed a premium upon property within the designated area to the
detriment of the surrounding property.
The Subcommittee was asked if two-way traffic was a desirable
feature on Fifth and Seventh Streets for traffic circulation in
the CBD. A majority answered that it would be desirable, but
there were two reservations: (1) Only if four-lane traffic were
provided on the streets, and (2) If on-street parking were elim-
inated.
Ash Street was considered a proper main feeder street for
the CBD area by 6 of 11 members. Others believed it would be a
proper feeder street o~ly because a mall on Santa Fe would cut
off two main feeders -- Santa Fe and Iron -- or there were no other
alternatives. One suggestion was that a diagonal street be con-
structed to Ash from E. North Street and Ohio Street.
-143-
The Subcommittee did not believe second level off-street park-
ing was feasible at the present time. It would be feasible only
when tied into second floor use of buildings arid a higher occupancy
rate than is now present.
Covered sidewalks on Santa Fe were considered desirable fea-
. tures by six members of the Subcommittee. Three indicated they were
not needed, while one indicated they would only be needed during
heavy storms and special sales days. One member preferred to
have sidewalks and street plantings of shrubs and trees as in
other cities.
Members were in almost unanimous agreement that building
front, improvement was necessary to the Central Business District.
One indicated that eligible structures should be identified at
an early date and included in the first NDP project. Other com-
ments were that store backs as well as fronts should receive
treatment and that treatment should be accompanied with new
merchandising approaches by merchants to revitalize the CBD.
Committee members were divided on the need for additional
off-street parking at the present time. A majority indicated it
was needed, but with reservations. Comments were that it should
be free and within 100 feet of stores.
CBD property owners would not, in all likelihood, be willing
to pay the full cost of providing free customer parking in the CBD,
according to the Committee. The general feeling was that ,the cost
would be prohibitive and merchants would be unwilling to pay addi-
tional to that which they are now paying for parking.
The Committee was not certain that a full street mall condi-
tion in the CBD would be desirable. Only three gave an unqualified
"yes" to the question. Others had reservations as follows: (1)
Too expensive for results obtained; (2) Only if plenty of free
parking is available; (3) A semi-mall situation permitting access
by emergency vehicles would be preferred.
A majority of the members be}ieved the projections of popula-
tion and retail sales were obtainable. Others were not sure or
did not have comment.
The Committee did not believe that new business and office
buildings were needed in the Central Business District or that
tenants would be ,willing to pay rent required by new buildings.
-144-
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
Some opinions were expressed that (1) Only new buildings to house
federal, state or regional offices would be warranted; (2) Rehab-
ilitation of present buildings would serve; (3) New buildings are
warranted only if parking comparable to that available in shopping
centers were available; (4) Rental rates in the CBD were currently
too low to warrant construction of such buildings.
The Committee members were asked to give their general opinions
on the proposed renewal activities in the,CBD. Six responded to the
request. Answers ranged from doubts of the advisability of creating
a mall to the belief that a mall would be a start on a much-needed
project. The general opinion was that suggestions, especially con-
cerning creating a mall, would not cure all ills. Also, additional
convenient parking would be essential to downtown development, even
if buildings would have to be removed adjacent to Fifth and Seventh
to make room for parking.
Recommendations Concerning the Citizen's Advisory Committee:
While the Citizen's Advisory Committee has been effective in
taking actions concerning the Community Renewal Program, a few rec-
ommendations can be made to help it become more effective.
The entire approach to membership selection should be changed.
At the present time, membership is based upon the expressed desire
by prospective members to serve on the Committee who mayor may
not have been contacted by the City staff or Committee members
concerning possible membership. The City Commission does approve
the appointment of members after they have volunteered for service.
The apparent hazard to the present system of appointment is that
the Committee may become unbalanced as to representation..
As long as the present system of membership selection is used,
prompt action on appointments should be taken by the City Commis-
sion. Delays of several months in taking action concerning
appointments have occurred in the past.
Better communication between the Citizen's Advisory Committee
and the City Commission or City staff is essential for improved
effectiveness of the Citizen's Advisory Committee. Sufficient
guidelines for action by the Citizen's Advisory Committee have not
been established by the City Commission. The Committee has been
-145-
-146-
I
I
I
.1
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
at a considerable loss as to what the Commission considers proper
areas of deliberation. The Commission has not utilized effective-
ly the services of the Committee as an advisory body by referring
controversial issues for deliberation and advice. Tne Citizen's
Advisory Committee has been rather effective in assuming the res~
ponsibility for deliberating on issues and making recommendations
to the City Commission.
The membership of the Citizen's Advisory Committee should be
expanded to provide for a broader base. Some of the members are
active in too many community affairs to be truly effective in the
Citizen's Advisory Committee. The Committee could be more effec-
tive in dealing with community affairs on the grass roots level
if its base were broad enough to enable it to take community
affairs more directly to the people within the neignborhoods.
Salvation Army Community Center
The Salvation Army maintains a commun~ty center on the north-
east corner of Block 22 in Neighborhood 4. A major portion of
the expenses for maintaining the center come from the United Fund,
but yearly meIT~erships are sold at $1.00.
The community center consists of a gymnasium with a concrete
basketball court, dressing rooms, chapel, reference room, and
areas used for different types of recreation.
Organized recreational activities are sponsored throughout
the year in the gym. Walk-in type ~ecreational activities such
as table t~nnis, pool, and shuffleboard are also available. The
center sponsors in-season basketball, baseball and softball for
boys and girls. The center sponsors two traveling basketball
teams for teenagers during the winter months. They play similar
teams in neighboring cities and as distant as Kansas City.
Special recreational and entertaining events such as skating
parties, hOQtenannys, and seasonal parties are held throughout
the year. The Center promotes camping activities and SWThuer camp
at a local camp and a camp near Kansas City.
Several different organizations are sponsored by the Center.
Three Cub dens with membership of approximately 50 a~e sponsored
by .the Center. A Scout troop and an Explorer post, with member-
ships of approximately 16 ~nd 12, respectively, are sponsored by
the Center.
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
Sunbeams, an organization similar to Girl Scouts for girls
7-10/ is sponsored by the Salvation Army Center. The membership
is approxiMately 50. A Girl's Guard organization for girls 11-17
has a membership of approximately 16. Girls in the organization
learn homemaking skills such as cake decorating.
A Junior Legion program of religious training for approxi-
mately 30 boys and girls 7-11 is sponsored by the Center. A Young
People's Legion serves the same function for approximately 20 teen-
age boys and girls.
A men's club of approximately 12 members promotes work pro-
jects on the building and promotes group study of various topics.
A Ladies' Home League of approximately 25 members meets at
least once a week and has as its purposes -- service, fellowship,
educational and spiritual training.
Church services are held at the Center each Sunday with ap-
proximately 250 attending. Sunday School sessions are held on
Sunday mornings and afternoons with approximately 150 part1cipating.
The Center maintains a reference room with television where
young people who have no appropriate place to study may gather to
do their homework and use encyclopedias and other r~ference mate-
rials.
The Center serves the disadvantaged of Neighborhood 4 and other
areas of Salina quite well, but improvements could be made to
the program if additional financing were available and. the facil-
ities improved. (See Recommended Community Renewal Activities.)
The Center needs additional staff members to better enable it to
carry out its program. The recreational program for girls is weak
and s~ould be improved.
The Salvation Army might consider the possibilities of
participating in the Federal government's "Food and Fellowship
Program" for the elderly. The purpose of the program is to insure
that elderly persons, especially those living alone, have balanced
meals. The meals are served at a community center similar to that
which the Salvation Army operates.
-147-
-148-
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
American Community Center
The American Community Center is operated in Block 34 of.
Neighborhood 9 primarily as a community center for Spanish Amer-
icans living in the area. It is supported through the United
Fund at a level of approximately $2400 a year and through dona-
tions by church, civic, fraternal and other organizations.
The Center provides a wide variety of outdoor athletic ac-
tivities during good weather. The City Recreation Commission
maintains a summer recreation program at the Center. Outdoor
activities at other times include baseball; football, volleyball,
kick ball and hockey.
The Center is open to school-aged youngsters every afternoon
following school for playing pool, table tennis, checkerH: and
other games. Opportunities in painting, crafts, watching T.V.,
reading, listening to records, are also provided. The average at~
.tendance at the Center after school is approximately 30. Free
piano lessons are offered to those who are interested. A library
is maintained where a student may find references to aid him or
her in doing school work. Special learning sessions are held
each Tuesday for those who are having difficulty in their schbol
work. Instructr::rs are furnished by Marymount College.
The Center also serves educational and recreational functions
for adults. Classes are held for non-English speaking persons to
learn to speak English. Also help is given those who are seeking
to complete a high school education.
Special demonstrations on cooking, serving, arts and crafts
are held for housewives. A number of housewives meet from time
to time to make dressings for local needs.
The Center is in Urban Renewal Project II and most people
served by the Center will be relocat~d. Chances are great that
many of the families' will not be relocated close together; hence
much of the cohesion that now exists will not exist after reloca-
tion. However, if many of the families settle in Neighborhood 14,
it would be advisable' for the Center to be relocated in that neigh-
borhood to serve the needs of the minority group now located in
the neighborhood as well as those who may be relocated there.
There appears to be a definite need in the future for a center
having similar programs, but careful consideration should be given
to its location.
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
Y.M.C.A.
The Y.M.C.A. has many activities of interest to boys, girls,
men and women at most age levels. Most of the activities are
carried out at the Y.M.C.A. building located on the northwest
corner of Block 26 of Neighborhood 8. The building has varying
degrees of adequacy: one section being old, the other section
being relatively new.
One of the activities provided outside the Y.M. facilities
is the Vanguard Program for elementary-aged boys at all public
elementary schools within Salina City Limits. Emphasis is placed
upon physical fitness during the winter months, while flag foot-
. ball is the main activity during the fall. Social activities,
such as bowling and skating, are also a part of the program.
.The program is operated through Vanguard Clubs ranging from
8 to 21 members. One or two boys from each club make up a council
to plan activities for all clubs within the City. Ten regular
leaders, plus supervlsors and alternates, are working with the
program. Extra adult help is secured for games. The entire pro-
gram is geared to the individual, and all participate in the
activities regardless of proficiency.
The Y.M. and the Council are working on a program of activ-
ities for the underprivileged and are discussing formation of
basketball teams.
A new program was inaugurated in the summer of 1968 for under-
privileged boys through funds provided by the Weiss Estate. Some
of the activities under this new program were fishing, overnight
campouts, bowling and swimming. Boys were bussed to and from the
activities each day. To give the boys a sense of earning a part
of the privileges, they were given the task of helping to clean
the City parks. Approximately 25-30 boys participated in the pro-
gram, of which approximately two-thirds were Negro. The program
was quite successful.
Swim and gym classes are held at theY.M.C.A. every afternoon
after school for elementary-aged boys. Two gymnastics classes are
taught and other athletic skills are emphasized. The classes are
set up by skill levels to more nearly individualize the program.
Each boy is insured of two sessions per week. Special activities
are held on Saturday.
-149-
Numerous swimming ac~ivities are held for both youths and
adults. F?-mily swimming is held on Monday and Friday nights.
Several adult swimming groups use the pool at many different times
during the week.' Women may swim most anytime during the day when
two or more come to the Y. Participation has been as high as 150
per week. .An aqua-tot program of swimming is conducted during the
day for pre-school children.
I
I
I
The basketball program at the Y.M.C.A. probably attracts more
boys who are not members than any' other activities. More than 500
boys participated in 1968-69 in the Sunday School Basketball League
on 50. teams.
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
The Y.M.C.A. sponsors two swimming teams during winter months
that practice three to four hours per week and participate in
meets every other week. The other swim teams in Salina are spon-
~ored by the Recreation Commission during the summer months.
Salina High School's Swim Team uses th~ Y.M.C.A. facilities for
practice from 6:00 to 7:00 A.M. each morning.
A swimming and gym program is maintained for junior high stu-
dents from 3:30 to 4:10 P.M. each afternoon after school. This
program has a rather limited success, probably due to lack of
promotion and the limited time available for it.
The Y.M.C.A. and Y.W.C.A. cooperate in sponsoring a "Club
Cherokee" program for senior high students from Salina High School
and Sacred Heart 'High School and Southeast of Saline. The main
activities of the Club are dances held nearly every Friday night
and for special occasions. A council of 29 makes the decisions,
pays bills, and collects money. Advisors from the Y.W.C.A. and
from the Y.M.C.A. supervise the activities. A friendship group
has been formed from the club to help newcomers to Salina High
School (an average of seven a week) to get acquainted with the
school, students and faculty. They also help the newcomer secure
a date for the next "Club Cherokee" dance. Attempts are be;i.ng
made to set up a "youth-in-government" program through Club Cher-
okee similar to the program sponsored by Hi-Y.
A co-educational Junior Leaders Corps has been established to
help run activities at the Y.M.C.A. and to help those who are in
the Corps to learn to act as leaders.
The Y.M.C.A. has given guidance to several who have partici-
pated in the "Big Brother" program for boys who are from homes
-150-
I
I
I
I
I
where a father is not present. Several students attending local
colleges are participating in this program.
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
Special adult programs are available at the Y.M.C.A. Women's
fitness classes are sponsored from time to time. A special exer-
cise room is available to young adult and adult members and to
non-members for a $1.00 fee. Swimming, handball, volleyball and
a health club provide activities for men.
The Y.M.C.A. facilities are used as meeting place by the fol-
lowing groups: Community Action Council, Welfare Council, a small
men's prayer group which meets weekly, and others. TheY.W.C.A.
sponsors swimming classes on Thursday evenings in the Y.M.C.A. pool.
. The Y.M.C.A. serves quite well the needs of those living in
Priority Neighborhoods, especially young boys. The Y.M.C.A. reaches
many disadvantaged young people through its programs for non-me~bers
and the "Back-A-Boy" and related programs for providing memberships.
for girls and entire families. Many business establishments and
individuals purchase single and family memberships for deserving
persons and employees.
The Y.M.C.A. is rather centrally located to serve all families
in Salina and especially those living in Priority Neighborhoods.
There is considerable evidence of excellent rapport between the
staff and persons of all income levels.
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
The old portion of the Y.M.C.A. will need to be replaced
within the 20-year period covered by this study. New facilities
probably will be constructed on the present site, due to the amount
already invested in the newer portion of the building.
Parking space has been one of the major problems at the Y.M.
The situation was alleviated somewhat by Y.M.C.A. purcha$ing the
old City library, razing it, and developing a parking lot on the
site during the course of this study.
Y.W.C.A.
The Salina Y.W.C.A. is located on Block 26 in Neighborhood 8
in a building that is old and quite inadequate for the many ac-
tivities sponsored by the Y.W.C.A.
The Y.W.C.A. has 12 clubs within its framework, all of which
are quite active. The Newcomers Club is composed of interested
I
I
-151-
women who have lived in Salina less than three years. They meet
twice monthly with an approximate membership of 100. The pro-
grams include such topics as flower arranging, raising flowers,
homemaking and topics of timely interest.
I
I
I
The "Y.W. Friends" is a group of ladies who have been in the
Newcomers Club and wish to continue participation in the same
type of,program. They meet twice monthly and have a membership
of approximately 45.
The Live Y'ers Club, composed of older business women and re-
tired women, meets twice monthly for dinner and has a membership
of approxim~tely 36.
I
I
I
The Y.W. sponsors an Antique Club for men and women who meet"
once a month. The membership is approximately '35.
Two women's TOPS,clubs meet weekly, and a Teen TOPS club
meets weekly during the school year. The women's clubs have mem-
berships of approximately 30 each, and the teenage club has a
membership of approximately 12.
I
I
.1
I
The Mutual Club is a club of approximately 30 active business
women who meet twice monthly for dinner.
The Y.W.C.A. Ambassadors Club is a boosters club of nearly
80 former board members and strong s~pports of the Y.W. which,
meets five times a year.
September to June activities include sessions on languages,
basic English, bridge, millinery, sewing, art, painting, swimming,
'I
I
I
I?
I
I
I
A "Reading for Fun" club meets monthly and has a membership
of approximately 15 members. Another club is Cake Decorating
Club which meets once a month.
The Y.W.C.A. sponsors the approximately 1,200 Y-Teens in the
Salina secondary schools and co-sponsors with the Y.M.C.A. nearly
every Friday night during the school year Club Cherokee or a
dance for Salina teenagers and teenagers from other schools in
the County.
Special activities include classes for approximately 150 chil-
dren during the summer in swimming at the municipal pool, sewing,
>arts, crafts, dramatics, creative writing, guitar and folk singing.
-152-
I
I
I
I
I
ballet for children and teens, tailoring, social dancing for adults
and teens, and citizenship for foreign-born wives of servicemen.
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
Special events include workshops in table setting, workshops
on decorating and holiday ideas, exhibits of articles made at the
Y.W.C.A., and many other special events.
The Y.W.C.A. established a branch at. Quayle Methodist Church
in Neighborhood 14 to better meet the needs of servicemen's wives
living in that neighborhood and Schilling Manor.
Plans are being made to build a new Y.W.C.A. on Block 68 of
Neighborhood 12. While the new location is rather centrally lo-
cated for most of the residents in Salina using the facilities,
the facilities will be more remote from the disadvantaged living
in the Priority Neighborhoods. Special care will need to be ex-
ercised to avoid losing rapport \vith the disadvantaged at the new
location.
I
Relatively few persons living in Neighborhood 4 are currently
being served by the Y.W.C.A.; therefore, considerable emphasis
will need to be placed upon services that will better meet the
needs of those living in the neighborhood. Consideration should
be given to establishing a satellite center under full sponsor-
ship of the Y.W.C.A. or through cooperation with other agencies to
promote more participation in Y.W.C.A. activities. Such a center
could result in more utilization of the central Y.M.C.A. facili-
ties by residents of the Neighborhood.
I
I
:1
I
I
I
Boy Scouts
The scouting program available for boys living in the Prior-
ity Areas is quite goOd and should be considered as an effective
aid to Community Renewal. Many disadvantaged boys in the Priority
Neig~borhoods are reached through the Boy Scout programs due to
the considerable interest shown by men and women throughout
Salina.
Packs, troops and posts meet at different locations through-
out Salina. The Priority Neighborhoods are well-served by meeting
places for the Scouts. A list of meeting places by neighborhoods
and blocks follow:
I
I
-153-
BOY SCOUT MEETING PLACES
1.
Priority Neighborhoods
A. Packs
1. First Methodist Church
2. St. John's Lutheran'
3. Salvation Army
4. Grand Avenue Methodist Church
5. Oakdale School
6. Trinity Lutheran Hall
(Across street from priority neighborhood)
7. Sunset Elementary School
8. First Presbyterian Church
9. Glenifer Hill Elementary School
B. Troops
1. St. John's Baptist Church (Negro)
2. First Presbyterian Church
3. First Methodist Church
4. First Christian Church
5. St. .John' s Lutheran Church
6. Salvation Army
7. Immanuel Lutheran Church
8. Grand Avenue Methodist Church
9. Trinity Lutheran Hall
(Across street from priority neighborhood)
10. Sacred Heart School
11. Sunset Elementary School
12. Oakdale Elementary School
C. Posts
1. St. John's Lutheran Church
2. Salvation ,Army
3. Trinity Lutheran Hall
(Across street from priority neighborhood)
4. V.F.W.
5.' Kancen Printing Company
'-154-
Neighborhood
and Block
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I'
I
,I
'I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
8-22
8-37
4-22
4-67
9-67
15-10
14-23
8-36
12-27
7-16
8-36
8-22
8-32
8-37
4-22
8-33
4-67
15-10
7-57
14-23
9-69
8-37
4-22
15-10
8-19
14-5
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
'I
I
I
I
I
Girl'Scouts
The Girl Scouting program is functioning in all parts of
Salina, but it has not been as successful as the Boy Scouts in
reaching the disadvantaged in the Priority Neighborhoods. Two
explanations seem reasonable:
1. The Salvation Army, through its Sunbeam and Girls' Guards,
attracts a rather significant number of girls who other-
wise would be intere~ted in Girl Scouts.
2. A good Girl Scout program is greatly dependent upon the
cooperation and leadership of the individual girl's mother.
This leadership and cooperation has not been full~ devel-
oped among the mothers of disadvantaged families.
~
The Girl Scout meeting places are located at places where they
are convenient for most girls in the Priority Areas. A list of
meeting places by neighborhood and block follows:
GIRL SCOUT MEETING PLACES IN PRIORITY AREAS
Neighborhood
and Block
A. Brownie Troops
1. Sacred Heart School (2)
2. Hawthorne Grade School
3. Whittier Elementary School
4. Bartlett Elementary School
7-57
4-66
7-94
7-88
B. Scouts
1. Hawthorne (1 junior and 1 special education)
2. Free Methodist Church (junior)
3. First Presbyterian Church (1 cadet and 1
senior)
4. Whittier Elementary School (junior)
5. Bartlett Elementary School (junior)
4-66
9-69
8-36
7-94
7-88
-155-
.1
other Social Agencies I
Numerous civic, fraternal, educational and special interest
organizations exist in Salina that could be enlisted to aid in com-I,
munity renewal programs. Home demonstration units could be very
helpful in teaching better housekeep1ng techniques to those removed
from ~ousing through community renewal actions. They could also I
aid those in rehabilitation areas to develop improved housekeeping
techniques and maintenance techniques necessary to maintain rehabil-
itated property in good condition. I
Kansas Wesleyan University and Marymount College should be con-
sidered excellent social resources for aiding in community renewal I
programs.
c
All community renewal programs, to be effective, will require
extensive education o~ the public. Most civic, fraternal, educa-
tional and special interest organizations can be effective in the
educational role if good leadership is developed within the organ-
izations and their efforts are well-coordinated from without.
RELOCATION HOUSING RESOURCES . . . .
Housing resources for relocation of'the residents of Urban
Renewal areas will be adequate at the beginning of the 20-year
period of this Community Renewal Program plan; however, the housing
relocation supply will ,become inadequate at the end of the period
unless' additional steps are taken ,to meet the needs for relocation.
Public housing projects appear to be in critical need for supply of
a portion of the low income and elderly relocation.
The vacant housing currently available for relocation is, in
most cases, not of high quality, but is much better than the housing
now occupied in areas .of clearance. Much of the housing for relo-
cation will need minor or major repair to bring it up to standard.
Much of the sound vacant housing in Salina is priced beyond the
housing capabilities of many who will be relocated. A great portion
of the families to be relocated will not have ,total housing cost
capabilities (payments or rent plus utilities) over $75 to $100 per
month. Therefore, only the seven Priority Neighborhoods provide
significant potential for relocation without subsidies being made.
Salina is currently structured, through the Local Housing
Authority, to assist in relocation of families being moved from
urban renewal project areas. Families who lived in Urban Renewal
Project #2 are being assisted in finding suitable conventional
housing or leased housing.
-156-
"\'/".
,',:.
(. .
~' t " ';;
~. ' :: \ I ~!
ii.:.'
l:, ,; 'j
I
..1',','
, .
I
~1
I
I
I
I
;, J I','
""'i'; .
I
I
I
\ /
I
I,
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
SUMMARY OF PROPOSED RESIDENTIAL URBAN RENEWAL
ACTIVITY AND RELOCATION
Rehabilitation Clearance Net
1970- 1975- 1980- 1970- 1975- 1980- Relocation
1975 1980 1990 Total 1975 1980 1990 Total (Families)
4 265 407 2 674 66 75 3 144 93
7 213 580 18 811 5 19 3 27 18
9 0 309 0 309 0 11 0 11 7
11 0 0 329 329 0 0 10 10 8
12 0 0 440 440 0 0 15 .15 10
14 0 0 0 0 27 0 0 27 2
478 1,296 789 2,563* 98 105 31 234** 138
* 2,563 Rehabilitation = 100% of 1,280 major repair and :!:50% of 2,895
minor repair.
** 234 Urban Renewal demolition + estimate 24 private demolition =
total of 258 clearance (216 in priority areas + 42 in non-priority
areas) condition structures in the 1968 inventory.
Net Relocation -- Demolition of occupied clearance structures. T.he
moving of residences to clear for non-residential.
Urban renewal improvements and the rehabilitation
of the moved residents are performed within the
neighborhood and considered likely that families
will continue residence at new locations and are
not included in the net relocation totals.
The low number of families (138) considered for relocation in the
proposed urban renewal activities is due in part to the condition
that only 138 clearance condition residences of the 5,179 total oc-
cupied residences in the priority area (comprising approximately one-
half of the City population) are occupied and that the proposed
renewal program is designed and placed in proposed stage of develop-
ment to reduce clearance to a minimum (principally only dilapidated
structures) .. When clearance of a sound or rehabilitable structure.
is necessary, it is planned that a previously prepared site within
that neighborhood will be available to move a residential structure
-157-
and rehabilitate. The ability to relocate within the ,same neighbor-
hood permits an extension of the rather long average tenure of resi-
dence (9-18 years), assures no unreasonable escalation in housing
cost, and permits choice of retaining neighborhood ties (74% of the
families interviewed in the priority areas expected to continue to
live in ,the same neighborhood).
The present supply of vacant, rehabilitable residences (493
single-family in the priority area and 28 in the balance 'of the City)'
provides a choice of housing rehabilitation opportunities for those
lower income families to relocate. As proof of this opportunity,
many of the relocatees of Urban Renewal Project #2 have employed
this process successfully. Urban Renewal Project #2 relocation
housing has been found available for the white and the minority
races with only financial barriers being observed in this relocation
effort.
The sector of population providing the most challenging housing
is that of housing the elderly (over 65 age persons) which account
for 9.5% of the City population and 12.2% of thepriori~y area pop-
ulation. The City is now considering the construction of a 150-250
unit housing for the elderly. under a Public Housing Authority program,
to be located near the downtown area (Neighborhood 8), near the
center of the priority area.
Salina recently passed a fair housing ordinance, but not enough
time has elapsed to determine its effectiveness. Minority groups are
currently being relocated in areas of Salina not formerly well inte-
grated. The extent to which integration will take place in many
areas of Salina with a fair housing ,ordinance is questionable. Due
tdthe lower financial capabilities of many minority families, inte-
gration is not likely to be extensive in the higher income neighbor-
hoods. The lack of integration is observed to be due only to
financial limitations and not a matter of minority or ethnic back-
ground.
-158-
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
'I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
PROGRAM FOR
RENEWAL ACTION
SALINA COMMUNITY
RENEWAL PROGRAM
I
I
I
,I
I
I
I
I
I
I
PROGRAM FOR RENEWAL ACTION
GENERAL . . . .
Blighting conditions and need for Community Renewal Activities
are present in most of the residential and commercial neighborhoods
that have been developed for a number of years. However, the
degree of blight and the limitation on local and federal resources
appear to limit treatment in only the seven priority neighborhoods
(4, 7, 8, 9, 11, 12 and 14) in the projected planning period of
this report. The quite minor blighting in other neighborhoods of_
the City does not warrant or qualify for renewal activities or is
presently, or in good prospect to be, renewed or improved by pri-
vate, non-federal actions.
Treatment for the six primary residential neighborhoods and the
CBD neighborhood is proposed in a 20-year period to 1990 in follow-
ing described phases and step timetables. Steps are used to desig-
nate the activities in the order that they should be undertaken in
each neighborhood within the five-year phases.
NEIGHBORHOOD 4.
Blight appears in Neighborhood 4 to a much greater degree than
in other neighborhoods; therefore, proposed activities in this
neighborhood should receive top priority.
I
I
I
I
'I
I
I
I
I
Neighborhood 4 has good potential for redevelopment, as it is
a-residential neighborhood which provides housing development
opportunities for moderate and low-income families. The neighbor-
hood is well served with water, sewer, natural gas, electricity
and streets. Low land costs, without special assessments, should
prove to be effective inducements for construction of new low and
moderately priced housing for which there will be a strong demand
in the next twenty years.
Treatment for nearly the entire neighborhood is proposed w~thin
the planning period to make it more attractive for redevelopment.
Much of the activity proposed for the neighborhood will be rehabil-
itation; however, areas in extreme blighted condition do warrant
total clearance. Most of the extreme blight is east of Santa Fe
Avenue; hence most of the proposed total clearance and extensive
redevelopment is proposed for that area. (See Community Renewal
Activities Map and Urban Design for Neighborhood 4. Also see cost
analysis for renewal action in Neighborhood 4 for'abreakdown of esti-
mated costs.)
-159-
PHASE I - 1970-75; Step 1, First Three Years of Project Time
CRP Blocks 15, 16, 25, 34, 35 and the north portions of Blocks
26, 45 and 46 are in extreme blighted condition with 22 residential
structures that are dilapidated to the extent that clearance is
warranted. within the same area are 4 "sound" residential struc-
tures and 54 "minor" and "major repair" structures that probably
will qualiy for rehabilitation; hence, spot clearance of residen-
tial and auxiliary structures accompanied by rehabilitation of
eligible residential structures is the most appropriate treatment
of the area. This action will provide approximately 55 clear
building sites for the relocation of houses from subsequent re-
newal actions or for new construction.
The redevelopment of the area should be accompanied by paving
Front Street to a 48-foot width and installing curb and gutter.
Third Street should be widened to 34-foot width and curb and gut-
ter installed along the west side from Hamilton Avenue ,to Harsh
Avenue. CRP Block 16 should be rep1atted to improve land utiliza-
tion for residential redevelopment. (See Urban Design Sketch.)
Step 2A - CRP Blocks 5, 6, and 7 -Third and Fourth Years of Phase I
This three-block area contains some of the most serious blight-
ing in Salina with 18 residential structures rated as "clearance"
and many serious environmental deficiencies. While there are
3 sound residences and 27 other structures considered'rehabi1itab1e,
the area has questionable durability if left to the normal course
of events. The area could be expected to deteriorate much further
if no renewal action is applied.
St. John's Military School, an educational institution of
long standing and a contributor of nearly a half million dollars
yearly to the economy of Salina has expressed a need for land to
expand its facilities to handle projected enrollment increases and
changes in educational emphases. The project area is ideally sit-
uated for the proposed expansion and the 18.3 acres would double
the size of the campus. The paving to a 48-foot width of Front
Street from the Union Pacific Tracks to Euclid Avenue and Euclid
Avenue from Front Street to Fifth Street will make it possible to
close Fifth Street from Otis to Euclid and shuttle traffic on
Fifth Street around the expanded campus, thus improving the util-
ity of the land acquired for expansion.
-160-
I
I
I
I
I
I
~I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
'I
I
I
---------
- - - ST."'SMIIM - - - - -
SCHOOL EXPANSION
1
!
I
;
SPOT CLEARANCE OF RESIDENTIAL.
HIGH RISE APARTMENT DEVELOPMENT
COMMUNITY RENEWAL ACTIVITIES
INDEX MAP
........ PROJECT BOUNDARIES -+
~f:~zf:~i~i~:I:i~f.~~~~~T::.,:~~;,~.::.:::~t..,. .~,
Sea"'n'..'"
000
0000
zooo
,
;.,;
~I
~
~-_&U
:In
i i
II i
'1' .!
!!-A"iffi1~
r-11n nil I
~jJtj .~
; 1....;I.rJ 1..~-lc.. J [':..'.:.:'
:. Fi, ! ~ '.: ~
I, I, I ~8i i ,^I; ,
i w.L i!:i~ l?~Lj
... fJ il'HltS~ I,LYEl1i'T-l
[S!lo'I~le"9ra~cfl ., i
&dReh,bol,lal,on .' I
, jI i 39!i I, ~ :; I
i ~JLJ .f1Mllffa L-lQjL.. J
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
i~:mP;;:~:Q~~:nQi~',~\:,::::' ~d'..';,;;~~~~;~~ :fd,i.: t~:~:~~m::,.d".1 v,gnt
.1Hon.;n..ndU,!,"nO.,.ln.....t.._'ho,;..db,..<ti.n40j
."h.H..';n....".f1959.n."...nd.d
I
I
I
I
I
I
'tit!
. I
, II
ifl
I I
+1
I
I;
I
/25
I
I
I
Scol. I" f..,:
400
-U\ L/' i~
g. \~ ~~ ----- __, - -. fiI.!
II I . [Ur';UD 1!:L ..
"._',~..."
"'-'::~
"',-,,:'2
I I' '1 I
~A~E I! STEP 2-A
!j I'
[! o,lal;CI~aranc.
SI! Joh~,sIIMilitary School
'1'1' i f8<pan.si~n
j Ii'
t
0.::
loJ
W
a:
IJ
5 T JOHN S
',AIL. ;TAD(
SC HOOl
. ! I
II II I
. I! I, I
1lO._J !JLJ U
,P-HASE '_~!E~ 3-1".
ITOI~II ~leClr9.fc~ II ~
I 'Ri.sal. 10; '"
I I 'I . ;
!.. S . ,a Iv. al..u".ol" Army.!.
L2lI._J ,41]---, <:i;'J
_Ii
0" .... _ _ --'-~ I
, ICCOMMUNITY RENEWAL ACTIVITIES
LEGEND
c::J PHASE BOUNDARY
SCREEN
.. STREETS TO BE PAVED
MIl STREETS TO BE REMOVED
400 800
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
Residences in the project area which are eligible for rehabili-
tation should be moved to sites cleared in Step 1, or other desir-
able sites in Neighborhood 4, or in other neighborhoods. Rehabili-
tation should be undertaken on the structures by private owners or
the Urban Renewal Agency.
Step 2B - CRP Blocks 10, 11, 12, 20, 22, 30, 31, 32, 33, 41, 42,
43, 44 - Third, Fourth and Fifth Years of Phase I
This project area is characterized by a mixture of "sound",
"minor repair", "major repair", and "clearance" residences, with
some commercial and industrial structures. Blighting in the area
is to a much lesser degree than in areas east of Santa Fe Avenue
in Neighborhood 4, but to a greater degree than in other neighbor-
hoods. Clearance of 13 residential structures, rehabilitation of
139 residential structures, rehabilitation of 4 commercial and
industrial structures, and development of a neighborhood park east
of Santa Fe is expected to enhance the area and make it more dur-
able. As the area is well served by utilities and streets, spot
clearance and rehabilitation are the only activities proposed for
the project area.
Step 3A - CRP Blocks 13, 14, 23, 24 - Fourth and Fifth Years of
Phase I
Serious blighting is in evidence in the four-block project
area, as 12 residential structures were rated as "clearance" and
a number of environmental deficiencies were found in the City-wide
survey. While the blighting is not as serious in Blocks 13 and
23 as in other blocks to the east, the advantages of locating a
neighborhood park closer to the center of population were consid-
ered sufficient to include these blocks in preference to blocks
having more blight"
It is proposed that the four blocks be totally cleared with
the "clearance" residential structures being demolished and the
39 rehabilitable residences being moved to new sites and rehabil-
itated.
The proposed neighborhood park should be developed to pro-
vide a swimming pool, one lighted ball diamond, one unlighted
b~ll diamond, a combination tennis-basketball court, one picnic
shelter, playground equipment and landscaping. paving, curb and
gutter should be removed on Fifth Street from Hamilton Avenue '
to Otis Avenue and on Antrim Avenue from Santa Fe to Fourth Street.
-161-
Step 3B - CRP Block 22 - Fourth Year of Phase I
The Salvation Army, which has for years played a major role in
providing educational, religious and social opportunities for under-
privileged. families. within Neighborhood 4 and other neighborhoods,
needs additional land to construct a chapel and additional class and
meeting rooms. Due to the condition of the structures to the south
of the present facilities, expansion to the south is the most feas-
ible direction of expansion. The project will require removal of
three residences and a one-frame structure being used as a "store
front" type religious mission. Improvements proposed for the
project site will be by the Salvation Army.
--
PHASE II - 1975-1980
Step lA - CRP Blocks 71, 72, 73, 74 - First 2 years of phase II
The four blocks in the project area constitute a seriously
blighted area as 25 residential structures (nearly 40 percent
of all residences) are in need of clearance, ten structures need
m~jor repair, 5 structures are sound and the others were rated
minor repair.
The project area has little potential for commercial develop-
ment and there appears to be no demand for industrial development
in this area. The proposed activity.for the project area is to.
spot clear the dilapidated structures, rehabilitate eligible struc-
tures, construct a shrubbery and fence screen to shield the area .
from the industrial uses to the south, and to redevelop as a resi-
dential area. Other proposed improvements include paving Forest
Avenue to 34-foot width from Front to Fifth Streets, paving of
Woodland A:venue to 34-foot width from Front to Third Streets,
paving of Front Street to 48-foot width from the Union Pacific
tracks to Woodland Avenue and construction of 3 cul-de-sacs. (See
Community Renewal Activities Map for Neighborhood 4.)
Step IB - CRP Blocks 36, 55, 56, 57, 58 and South Portions of
Blocks 36, 45 and 46 -First 2 Years of Phase II
This project area has considerable amount of blight of com-
mercial and residential structures. Due to reduced traffic vol-
ume on Old U.S. Highway 40, the area has limited potential for
commercial development. Proposed activities include spot clearance
of llresidences .and one commercial. structure, rehabilitation of
30 residences and 3 commercial structures, and paving of Front
Street to a 48-foot width from Woodland Avenue to approximately
100 feet south of Antrim Avenue.
-162-
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
Step lC - CRP Blocks 1, 8, 9, 17, 18, 19, 27, 29, 37, 38, 39, 40,
47, 48, 49, 50, 59, 60, 120, 130- First 2 Years of
Phase II
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
This project area shows the least amount of 'deterioration
among areas of Neighborhood 4. There are numerous "sound" resi-
dences and most of the remainder are in need of minor repair.
The proposed activity is rehabilitation of 165 residences and
7 commercial structures to prevent the spread of blight. The
city-wide survey revealed that only 5 residential structures need
to be cleared. Paving of Euclid to a 34-foot width arid ~nstalling
curb and gutter from Ninth Street to the city Limits are the only
proposed improvements for the project area. '
Step 2 - CRP Blocks 51, 52, 53, 54, 67, 68, 69, 70, 83, 84, 85, 86,
87, 89, 90, 91, 92, 101, 102, 103, 104 - Third and Fourth
Years of Phase II
This area is characterized by a mixture of residential, com-
mercial and industrial structures, ranging from sound to dilapidated
structures in need of clearance. Abatement of commercial usage,
especially along north Santa Fe has been under way for several
years. This trend is expected to continue as more automobile
agencies move from the area. Deterioration of the area is expected
to continue until such time that property values have declined
to the point that redevelopment of much of the area as residential
will be feasible.
Blocks 52, 67, 83, 87, 89, 101, 102 and 103 are expected to
remain predominantly commercial and industrial; therefore, the 20
residential structures intermingled with commercial and industrial
structures within these blocks should be moved to areas more com-
patible. Demolition is proposed for 22 residential and 11 commer-
cial or industrial structures within the project area. The abate-
ment of commercial and industrial uses and redevelopment for
residential uses should be encouraged through the rehabilitation
of the 62 eligible residential structures on site and the 20
residences moved to new sites. Rehabilitation of 28 commercial
and industrial structures to remain is proposed to upgrade condi-
tions ,within the blocks expected to remain predominantly commercial
and industrial.
Improvements proposed include paving to 34-foot width Lincoln
Avenue from Sa.nta Fe Avenue to Fifth Street and Fifth Street from
Lincoln Avenue to Grand Avenue.
-163-
(
Step 3 - CRP Blocks 61, 62, 63, 64, 75, 76, 77, 78, 79, 80, 81,
82, 93, 94, 95, 96, 97, 98, 100, 105, 106, 107, 108, 109,
110, 111,112, 113j 114, 115,116, 117, 118, 119 - Fourth
and Fifth Years of Phase II
This project area has a mixture of light industrial, commer-
cial and residential us'age. Commercial and light industrial
development is expected to continue in blocks along Broadway or
U.S. Highway 81 By-Pass, but the blocks now devoted primarily to
residential uses are, due to the proximity of Hawthorne Elementary
School, expected to continue to be used for residential purposes.
Rehabilitation of 125 residences and 25 commercial and industrial
structures to upgrade the area constitutes the main acti~ity
proposed for the project area. Twelve residential and 1 non- '
residential structure will require clearance. The two mobile home
parks in the project area should be improved to make the area'more
attractive.
Proposed improvements include paving to 34-foot width Barney
Street from North Street to Lincoln Avenue, Thirteenth Street
from the Union Pacific tracks to North Street, and Reynolds Street
from the Union Pacific tracks to North Street.
PHASE III - 1980-1985 - CRP Block 65 - Hawthorne School Expansion -
First Year of Phase III
The Hawthorne school site of ,approximately 3.7 acres is far
below State recommended standards for elementary school sites.
As the redevelopment of much of Neighborhood 4 is proposed, the
enrollment of the school is expected to remain constant or increase.
The older section of the school will need to be replaced in the
future. Construction of the new section ci:m reasonably'be expected
to require additional land, further compounding the problem of
inadequate site. Acquisition of the east half of Block 65 by the
Unified School District and closure of Tenth Street from Grand
Avenue to Woodland Avenue will add 3 acres to the site.
The project would require demolition of 3 commercial and
industrial structures and moving 2 residences to new sites.
Proposed improvements include removal of paving, curb, and
gutter from Tenth Street from Grand Avenue to Woodland Avenue and
playground developmentb~ Unified District 305.
-164-
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I'
I
I
I
I
I
I
~, PROPOSED ST. JOHN'S MILITARY ACADEMY EXPANSION
~'}-(v ~_Q
\
I
I
I
..;........
I...
~ _.... --- \,l@r",_ . '
"","" ~!...'.!..'
",,,t\!" _~.:.. .!!.'J.b.,...
~ ,"'.......- -~"
- __ "",,~ ~":--. ,4~ ~ -. ~ ~"'"
_-..:.....; ~ -- 'J""~-::::-... .... . --. -- --.....' ~-~ $Z>-:;~!.~"
---_: ~~... ~ ~ - ...,,:"" -. t""'~&:'_:;:':':- -~"",- - ..-.. :... ~ ...~- . - - ~ d'-'t.",
. ~ ~-~~....:.- ......, '""" -~-... ~ -...... -~ ~/ ~ ....... -!.'"
-:--.,.;. -.........' ~ ",.....' ~~ __~;t:~_- -_..;~:..... _ 4>- . _~q;-..- . ... _<!~....,:> "~"'~
~ .. -:;;;::'-~~#J"'~~=--'-r.-~,--_<rcr:;-:-- - -ih1,~".. -4>-- _'__ ~ . iI''P"'-
-< -- -...., ~,...p~ . !;;i~~"" ~- a~ "' . ...-;tt" ..,'.o!'",_..clII>'~~-_ ~<3>-''''".-~' __
. ~ ' ,,;,..~;?<' ",,;,,;,,~:;::.-!:' ",p.~;.~ "" ,....::. :-__"-:.!'!'.[,,;,;'!':~~/>:""~~' ~ - "> ~ PR 0 P 0 SED N E I G H B 0 RHO 0 D PAR K
-, ~ "'-'--~J 111;< </>' - II' 4-- '< ~''<l!II~ '-~- ~ .-/ ___
. ~ ' ..... ... '~~ k-T . ''-1; ~~~ . - ...;:&>- ~!!'i,- ~'-....,,~.... _<.t'...~ !i '~ll'''''"J;!'' -.... _~___ --,,__
~~ ~ ~ ~ "" ..~...~~€.'t1v - ~ . "'::c;.. ~,.,-__ "';:::~~;'I';-_~"^'~"'''~ O<:_~;!/;>"'-" .4\!1' ...u\~---..:-..._.---- ~ _ _ ->-
) tpr-~ .. ~~ "~,I"~ _<z>"" """" ~~....- -..~ - ....-./:!-""" ~- 4:"'- ~~- 4:i".~"- '.~w-:-:; -- ~ ~ ~
~ ::~~ ~.... ' -~~~ "%;:> . .::'i;.'~'!';;",- .4" ::. -:- -.d,'>_ ~iI~~- ~
-.... ~;;. ~ ~ '" .. "'-..:F~- .-.,.;f'!'!b....~i!f,~ ... -... -- '!"" _...1",....-.. ~~ ~t;;';:......"'< ~ ~ -- ~ _
....~-!.,; ~ .......:: .;.,.-#~" "'ti'i,,!~7r:ii_"'- -:-:!4~~,^~ ~"~~Ti<f~~_~_-<1:::,!!+:;,"''-;!-,7:Z'' ~ -r.---_ ~ ~:P"'""'''~' ~ :>/
.-.... .. -- """" 'T~ ,- 1~"'''' .. <':1":- ~\" .."".~ ~~ ~ "(? - ~..... ....~ ....---.-..........
,-. -c. I';',; . "p- ~ ~-~.. - ~4-~ __ ".." _ E~~': ~"j4i[..-" :_ _ :'J;; ~~- ".-
- .- /. -..... ' . ;;~~.f,- "';',~,,_4~ "" . _,!;;;",,,...~i'~'I'-' ~-_.~'p-_: ,.q;~>y "p-~ ;;ft.E.SIDENTlAL REDEVELOPMENT
- / - ......."........ Q "I - '7"->- ,,- ...x, __~.. o#l>' _ ~'...-: ~ _ '""lI:Qr:
- .... _4:-&;.;;"",... ""~ ~.~:t~i;- '(t", _~....~...., ... _"'...., ... __ ~.,,, ~ ...... ~ ""~~ __ ~ .~_~
--7!k~ '" "'",.~,,'~'----_ ;'_<T;~ .;'" ~-".J~<1"-- :'_..."7"~ . "-:... _~~ <. _.:-,
" "'41. ~'1~:;;~.~ 0 Q '. "-'cI,--..p_l,O'I" .'7'" ~'_' ~~"'~~":P I:;i
_~"'-::;!tt ;~\I!~;J"" - ~ -.. ...::'Z'" _ L.-:: ~ ~ r ...:.!>--:t>""'~ > -- <I"'''''' ._ _<1>'1. ': __, . ~';;;;""""';p.~-..--~ ~~~- '.~ ,~/
'-~"4-""""'" .. _-Z.-~ ~---!~-.::.-< ._/-- ~ -;-.......,,,,,, ';-~\!'\'1> :>0 ~ ." ~ .. . ~ .,:;;..~_-... _~...
" ~ ..,.. ;t..-.-Z..... .... "':Pi...,. ~ --..... '> - ~'?~. ....4 1>, '- ,,< __ ~........ '~ ... ~ ~ ......<'!9" ....
'>~> <<4.... :':;"~<r;i, - ':-+:.r;t:-J~.< "'-':")l6r~ S~l;-~~ ION < AJlM >A-N-S'! 0 N .-,/ ~~~.j,<" .,s:-:' ':., "::-~ ,
... ... ~~ --:;::r:.( :'-~ ~~ ~ <J>~':::"~- ~:;r.~ -., ";!~:l~~' ~ < __ ."'-... .~'''--..____ ~> ... ~ ~d '-..,,,.- -P_~ :;;..", ""~ ....~>
.:':'7 -...i',':Z>'fO._ ~_.,..> "::l? ',,< ",JiEi;.'. ',,~ _-, --:::;;;'~..., '>/ .--~<.Ff~'- ,..~'~ ,-........""..<".-.- 11
.., ~ ...\\. ~~ -~,..... --" ..... -...<:::.;.,; :i.,.......T~- ~ ........- <.. ~__ 4tt'> <-:1:> -..I~"',. .. -r-- -", ~_~../ ~
,-~"''I'''' . -_: ~f/-___ - ~ _~~~ ~ '~~'J;lo. ~.. ~" -z;..,:''''"c... ~ --<4,- ."~ ....... -- . """ ;::,.. .r> ~_ ~ -:- .~4"'~ ---..._ //
~~::7-:::__~~"'-:l?:",.~ '. <S;"'" ~';'-,.. -,<!?l..<~. - ""'" '-~, ~ ~ ,.. ..<1..'1.0" " ~ ~~ -~...~-../? .
--~T~:!";~'--!.<.:l?;>'~_ ...~~--"'" ....,,--.; --~-:r?'P::~ ~~-.<:!~::~ '"".:;~..__q;r; ~.S.AN'l)nnh"'~-"""CM. ....,:p.:t'l' ....;;;;.--:
. ....~.. - ~~<.:c:!:,- ..,.. ,~ ,..,.. <~-,,;,"~.... ~- ;~..,:;. ~ ~ <4~ ~ -- ~- 0
..... <'Pr"""-*'._-'-'_<;~-""''' ".::::>...,;:::,..---.....t;;.--... ~_ -_<1> ~ ._....~ ...........<~ '> ,-t ~.J:>_.,.--.." _r~ ". _~lp- ... _ . ~--".... . <P ..""
. '~<P___, :"', ..,~ ---:' ~"'_"_____ _..~,~ ~'___ "'--:' -'-~.F "JluJulll';>> .- .....~._';:'_~'~.,. .
'-- ',<p- ,..~<:::<1?~ -:,:~':r-:"'.~ ,,~ii;fIJ~ ."p-"'",<P" .,.q _~"'3.- ~i'\'" _ ~ "'<>-";--~':'-'';'" -
/....~Qi........<:C5~ ... ;-~~,~.. -~,~....,-- -- ~II --"-- ~.t.:'~""""'--'--"'" .........;. ....,.
/:;.'!:<t><p:'''-.,~''It.'<f'''<t>~~_ ~~~~' _ ~L;JIi!llr" ~'---',' ". - . " -f\iT'.~ -~
/4>- _C>- ..::'l?p~" S,. - <1>.-/ <<\\""", -- --_.<$>"';<0 >~"l.-, 'i'Cc;- . . -...-F'-'';::'',-~~ ..;;:-
~-.~~~.....:t::~~+<Z?~~;,,- .,.~/ <~ .,.,~w~-:.~\~~~ ~ ~". ~~.~..,:;. ~/ A1l11i~ ~ _<:p.~",;;~~ ,~~
- . ~ ~"~- . ~~ >-t"--<\"\\ '" ""'ijlll"'" _ ~W' - . ... __. ~.-.
'-.-,z::-p......""'."':..-.-,. . ;_-:t~":\"<;:;"'\\i\": """'-.,~~~.....- .,;x>",,~.'\I\' -'-~.~ '. .:..~~.. ~'-:;.,.,'
,- "~~v " ~~~l"""" ~ .'~ .~O').' . -' '. _ ~' .,.---- .-z
~-' "<~.l..t..A" :\.~~ ....\ p"" -- . <1>~ ....,?~, .~- ~ . ~<<
' . ~1\1{' '\\\~v\.p.t'. ,,'- ~,S;>"-~,' - <p""-<~ 4~4>"', ,',~ ,-
-...--,-. '-000 ~;;UjJt'-, '. ,~--'~.- ,.~_.~ ' ~\. _.~-...., -c;:~.,' .:~ -,...
-'tl ~" '~.Allin", .~<1>-:"~'-"~_ "'~<P>. '0'" f,',-. +'~~ ~_.,
~ I ~'..:.r --, ~... <J'>...;p<...;.. -.......--.~ /'>" ""...+-~ w ~ ~/...~ ~..--;
,~~.~ :,~.s;>:::)"~1~:' .~j
-, :,.~<t>..~,>/ ' J~~~"" <~ .::;;,~ ~
.., v ,,>~<i>"'c "'..f/i' /
.~~..."<:~.,~~ . .
:~-~...,:>.,..~
I
I
C>
REPLAT FOR
RESIDENTIAL REDEVELOPMENT
"
I
I
-, -,
-,
~':~... .,;;. -.....
','---
-
\
~,\
---- ...-
I
'-<d
~.
I
I
I
I
I
I
PROP
SED
MUNITY REN
AL ACTI
NS
I
NEIGHS
RHO
D -4
I
I
I
i
~
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
NEIGHBORHOOD 7.
Blight does not appear in Neighborhood 7 to the extent it
does in Neighborhood 4, but Neighborhood 7 has experienced con-
siderable deterioration in recent years. Most proposed actions
for the Neighborhood are designed to arrest and reverse the trend.
Rehabili.tation is recommended as the mainstay of Community Renewal
Action for Neighborhood 7 to upgrade it to the fine residential
neighborhood for which it 1S capable. Spot clearance of residences
that are dilapidated and causing overcrowding is deemed essential
for neighborhood improvement.
One of the crucial actions in Neighborhood 7 is the construc-
tion of aconnecting link between Ash and State Streets to improve
Central Business District circulation and to improve total city
traffic circulation. One of the main deficiencies in the Salina
traffic circulation is th~ lack of adequate east-west arterial
streets. Construction of this street link will greatly aid the
traffic flow from the Interstate Highway System and Kansas Highway
140 to the Central Business District, as well as aiding cross-
town traffic. (See Community Renewal Activities Map and Urban
Design for Neighborhood 7. Also refer to Cost Analysis for re-
newal actions in Neighborhood 7 for a breakdown of estimated costs.)
Step lA - Connection of Ash Street to State Street
This is proposed for the third year of Phase I. The project
will involve the moving of 10 residences in Blocks 40 and 41 and
their rehabilitation on new sites.
Construction of the State - Ash Street link will require pav-
ing to a 48-foot width; installing curb, gutter, turnbays and sig-
nal lights; and widening State Street from' the Miss,ouri Pacific
tracks to the west City limits.
Step lB - CRP Blocks 6, 7, 8, 9, 17, 18, 25, 26, 27, 28, 29, 38,
39, 40, 41, 42, 49, 50, 51, 52, 53, 54, 59, 60, 61, 62,
63 -Third, Fourth and Fifth Years of Phase I
This project area is mainly residential with industrial land
usage on the north perimeter along the railroad tracks and commer-
cial uses along the west perimeter (along Broadway). Transition of
Blocks 39 and 50 from residential to commercial uses in the years
to come can be anticipated. The residences facing Broadway within
the two blocks have questionable durability due to insufficient
setback from the street. Other portions of the project area can
-165-
remain as viable residential uses after rehabilitation is performed
on the approximately 205 residential structures. Rehabilitation
will also be required on 5 residences moved to new sites to relieve
overcrowding and on 7 commercial structures. Five "clearance" .
rated structures are slated to be demolished.
PHASE II - Step I - CRP Blocks 11, 13, 14, 15, 16, 20, 21, 22, 23,
24, 30, 31, 32, 33, 34, 43, 44, 45, 46, 47 - First
Three Years of. Phase II
This project area is characterized by a number of large single
and multi-family dwellings with a fringe of commercial, industrial
and public uses along the north and east. Rehabilitation will be
th~ main activity in the area, as only 9 "clearance" residences
need to be cleared. Three additional residences are proposed for
moving to relieve overcrowded conditions. Approximately 154 resi-
dential and 9 commercial structures will require rehabilitation.
The thr~e residences moved to relieve overcrowding will also re-
quire rehabilitation; No site improvements are proposed for the
project area, as it is well served by utilities and streets.
Step 2 - CRP Blocks 55, 56, 57, 64, 65, 66, 67, 68, 70, 71, 72,
73,74,75,76,77,78,79,80,81,82,83,84,85,86,
87, 88, 89, 90, 91, 92, 93, 95, 96, 97, 98, 100, 101 -
Third, Fourth and Fifth Years of Phase II
The project area is predominantly residential with a fringe
of commercial and industrial structures along Broadway on the
west. Most of the residences are in need of minor repair with
only 10 or approximately 2 percent rated a~ "clearance".
Proposed activities include spot clearance of the 10 resi-
dences requiring clearance, moving 7 residences to new sites to
relieve overcrowding, rehabilitation of 416 residences and 5'
commercial structures, and rehabilitation of the 7 residences
moved to new sites. No site improvements are proposed, as the
project area is well served by utilities and streets.
-166-
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I:
1- Ii.
I I
I -
I
I
I ~
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
II fl
II
I: tl
II f I
I 11
I t I
I : II
! ! t I
III
'I f I
I 102
,.-.... ,
hi "I
")i ....,.
,
~! I
; i >--1 ,
, ~ I
'. I i 1.'.1
..J l~_mJ ~.-.J ,
.
COMMUNITY RENEWAL ACTIVITIES
LEGEND
lIIH: STREETS TO BE REMOVED
CJ PHASE BOUNDARY
_ ASH Sf.. TO STATE ST.CONNECTlON
Salina COfllllllunity a.n..al PrOgra.
Salirla, Kansas
Protect No. Kans. ISKI.
'reparM Nr City o"Salina, KanIG.,
Iy IUCHEI & WtlLtS ConlultinSl Engin..n,
'Ionners, Architech, 1969
Th....'.....'i.ft."hi.........fi......,ioll.......d'h,..uOh..'.d.,..l"0'"
......'h.........IA..i".......d..ini.....'j...,l'h.O.pa".....'
01 H".,in, and U,b"n 0...10......,. ".'h..'lud b, ....i.... ~O!
..f.h.H....i....."..fI9S9,a.....ond.d
Scow in 'Mt;
<00
400
800
-------------------
II
I
f-
,
~
"'Cl
;ltlI ,
0
)- "'Cl
IJ'l 0 ~
::I: IJ'l m
m e
IJ'l 0
;-t Z n
.... ~ m 0
0 ::I: 0 ~
IJ'l =4 ~
.... .... :J:
)- m . c:
.... ;ltlI 0 Z
m
IJ'l :IIlIJ ....
IJ'l n :J: -<
;-t ::I: 0
n 0 :IIlIJ
0 0 0 m
Z w- e z
Z m "l
m )(
n "'Cl )>
~ )- r-
0 Z )>
Z IJ'l
0
Z
Z
~
/
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
PHASE III - 1980-1985
Step 1 - CRP Blocks 94 and 99 - Whittier School Expansion and
Neighborhood Park Development - First 2 Years of Phase III
The Whittier Elementary School site of approximately 2.5
acres is far below the State recommended minimum elementary school
site. Recent construction to accommodate additional pupils has
further compounded the problem. Neighborhood 7 is not well served
by City park facilities; therefore, it is proposed that a combi-
nation City park and school playground be developed by acquiring
CRP Block 99 through Urban Renewal for development of such facil-
ities. Blighting within the block is not as extensive as in other
blocks surrounding the school, but the block is recommended in
preference to others for the following reasons: It is desirable
to close the street between the block used for expansion and the
present site. Spruce Street can be closed with little interference
with traffic flow because it terminates at Baker Street. It is
deemed desirable to keep Phillips Street, one of the major north-
south streets in the area, open - precluding acquisition of Block
93. The fronting of the Whittier Building on Cedar Street pre-
cluded serious consideration of Block 84.
The project will require moving and rehabilitation of 18
residences to new sites and demolition of 3 residences considered
not capable of being moved.
Site improvements will require removing paving, curb and
gutter on Spruce Street from Phillips Street to Baker Street.
Proposed park and playground development includes an unlighted
ballfield and playground development, playground equipment, combi-
nation tennis-basketball court, and landscaping.
-167-
--I
NEIGHBORHOOD 8 (Central Business District)
I
I
I
The Commercial Sector Projections section of this report de-
scribes the predominant activity in this neighborhood is now and
should continue to be commercial area. The 'core area' (Ash to Walnut
and Fifth to Seventh) of this commercial is in need of substantial
rehabilitation, some clearance and considerable refinement to only
comparative gooas s~les and-office institution services that are
frequented by comparative goods shoppers. The blocks adjacent- the
'core area' to the east, west and south should continue transi-
tion from residential to 'other commercial' use (non-comparative
goods sales, office, service type businesses and certain specialty
shops).. The--::area- surrounding the 'other commercial'to the east,
west and south should continue as public and resident1al with a
desirable transition to multi-story, multi-family uses.
7th to 9th - Public use as Civic Center to continue.
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
The area to the north of Ash Street (north limit of 'core
area') is now a mixture of wholesale, warehouse, commercial, public
and industrial uses. Area uses considered desirable are as follows:
Ash to Elm:
4th to Santa Fe - Clear entire area and develop a sports-
convention center and a new combined bus station.
Santa Fe to 7th- Combination of clearance and rehabili-
tation to permit transition to office uses.
Elm to Pine:
4th to 7th - Continue as industrial uses.
7th to 9th -This predominantly residential area is sur-
rounded and interspersed with commercial and industrial
uses and is recommended for transition from residential to
commercial-industrial uses. No residential rehabilitation,
is proposed.
The area east of 4th between Iron and Mulberry is now a
mixture of commercial, service and residential uses and
is proposed to be redeveloped to multi-family residential,
particularly elderly. This will involve minor relocation
of the stream with a new bridge structure on Iron and a
_~stra~ghteni~g and extension of 4th Street at Iron.
(See discussion under Neighborhood #12)
I
I
l
-168-
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I'
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
Core Area of CBD
A map titled "Proposed Community Renewal Activities
in the CBD" shows the Core Area of the CBD which was
considered bounded by Walnut, Ash, 7th and 5th Streets
to achieve a desirable compactness for convenience of
comparative goods and services. The Core Area was
confined to a relatively small area, as there is a
limit of demand for high cost space which will result
from a highly improved commercial area. In brief sum-
mary, the activities proposed in the CBD are described
as follows:
Circulation - Improvement of Ash, Walnut and
4th as trunk feeder routes to the CBD and the con-
version of Ash, Walnut, 5th and 7th Streets as free-
flowing, two-way CBD circumferential route. These
improvements include removal of street parking, traffic
control devices (medians, turn bays and signals) and
in the case of 4th Street a realignment of the stream,
railroad and the street at Iron.
The present one-way streets are an inconvenience to
traffic and particularly out of town customers. The
proposed trunk route would establish Ash street as
the trunk feeder-connector to State, 9th and Ohio and
eventually to Iron Street near Ohio serving traffic
to CBD from the south, southeast and southwest. The
circumferential route then would need to be a free-
flowing two-way, four-lane street which can be made
available by removing 23 parking spaces on Walnut and
converting angle parking to parallel parking on 5th
and 7th with a loss of 103 spaces. This two-way,
four-lane facility can adequately provide for circula-
tion to the off-street parking, exi?ting and proposed,
located adjacent to this circumferential CED route.
The use of Iron Street as a major traffic street from
5th to 7th provides substantial conflict with shoppers
and with the eventual mall. Turn bays and medians
will be needed on Iron and Ash at 5th and 7th and on
Walnut Street at Santa Fe.
Parking - provision of additional off-street
parking to meet the present customer parking defi-
ciency of 525 parking spaces (in part due to removal
of on-street parking spaces to permit adequate
vehicular circulation) and the provision to satisfy
the projected need for a total of 1815 additional
spaces by 1990.
-169-
-170-
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
A detailed survey and analysis of existing and
projected off-street parking needs was performed
on the basis of the 5th highest parking demand hour
of the year. It is considered impractical to design
and build for the peak hour need. The map, "Exist-
ing Parking for the Core Area of CBD" , identifies the
on-street and off-street parking facilities January
1969 and the "Proposed CBD" map shows the recommended
parking to satisfy 1990 parking demand. The attached
tables describe the proposed schedule, details of the
findings and estimated costs. It is noticeable that
the future mall area of Santa Fe is initially a com-
pact parking lot and under full mall excludes all
parking and traffic except emergency parking. The
location and multi-story nature of proposed parking
facilities is essential to satisfy maximum walking
distance criteria; these find favor in economy and
permit a maximum compact CBD area. The parking plan
makes maximum use of air space and space over existing
city property.
New Business Building - Three sites (on Santa Fe
at Iron and at 4th) are proposed to be cleared for
new commercial buildings to satisfy the demand for
new space and to aid the example --.generated impetus
for rehabilitation of existing structures. These
proposed new commercial building sites are now occu-
pied by structures of questionable rehabilitation
quality as to arrangement and condition.
It is unanimously agreed and the present vacant
structures attest to the findings of this study that
there is now an excess of structures in the CBD in
1969, and it is also clearly apparent that retail
sales available by 1990 will warrant 140,000 square
feet more than the 1969 building supply. There is
considerable developer demand for sizable tracts
for new buildings adjacent to parking in a redevelop-
ing CBD. Such new developments can be accommodated
by the proposed cleared sites, and such development
provides a substantial attraction to other redevelop-
ment and rehabilitation activities.
Mall - provision of an eventu~l full shopper mall
on Santa Fe from Walnut to Ash, achieved by initial
use as right angle parking lot, then semi-mall and
then a full mall.
I
I
I
The mall improvements are described on the
"Mall Urban Design Sketch" and consist of sidewalk
and crosswalk corners, aesthetic decorations and
conveniences, added goods display areas, no vehicular
traffic, attractive space for special outdoor group
sales promotion activities, rest rooms, rest a~eas,
information and telephone centers.
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
Building Front Remodel - A sketch plan of im-
provements to structures fronting on the proposed
Santa Fe Mall is proposed to improve the aesthetics
of the CBD.
It is important that the unique character of the
interesting structure in the CBD be retained. A de-
tailed study of the building fronts was performed, and
the attached urban design sketches were made to
show the extent and general character of the proposed
rehabilitation of the structures.
Building Rehabilitation - A rehabilitation stan-
dard was developed jointly by a business oper~tors
committee, city. building inspection department and
the consultant. This standard would require the
rehabilitation of all structures to the stipulated
standards.
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
The standards are to serve as models in residen-
tial and non-residential areas and may be amended
in the adoption for a specific project. The stan-
dards are effective only in the projects on which
they are specifically adopted. The standards are
furnished in limited supply to the City as an
appendix to this CRP report.
The proposed steps and phases of development
are shown by year, as are the estimated costs on the
estimate briefs in the Local Funding Section of this
report.
-171-
SALINA CBD MALL
$74/L.F.
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
Mall Canopy - 101 High X 151 Wide (For each 25' length of front)
Column Section ----------------
Front Beam --------------------
Rear Beam ---------------------
Corr. Fiberglass Roof ---------
Electrical --------------------
Drainage ----------------------
Contingency -------------------
45201 @ $74.00 =
Street Surface (70')
$ 750.00
250.00
200.00
150.00
100.00
100.00
300.00
$1,850.00/251 =
Leave present concrete walks intact
New sand fill & 411 concrete
surface scored in pattern --- $
If glitter sand surface added -
Storm drainage catch basins and
conn. to present system -----
1840 Linear Feet @ $50.00 =
Contingency @ 10% =
Landscaping, Etc.
48.00
1.00
$
1.00
50.00/L.F.
611 Trees -- 16 @ $125.00 ------ $2,000.00
311 to 411 trees -- 20 @ $75.00 - 1,500.00
Shrubs -- 300 @ $10.00 -------- 3,000.00
Planting -----~---------------- 4,000.00
Sub-Total ---------------------$10,500.00
Contingency @ 10% ------------- 1,000.00
Pylon -- 2 @ $1,500.00 --------
Water fountain ----------------
Flag poles -- 6 @ $600.00 -----
Stone and concrete planters,
20 @ $300.00 ----------------
Abstracts and display areas --
10 @ $500.00 ----------------
Benches -- 20 @ $100.00 -------
-172-
l
$3,000.00
2,000.00
3,600.00
6,000.00
5,000.00
2,000.00
$334,480.00
$ <'92,000 . 00
9,000.00
$101,000.00
$ 11,500.00
$ 9,900.00
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
II
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
Canopy
Street Surface
Landscaping, Etc.
Miscellaneous
Total
Support. & Misc. Items
GRAND TOTAL
$334,480.00
101,000.00
11,500.00
9,900.00
$456,880.00
100,000.00
$556,880.00
-173-
7.
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
Parking need procedure - 1969 parking usage survey and U.L.I. space I
survey - space per $1,000,000 sales.
Retail sales estimates based on 12 county trade area, amount Salina I
leakage out is equal to trade from outside trade area (!2 to 4%).
Saline County PCI increase from 1967-$3,110 to 1990-$4,140 and esti-
mated PCI for 12 counties calculated on rate of increase 50-60 MFI I
as % of state MFI.
1990 Condition I - Conservative - Salina population increase from
39.0 to 45.0, Saline County - 48.0 to 57.0 and 12 county - 112.0 to I
104.0. Salina % of 12 county trade continues @ 4.0% and CBD contin-
ues at 34% of Salina CBD type sales.
1990 Condition II - Probable - Salina population increase from 39.0 I
to 58.0, Saline County - 48.0 to 66.0 and 12 county - 112.0 to 104.0.
Salina % of 12 county trade increases from 4% to 10% and CBD contin-
ues to get 34% of all Salina CBDtype sales.
Retail sales trend - the percent sales of income will decline from I
54% to 45% as per state and national trend.
Parking loss - Str. - Loss of 120 spaces is necessary to provide I
adequate, safe circulation.
S.F. - Loss of 240 spaces on Santa Fe is to permit
full mall construction.
5th - Parking Need - Estimates were made based on ULI national sur- 11
vey of shopping centers. 5th indicates the parking need to satisfy
the 5th highest hourly parking demand, 10th and 30th, likewise. I
I
I
I
SALINA CRP STUDY
RECAP OF SALINA CBD PARKING SPACE SUPPLY
1969
------Existing Parking----- Parking
Sales CBD On- ----Needed---
Pop. . Sales .Off- Str. Loss
.
Year (1000) Inc. (Mil. $) Str. Exist. Str. S.F. Total 5th 10th 30th
1967 38.0 0.54 18.1 910 546 120 1336 1750 1470 1320
-1968 39.0 0.54 19.7 910 546 120 1336 1910 1620 1440
19901 45.0 0.45 24.2 120 240 1096 2420 2050 1830
199011 58.0 0.45 29.2 120 240 1096 2960 2510 2240
Parking Analysis Premises:
1.
2.
3.
4.
5.
6.
-174-
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
OFF-STREET PARKING CONSTRUCTION COST AND
RAW LAND ACQUISITION COSTS
(1) (2) (3)
Lot No. Land Constr. Costs - Total Cost/
No. Spaces Acq. Cost No Cash Credits Costs Space
6 457 $ 0 $914,000 $914,000 $2,000
8 361 30,000 722,000 752,000 2,083
5 317 36,000 634,000 670,000 2,113
9 330 50,000 660,000 710,000 2,152
4 197 50,000 394,000 440,000 2,254
7 230 32,000 460,000 492,000 2,139
(1) Multi-story parking costs based upon 1961 value and extrapo-
lating to 1970 by Consumer Price Index to yield $2,000 per.
parking space.
(2) Assume cost of land purchased from the Urban Renewal Agency
and cost of purchasing structures not eligible for Urban
Renewal costs.
(3) These costs will undoubtedly exceed city bonding capacity;
therefore, it is recommended a public parking authority be
formed to develop all off-street parking facilities.
-175-
f--
-
I
I--'
-.J
en
I
-
-
PARKING SUPPLY-DEMAND TABLE
Recommended Parking provisions
Parking On-Street ---------------------Off-Street Parking---------------------
Year Demand Parking 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11
1968 1910 475 (1) 91 73 75 77 92 176 38 150 138
1975 2153 475 (1) 91 73 75 77 549 176 399 150 138
1980 2421 475 (1) 91 73 75 394 549 176 399 150 138
1985 2693 235 (2) 91 73 75 197 394 549 176 399 330 150 138
1990 2960 235 (2) 91 73 75 197 394 549 406 399 330 150 138
* Deficient 525 parking spaces.
(1) Condition includes right-angle parking on Santa Fe, Walnut to Ash - 240 spaces.
(2 ) Condition of no on-street parking on Santa Fe, Walnut to Ash - Mall.
Total
1,385*
2,203
2,520
2,807
3,037
PARKING DEMANDS BASED UPON RETAIL SALES IN CBD
Factor --------Parking Supply Required-------- Parking
Retail On-Street Off-Street Spaces/ Deficiency
Sales Parking Parking $1 Million 5th Highest lOth Highest 30th Highest 5th Highest
Year CBD Supply Supply Sales Hour Hour Hour Hour
1968 19.7 475* 910 97 1,910 1,643 1,471 525
1975 22.2 475* 910 97 2,153 1,852 1,658 768
1980 24.7 475* 910 98 2,421 2,082 1,864 1,036
1985 27.2 235** 910 99 2,693 2,316 2,074 1,548
1990 29.6 235** 910 100 2,960 2,546 2,279 1,815
Reduction from 546 (1968 on-street parking supply) to 475 on-street parking spaces due to recom-
mended parking changes to satisfy traffic demands.
** Loss of 240 on-street parking spaces on Santa Fe due to mall.
*
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-,
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
ESTIMATED URBAN RENEWAL COSTS
Neighborhood 8 - Core Area Ash to Walnut-Seventh to Fifth
. Off-Street Parking Land Clearance Cost
Lot Added Acquisition Demolition U.R. Lin. Resale Project City
Year No. No. Spaces Costs Costs Admin. Ft. Value Costs Costs
1971 6 457 $ 0 $ 20,000 $ 4,000 200' $ 0 $ 24,000 $ 6,000
1971 8 361 158,900 20,000 35,780 150' 30,000 184,680 46,170
1976 5 317 91,000 15,000 21,200 120' 36,000 91,200 22,800
1080 4 197 76,300 30,000 21,260 250' 50,000 77 , 560 19,390
1984 9 330 136,100 20,000 31,220 250' 50,000 137,320 34,330
1989 7 230 66,700 15,000 16,340 160' 32,000 66,040 16,510
Totals 1,892 $529,000 $120,000 $129,800 $198,000 $580,800 $145,200
I Off-Street Parking Construction and Raw Land Acquisition Costs
I-'
-.....J
-.....J
I
Lot Number Acquisition Construction Costs Costs Per
Year No. Spaces of Land Non-Cash Credits Total Cost Space
(1) (2) (3)
1971 6 457 $ 0 $ 914,000 $ 914,000 $2,000
1971 8 361 30,000 722,000 752,000 2,083
1976 5 317 36,000 634,000 670,000 2,114
1980 4 197 50,000 394,000 444,000 2,254
1984 9 330 50,000 660,000 710,000 2,152
1989 7 ~ 32,000 460,000 492,000 2,139
Totals 1,892 $198,000 $3,784,000 $3,982,000
(1) Multi-story parking costs based upon 1961 value of $1,650 and extrapolated to 1970 by
Consumer Price Index to yield $2,000 per parking space.
(2) Assume costs of land purchased from the Urban Renewal Agency and costs of parking struc-
tures are not eligible urban renewal project costs.
(3) These costs will undoubtedly exceed the City bonding capacity therefore, it is recom-
mended that a public parking authority be formed to develop all off-street parking
faci1i ties..
-
-
-
Block
SALINA CENTRAL BUSINESS DISTRICT ASSESSED VALUATION - 1968
Valuation
of Land
Valuation of
Improvements
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
29
30
31
32
33
34
35
36
37
38
39
40
Union Pacific Railroad
$ 6,150 $ 37,550
12,060 174,850
10,870 46,670
2,560 23,670
Included with Block 5
10,500 97,280
3,100
A.T. & S.F.,
3,900 .
10,900
9,260
31,000
30,460
14,740
Civic Center
Civic Center
61,240
47,050
24,980
24,270
50,170
120,960
71,140
4,000
2,000
40,820
131,850
94,920
34,060
20,190
2,000
54,550
55,170
24,060
7,140
11,330
32,"900
33,510
11,040
TOTALS
AND $1,104,850
AVERAGES
C.R.I. & P.
15,330
20,870
16,740
68,630
159,290
41,480
102,470
123,420
82,670
30,300
143,450
321,870
168,490
16,410
3,200
57,090
520,360
188,930
84,410
61,540
2,030
99,830
155,790
62,840
32,910
31,540
80,830
54,310
26,300
$3,153,350
Total
Valuation
$ 43,700
186,910
57,540
26,230
107,780
3,100
and Missouri
19,230
31,770
26,000
99,630
189,750
56,220
163,710
170,470
107,650
54,570
193,620
442,830
239,630
20,410
5,200
97,910
652,210
283,850
118,470
81,730
4,030
154,380
210,960
86,900
40,050
42,870
113,730
87,820
37,340
$4,258,200
I
I
Square Feet
of Assessed
Property
Assessed Valuation
of Land Per
Square Foot
Assessed Valuation
of Land and
Improvements Per
Square Foot
I
37,500
65,250
52,400
139,350
77,550
18,750
Pacific Railroads
23,800
130,000
114,000
154,200
122,892
112,100
180,000
171,550
170,700
79,000
96,000
83,500
114,100
18,000
9,500
114,900
166,374
158,900
135,500
139,724
5,000
87,300
121,800
180,000
50,000
90,000
120,050
119,100
120,000
3,578,790
$ .16
.18
.21
.02
.14
.17
.16
.08
.08
.20
.25
.13
.34
.27
.15
.31
.52
1. 45
.62
.22
.21
.36
.79
.60
.25
.14
.40
.62
.45
.13
.14
.13
.27
.28
.09
$ .31
$1.17
2.86
1.10
.19
I
1. 39
.17
I
.81
.24
.23
.65
1. 54
.50
I
I
.91
.99
.63
.69
2.02
5.30
2.10
1.13
.55
.85
3.92
1. 79
.87
.58
.81
1.77
1. 73
.48
.80
.48
.95
.74
.31
I
I
I
.1
I
I
$1.19
I
Utility Company properties are assessed by the State of Kansas and are not included in this table.
I
Public and Quasi-Public property, of which there is a considerable amount in the CBD, is not
assessed.
Source: Saline County Assessor's Records of 1968
l
-178-
I
I
I
I
-----------~
//';111'
, ,.-'- -, .~.~.
------
-r'1
c:::
--I
. c:::
c::: ::::::c
-"
CD ,..,..,
==
...... cr.>
c::> :J>
:z:
en --I
c::> :J>
=
......
::::s- -r'1
== ,..,..,
CD
en
...... 3:
~
~ :J>
r-
r-
--
;"0
..
~~
f ~
~i
_ x
-;
n.
~ ~
~r
_ c
-.
~~
;: ~
t ~
,.
~,;
, .
",
;- ~
:: r
, .
r~
'J
I
I
I I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
EAST
SIDE
SANTA
FE
: IRON
TO
VVALNUT
WEST
S I DE
TO
SANTA
IRO N
FE
WALNUT
Sotino Community Ren..."l Proll'am
Salina Kan.". P'''iulNo_R.S3CR
P'epo,ed by 6uch.,& Willi.,
Con.ullir\9 Enginur>,Plonne.., Archilo,l<.
Thep,.porotionoflhi.u,banduign<iletch
10". financially aided through a Fede,al grant
f,am the Renewal Au;"an,.. Admini.halian
01 lh.. Ceportmentm.nt of Hau.ing "rid Urban Oeuelo"......nl,
Guthoriud by Seclion <lOS of the Hau.ing Act 011959 G' "mended
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
EAST
SID E
SANTA
FE
ASH
TO
IRa N
IIII
WEST
SI DE
SAN TA
FE
AS H
TO
IRON
50lino Community R~n.wal P,ogram
Salina, Kan.o. P,oiectNo. R.5JCR
P,epored by Buche, & Willis,
Con,uhing Engine,,", Plonn..., ArchitoclS
The preparalion 01 thi. urban duign.htch
w,ufinon(i"lIyaid"dth,ough0 Fed,,'alg"ml
from th"Rene.ol A..i,'on,. Administration
01 tho Deportmentm.,,! 01 Hou.ing and U,ban Oevelopment,
au.h".,ud bv Sulio" 405 01 tho Haulinll Ad 011959 ,n amended
-------------------
~
~
2 I
0 lI'
:c 0
~ C
I ~
I
lI'
- In
C
-
rn 0
m
-
1] -
0 1]
2 0
2
II
II
~
~ (JI
I ~
I
~
0 ~
0
(JI
~ "
I ~
~ .. =: I
[~ <00
_0
~~ J~~
~! -!tI
00
00 i>1:z
O' ~ ::.; 0
..;.",
.. ~. f ~
~i
~ ~
~r
00
-0
~~
~ ~
t ~
(I)
o
c
~
I
U\
-
c
rn
~
(I)
I
II
(JI
~
I
~
o
-------------------
:x=-
~
::c:
~
--I
-:J
--I
::c:
r-
<::)
<::)
::::-::::
:z:
c::>
r"'T"1
:x=-
~
--I
;I
f ~
~!
0"
.,
I!
~r
00
~~
~ ~
r
0..
~~ g
~ c.. 6'
~:~
;}~
:"Po;
r~~
-~ ". ~
! ~
I
I
I
I l ~ BOD 0 D D D 0 D ODD D ~. D 0 IJ ~D L ~
J ~ [jCS DO 0 [J D 0 0 0 0 ~ 0 ~ Q L U ~
I
I ]
I ~l
I
I
I 0
SANTA FE
I ~ .~ oU Lb wrrw H 0 [l :.\lJ L,~ .DTI W i wmLlJ l jj lUl ~ IlljJJ~ Il-J T_~l_
': Q] 'I r (_~l ur rllllll~ .~ _~.J:=:sl
FIFTH
I ~ ~ Ig D C1l)O [] D ~'D 0 Dun. ~ JJJW1Th',J{J 1m ~ ,
I ~ q~ 0 D DOG DI ~ elL] II rP '-- _ ~
I FOURT~ . " ,
~ fl 0 0 C;l [;J~"f.:.t~~i ..~5: l~na5a~:~J.:ia~ 0 D
I =:J ~ 0 Iv ltitm'fi1 ILlIS on.ult;ng4"Ji~,
Planners, Archit ,..J .
c:=::J 0
I nepreparallon oflhis map was financially aided Ihrough a Federalgra of +
from the Renew,,1 Auistance Administration of the Department
of KOlIsiRg and Urban Development. au'htllized by sedion 40S Scali in f,,'-
01 !he Housing Ad of 19S9, " .mended. 00 0 . 00 200
I
D ~ ,.~~) BJJ4
fllJTITn . _ I ~
"15"
] .I[D~ a~ .bP lJl 1~'~1fll~=a J riB TJ I ill II Jo
'LrTffifTnTfillTil m I ~11 "I ~ 11'1 I n.l D~lIlll '11111111 lliL ~ w ~~11 ["Qj
r-~
. [Li
[JDODOOO 0 ODD
NINTH .
EIGHTH
SEVENTH
-~
J--
D
Dol MeMO"^, D
l HALL
[ ]
cCJDD
COURT
HOUSE
STREET
DO 0 0 \:j
w
a:
CJ D [] .~
I-
W
W
a:
I-
<f)
CITY
COUNTY
~'BRm
C
BD. OFeD.
BLDG.
STR EET
AVENUE
STREET
"14'1
(1 ~
[r~~~~
L_
ON STREET PARKING
'3" NO. OF SPACES
~ OFF STREET PARKING
I LOT NO.
73'" NO. OF SPACES
I
I
I
I
CHURCH
~\\,,&I~I'" "O~
~~SIO~tl,,"l ~
I
I
I
'IO~
1\.1'....
v.~\\....&
~'I....\. ...
v.~~O~ CHURCH
I
'IO~
\.1'....
....&1
~~\\::cc-.". :::::=~
~'I""\. ~ . H__
v.~SIQ~
I
I
"\. i
~v.C.IP. 'IO~ 'i
c.Otl<tI< p.&I\.I'.... :
::,,::~~~~==""" :=' ';"
&. v.~SIO~~ ,,"'0_, I
I
I
,,11" 'IO~ I
~~Sloi':i'i"~ \I~\\.@.& -"-":, ----=';
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
N!N7H
v"-
- ".". ~,.,"- tlS;o~J
~'1-V"
-, '.. S11~ ~
"6\1:\\IG',
,Jill'll
EiGHTH
OO\.
sc.\\
"",\\I~"
u\O'- j
~\l"" '
SEVENTH
FIFTH
'~
r I~ ---::~L U ~ fJ r ,II p;~' l t
5 1~~.,~~~;'1~~ '", ~ ,~~ jOJ ~
aJ -'l-'~" + ...J ~~ .(
~ ~,~ ~~,~ = lJ D[ ~ rX "I I I~ ~
",__"",~lJ,R~"_,,~,,,.___,~,.,
r"-'---'--'~
,"'" Si [] ~\~i\l:'S\ I !l r-l n D
I"" ~'~\l:1~\:':::::J - I,,; L..J L"-" J ~S
+-
,Salina Community Renewal Program
Project No. Kans. R53CR Salina, Kansas
Prepared for City of Salina Kansas,
Iy BUCHER & WILLIS Consulting Engineers,
Planners, Archit.cts, 1969.
Jhe preparation of this report was financially aided through a Federal grant
from the Renewal Assislance Administration of the Department
0' Housing and Urban Development, authorized by section 405
of the Housing Act of 1959, as amended.
if
'. j
~i~ DI~'~J niL, D '.. ..\l....~.iJ..,~.i......--TI
)' LI'.,.L- I; !. .~:~~s.lrQ nlj'
o 0;;][,",'" .., I , '[j'
L~ li~~" ~15:IGO' 10,[lt,_1"
E'-...T~;,-"-..~"--J"...'..l,,......'. - .\., ".
LJLJ LJ U C; II "
\l:1"~ \ \' II . ,
['."-1......._',.",, ~i I.. J,....~..,..(..'~:,... iT I iMr" iJ:
. ... ..._LJUI~.,rll:
H :;
! ----r:rr---I'~'~tt-T~ f"
rl fl Jil\\ \~j il
. ,',:':.:.:':.:':.:': j I "l : i ' -;~o\JSW~"~ I..J i....j\\~~,\ i I ji
9~::::::::::::::::::::: ill] ~~, I L' I : : \ ,\ I, +
":::::::::::::::::::::. " I ~~ Uil" ,\ i I . '1" \ \, I ' 'j
r'i,,':':':"""'r -~T ,0;..Je- 1 L.L., '[ \" Itl.L.L.~.\;\~\ f. jlll.
. ~'\ "I'! \ "
~ Il-'~~.' GLI~1ri1t [\\n\lCi-rYTI--l\IJ
"'-!II<lr!ldilJ~ eJI ~'\l-~~~~~~~_~CCL--i~LC1~
_~~~PRaP-CiJtE:~~r-"iti~~":~:~~~:e>-::__,~~~;'c~c~__,~__ J;
COMTM.UN........lr~+~ '~RE'~. E'W'At.r::::: ~CT1vt'l"f'e=s-"::"FOR "=CB':it)",=-,=.='::=='=":,i'':L..~_"" - - ..." '-
._\ I < I I !
- L~ , , ILEGEND .
~ EXISTING
" ~ OFF STREET PARKING TO REMAIN
'BUILDING FRONTS TO REMAIN
PROPOSED
-
il'''''-I
III ~l. I
I lOr$, J'
~I
~,~-,
At.
L~~:~'GJ
\.,G
~\l"
CCl
'. l)
LJ
[]
CCUR
~OUSF
:-1
u
[)
M[1v10R~,A,
"
l..,.",
STREET
L
W
W
'"
Iii
<,.~,
,,,,
~,.,.
"u
CITY
w
")
2-
w
?(
I-
u
u
'"
in
CC,uNTr
~G
~.,
~
U&RARY
Sf) OFE:D
BLDG
'?.r..
I : -, \.
I I, ji;~,-C.I~
I !S8tt--0'''~~
STREET
riJl"'j I ~ liit'liTi'- T[I'
~~t~:'1" J\~ l ,I I"
0'-
"", ...;.. ,'.w. ,. ,,,;,;, k
estimated need for 1990, /
based on retail sales of $29.6 Million
in the Central Business District
-"I
T'
I
HILL
RIYDl.
OFF STREET PARKING
LOT NO,
NO, OF SPACES
4
"l97
13 LEVELS)
IlIlIIlllll
NO, OF LEVELS OF PARKING
2ND LEVEL PARKING ONLY
REVISED ON STREET PARKING
USEfUL TO CORE AREA OF C B D
LAND USE
MALL
NEW BUILDING FRONTS
STRUCTURES TO BE CLEARED
NEW STRUCTURES
"2S'
COMMERCIAL
-
~
:::::::::::::::::::
:.:.~.:.:.:.:.:.:.'
]
LJ
n
L
W
W
a::
1-
<J)
STREET
i t.-
C)
~. I
,..
,~
I
,
l___ _n__
r"
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
NEIGHBORHOOD 9.
Neighborhood 9, other than Urban Renewal Project #2, is es-
sentially a residential neighborhood with a fringe of commercial
and public uses along its south boundary. Approximately 100
acres of mixed residential, commercial and industrial uses in
quite blighted condition are now an active urban renewal project
which will result in an area cleaned for new industrial uses.
Rehabilitation of residential structures in Neighborhood 9 is
proposed as the key for renewing the vitality of the neighborhood.
The neighborhood is well served by utilities and streets and is
expected to continue to be a residential area for families of
moderate and low-income if the deterioration is arrested and effec-
tive renewal activities are undertaken. (See Community Renewal
Activities Map and Urban Design for Neighborhood 9. Also see
the Cost Analysis of renewal actions for a breakdown of costs.)
PHASE II - 1975-1980
Step 1 - CRP Blocks 42, 43 and east half of Block 41 - First Two
Years of Phase II
The project area is deteriorating rapidly and the deteriora-
tion is expected to accelerate with removal of residences to the
north in Urban Renewal Project #2, as the small residential area
will become somewhat isolated from other residential areas. The
Smoky.Hill River to the east, the commercial and industrial uses
to the west and Ash Street to the south already isolate the area
to a considerable degree.
Total clearance of the project area will make 12.3 acres of
land available for city maintenance yard expansion and industrial
park development.
Proposed project activities include demolition of 3 residen-
tial and 2 co~mercial structures, moving and rehabilitating 34
residences on new sites, and clearing of trees and brush from
Block 43 to permit completion of the landfill. It is proposed
that Front Street be realigned to improve the intersection at
Ash Street and that Front Street be widened to 34-feet pavement
with curb and gutter.
-179-
The project area is almost entirely residential consisting
of 136 "sound" residences, 90 requiring rehabilitation and 2 dem-
olition. Pr6posed activiiies include demolition of the 2 "clear-
ance" structures, moving 1 residential structure to relieve
overcrowding, demolition of 2 commercial structures, and rehabili-
tation of 90 residences plus 1 moved to a new site. No project
site improvements are planned, as the area is well served by
utilities and streets.
I
I
I
Step 2 - CRP Blocks 44, 45, 46, 50, 51, 52, 57, 58, 59, 60, 61,
62, 66, 67 - Second, Third and Fourth Years of Phase II
Step 3 - CRP Blocks 47, 48, 49, 53, 54, 55, 63, 64, 68, 69, 16A,
17A, 18A, 19A, 20A, 2lA, 22A - Third, Fourth and Fifth
Years of Phase II
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
The project area is characterized by a mixture of single-
family dwellings, apartment houses and some commercial uses.
Varying degrees of blight occur in the area, but rehabilitation
can be expected to renew the area and make it durable. One hun-
dred six residences are considered sound.
Proposed activities include clearing 6 residential struc-
tures rated "clearance"i moving 3 residences cau~ing overcrowdingi
and rehabilitating 184 residences, including 3 moved to relieve
overcrowding. No project site improvements are proposed, as all
'utilities and streets are adequate.
-180-
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
l~
, .. i
'1:1 .
ii I
I 'I I i~,
ili ~I Il!!~~
I~Ll_J ~ ~.: l~~J
:-~I:~ illl!: "II ~~~~I+';;a~l:l ~ ~
I I 1 II I: ":,ehal~il~~ian I' fe' ~ I
II I: I r I! I, ~ I ~M.~ I
~ASt II STEP I II I I I I ~ I I ~
J;~:~ [gjU U~ ~ ~.~~ . , ,I
I 1----. nn r----'n [-'-' u \~ /---
~.... J I JLI ! I \\~ I .....d
~..ICWN5rOWN , ~_,~ '&?.. i ~.J~ ~- AVE I1,A__ -.--~ ~~ I ~""(~
I ] I--\~~'~ ,I
167 '1 I ---'l j I l
l~ I.aoA--.J I
~!. ~I[ ~nn
nl. l I ] II AVE ]
I
I
I
I. '--""""" .....'.,..--_....., r'l'.. 'l.
I I " .' .. I
II II~! I II '; , I
II 'I ~ I J! ~! il ~
-I F n I. .'1
_ l.dffi ~ I_J l_.L...;
~J
~
..j
I
=1
j
--1
I
,
i
I
'I
I
I
I
I
I
I
\f
URBAN RENEWAL AREA NO.2
,Ne:r~ ~r
I ~
..... ... '. .WOQDLA['\JQ...
uJ
~
ul
:cc=.cc-===r---.......--.....l
.-.-..----...----l-://~--
p'//:-/" //
. " /. -----
\ p ...t~ __------
..____~ Stllift. Co..unity l.n...1 'r~ra..
Salina, Kansa.
'rotect No. Kanl. 153C.
'...pared for City of Salina, Kansas,
By BUCHER & WUIS, Consulting Engine.rs,
'lanners, ... rch iNch, 1969.
--~~:;;:::.~::~~:i:....'....,
I ----
I I
I !
nn
COMMUNITY RENEWAL ACTIVITIES
LEGEND
c::J PHASE BOUNDARY
.. STREET REALIGNMENT
Scale in t..t:
400
400
800
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
" 0
0"
~
Q \.,)
== -<
-< ==
>- ~
~ ....;J
\.,) -<
~ -
-< ~
~ en
~ ;;;;i
~ Q
~ ;Z;
-< -
~ ~
>- ~
~ -
o ....;J
~
',.. 4
",4,
"
..
, ":
" I \
(i; '- )
0;' '--
'.
.
I
I
I
I
I
I
NEIGHBORHOOD- 11.
Neighborhood 11 is a neighborhood of contrasts. The east
portion was densely developed years ago as a residential section.
The west portion is of rather recent development as a mixed res-
idential, commercial and light industrial section. The character
of neighborhood is not expected to change greatly if rehabilita-
tion is performed effectively. The main activities proposed are
rehabilitation and spot clearance of residences so rated and those
causing overcrowding.
I
The first proposed activity for the neighborhood is clearance
~f South Park School in Block 27 in the first year of Phase I and
development of a small neighborhood park to alleviate somewhat the
deficiency of parks in that area of the City.
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
Development of the proposed 1.4 acre park should be undertaken
with use of BOR funds. Development should include an unlighted
ball diamond, playground equipment, combination tennis-basketball
court and landscaping. (See Community Renewal Activities Map and
Urban Design for Neighborhood 11. Also see the cost analysis of
renewal activities in Neighborhood 11 for a breakdown of costs.)
PHASE III - 1980-1985
Step 1 - CRP Blocks 6, 7, 8, 9, 10, 11, 15, 16, 17, 18, 19, 20,
21, 22, 26, 27, 28, 32, 33, 34 - First 2 Years of rhase III
The project area includes a variety of residential structures.
It in~ludes a number of duplexes and larger dwellings devoted to
apartment house use. It includes many sound structures as well
as a good number requiring major and minor repair. Overcrowding
of.residences is as serious as anywhere in Salina. However, re-
habilitation and spot clearance should greatly prolong the dura-
bility of the area.
Proposals for the project area include clearing 7 residential
structures rated as "clearance"; moving 8 residential structures
causing overcrowding; rehabilitation of 210 residences, including
the 8 moved to new sites; and clearance of 1 industrial structure
that is inharmonious to surrounding land use in Block 18. No
site improvements are necessary, as the project area is well
served by utilities and streets~
I
I
-181:-
Step 2 - CRP Blocks 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 12, 13, 14, 23, 24, 25, 29,
30, 31, 35, 36, 38, 39, 40, 41, 42, 43, 44, 45, 46, 47 -
Third, Fourth and Fifth Years of Phase III
This project area contains a variety of land uses. A number
of highway service businesses with some light "industry are located
,along Broadway or U.S. Highway 81 By-Pass and Crawford Avenue.
,The project area also has a mixture of residential uses'-- larger,
older homes; smaller, newer, inexpensive homes; newer, moderately
priced hqmes; and mobile homes located in two mobile home parks.
Despite the mixture of uses, the area is expected to remain rather
durable, as only three residential structures are rated "clearance"
and 2 are causing overcrowding. Two commercial structures in Block
46 are deteriorating and are expected to be replaced through pri-
vate actions within a few years.
Proposed actions for the project area include demolition of
three residences, moving two residences to new sites and rehabil-
itating them, rehabilitating 117 residential structures, and
rehabilitating six commercial structures.
-182-
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
!:. I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
---------------~---
I
I
I
I
i
I
\j LJ"l: k ~II I '1: ~ ~ I I
~ < l<J ' I I t
f... l:{ 35 ~36 t'; 'I~ 'I: ,
) 1:/ ELGIN DR () 139 ItO 1,4~ I;
i:( '" HA~ ~_J LA~.fJ I
/": ~V h. r-l [~ r- i I
~l:{ 49 0'.; ~II I ~ :. '"II
, .'.... ~, I
\ ~ ~ h.t i ::>1
38 3 C WFOf1D ~ . 44"'] ~5_ <::Ii ~.?_ ___J 146
CJ
i- . \ccmo~c~ ~iJ=s1.Jl..?/~" II
+ ",=M~cnnM7
ClGt:3C1c:Jr;:JC
Salina, Kansas
Project No. Kans. R53CR
Prepared for City of Salina, Kansas,
By BUCHER & WILLIS, Consulting Engineers,
Planners, Architects, 1969
The p(e~!Illion Gllhil m~p walliundally aid!~ lbrough I fedtral grlnt
from the Renewal AISillanc! .dmi~i\tralioft 01 Ih Depl~menl
gj HOUling and Urbil~ De.elopmenl, luthorilea JI section 405
oflheHousi~gA!tot lm,alilmended.
~. r-'rll . D NorruOd III ~ U U I
V I D~DLJ lJ . L-Jc
~:J~llll nD~m~D' f
~ II lJ 5 ~ , U, UWlJ" I
I ~ I I n 0 rnHA'SElms;TEi] ! I ~ [
C4/<MO.. 8L_-=--=-~= _I :.. .!. . s,JJf6d~~!:~ve d CI -.
lr-- I I 15 Ii. 'Rij;'~~Hitation . ~
PHASE III STEP 2 , , ' .
Sp~t Clearance ; I U I I II . I c=J D
& Rlehibilitation I - ~. 1119 J~ I r--II
,.12' 1/3 ~ Pf?€:SC 20 . ~ 22
I ~ r--l~ . ~,---, r;:;;]'---'
I ~: :i i I PHASE II ST.EP.1l I
I ~ I I i II I I
, ~ I Clearance of I I
oc, II I'
I School Building
- In~'mDun[ln
!!.: I lo. I ~.~
" JO, I" 'i ~#.w""" " J
111[~ Il~ m nN n~ 0 n n ni
COMMUNITY RENEWAL ACTIVITIES
LEGEND
o PHASE BOUNDARY
Seal. in t..I:
400
400
BOO
I
I
II
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
! I
I
I
I
II
I
~
~
Eo-<
-
(Tj
'""
;;..:: e
c=: 0
< ::::
Q. ~
,...,
;;i ~
(Tj c=:
e <
Q. Q.
e ::::
c=: Eo-<
;..;
e
(Tj
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
NEIGHBORHOOD 12.
Neighborhood 12 is a primarily single-family residential'
neighborhood, but it has a number of commercial establishments
along the west side that are an extension of the Central Business
District along Santa Fe Avenue and new businesses that have been
built in recent years along Crawford Avenue. The single-family
residential areas vary from the larger, older homes in the north
and west portions of the neighborhood to the inexpensive and mod-
erately priced newer homes in the area east of Ohio Street. A
number of multi-family dwellings have been constructed in the south
portion of the neighborhood in recent years. Despite the diversity
in the neighborhood, it is expected to remain durable for a
number of years. Proposed activities consist mainly of rehabilita-
tion. Much of the areas east of Ohio and in the south portion,
south of the Smoky Hill River, are of such recent development
they do not require treatment.
The first recommended action within the neighborhood is to
demolish the old Washington School Building within 2 years of
being vacated. This action would be accomplished by the Unified
School District and would not involve Urban Renewal action. Title
of the land should be retained by the Unified School District for
future ~xpansion of the Special Education Center or for future
use by the district for other purposes. (See Community Renewal
Activities Map and Urban Design for Neighborhood 12. Also see
the Cost Analysis of renewal costs in Neighborhood 12 for a
breakdown of costs.)
PHASE III - 1980-1985
S~ep 1 - CRP Blocks 1, 16, 17, 18 -First 2 years of Phase III
Blocks 16, 17, 18 contained 4 "clearance" residential struc-
tures and a number of deteriorating commercial and light industrial
buildings, according to the city-wide ~urvey. The, area can be
expected to decline much more rapidly if left to the no~mal pr~-
cesses. The 5.5 acres of land in the project area prov1de an 1dea~
location for development by private or public action of a high~rise
apartment complex for the "golden age" 'group or you~ger individuals,.
The complex would be conveniently located for snopp1ng and enterta;l,n'"
ment activities in the Central Business District.
Proposed activities for the project area include demolition
of 3 residential structures, demolition of 11 commercial, indus-
trial and semi-public structures, and moving to new sites and rehab-
ilitation of 5 residential structures.
-183-
Proposed improvements include widening and straightening Fourth
Street to permit improvement of the Fourth Street and Iron Avenue
intersection and eventual extension of Fourth Street to Ash Street.
This will require realignment of a small portion of the Smoky Hill
River and replacement of the Iron Avenue Bridge over the River.
Step 2 -.CRP Blocks 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 19, 20, 21, 22, 23 -
Third, Fourth and Fifth Years of Phase III
The project area includes a few commercial structures alon~
Iron Avenue, but it is primarily an area of older single~family
dwellings of differing sizes. Many of the dwellings are well-
maintained, but others are deteriorating. Land usage is expected
to remain about the same as at the present, but deterioration is
expected to continue unless it is rejuvenated by rehabilitation.
Proposed activities for the project area include clearance
~f 3 residential structures, moving to a new site and rehabilita-
t~on.q~ 1 residence causing overcrowding, r~habilitation of 146
.1. "." ,"'. .'
residential structures, and rehabilitation of 3 commercial struc-
tures.
PHASE IV - 1985-1990
Step 1 - CRP Block~ 34, 35, 36, 44, 45, 46, 47, 62, 63, 64, 65,
82~ 83, 84,85,86,87,88,89,90,91 - Fi.rst, Second
and, Third Years of Phase IV
The project area is a fringe area of the Central Business
District and portions are transitional as a restilt. The transi-
tion from residential to commercial and public use is expected
to continue in Blocks 84 and 85. The character of the remaining
project area can be expected to remain much the same as it is now -
a group of well-maintained" older and larger r~sid~nces on Santa
Fe and west to Ninth Street, a mixture of medium sized homes not
so well kept and relatively new multi-family homes to the east
of Santa Fe Avenue.
Proposed actions include ~emolition of 4 "clearance" resi-
dential structures, moving and rehabilitating 1 residential
structure causing overcrowding, rehabilitation of 177 residential
structures, and rehabilitation of 6 commercial structures. No
site improvements are proposed.
-184-
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
a
I
I
I
I
m
I
I
I
I
r~-----'
, I
'-.IRON i
Neighborhoo~ 12 , .. 7' r
r-- -.-.---- r--l r--\~~r / i
= d ,__~ ___---' '-- _~ .
[~~=_~ r-_m__~j [-=-=J L_A:- _______..J
brl ~ :--F-l
~L___J !!L_J /?__~ ~3 AVE._._ J
E.I:lASE JV_STEP_2____~
i Spoi'earance ~.
126& R~ttlitation 8
'---- 2L_~YC___~
+
Salina Community Renewal Program
Salina, Kansas
Project No. Kans. R53CR
Prepared for City of Salina, Kansas,
By BUCHER & WILLIS, Consulting Engineers,
Planners, Architects, 1969
r.--ln 1---1
I II ' ,
!. I ~
i 1 <fr
I I ()i
! I V
! I ~ I ~
b) ~II :
LL ~~...~
,
:~:..P:h:~':~:~:~il~',~\:r:~:. ';,d'..f;,;;~~,~:;~~ :id~: t~:~:~~,,::,ede,gl .'~~I
~l H~",;~. ~"d U,b~" o...I~P"'"', ~","~,;..d b, ,.",~" 40,
~ll". ~~".;". Ad of 19,9.~, ~..."d.d
r-lr-l
I ~II !
i ~ i I
I ~ I
183 l I ~.
iffi.Bl, ~!
r-PHAS~ IV ~EP 1
I Spot Cleara:nc~
I & Rehabilitation
, i !
I
~~----j
r--
-
COMMUNITY RENEWAL ACTIVITIES
LEGEND
c::::J PHASE BOUNDARY
Scoleintut
,
400
800
400
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
II
I
I
I
jl
I
I
p .~
f't.
,6 I'~\ I,
,ll \'
I ~.I)C\ \
" 4 \
/..'
~,tr'
~\\ ....
yi "
f;f
~
~
.....;l
~
~
o
\..;1
E-
;Z;
~
~
E-
=:
-<
~
-<
Q
~
CI:J
o
~
o
=:
. .
" .
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
Step 2 - CRP Blocks 9, 10, 11, 12, 13, 14, 24, 25, 26, 27, 28, 29,
30, 31, 40, 41, 42, 43 - Third, Fourth and Fifth Years of
Phase IV
The project area is a mixture of inexpensive homes of rather
recent construction having limited durability, moderately priced
homes of rather recent construction with good durability, and
older, fairly well maintained homes.
Proposed actions include demolition of '5 "clearance" resi-
dences and rehabilitation of 110 residences. No improvements are
proposed,because the area is well served by public utilities and
facilities.
-185-
NEIGHBORHOOD 14.
Neighborhood 14 is characteritized by low and moderately'
priced housing of limited durability constructed hurriedly and
inexpensively to house personnel after the reactivation of Schilling
Air Force Base in the early 1950's. At the time of the city-wide
survey, 456 of the residences were vacant, most of which had been
turned over to the Federal Housing Administration on loan defaults.
A total of 573 were occupied. Wh.ile only 14 houses were rated as
"clearance", deterioration was much in evidence, as 550 were rated
as needing minor or major repair.
Since the time of the city-wide survey, a FHA policy of sell-
ing houses for removal from Salina has been undertaken. The result
has been that over 150 houses have been sold and many of them re-
moved up to the time of this report.
It is recommended that most of the treatment for the neighbor-
hood be handled by FHA and that the policy of rehabilitating
residences for resale, where feasible, be continued. The remaining
houses owned by FHA should be sold for removal and lots made
available'for redevelopment. Private individuals now owning resi-
dences in the area c~h be expected to do a better job of mainten-
ance after redevelopment occurs.
The neighborhood is well platted and all utilities are ade-
quate; ,therefore, it can be considered a desirable area for redev-
elopment of housing for low and moderate income families. ~he
neighborhood is well served by Sunset Elementary School and will
be well served by park facilities with further development of
Centennial Park. Industrial workers find it well situated for
efficient travel to and from most places of industrial employment.
The city of Salina -- wi thout Urban Renewal funds -- should
purchase all of CRP Block 2 and Lots 5 through 18 of Block 9,
clear the remainder of the houses in the designated area, and
clear all the remaiping residences on property it now owns on the
south portion of Block 8.
Park development on the acquired property should include 1
lighted ball diamond, 2 unlighted ball diamonds, 3 picnic shelters
along Crawford Avenue for roadside park development, a combination
tennis-basketball court, playground equipment, and landscaping.
Development should be undertaken with use of Bureau of Outdoor
Recreation funds. (See Community Renewal Activities Map and
Urban Design for Neighborhood 14. Also see the Cost Analysis
of renewal actions in Neighborhood 14 for a breakdown of costs.)
-186-
I
I
U
I
I
I
o
I
I
I
I
m
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
Neighborhood 14
I
I,
;
'"
rr; r-c-'~
,-; Total \
, \' ,
~Ie:ar~nc. \
;" ;: \ \. . \
:arl(,Expanslo
,r ,;; '. '\ \
j:~, A \
l~ ~'
, (
~I '
j i,
.1 I
~l !
~,_J I
1
~
I
I
I
I
+
I
Salina ComMunity lene.al 'rOGraM
Salina, Kansas '\
'roiect No. Kans. 1531
',.par.d for City of Salina, Kansas,
Iy IUCHEI & W..L1S, Consvbins Engin....,
'lanners, Architects, 1969.
I
I
""prelNlilionol~IIlIPWlllinJlciIIIYlid,dthIGlG.IF"tfI19rlll
frolllM Real.II"'lli~lIIU AcImillistrillion of I he Ocp.rlllllat
oIl\oasinfnd U"1IIIlm1oplllnl,iII~oriledbysectio..co5
oflhHo.u.g.l.dof19S9,llllIeaded.
I
I
I
I
r---lj-Z 1/
;___~~~~/v~};/h\
MMUNITY RENEWAL ACTIVITIES
I
LEGEND
r::J PHASE BOUNDARY
I
Scale in f..t:
400
400
800
I
I
I
I.
I
I
;~~~
\4, ~~ \
~,. ~
1': ,,'(,. L"',
'1:~" .". :';:;:). \
.'4 ~, ,
'Ii OQ I., "~' \
'r ',<M,'
\ f/!' ,/'
~. \;,'
~\~;.
. '
",. \'1-,'
.' ,4h>
,~. t~~" "
,\~, \I~', ,'.
Q ,'\!) ~
',' ,q,'\~\",.'
\'~'J> .
\"0 ,;; .
"~" /.
.\ ~~'
1. \ ""
, .ti^~ l
"%~.,,
'I.':~$~'"
. ri~
" .':'.~~'~
I. ~\\
" ,\. ,
, . %:'"
. \ '
~. , \
f' ~\'f
" ""*,','r,'
,,', "':\
+' , ~
.. '::;.
,. ",,'" '
.... ~~ 1
, .:..:,...".,
" " . ",
'. ;;:-'
" '.
,
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
, FINANCIAL ,CONSIDERATIONS
Extensive research was conducted to determine the approximate
costs 'of community renewal activities proposed for the 20-year
period of this program. All costs are based upon 1969 estimates
and do not take into consideration rising costs due to inflation.
More comprehensive cost estimates will need to be made at the
time of entering a new project. Appraisals made at that time
may vary considerably from those made in the CRP study.
Rehabilitation Costs:
After the completion of the 100 percent exterior survey
conducted Py the City Staff, the Consultant's architect, with the
aid of ,a construction contractor and a realtor, conducted a
field survey to determine the approximate costs of rehabilitating
residential properties and to what extent rehabilitation could
be performed in two priority neighborhoods, 4 and 7. A rehabil-
itation estimated cost sheet was completed on all residences
within representative blocks in the two neighborhoods. An average
rehabilitation cost was compiled for each neighborhood based upon
houses requiring minor repair and major repair. Estimated re-
habilitation costs varied considerably from house to house depend-
ing upon age,~type of construction, size, renovation needed to
bring the property up to standard, and amount of deterioration
which had occurred.
Average rehabilitation costs of $3,256 and $3,500 for
Neighborhoods 4 and 7, respectively, were then applied to proposed
project areas in other neighborhoods having similar housing.
These costs can be found in the cost analysis seotion for all
priority neighborhoods. An example of the form used for com-
puting rehabil~tation costs on individual ,residential propertie~
is included in the appendix.
Suggested rehabilitation standards formulated during the
course of the CRP study are furnished to the City in limited
number as an appendix to this report.
Estimated rehabilitation costs for commercial properties
in the priority areas are based upon the interior inspections
made by the City Inspection Department within the CBD the summer
of 1968. A form used for this inspection is included in the
appendix.
Acquisition Costs:
Acquisition costs ,for all properties to be cleared or
included within a redevelopm~ntproject area were computed and
-187-
included in the cost analysis section of this report for each of
the priority areas. Acquisition costs were computed by securing
the assessed valuation of all properties and improvements to be
acquired from the Saline County Assessors Office.
During the course of this study, a reappraisal of all pro-
jects has been underway. ,As the reappraisal was not completed
until early 1970, old assessed valuations were used for most
computations. New assessed valuations were used to determine
estimated costs in the core area of the CBD. Old assessed valu-
ations were approximately 25 percent of the true value. Therefore,
acquisition costs for residential areas and many commercial areas
were computed by multiplying the assesed valuation by 4 and adding
another 15 percent to include potential extra costs of acquiring
the properties, such as court costs. Administrative costs of
20 percent were then added to the acquisition costs.
Acquisition costs of commercial properties were determined
in a similar manner. Under the new appraisals the assessed valu-
ation is based upon 30 percent of the actual value; therefore,
the assessed valuation of the properties to be secured in the
core of the CBD was multiplied by 3~. Then 15 percent and 20 per-
cent of the costs were applied to include extra costs of acqui-
sition and administrativeqQ~t~.
Resale Values:
Resale values of cleared land were based upon assessed val-
uation of land upon w~ich improvements were located. I These
varied from area to area but an average was computed for each
project area.
Demolition Costs:
Average demolition costs were estimated to be $600 per
residence, transferring all salvage rights to the demolition
contractor. Commercial property demolition costs varied consid-
erablybased upon size and nature of construction. The estimates
on both types of property were based upon costs of demolition of
a number of residential and commercial properties within the
past two years.
New Construction Costs:
Estimated new construction costs we+e based upon 1969 costs
and do not take into account rise in costs due to, inflation.
Funding of Renewal Activities:
A rather detailed breakdown of all renewal projects in
each neighborhood 'is included in the Cost Analysis Section of
-188-
,., i:
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
,I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
"I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
this report. Each five year period is designated as either
Phase I (1971-75), Phase II (1976-80)i Phase III (1981-85), or
Phase IV (1986-90). The periods are further broken down by the
designation of steps or projects to be undertaken within the
vari6us neighborhoods during each five-year period. A year
by year summary is then made of the total costs, federal funds
and local funds of the renewal activities in residential neigh-
borhoods and Neighborhood 8 (CBD). Total costs are further
summarized for all projects each year as to estimated total
renewal project, federal funds in rehabilitation grants and loans,
other federal funds and local funds. All information and tables
concerning costs are included in the Cost Analysis Section of
this report. No attempt was made to separate the amounts that
would be required for rehabilitation loans and grants, because
it would have been difficult to determine accurately the finan-
cial capabilities of families to rehabilitate their homes.
City Funding of Project Costs:
The City of Salina will need to-furnish on the average
approximately $100,000 each year in cash, non-cash grants-in-
aidr or credits to cover local costs of community renewal activi-
ties. The method used for funding will need to "be determined by
the city officials, but it will be imperative that the City
commit itself to this approximate amount for the Community Renewal
Program to be continued in a successful manner.
-189-
,
COST ANALYSIS FOR COMMUNITY RENEWAL ACTIVITIES
Neighborhood 4
Phase I - 1970-1975
$190,164.00
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I.
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
Step 1 - CRP Blocks 15, 16, 25, 26, 45, 46 ~ First 3 Years of Phase I
Renewal Costs:
Acquisition costs for spot clearance of 22 resi-
dential structures
Demolition costs for 22 residential structures
at $600 each
Total acquisition and demolition costs
. Less resale value 22 tracts of land at $500 each
Net Project Acquisition Costs
Improvement Costs:
Paving of 650 feet of Front Street to 48-foot
width at $28.25 per lineal foot
Paving to 34-foot width on Harsh Avenue from Fifth
Street to Third Street (650 feet) at $20/1in. ft.
Widening to 34-foot width and installing curb on
west side of Third Street from Hamilton Avenue
to Harsh Avenue at $lo.oO/iineal foot (900 feet)
Replat of CRP Block 16
Total Improvement Costs
Project Acquisition and Improvement Costs
Administrative Costs at 20%
Aggregate Renewal Costs
Salina's Costs at 25%
Rehabilitation of 54 residential structures at $3256
Administrative Costs for Rehabilitation at 20%
Total Rehabilitation Costs
Salina's Costs at 25% Administrative Costs
Total Costs - Step 1
Salina's Costs
13,200.00
$203,364.00
11,000.00
$192,364.00
$ 18,362.50
13,000.00
9,000.00
400.00
40,762.50
$233,126.50
46,625.30
$279,751. 80
$ 69,937.95
$175,825.00
35,165.00
$210,990.00
$ 8,791.25
$490,741.80
$ 78,729.20
Step 2A - CRP Blocks 5, 6, 7 - Third & Fourth Years of Phase I
Renewal Costs':
Acquisition costs for 48 residential structures
Demolition of 18 residential structures at $600
Moving of 30 residential structures to new sites
at $750 each
-190-
$190,164.00
10,800.00
22,500.00
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
Total Acquisition, Demolition and Moving Costs
Less resale value of 18.3 acres of land at
$2,000 per acre
Less value of 30 unrehabilitated houses to be
moved to new sites at $1644 each
Net Project Acquisition Costs
. Improvement Costs:
Paving to 48-foot.width of Front Street from Otis
Avenue to Euclid Avenue and Euclid Avenue to
Fifth Street and installing curb and gutter at
$28.25 per lineal foot (2100 feet)
Paving of Otis Avenue to 34-foot width from Third
Street to Fourth Street at $20/1in. ft. (250 ft.).
Total Improvement Costs
Total Acquisition and Improvement Costs
Administrative Costs at 20%
Aggregate Renewal Costs
Salina's Costs at 25%
Rehabilitation Costs:
Rehabilitation of 30 residential structures on new
sites at $4006 each
Administrative Costs of Rehabilitation at 20%
Total Rehabilitation Costs
Salina's Costs at 25% Administrative Costs
Total Costs - Step 2A
Salina's Costs
$223,464.00
36,600.00
49,320.00
$137,544.00
$ 59,325.00
5,000.00
$ 64,325.00
$201,869.00
40,373.80
$242,242.80
$ 60,560.20
$120,180.00
24,036.00
$144,216.00
$ 6,009.00
$385,458.80
$ 66,569.20
Step 2B - CRP Blocks 10, 11, 12, 20, 22, 30, 31, 32, 33, 41, 42, 43,
44'- Third, Fourth & Fifth Years of Phase I
Acquisition costs for spot clearance of 13
residential structures
Demolition of 13 residential structures at
$600 each
Total Acquisition and Demolition Costs
Less resale value of 13 tracts of land at $500
Net Acquisition and Demolition Costs
Improvement Costs~
Total Project Acquisition, Demolition and
Improvement Costs
Administrative Costs at 20%
Aggregate Renewal Costs
Salina's Costs
.,.191-
$ 28,106.00
7,800.00
$ 35,906.00
6,500.00
$ 29,406.00
0.00
$ 29,406.00
5,881.20
$ 35,287.20
$ 8,821.80
. ..'; !';'..
""'""1'"
.:l- j'i ~I..r(' ; ~
. '.'
Rehabilitation Costs:
Rehabilitation of 139 residential structures at
$3256 each
Rehabilitation of 4 commercial and industrial
structures at $5000 each
Administrative Costs for Rehabilitation at 20%
Total Rehabilitation Costs
Salina's Costs at 25% of Administrative Costs
$452,584.00
20,000.00
94,516.80
$567,100.80
$ 23,629.20
Total n'Go's,tsll- sStrep _2B
Salina's Costs
$602,388.00
$ 32,451.00 ?
Step 3A - CRP Blocks 13, 14, 23, 24 - Fourth & Fifth Years of Phase I
Acquisition costs for total clearance
Demolition of 12 residential structures at $600
Moving of 39 residential structures to new
'sites at $750 each
Total Acquisition, Demolition & Moving Costs
Less'value of 39 unrehabilitated iesidential
\"~-'-str,uctur.es ~at' $1644 each
Net-Acquisition; Demolition and Moving Costs
$187,220.00
7,200.00
29,250.00
$233,670.00
64,116.00
$169,554.00
Improyement Costs:
Removal of 1700 feet of paving, curb and gutter
at $10.00 per lineal foot
Total Acquisition, Demolition, Moving and
Improvement Costs
Administrative Costs at 20%
Aggregate Renewal Costs
Salina's Costs at 25'
$ 17,000.00
. $186,554.00
37,310.80
$223,864.80
$ 55,966.20
Park Development - BOR Funds:
Playground equipment
Swimming pool and bathhouse
.1 lighted ball diamond
1 unlighted ball diamond
1 picnic shelter
1 tennis-basketball court
., :Landscaping
Total Park Development Cost
- 'Salina's Costs
$ 4,000.00
90,000.00
5,000.00
2,000.00
10,000.00
5,000.00
5,000.00
$121,000.00
$ 60,500.00
Rehabilitation Costs:
Rehabilitation of 39 residential structures on
new sites at $4006 each
$156,234.00
-192-
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
Administrative Costs of Rehabilitation at 20%
Total Rehabilitation Costs
Salina's Costs at 25% Administrative Costs
$ 31,246.80
$187,480.80
$ 7,811. 70
Total Costs -.Step 3A
Salina's Costs
$532,345.60
$124,277.90
Step 3B - CRP Block 22 - Fourth Year of Phase I
Acquisition costs for total clearance of 4
structures
Demolition of 1 structure at $600
Moving of 3 residential structures to new sites
at $750.00 each
Total Acquisition, Demolition and Moving Costs
Less resale value of 3 unrehabilitated residential
structures at $1644 each
Less value of 8 lots at $500 each
Net Acquisition, Demolition and Moving Costs
Administrative Costs at 20%
Aggregate Renewal Costs.
Salina's Costs at 25%
$ 14,122.00
600.00
2,250.00
$ 16,972.00
4,932.00
4,000.00
$ 8,040.00
1,608.00
$ 9,648.00
$ 2,412.00
Rehabilitation Costs:
Rehabilitation of 3 residential structures on new
sites at $4006 each
Administrative Costs at 20%
Total Rehabilitation Costs
Salina's Costs (25% of Administrative
Total Costs - Step 3B
Salina's Costs
$ 12,018.00
2,403.60
$ 14,421.60
Costs) 600.90
$ 24,069.60
$ 3,012.90
Phas~ II - 1975-~980
Step lA - CRP Blocks 71, 72, 73, 74 - First 2 Years of Phase II
Acquisition costs for spot clearance of 25
residential structures
Demolition cost for 25 residential structures
at $600 each
Moving of 5 residential structures to permit
construction of screen at $750 each
Total Acquisition, Demolition and Mqving Costs
$ 56,592.00
15,000.00
3,750.00
$ 75,342~00
-193-
Less resale value of 5 unrehabilitated residential
structures at $1644 each
Less resale value of 21 tracts of land at $500
Net Project Acquisition Costs
Improvement Costs:
Paving of Forest Avenue to 34-foot width from
Front Street to Fifth Street at $20.00 per lineal
foot (1250 feet)
Paving of Woodland Avenue from Front to Third
Streets, $16.96 per lineal foot (260 feet)
Paving of Front Street to 48-foot width and
installing curb and gutter from Union Pacific
Railroad tracks to Woodland at $28.25 per lineal
foot (950 feet)
Building of 3 cul-de-sacs at $3,928.50 each
Construction of 1250 foot fence & shrubbery screen
Total Improvement Costs
Total Project Acquisition and Improvement Costs
Administrative Costs at 20%
Aggregate Renewal Costs
Salina's Costs at 25%
Rehabilitation Costs:
Rehabilitation of 5 residential structures on new
sites at $4006 each
Rehabilitation of 33 residential structures at
$3256 each
Administrative Costs of Rehabilitation
Total Costs for Rehabilitation
~
Salina's Costs at 25% of Administrative Costs
Total Costs - Step lA
Salina's Costs
$ 8,220.00
10,500.00
$ 56,622.00
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
'I
I
I
$ 25,000.00
4,409.60
26,837.50
11,785.50
8,500.00
$ 76,532.60
.$133,154.60
26,630.92
$159,785.52
$ 39,946.38
$ 20,030.00
107,448.00
25,495.60
$152,973.60
$ 6,373.90
$312,759.12
$ 46,320.28
Step lB - CRP Blocks 36, 55, 56,57, 58 and portions of Blocks 45
and 46 - First 2 Years of Phase II
Renewal Costs:'
Acquisition costs for spot clearance of 11 resi-
dential and 1 commercial structure
Demolition costs for 11 residential structures
at $600 each
Demolition costs for 1 commercial structure
Total Acquisition and Demolition Costs
Less resale value of 14 lots at $506 each
Net Project Acquisition and Demolition Costs
-194-
$ 64,216.00
6,600.00
1,500.00
$ 72,316.00
7,000.00
$ 65,316.00
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I-
I-
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
Improvement Costs:
Paving of Front Street to 48-footwidth from Wood-
land Avenue to 100. feet south of Antrim Avenue
and installing curb and gutter @ $28.25/1in. ft.
(1850 feet)
Project Acquisition and Improvement Costs
Administrative Costs at 20%
Aggregate Renewal Costs
Salina's Cost at 25%
Rehabilitation Costs:
Rehabilitation of 30 residential structures at
$3256 each
Rehabilitation of 3 commercial structures at
$5000 each.
Administrative Costs of Rehabilitation at 20%
Total Rehabilitation Costs
Salina's Costs at 25% of Administrative Costs
Total Costs - Step IB
Salina's Costs
$ 52,262.50
$117,578.00
23,515.60
$141,093.60
$ 35,273.40
$ 97,680.00
15,000.00
22,536.00
$135,216.00
$ 5,634.00
$276,309.60
$ 40,907.40
Step 1C - CRP Blocks 1, 8, 9, 17, 18, 19, 27, 29, 37, 38, 39, 40, 47,
48, 49, 50, 59, 60, 120, 130 - First 2 Years of Phase II
Renewal Costs:
Acquisition costs for spot clearance of 5 resi-
dential structures
Demolition costs for 5 residential structures at
$600 each
Total Acquisition and Demolition Costs
Improvement ,Costs:
Paving of Euclid to 34-foot width and installing
curb and gutter at $20 per lineal foot from
Ninth Street. to Dry Creek (750 feet)
Total Acquisition, Demolition & Improvement Costs
Administrative Costs at 20%
Aggregate Renewal Costs
Salina's Costs at 25%
Rehabilitation Costs:
Rehabi.litation of 165 residential structures at
$3256 each
Rehabilitation of 7 commercial structures at
$5000 each
-195-
$ 18,037.00
3,000.00
$ 21,037.00
$ 15,000.00
$ 36,037.00
7,207.40
$ 43,244.40
$10 ,,811.10
$537,240.00
35,000.00
Administrative Costs at 20%
Total Rehabilitation Costs
Salina's Costs at 25% of Administrative Costs
Total Costs - Step lC
Salina's Costs
114,448.00
$686,688.00
$ 28,612.00
$729,932.40
$ 39,423.10
Step 2 - CRP Blocks 51, 52, 53, 54, 67, 68, 69, 70, 83, 84, 85, 86,
87, 89, 90, 91, 92, 101, 102, 103, 104 - Third and Fourth
Years of Phase II
Renewal Costs:
Acquisition cost for spot clearance of 22 resi-
dential structures
Demolition of 22 residential structures at $600
Acquisition costs for 20 residential structures in
commercial and industrial areas in CRP Blocks
52, 67, 83, 87, 89, 101, 102
Moving of 20 residential structures.to new sites
at $750 each
Acquisition costs for spot clea~ance of 11 commer-
cial and industrial structures
Demolition of 11 commercial and industrial
structures at $2000 each
.Total Acquisition, Demolition and Moving Costs.
Less resale value of 22 tracts of land where
residential structures were cleared at $500 each
Less resale value of 20 tracts of land where
residential structures are to be removed from
industrial and commercial areas at $1000 each
Less resale value of 20 urtrehabilitated houses to
be moved to new sites at $1644 each
Less resale value of land where commercial and
industrial structures are to be removed
Net Acquisition, Demolition and Moving Costs
Improvement Costs:
Paving to 34-foot width Lincoln Avenue from Santa
Fe Avenue to Fifth Street and Fifth Street from
Lincoln Avenue to Grand Avenue at. $20 per lineal
foot (900 feet)
Total Acquisition, Demolition, Moving and
Improvement Costs
Administrative Costs at 20%
Aggregate Renewal Costs
Salina's Costs at 25%
-196-.
$ 79,764.00
13,200.00
85,524.00
15,000.00
152,582.00
22,000.00
$368,070.00
11,000.00
20,000.00
32,880.00
10,500.00
$293,690.00
$ 18,000.0.0
$311,690.00
62,338.00
$374,028~00
$ 93,507.00
I,
I
I
I
-I
.1
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
,I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
'I
I
I
I
Rehabilitation Costs:
Rehabilitation of 20 residential structures on new
sites at $4006 each
Rehabilitation of 62 residential structures at
$3256 each
Rehabilitation of 28 commercial and industrial
structures at. $5000 each
Administrative Costs at 20%
Total Rehabilitation Costs
Salina's Cost at 25% of Administrative Costs
Total Costs - Step 2
Salina's Costs
$ 80,120.00
201,872.00
140,000.00
84,398.40
$506,390.40
$ 21,099.60
$880,418.40
$114,606.60
Step 3 - CRP Blocks 61,62,63,64,75,76,77,78,79,80,81,82,
93, 94, 95, 96, 97, 98, 99, 100, 105, 106, 107, 108,109,
110, Ill, 112, 113, 114, 115, 116, 117, 118, 119 - Fourth
and Fifth Years of Phase II
Renewal Costs:
Acquisition costs for 12 residential structures
Demolition costs for 12 residential structures at
$600 each
Acquisition of 1 non-residential structure
Clearance of 1 non-residential structure
Total Acquisition and Demolition Costs
Less resale value of 12 tracts of land at $500
Less resale of 1 industrial tract of land
Net Acquisition and Demolition Costs
11
Improvement Costs:
Paving of Barney Street to 34-foot width from
North Street to Lincoln Avenue.at $20 per
lineal foot (600 feet)
Paving of Thirteenth Street to 34-foot width
from Union Pacific tracks tQ North Street at
$20 per lineal foot (350 feet)
Paving of Reynolds Street to 34-foot width from
Union Pacific tracks to North Street at $20 per
lineal foot (400 feet)
Total Improvement Costs
Project Acquisition and Improvement Costs
Administrative Costs at 20%
Aggregate Renewal Costs
Salina's Costs at 25%
I
~I
!
II
I
i
!I
I
I
I
-197-
$ 38,318.00
7,200.00
5,980.00
1,000.00
$ 52,498.00
6,000.00
1,000.00
$ 45,498.00
$ 12,000.00
7,000.00
8,000.00
$ 27,000.00
$ 72,498.00
14,499.60
$ 86,997.60
$ 21,749.40
Rehabilitation Costs:
Rehabilitation of 125 residential structures at
$3256 each
Rehabilitation of 25 commercial and industrial
structures at $5000 each
Administrative Costs of Rehabilitation at 20%
Total Rehabilitation Costs
Salina's Costs at 25% of Administrative Costs
$407,000.00
125,000.00
106,400.00
$638,400.00
$ 26,600.00
Total Costs - Step 3 .
Salina's Costs
$725,397.60
$ 48,349.40
Phase III - 1980-1985 - CRP Block 65 - Hawthorne School Expansion -
First Year of Phase III
Renewal Costs:
Acquisition costs of total clearance of east half
of CRP Block 65
Demolition of 3 commercial and industrial struc-
tures at $3000 each
Moving of 2 residential structures to new sites
at $750 each
Total Acquisition, Demolition and Moving Costs
Less resale value of 2 unrehabilitated residential
structures at $1644 each
Less resale value of land to school district
Net Acquisition, Demolition and Moving Costs
$152,858.00
9,000.00
1,500.00
$163,358.00
3,288.00
6,000.00
$154,070.00
Improvement Costs:
Removal of paving, curb and gutter on Tenth Street
from Grand Avenue to Woodland Avenue at $2.50
per square yard (2460 square yards)
Total Acquisition and Improvement Costs
Administrative' Costs at 20%
Aggregate Project Costs
Salina's Costs at 25%
$ 6,150.00
$160,220.00
32,044.00
$192,264.00
48,066.00
Rehabilitation Costs:
Rehabilitation of 2 residential structures on new
sites at $4006 each
Administrative Costs of Rehabilitation at 20%
Total Cost of Rehabilitation
Salina's Cost at 25% of Administrative Costs
$ 8,012.00
1,062.40
$ 9,614.40
$ 400.60
Total Costs - Phase III
Salina's Costs
$201,878.40
$ 48,46.6.00
-198-
I
I
I
I
I
I
.1
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I'
I
I
I
:1
I
I
I
I
I
I
:1
I
I
I
I
COST ANALYSIS FOR COMMUNITY RENEWAL ACTIVITIES
Neighborhood 7
Phase I - 1970-1975
Step lA - Connection of Ash and State Streets - CRP Blocks 40 and 41,
Third Year of Phase I
Renewal Costs:
Acquisition costs for 10 residential structures
Moving of 10 residential structures to new sites
at $1000 each
Total Acquisition and Moving Costs
Less resale value of 10 unrehabilitated residen-
tial structures to be moved to new sites at
$3187 each
Net Acquisition and M?ving Costs
Improvement Costs:
Construction of 48-foot wide connecting street
with curb, gutter, turnbays, signal light;
widen State Street from connecting link west
to City limits to 48-footwidth
Total Acquisition, Moving and Improvement Costs
Administrative Costs at 20%
Aggregate Project Costs
Salina's Costs at 25%
Rehabilitation Costs:
Rehabilitation of 10 residential structures on
new sites at $4500 each
Administrative Costs at 20%
Total Rehabilitation Costs
Salina's Costs at 25% of Administrative Costs
Total Costs - Step lA
Salina's Costs
$112,032.00
10,000.00
$122,032.00
31,870.00
$ 90,162.00
$ 76,800.00
$166,962.00
33,392.40
$200,354.40
$ ~0,088.60
$ 45,000.00
9,000.00
$ 54,000.00
$ 2,250.00
$254,354.40
$ 52,338.60
Step IB - CRP tilocks 6, 7, 8, 9, 17, 18, 25, 26, 27i 28, 29, 38, 39,
40, 41, 42, 49, 50, 51; 52, 53, 54, 59, 60, 61, 62, 63 -
Third, Fourth and Fifth Years of ' Phase I
Renewal Costs:
Acquisition costs for spot clearance of 5 resi-
dential structures
-199-
$ 21,114.00
Demolition of 5 residential structures at $600
Acquisition costs for 5 residential structures
causing overcrowding
Moving of 5 residential structures causing over-
crowding at $1000 each
Total Acquisition, Demolition and Moving Costs
Less resale value of 5 tracts cleared of "Clear-
ance" residential structures at $500 each
Less resale value of 5 tracts of land cleared to
relieve overcrowding at $500 each
Less resale value of 5 unrehabilitated residen-
tial structures at $3187 each
Net" Acquisition, Demolition and Moving Costs
Improvement Costs:
Administrative Costs at 20%
Aggregate Renewal Costs
Salina's Costs at 25%
Rehabilitation Costs:
Rehabilitation of 5 residential structures on new
sites at $4500 each
Rehabilitation of 205 residential structures at
$3500 each
Rehabilitation of 7 commercial structures at
$5000 each
Administrative Costs for Rehabilitation at 20%
Total Rehabilitation Costs
Salina's Costs at 25% of Administrative Costs
Total Costs - Step 1B
Salina's Costs
Phase II - 1975-1980
$ 3,000.00
31,832.00
5,000.00
$ 60,946.00
2,500.00
2,500.00
15,935.00
$ 40,011.00
o.ob
8,002.20
$ 48,0"13.20
$ 12,003.30
$ 22,500.00
717,500.00
35,000.00
155,000.00
$930,000.00
$ 38,750.00
$978,013.20
$ 50,753.30
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
'I
I
I
I
B
U
I
I
I
I
I
Step 1 - CRP Blocks 11, 13, 14, 15, 16, 20, 21, 22, 23, 24, 30, 31,
32, 33, 34, 43, 44, 45, 46, 47 - First Three Years of Phase II
Renewal Costs:
Acquisition costs for clearance of 9 residential
structures
Demolition costs for 9 residential structures at
$600 each
Acquisition costs for 3 residential structures
causing overcrowding
-200-
$ 51,926.00
5,400.00
19;366.00
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
Moving of 3 residential structures to new sites
at $1000 each
Total Acquisition, Demolition and Moving Costs
Less ,resale value of 9 cleared tracts of land
at $500 each
Less resale value of 3 tracts cleared to relieve
overcrowding at $500 each
Net Acquisition, Demolition and Moving Costs
Improvement Costs: '
Total Acquisition, Demolition, Moving and
Improvement Costs
Administrative Costs at 20%
Aggregate Renewal Costs
Salina's Costs at 25%
Rehabilitation Costs:
Rehabilitation of 3 residential structures on new
sites at $4500 each
Rehabilitation of 154 residential structures at
$3500 each
Rehabilitation of 9 commercial structures at
$5000 each
Administrative Costs for Rehabilitation at 20%
Total Rehabilitation Costs
Salina's Costs at 25% of Administrative Costs
Total Costs - Step 1
Salina's Costs
$ 3,000.00
$ 79,692.00
4,500.00
1,500.00
$ 73,692.00
0.00
$ 73,692.00
14,738.40
$ 88,430.40
$ 22,107.60
$ 13,500.00
539,000.00
45,000.00
119,500.00
$717,000.00
$ 29,875.00
$805,430.40
$ 51,982.60
Step 2 - CRP Blocks 55, 56, 57, 64,65, 66, 67, 68, 70, 71, 72, 73,
74, 75, 76, 77, 78, 79, 80, 81, 82, 83, 84, 85, 86, 87,
88, 89, 90, 91, 92, 93, 95, 96, 97, 98,100, 101 - Third,
Fourth and Fifth Years of Phase II
Renewal Costs:
Acquisition costs for 10 clearance of 10 resi-
dential structures
Demolition costs for 10 residential struc~ures
at $600 each
Acquisition costs for 7 residential structures
c3.using overcrowding
Moving costs for 7 residential structures to new
sites at $1000 each
Total Acquisition, Demolition and Moving Costs
Less resale value of 10 tracts of land cleared'
of "Clearance" structures at $500 each
-201-
$ 63,020.00
6,000.00
67,114.00
7,000.00
$143,134.00
5,000.00
Less resale value of 7 tracts of land cleared to
relieve overcrowding at $500 each
Less resale value of 7 unrehabilitatedresiden-
tial structures to be moved to new sites at
$3187 each
Net Acquisition, Demolition and Moving Costs
Improvement Costs:
Administrative Costs at 20%
Aggregate Renewal Costs
Salina's Costs at 25%
Rehabilitation Costs:
Rehabilitation of 7 residential structures on' new
sites at $4500 each
Rehabilitation of 416 residential structures at
$3500 each
Rehabilitation of 5 commercial structures at
$5000 each
Administrative Costs of Rehabilitation at 20%
Total Rehabilitation Costs
Salina's Costs at 25% of Administrative Costs
Total Costs - Step 2
Salina's Costs
Phase III - 1980-1985
$ 3,500.00
I
I
I
I
I
I
=1
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
22,309.00
$112,325.00
0.00
22,465.00
$134,790.00
$ 33,697.50
$ 31,500.00'
1,456,000.00
25,000.00
302,500.00 .
$1,815,000.00
$ . 75,625.00
$1,949,790.00
$ 109,322.50
Step 1 - CRP Blocks 94 and 99 - Whittier School Expansion and Neigh-
borhood Park - First Two Years of Phase III
Renewal Costs: '
Acquisition costs for total clearance of Block 99
Demolition of 3 residential structures at $600
Moving of 18 residential structures to new
sites at $1000 each
Total Acquisition, Demolition and Moving Costs
Less resale value of 18 unrehabilitated residen-
tial structures at $3187 each
Less fair resale value of city and school district
Net Acquisition, Demolition and Moving Costs
Improvement Costs:
Removal of paving, curb and gutter on Spruce
from Phillips to Baker at $2.50 per square
yard (1133 square yards)
-202-
$208,150.00
1,800.00
18,000.00
$227,950.00
57,366.00
8,500.00
$162~084.00
$ 2,832.50
I
I
I
I
I
I'
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
Total Acquisition and Improvement Costs
Administrative Costs at 20%
Aggregate Project. Costs
Salina's Costs at 25%
Park and Playground Development Costs . (With BOR Funds):
Unlighted ball field and playground development
Playground equipment
Landscaping
Combination tennis-basketball court
Total Costs for Development
City Costs at 25%
BOR Funds
. School District Funds
Rehabilitation Costs:
Rehabilitation of 18 residential structures on new
sites at $4500 each
Administrative Costs of Rehabilitation at 20%
Total Rehabilitation Costs
Salina's Costs at 25% of Administrative Costs
Total Costs - Phase III
Salina's Costs
-203-
$164,916.50
32,983.30
$197,899.80
$ 49,474.95
$ 2,000.00
4,000.00
1,500.00
5,000.00
$ 12,500.00
3,125.00
3,125.00
6,250.00
$ 81,000.00
16,200.00
$ 9 7 , 200 . 00
$ 4,050.00
$307,599.80
$ 56,649.95
COST ANALYSIS FOR COMMUNITY RENEWAL ACTIVITIES
Neighborhood 9
Phase II - 1975-1980
$196,788.00
1,800.00
2,000.00
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
Step 1 - CRP Blocks 42, 43 and E half of Block 41 - First Two Years
of Phase II
Renewal Costs:
Acquisition costs for total clearance
Demolition of 3 residential structures at $600
Demolition of 2 commercial structures at $1000
Moving of 34 residential structures to new sites
at $750 each
Total Acquisition, Demolition and Moving Costs
Less resale value of 34 unrehabilitated residen-
tial structures at $1644 each'
Less resale value of 9 acres of land at $20'00/
acre
Net Project Acquisition, Demolition and Moving
Cos ts
Improvement Costs:
Paving to 34-foot width of Front Street from Ash
to Elm and improving intersection of F~ont and
Ash at $20 per lineal foot (750 feet)
Removing trees, brush, etc. and complete landfill
on Block 43
Total Improvement Costs
Total Acquisition, Demolition, Moving and
Improvement Costs '.", ."
Administrative Costs at 20%
Aggregate Renewal Costs
Salina's Costs at 25%
Rehabilitation Costs:
Rehabilitation of 34 residential structures on
new sites at $4006 each
Administrative Costs at 20%
Total Rehabilitation Costs
Salina's Costs
Total Costs - Step 1
Salina's Costs
-204-
25,500.00
$226,088.00
55,896.00
18,000.00 .
$152,192.00
$ 5,000.00
5,000.00
$ 20,000.00
$172,192.00
34,438.40
$206,630.40
$ 51,657.60
$136,204.00
27,240.80
$163,444.80
$ 6,810.20
$370,075.20
$ 58,467.80
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I,
I
Step 2 - CRP Blocks 44, 45, 46, 50, 51, 52, 57, 58, 59, 60, 61, 62,
66, 67 - Second, Third and Fourth Years of Phase II
Renewal Costs:
Acquisition costs for spot clearance of 2 residen-
tial structures
Demolition costs for spot clearance of 2 residential
structures at $600 each
Acquisition costs for clearance of 3 commercial
structures
Demolition of 3 commercial structures at $750 each
Acquisition of 1 residential structure causing
overcrowding
Moving of 1 residential structure causing over-
crowding
Total Acquisition, Demolition and Moving Costs
Less resale value of 2 lots cleared of residen-
tial structures at $500 each
Less resale value of 1 unrehabili~ated residen~
tial structure
Net Acquisition, Demolition and Moving Costs
Improvement Cqsts:
Total Acquisition, Demolition, Moving and
Improvement Costs
Administrative Costs at 20%
Aggregate Renewal Costs
Salina's Costs at 25%
Rehabilitation Costs:
Rehabilitation of 90 residential structures at
$3256 each
Rehabilitation of 1 residential structure on a
new site at $4006-
Administrative Costs for Rehabilitation at 20%
Total Rehabilitation Costs
Salina's Costs at 25% of Administrative Costs
Total Costs - Step 2
Salina's Costs
-205-
$ 18,458.00
1,200.00
10,948.00
2,250.00
4,922.00
750.00
$ 38,528.00
1,000.00
1,644.00
$ 35,884.00
0.00
$ 35,884.00
7,176.80
$ 43,060.80
$ 10,765.20
$293,040.00
4,006.00
59,409.20
$356,455.20
$ 14,852.30
$399,516.00
$ 25,617.50
step 3 - CRP Blocks 47, 48, 49, 53, 54, 55, 63, 64, 68, 69, l6A, l7A,
l8A, 19A, 20A,. 21A, 22A - Third, Fourth and Fifth Years of
Phase II
Renewal Costs:
Acquisition costs for clearing 6 residential
structures
Demolition costs for 6 residential structures
at $600 each
Acquisition costs for clearing 3 residential
structures causing overcrowding
Moving costs of 3 residential structures to
new sites at $750 each
Total Acquisition, Demolition and Moving Costs
Less resale value of 6 tracts of land from
which structures were cleared at $500 each
Less resale value of 3 tracts of land from which
resid~ntial structures are removed to-relieve
overcrowding at $500 each
Less resale value of 3 unrehabilitated structures
to be moved to new sites at $1644 each
Net Acquisition, Demolition and Moving Costs
$ 29,394.00
3,600.00
20,424.00
2,250.00
$ 55,668.00
3,000.00
1,500.00
4,932.00
$ 46,236.00
0.00
$ 46,236.00
9,247.20
$ 55,483.20
$ 13,870.80
Improvement Costs:
Total Acquisition, Demolition and Improvement
Costs
Administrative Costs at 20%
Aggregate Renewal Costs
Salina's Costs at 25%
Rehabilitation Costs:
Rehabilitation Costs for 181 residential struc-
tures at $3256 each
Rehabilitation costs for 3 residential struc-
tures on new sites at $4006 each
Administrative Costs for Rehabilitation at 20%
Total Rehabilitation Costs
Salina's Costs fit 25% of Administrative Costs
Total Costs - Step 3
Salina's Costs
$589,336.00
12,018.00
120,270.80
$721,624.80
$ 30,067.70
$777,108.00
$ 43,938.50
-206-
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
COST ANALYSIS FOR COMMUNITY RENEWAL ACTIVITIES
Neighborhood 11
Phase I - 1970-1975 - CRP Block 27 - First Year of Phase I
City acquire from Unified District 305 the abandoned
South Park School and develop as a neighborhood park
Non-Urban Renewal Activity
Total Costs - Phase I
Salina's Costs
$ 1.00
5,000.00
$ 2,000.00
2,000.00
5,000.00
500.00
$ 9,500.00
4,750.00
$ 14,501.00
$ 9,751.00
Acquisition Costs
Demolition Costs
Development Costs: BaR Funds
Unlighted ball diamond
Playground equipment
Combination tennis-basketball court
Landscaping
Total Development Costs
Salina's Costs at 50%
Phase III - 1980-1985
Step i - CRP Blocks 6, 7, 8, 9, 10, 11, 15, 16, 17, 18, 19, 20, 21,
22, 26, 27, 28, 32, 33, 34 - First Two Years of Phase III
Renewal Costs:
Acquisition costs for clearing 7 resideritial
structures
Demolition costs for 7 residen~ial structures
at $600 each
Acquisition costs for clearing 1 industrial
structure
Demolition of 1 industrial structure
Acquisition costs for 8 residential structures
causing overcrowding ,
Moving of 8 residential structures to new sites
at $lOOO'each
Total Acquisition, Demolition and Moving Costs
Less resale value of 5 tracts cleared of
residential structures at $500 eacp
Less resale value of 8 tracts of land from which
structures causing overcrowding were cleared
$ 55,246.00
4,200.00
11,914.00
2,000.00
70,656.00
8,000.00
$152,016.00
2,500.00
4,000.00
-207-
Less res~le value of 8 unrehabilitated residential
structures to be moved to new sites at $3,187
Net Acquisition, Demolition and Moving Costs
Improvement Costs
Total Acquisition, Demolition, Moving and
Improvement Costs
Administrative Costs at 20%
Aggregate Renewal Costs
Salina's Costs at 25%
Rehabilitation Costs:
Rehabilitation of 202 residential structures at
$3500 each
Rehabilitation of 8 residential structures on
new sites at $4500 each
Administrative Costs for Rehabilitation at 20%
Total Costs of Rehabilitation
Salina's Costs at 25% of AdministrativeCost~
Total Costs - Step 1
Sa1ina.'s Costs for Step 1
$ 25,496.00
$120,020.00
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
0.00
$120,020.00
24,004.00
$144,024.00
$ 36,006.00
$ 707,000~00
36,000.00
148,600.00
$ 891,600.00
$ 37,150.00
. $1,035,624.00
$ 73,156.00
Step 2 - CRP Blocks 1,2,3,4,5,12,13,14,23,24,25,29,30,
31, 35, 36, 38, 39, 40, 41, 42, 43, 44, 45, 46, 47 - Third,
Fourth and Fifth Years of Phase III
Renewal Costs:
Acquisition costs for spot clearance of 3 resi-
dential structures
Demolition of 3 residential structures 'at $600
Acquisition costs for 2 residential structures
causing overcrowding
Moving 2 residential' structures to new 'sit.es
at $1000 each
TqtalAcquisition, Demolition and Moving Costs
Less resale value of 3 tracts of land cleared
of residences at $500' each
Less resale value of 2 tracts of land cleared
of residences creating overcrowding at $500
Less resale value of 2 unreh~bilitated residen-'
tial structures to be moved to new sites at
. .
.$~187 each
Net Acquisition, Demolitj,.on and Moving Costs
-208-
$ 18,032.00
1,800.00
18,722.00
2,000.00
$ '40,554.00
1,500.00
1,000.00
6,374.00
$ 31,680.00
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
Improvement Costs:
Total Acquis~tion, Demolition, Moving ,and
Improvement Costs
Administrative Costs at 20%
Aggregate Renewal Costs
Salina's Costs at 25%
0.00
$ 31,680.00
6,336.00
$ 38,016.00
$ 9,504.00
Rehabilitation Costs:
Rehabilitation of 117 residential structures at
$3500 each
Rehabilitation of 2 residences on new sites at
$4500 each
Rehabilitation of 6 commercial structures at
$5000 each
Administrative Costs of Rehabilitation at 20%
Total Rehabilitation Costs
Salina's Costs at 25% of Administrative Costs
$409,500.00
9,000.00
30,000.00
89,700.00
$538,200.00
'$ 22,425.00
Total Costs - Step 2
Salina's Costs
$576,216.00
$ 31,929.00
-209-
COST ANALYSIS FOR COMMUNITY RENEWAL ACTIVITIES
Neighborhood 12
Phase I - 1970-197~
Step 1 - CRP Block 35 - Second Year of Phase I
Demolition of Washington School Building by Unified
School District - Not Urban Renewal Action
Demolition Costs
Phase III - 1980-1985
$ 10,000.00
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
Step 1- CRP Blocks 1, 16, 17, 18 - First Two Years of Phase III
Renewal Costs:
Acquisition costs for total clearance
Demolition costs for 3 residential structures
at $600 each
Moving of 5 new residential structures to new
sites at $1000 each
Demolition of 10 commercial and industrial struc-
tures at $1500 each
Total Acquisition, Demolition and Moving Costs
Less resale value of 5 unrehabilitated residen-
tial structures at $3187 each
Less resale value of 5.5 acres of land at $4000
per acre
Net Acquisition, Demolition and Moving Costs
Improvement Costs:
Replacing Iron Avenue Bridge of Smoky Hill River
with box, straightening channel of Smoky Hill
River to permit improvement of Iron Avenue and
Fourth Street Intersection
Widening north portion of Fourth Street between
Iron Avenue and Walnut Avenue at $28.25 per
lineal foot (200 feet)
Removal of paving, curb and gutter on Third Street
between Walnut Avenue and Smoky Hil.l River at
$2.50 per square yard (l122 square yards).
Total Improvement Costs
Total Acquisition, Demolition, Moving and
Improvement Costs
-210-
$266,570.00
1,800.00
5,000.00
15,000.00
$288,370.00
15,935.00
22,-000.00
$250,435.00
$170,000.00
5,650.00
2,805.00
$178,455.00
$428,890.00
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
II
I
I
I
Administrative Costs at 20%
Aggregate Renewal and Improvement Costs
Salina's Costs at 25%
Rehabilitation Costs:
Rehabilitation of 5 residential structures on new
sites at $4500 each
Administrative Costs for Rehabilitation at 20%
Total Rehabilitation Costs
Salina's Cost at. 25% of Administrative Costs
$ 85,778.00
$514,668.00
$128,667.00
$ 22,500.00
4,500.00
$ 27,000.00
$ 1,125.00
Step 2 - CRP Blocks 1,2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 19, 20, 21, 22, 23 -
Third, Fourth and Fifth Years of Phase III
Renewal Costs:
Acquisition for spot clearance of 3 residential
structures
Demolition cost for 3 residential structures at
,
$600 each
Acquisition costs for clearance of 1 residential
structure causing overcrowding
Moving of 1 residential structure to new site
Total Acquisition, Clearance and Moving Costs
Less resale value of 3 tracts cleared of resi-
dential structures at $500 each
Less resale value of 1 tract cleared of residence
. causing overcrowding
LeSs resale value of 1 unrehabilitated residence
Net Acquisition, Clearance and Moving Costs
Improvement Costs:
Total Acquisition, Clearance, Moving and
Improvement Costs
Administrative Costs at 20%
Aggregate Renewal Costs
Salina's Costs at 25% of Administrative Costs
Rehabilitation Costs:
Rehabilitation of 146 residential structures at
$3500 each
Rehabilitation of 1 residential structure on new
site
Rehabilitation of 3 commercial structures at
$5000 each
Administrative Costs of Rehabilitation at 20%
Total Rehabilitation Costs
-211-
$ 13,110.00
.1,800.00
4,094.00
1,000.00
$ 20,004.00
1,500.00
500.00
3,187.00
$ 14,817.00
0.00
$ 14,817.00
2,963.40
$ 17,780.40
$ 4,445.10
$511,000.00
4,500.00
15,000.00
106,100.00
$636,600.00
4,500.00
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
Salina's Costs at 25% of Administrative Costs
$ 26,525.00
Total Costs - Step 2
Salina's Costs
$654,380.40
$ 30,970.10
Phase IV - 1985-1990
Step 1 - CRP Blocks 34, 35, 36, 44, 45, 46,.47, 62, 63, 64, 65, 82,
83, 84, 85, 86, 87, 88, 89, 90, 91 - First, Second and
Third Years of Phase IV
Renewal Costs:
Acquisition costs for clearing 4 residential
structures
Demolition of 4 residential structures at $600
Acquisition costs for clearing 1 residential
structure causing overcrowding:
Moving of 1 residential structure to new site
Total Acquisition, Demolition and Moving Costs
Less resale value of 4 tracts of land cleared
of residential structures at $500 each
Less resale value of 1 tract of land cleared
of residence causing overcrowding
Less resale value of 1 unrehabilitated house on
.new site
Net Acquisition, Demolition and Moving Costs
Improvement Costs:
Total.Acquisition, Demolition and Moving Costs
Administrative Costs at 20%
Aggregate Renewal Costs
Salina's Costs at 25%
$ 24,.380"00
2,400.00
7,452.00
1,000.00
$ 35,232.00
2,000.00
250.00
3,187.00
$ 29,795.00
0.00
$ 29,795.00
5,959.00
$ 35,754.00
$ 8,938.50
Rehabilitation Costs:
Rehabilitation of 177 residential stru~tures at
$3500' each
Rehabilitation of 1 residential structure on
new site
Rehabilitation of 6 commercial structures at
$5000 each
Administrative Costs for Rehabilitation at 20%
Total Rehabilitation Costs
Salina's Costs at 25% of Administrative Costs
$619,500.00
30,000.00
130,800.00
. $784,800.00
$ 32,700.00
Total Costs - Step 1
Salina's Costs
$820,554.00
$ 41, 638 . 50
-212-
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
Step 2 - CRP Blocks 9, 10, 11, 12, 13, 14, 24, 25, 26, 27, 28, 29,
30, 31, 40, 41, 42, 43 - Third, Fourth and Fifth Years of
Phase IV
Renewal Costs:
Acquisition costs for spot clearance of 5 resi-
dential structures
Demolition of 5 residential structures at $600
Total Acquisition and Demolition Costs
Less resale value of 5 tracts of land cleared
of residential structures at $500 each
Net Acquisition and Demolition Costs
Administrative Costs at 20%
Aggregate Renewal Costs
Salina's Costs at 25%
$ 24,610.00
3,000.00
$ 27,610.00
2,500.00
$ 25,110.00
5,022.00
$ 30,132.00
$ 7,533.00
:1
Rehabilitation Costs:
Rehabilitation of 110 residential structures at
$3500 each
Administrative Costs of Rehabilitation at 20%
Total Rehabilitation Costs
Salina's Costs at 25% of Administrative Costs
$385,000.00
77,000.00
$462,000.00
$ 19,250.00
I
I
I
'I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
Total Costs - Phase IV
Salina's Costs
$492,132.00
$ 26,783.00
-213-
Total Costs - Phase I
Salina's Costs
$ 66,266.20
$ 56,916.20
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
COST ANALYSIS OF COMMUNITY RENEWAL ACTIVITIES
Neighborhood 14
Phase I - 1970-1975 - Expansion Centennial Park - CRP Blocks 2, 8,
9 - Non Urban Renewal Activity - First Two Years Phase I
Renewal Costs:
Acquisition of land not now owned by the city in
CRP Blocks 1 and 9
Removal of 5 residential structures on purchased
land. at $750 each
Removal of 22 residential structures on land owned
by city at $750 each .
Total Acquisition and Clearance Costs
Less resale value of 27 unrehabilitated residen-
tial structures at $2000 each
Net Acquisition and Clearance Costs
Administrative Costs at 20%
Total Acquisition and Clearance Costs
$ 73,416.00
3,750.00
16,500.00
$ 93,666.00
54,000.00
$ 39,666.00
7,933.20
$ 47,566.20
Park Development (With BOR Funds):
1 lighted ball diamond
1 combination tennis-basketball court
2 unlighted ball diamonds
3 picnic shelters at $900 each
Landscaping
Total Development Costs
Salina "s Costs
$ 5,000.00
5,000.00
4,000.00
2,700,.00
'2,000.00
$ 18,700.00
$ 9,350.00
-214-
-------------------
SALINA COMMUNITY RENEWAL COSTS BY YEAR
(Residential Neighborhoods)
Total Funds Federal Funds
Fiscal 1971:
One-third aggregate renewal. costs for Phase I,
Step 1 in Neighborhood 4
One-third cost for rehabilitation for Phase I,
Step 1 in Neighborhood 4
* Acquisition of old South Park School for park
development, Neighborhood 11
* One~half cost of expansion of Centennial Park,
Neighborhood 14
Total
Fiscal 1972:
I
tv
I-'
111
I
One-third aggregate renewal costs for Phase I,
Step 1 in Neighborhood 4
One-third rehabilitation costs for Phase I,
Step 1 in Neighborhood 4
Demolition of Washington School (Unified School
District Funds)
* One-half cost of expansion of Centennial Park,
Neighborhood 14
Total
Fiscal 1973:
One-third aggregate renewal costs for Phase I,
Step 1 in Neighborhood 4
* Non-Urban Renewal Activity (BOR Funds To Be Used)
$ 93,250.60$ 69,937.95 $
70,330.00 67,399.58
14,501.00 4,750.00
33,133.10 4,675.00
$ 211,214.70 $ 146,762.53 $
$
93,250.60 $
69,937.95 $
70,330.00
67,399.58
10,000.00
33,133.10
4,675.00
$ 206,713.70 $ 142,012.53 $
$
93,250.60 $
69,937.95 $
Local Funds
23,312.65
2,930.42
9,751.00
28,458.10
64,452.17
23,312.65
2,930.42
10,000.00
28,458.10
64,701.17
23,312.65
I
tv
I-'
Cl'\
I
One-third cost for rehabilitation for .Phase I,
Step 1 in Neighborho.od 4
One-half aggregate acquisition, demolition and
improvement costs, Phase I, Step 2A of Neigh-
borhood 4
One-half rehabilitation costs, Phase I, Step 2A,
Neighborhood 4
One-third rehabilitation costs of Phase I, Step
2B, Neighborhood 4
One-third renewal costs of Phase I, Step IB,
Neighborhood 7
One-third rehabilitation costs of Phase I, Step
1B, Neighborhood 7
Aggregate project costs for connection of Ash to
State Street, Neighborhood 7
Rehabilitation costs for houses moved from pro-
ject area, Neighborhood 7
One-third aggregate acquisition and improvement
costs of Phase I, Step 2B, Neighborhood 4
Total
Fiscal 1974
One-half aggregate acquisition, demolition and
improvement costs, Phase I, Step 2A, Neigh-
borhood 4
One-half rehabilitation costs of Phase I, Step
2A~ Neighborhood 4
One-third aggregate acquisition, improvement
costs of Phase I, Step 2B, Neighborhood 4
One-third rehabilitation costs, Phase I, Step
2B, Neighborhood 4
Total Funds
Federal Funds
Local Funds
2,930.41
30,280.10
3,004.50
7,876.40
4,001.10
12,916.67
50,088.60
2,250.00
2,940.60
$1,137,964.80 $ 998,363.77 $ 139,601.03
30,280.10
3,004.50
2,940.60
/
7,876.40
-------------------
$ 70,330.00 $ 67,399.59 $
121,121.40 90,841.30
72,108.00 69,103.50
189,033;60 181,157.20
16,004.40 12,003.30
310,000.00 297,083.33
200,354.40 150,265.80
54,000.00 51,750.00
11,762.40 8,821.80
$ 121,121.40 $ 90,841.30 $
72,108.00 69,103.50
11,762.40 8,821.80
189,033.60 181,157.20
-------------------
Total Funds
Federal Funds
Local Funds
One-half acquisition, demolition, moving and
improvement costs, Phase I, Step 3A, Neigh-
borhood 4
* One-half park development costs, Phase I, Step
3A, Neighborhood 4
One-half rehabilitation costs, Phase If Step 3A,
Neighborhood 4
Acquisition, demolition and moving costs of
Phase I, Step 3B, Neighborhood 4
Rehabllitation costs of Phase I, Step 3B,
Neighborhood 4 (1 year)
One-third aggregate renewal costs, Phase I,
Step IB, Neighborhood 7
One-third rehabilitation costs of Phase I, Step
1B, Neighborhood 7 (1 of 3 years)
$ 111,932040 $ 83,949.30 $
27,983.10
60,500000 30,250.00
30,250.00
93,740.40 89,834.55
3,905.85
9,648.ob 7,236.00
2,412.00
14,421.60 131820.70
600.90
16,004.40 12,003.30
4,001.10
310,000.00 297,083.33
12,916.67
I
N
I-'
-J
I
Total
$1,010,272.20 $ 884,100.98 $ 126,171.22
Fiscal 1975
One-third aggregate acquisition and improvement
costs, Phase I, Step 2B, Neighborhood 4
One-third rehabilitation costs of Phase I, Step
2B, Neighborhood 4
One-half Cj.cquisition, demolition, moving and
improvement cost, Phase I, Step 3A
* One-half park development costs, Phase I, Step
3A, Neighborhood 4
One~ha1f rehabilitation costs, Phase I, Step 3A,
Neighborhood 4
$ 11,762.40 $ 8,821.80 $
2,940.60
189,033.60 181,157.20
7,876.40
111,932.40 83,949.30
27,983.10
60,500.00 30,250.00
30,250.00
93,740.40 89,834.55
3,905.85
* BOR Funds To Be Used for Park Development
--"-----------------
One-half acquisition, demolition, moving and
improvement costs, Phase I, Step 3A, Neigh-
borhood 4
* One-half park development costs, Phase I, Step
3A, Neighborhood 4
One-half rehabilitation costs, Phase I, Step 3A,
Neighborhood 4
Acquisition, demolition and moving costs of
Phase I, Step 3B, Neighborhood 4
Rehabilitation costs of Phase I, Step 3B,
Neighborhood 4 (1 year)
One-third aggregate renewal costs, Phase I,
Step 1B, Neighborhood 7
One-third rehabilitation costs of Phase I, Step
1B, Neighborhood 7 (1 of 3 years)
I
tv
I-'
-....J
I
Total
Fiscal 1975
One-third aggregate acquisition and improvement
costs, Phase I, Step 2B, Neighborhood 4
One-third rehabilitation costs of Phase I, Step
2B, Neighborhood 4
One-half acquisition, demolition, moving and
improvement cost, Phase I, Step 3A
* One-half park development costs, Phase I, Step
3A, Neighborhood 4
One-half rehabilitation costs, Phase I, Step 3A,
Neighborhood "4
* BOR Funds To Be Used for Park Development
Total Funds
Federal Funds
Local Funds
$ 111,932.40 $ 83,949.30 $
27,983.10
60,500.00 30,250.00
30,250.00
93,740.40 89,834.55
3,905.85
9,648.00 7,236.00
2,412.00
14,421.60 13,820.70
600.90
16,004.40 12,003.30
4,001.10
310,000.00 297,083.33
12,916.67
$1,010,272.20 $ 884,100.98 $ 126,171.22
$ 11,762.40 $ 8,821.80 $ 2,940.60.
189,033.60 181,157.20 7,876.40
111,932.40 83,949.30 27,983.10
60,500.00 30,250.00 30,250.00
93,740.40 89,834.55 3,905.85
One-third aggregate renewal costs of Phase I,
Step IB, Neighborhood 7
One-third rehabilitation costs of Step IB,
Neighborhood 7
Total
Fiscal 1976
I
l\J
I-'
CD
I
One-half aggregate renewal costs for Phase II,
Step lA, Neighborhood 4
One-half rehabilitation costs of Phase II, Step
lA, Neighborhood 4
One-half aggregate renewal and improvement costs,
Phase II, Step IB, Neighborhood 4
One-half rehabilitation costs, Phase II, Step IB,
Neighborhood 4
One-half aggregate renewal costs, Phase II, Step
lC, Neighborhood 4
One-half rehabilitation costs, Phase II, Step
lC, Neighborhood 4
One-third aggregate renewal costs, Phase II,
Step 1, Neighborhood 7
One-third rehabilitation costs, Phase II, Step 1,
Neighborhood 7
One-half aggregate renewal costs, Phase II, Step
1, Neighborhood 9
One-half rehabilitation costs, Phase II, Step 1,
Neighborhood 9
Total Funds
Federal Funds
Local Funds
4,001.10
12,916.66
$ 792,973.20 $ 703,099.49 $ 89,873.71
19,973.19
3,186:95
17,636.70
2,~17.00
5,405.50
14,306.00
7,369.20
9,758.34
25,828.80
3,405.10
$1~113,014.96 $1,003,328.18 $ 109,686.78
-------------------
Total
$ 16,004.40 $ 12,003.30 $
310,000.00 297,083.34
$ 79,892.76 $ 59,919.57 $
76,486.80 73,299.85
70,546.80 52,910.10
67,608.00 64,791.00
21,622.20 16,216.70
343,344.00 329,038.00
29,476.80 22,107.60
239,000.00 229,241.66
103,315.20 77,486.40
81,722.4D 78,317.30
.-
-------------------
Total Funds
Federal Funds
Local Funds
Fiscal 1977
I
I\.)
I-'
~
I
One-half aggregate renewal costs for Phase II,
Step "lA, Neighborhood 4
One-half rehabilitation costs of Phase II, Step
lA, Neighborhood 4
One-half aggregate renewal and improvement
costs, Phase II, Step lB, Neighborhood 4
One-half rehabilitation costs, Phase II, Step
lB,Neighborhood 4
One-half aggregate renewal costs, Phase II,
Step lC, Neighborhood 4
One-half rehabilitation costs, Phase It, Step
lC, Neighborhood 4
One-third aggregate renewal costs, Phase II,
Step 1, Neighborhood 7
One-third rehabilitation costs, Phase II,
Step 1, Neighborhood 7
One-half aggregate renewal costs, Phase II,
Step 1, Neighborhood 9
One-half rehabilitation costs, Phase II, Step
1, Neighborhood 9
One-third aggregate renewal costs, Phase II,
Step 2, Neighborhood 9
One-third rehabilitation costs, Phase II,
Step 2, Neighborhood 9
Total
$ 79,892.76 $ 59,919.57 $ 19,973.19
76,486.80 73,299.85 3,186.95
70,546.80 52,910.10 17,636.70
67,608.00 64,791.00 2,817.00
21,622.20 16,216.70 5,405.50
343,344.00 329,038.00 14,306.00
29,476.80 22,107.60 7,369.20
239,000.00 229,241.67 9,758.33
103,315.20 77,486.40 25,828.80
81,722.40 78,317.30 3,405.10
14,353.60 10,765.20 3,588.40
118,818.40 113,867.63 4,950.77
$1,246,186.96 $1,127,961.02 $ 118,225.94
Fiscal 1978
One-half aggregate renewal costs, Phase II"
Step 2, Neighborhood 4
$ 187,014.00 $ 140,260.50 $
46,753.50
Total Funds Federal Funds Local Funds
One-half rehabilitation costs, Phase II, Step
2, Neighborhood 4 $ 253,195.20 $ 242,645.40 $ 10,549.80'
One-third aggregate renewal costs, Phase II,
Step 1, Neighborhood 7 29,476.80 22,107.60 7,369.20
One-third rehabilitation costs, Phase II, Step.
1, Neighborhood 7 239,000.00 229,241.67 9,758.33
One-third aggregate renewal costs, Phase II,
Step 2, Neighborhood 7 44,930.00 33,697.50 11,232.50
One-third rehabilitation costs, Phase II, Step
~ 2, Neighborhood 7 '" 605,000.00 579,691.33 25,308.67
One-third aggregate renewal costs, Phase II,
Step 2, Neighborhood 9 14,353.60 10,765.20 3,588.40
One-third rehabilitation costs, Phase II, Step
2, Neighborhood 9 118,818.40 113,867.63 4,950.77
One-third aggregate renewal costs, Phase II,
I Step 3, Neighborhood 9 18,494.40 13,870.80 4,623.60
I\J One-third rehabilitation costs, Phase II, Step
N
0 3, Neighborhood 9 240,541. 60 230,519.03 10,022.57
I
Total $1,750,824.00 $1,616,666.66 $ 134,157.34
Fiscal 1979
One-half aggregate renewal costs, Phase II,
Step 2, Neighborhood 4 $ 187,014.00 $ 140,260.50 $ 46,753.50
One-half rehabilitation costs, Phase II, Step
2, Neighborhood 4 253,195.20 242,645.40 10,549.80
One-half aggregate renewal costs, Phase II,
Step 3, Neighborhood 4 43,498.80 32,624.10 10,874.70
On~-ha1f rehabilitation costs, Phase II, Step
3, Neighborhood 4 319,200.00 305,900.00 13,300.00
One-third aggregate renewal costs, Phase II,
Step 2, Neighborhood 7 44,930.00 33,697.50 11,232.50
-------------------
-------------------
Total Funds
Federal Funds
Local Funds
One-third rehabilitation costs, Phase II, Step
2, Neighborhood 7 $ 605,000.00 $ 579,691.33 $ 25,308.67
One-third aggregate renewal costs, Phase II,
Step 2, Neighborhood 9 14,353.60 10,765.20 3,588.40
One-third rehabilitation costs, Phase II,
Step 2, Neighborhood 9 118,818.40 113,867.64 4,950.76
One-third aggregate renewal costs, Phase II,
Step 3, Neighborhood 9 18,494.40 13,870.80 4,623.60
One-third rehabilitation costs, Phase II, Step
3, Neighborhood 9 240,541. 60 230,519.03 10,022.57
Total $1,845,046.00 $1,703,841.50 $ 141,204.50
Fiscal 1980
I One-half aggregate renewal costs, Phase II,
N
N Step }, Neighborhood 4 $ 43,498.80 $ 32,624.10 $ 10,874.70
~
I One-half rehabilitation costs, Phase II, Step
3, Neighborhood 4 319,200.00 305,900.00 13,300.00
One-third aggregate renewal costs, Phase II,
Step 2, Neighborhood 7 44,930.00 33,697.50 11,232.50
One-third rehabilitation costs, Phase II, Step
2, Neighborhood 7 605,000.00 579,691.33 25,308.67
One-third aggregate renewal costs, Phase II,
Step 3, Neighborhood 9 18,494.40 13,870.80 4,623.60
One-third rehabilitation costs, Phase II, Step
3, Neighborhood 9 240,541.60 230,519.04 10,022.56
Total $1,271,664.80 $1,196,302.77 $ 75,362.03
Fiscal 1981
Aggregate project costs, Phase III, Neighborhood 4 $ 192,264.00 $ 144,198.00 $ 48,066.00
Rehabilitation costs, Phase lIT, Neighborhood 4 9,614.40 9,213.80 400.60
Total Funds
Federal Funds
Local Funds
One-half agg~egate project Gosts, Phase III,
Step 1, Neighborhood 7
* One-half development costs park, Phase III,
Step 1, Neighborhood 7
One-half rehabilitation costs, Phase III, Step
1, Neighborhood 7
One-half aggregate renewal costs, Phase III,
Step 1, Neighborhood 11
One~half rehabilitation costs, Phase III, Step
1, Neighborhood 11
One-half aggregate renewal and improvement
costs of Phase III, Step 1, Neighborhood 12
One-half rehabilitation costs, Phase III, Step
l~ Neighborhood 12
$ 98,949.60 $ 74,212.12 $ 24,737.48
6,250.00 1,562.50 4,687.50
48,600.00 46,575.00 2,025.00
72,012.00 54,009.00 18,003.00
445,800.00 427,225.00 18,575.00
257,334.00 193,000.50 64,333.50
13;500.00 12,937.50 562.50
$1,144,324.00 $ 962,933.42 $ 181,39,0.58
I
N
N
N.
I
Total
Fiscal 1982
* One-half development costs of park, Phase III,
$tep 1, Neighborhood 7
One-half aggregate project costs, Phase III,
Step 1, Neighborhood 7
One-half ~ehabilitation costs, Phase III, Step
1, Neighborhood 7
One-half aggregate renewal costs, Phase III,
Step 1, Neighborhood 11
One-half rehabilitation costs, Phase III, Step
1, Neighborhood 11
One-half renewal and improvement costs, Phase
III, Step 1, Neighborhood 12
$ 6,250.00 $ 1,562.50 $ 4,687.50
98,949.60 74,212.13 24,737.47
48,600.00 46,575.00 2,025.00
.72,012.00 54,009.00 18,003.00
445,800.00 427,225.00 18,575.00
257,334.00 193,000.50 64,333.50
* BOR Funds To Be Used for Park Development
-------------------
-------------------
Total Funds Federal Funds Local Funds
Fiscal 1985
One-third aggregate renewal costs, Phase III,
Step 2, Neighborhood II, $ 12,672.00 $ 9 , 50 4 .,00 $ 3,168.00
One-third rehabilitation costs, Phase III, Step
2, Neighborhood, 11 '179,400.00 171,925.00 7,475.00
One-third'aggregate renewal costs, Phase III,
Step 2, 'Neighborhood 12 5,926.80 4,445.10 1,481.70
One-third rehabilitation costs, Phase III, Step
2, Neighborhood 12 212,200.00 203,358.32 8,841.66
Total $ 410,198.80 $ 389,232.44 $ 20,966.36
Fiscal 1986
I
tv One-third aggregate renewal costs, Phase IV,
tv
01:>0 Step 1, Neighborhood 12 $ 11,918.00 $ 8,938.50 $ 2,979.50
I
One-third rehabilitation costs, Phase IV,
Step,l, Neighborhood 12 261,600.00 250,700.00 10,900.00
Total $ 273,518.00 $ '259,638.50 $ 13,879.50
Fiscal 1987
One-third aggregate renewal costs, Phase IV,
Step 1, Neighborhood 12 $ 11,918.00 $ 8,938.50 $ 2,979.50
One-third rehabilitation costs, Phase IV,
Step 1, Neighborhood 12 261,600.00 2 50 , 7 00 . 0 0 10,900.00
Total $ 273,518.00 $ 259,638.50 $ 13,879.50
-------------------
-------
-
-
--------
- --
I
IV
IV
0"\
I
SUMMARY OF SALINA COMMUNITY RENEWAL COSTS BY YEAR
All Residential Neighborhoods
(Estimate Based upon 1969 Values)
_ Fiscal Year
Total
Project Funds
Federal Funds
In Rehabilitation
Loans & Grants
Other Federal
Funds
Local Funds
1971
1972
1973
1974
1975
1976
1977
1978
1979-
1980
1981
1982
1983
1984
1985
1986
1987
1988
1989
1990
$ 211,214.70
206,713.70
1,137,964.80
1,010,272.20
792,973.20
1,113,014.96
1,246,186.96
1,750,824.00
1,845,046.00
1,271,664.80
1,144,324.00
942,445.60
410,198.80
410,198.80 _
410,198.80
273,518.00
273,518.00
437,562.00
164,044.00
164,044.00
$ 58,608.34
58,608.33
579,559.67
566,086.33
493,978.33
673,-467.67
772,483.01
1;213,796.00
1,280,629.33
970,617.99
431,262.00
423,250.00
326,333.34
326,333.33
326,333.33
218,000.00
218,000.00
346,333.34
128,333.33
128,333.33
$ 88,154.19
83,404.20
418,804.10
318,014.65
209,121.16
329,860.51
355,478.01
402,870.66
423,212.17
225,684.78
531,671.42
386,271.63
62,899.09
62,899.10
62,899.11
41,638.50
41,638.50
68,421.-49
26,783.00
26,783.01
$ 64,452.17
64,701.17
139,601.03
126,171.22
89,873.71
109,686.78
118,225.94
134,157.34
141,204.50
75,362.03
181,390.58
132,923.97
20,966.37
20,966.37
20,966.36
13,879.50
13 , 8 79 . 50
22,807.17
8,927.67
8,927.66
TOTALS
$15,215,927.32
$9,540,347.00
$4,166,509.28
$1,509,071.04
-------------------
<:::
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
..1
J
I
I
I
I
I
I
COST ANALYSIS FOR NEIGHBORHOOD 8
1971-72 -- Clearance of land for Parking Lot 6 in Block 23:
Acquisition costs (now City-owned)
Demolition Costs
Administrative Costs
Total Acquisition and Clearance Costs
Salina's Costs at 25%
o
$ 20,000.00
4,000.00
$ 24,000.00
$ 6,000.00
1971-72 -- New building, southeast corner Santa Fe & Ash, Block 24:
Cost of acquisition of new building site
Clearance costs
Administrative costs at 20%
Total acquisition and clearance costs
Less resale value of land
Net administrative and clearance costs
Salina's Costs at 25%
Rehabilitation Of 11 commercial structures.in
Block 24
Administrative costs of rehabilitation at 20%
Total rehabilitation Costs
Salina's Costs at 25% Administrative Costs
Total Project Costs
Salina's Costs
$ 91,700.00
30,000.00
24,340.00
$146,040.00
36,000.00
$110,040.00
$ 27,510.00
$220,000.00
44,000.00
$264,000.00
$ 11,000.00
$374,040.00
$ 38,510.00
1971-72 -- New building, southwest corner Santa Fe & Ash, Block 23:
Acquisition costs for new building site
Clearance costs
Administrative costs at 20%
Total acquisition and demolition costs
Less resale of land
Net acquisition and clearance costs
Salina's Costs at 25%
Rehabilitation of 12 commercial structures in
Block 23
Administrative costs of rehabilitation at 20%
Total rehabilitation costs
Salina's costs at 25% of administrative costs
Total Project Costs
Salina's Costs.
-227-
$183,700.00
40,000.00
44,740.00
$268,440.00
75,000.00
$193,440.00
$48,360.00
$240,000.00
48,000.00
$288,000.00
$ 12,000.00
$481,440.00
$ 60,360.00
$158,900.00
20,000.00
35,780.00
$214,680.00
30,000.00
$184,680.00
$ 46,170.00
I
I
I;
I
I
I
I
I
I
,I
I
I
I,
I
I
I
'I
I
I
1971-72 -- Clearance for establishing Parking Lot 8 in Block 24:
Acquisition costs for parking lot site
Clearance costs
Administrative costs at 20%
Total acquisition and clearance costs
Less resale value of land
Net acquisition costs
Salina's Costs at 25%
1973~74 -- Improvements in, core area:
Improved street lighting on Ash & Irani 5th
& 7th Streets
Traffic signals at 8 intersections at $64
Extension of sidewalks into street area on
Santa Fe to cut off through traffic and
create parking
Construction of entrances
Administrative costs for improvements at 20%
Total improvement costs
Salina's Costs at 25%
$ 40,000.00
64,000.00
i6,200.00
60,200.00
36,080.00
$216,480.00
$ 54,120.00
1973-74 -- Clearance for business building at southeast corner of
Santa Fe and Iron and rehabilitation in Block 29:
Acquisition costs for business building site
Demolition costs
Administrative costs at 20%
\
Total acquisition and clearance costs
Less resale value of land
Net acqui~ition and clearance costs
Salina's Costs at 25%
Rehab\litation of 15 buildings in Block 29
Administrative costs of rehabilitation at 20%
Total rehabilitation costs
Salina's costs at 25% administrative costs
Total Project Costs
Salina's Costs
1973-74 -- Rehabilitation of 16 commercial structures
in Block 28
Administrative costs of rehabilitation at 20%
Total rehabilitation costs
Salina's costs at 25% of administrative costs
-228-
$,18 3 , 700 . 00
40,GOO.00
44,740.00
$268,440.00
108,000.00
$160,440.00
$40,110.00
$300,000.00
60,000.00
$360,000.00
$ 15,000.00
$520,440.00
$ 55,110.00
$320,000.,00
64,000.00
$384,000.00
$ 16,000.00
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
1974 -- Clearance of 2 residential structures in Block 38 and re-
development as commercial or apartment. Rehabilitation of
3 residences and 1 apartment house:
Acquisition costs
Clearance costs
Administrative costs at 20%
Total acquisition and clearance costs
Less resale value of land
Net acquisition and clearance costs
Salina's costs at 25%
Rehabilitation of 3 residential structures
Rehabilitation of apartment house
Administrative costs at 20%
Total rehabilitation costs
Salina's Costs at 25%
Total Project Costs
Salina's Costs
1975 -- Rehabilitation of Block 21:
1975
'\
Rehabilitation of 4 commercial structures
Administrative costs at 20%
Total project costs
Salina's Costs at 25% administrative costs
$ 41,998.00
1,200.00
8,639.60
$ 51,837.60
10,000.00
$ 41,837.60
$ 10,459.40
$ 10,500.00
20,000.00
6,100.00
$ 36,600.00
$ 1,525.00
$ 78,437.60
$ 11,984.40
$ 40,000.00
8,000.00
$ 48,000.00
$ 2,000.00
Acquisition of site at northeast corner of Santa Fe and
Ash for new bus station, Block 19:
Acquisition costs
Clearance costs
Administrative costs at 20%
Tot~l acquisition and clearance costs
Less resale value of land
Net project costs
Salina's Costs at 25%
$ 50,100.00
20,000.00
14,020.00
$ 84,120.00
40,000.00
$ 44,120.00
$ 11,030.00
1975-76 -- Rehabilitation of 12 commercial structures in Block 22:
Rehabilitation costs
Administrative costs at 20%
Total rehabilitation costs
Salina's Costs at 25% of administrative costs
-229-
$240,000.00
48,000.00
$288,000.00
$ 12,000.00
1975-76 -- Rehabilitation and clearance in Block 27:
Acquisition of 2 apartment houses
Acquisition of 1 commercial building
Clearance costs
Administrative costs at 20%
Total acquisition and clearance costs
Less resale value of land,
Net acquisition and clearance costs
Salina's Costs at 25%
Rehabilitation of 6 commercial structures
Administrative costs of rehabilitation at 20%
Total rehabilitation costs
Salina's Costs at 25% of Administrative
Total Project Costs
Salina's Costs
$ 29,256.00
28,428.00
2,200.00
11,976.80
$ 71,860.80
5,000.00
$ 66,860.80
$ 16,715.20
I
I
I
.1
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
$120,000.00
24,000.00
$144,000.00
$ 6,000.00
$210,860.80
$ 22,715.20
1976
Clearance of land for new commercial building, northwest
corner of Ash and Santa Fe, Block 18:'
Acquisition costs
Clearance costs
Administrative costs at 20%
Total acquisition and clearance costs
Less resale value of land
Net acquisition and clearance costs
Salina's Cas ts
$ 56,200.00
10,000.00
13,240.00
$ 79,440.00
80,000.00.
$ 0.00
$ 0.00
1976
Development of Parking Lot Son southwest corner of Iron
and Fifth:
Acquisition costs at 3-1/3 assessed value,
plus 15%
Clearance costs
Administrative costs at 20%
Total acquisition and clearance costs
Less resale value of land
Net acquisition and clearance cost~
Salina's Costs at 25%
$ 91,000.00
15,000.00
21,200.00
$127,200.00
36,000.00
$ 91,200.00
$ 22,800.00
1977-78 -- Rehabilitation of 25 commercial structures, Block 33,:
Rehabilitation costs, 25 commercial structures
Administrative costs at 20%
Total rehabilitation costs
Salina's Costs at 25% administrative costs
-230-
$500,000.00
100,000.00
$600,000.00
$ 25,000.00
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
'I
I
I
I
I
1977-78 -- Rehabilitation of 18 commercial structures in Block 34:
Rehabilitation of 17 commercial structures
Rehabilitation of 1 commercial structure
Administrative costs at 20%
Total rehabilitation costs
Salina's Costs at 25% administrative costs
$340,000.00
10,000.00
70,000.00
$420,000.00
$ 14,000.00
1979 -- Clearance of Block 31 for expansion of junior high site:
Acquisition of 26 residential properties and
1 church .'
Clearance costs for residences
Administrative costs at 20%
Total acquisition and clearance costs
Less resale value of land
Net acquisition and clearance costs
Salina's Costs at 25%
$405,958.00
15,600.00
84,311.60
$505,869.60
75,000.00
$430,869.60
$107,717.40
1980 -- Improvement of 5th, 7th, Ash 'and Iron to conform to mall:
Parking, street entrances, islands
Administrative costs at 20%
Total costs
Salina's Costs at 25%
$120,000.00
24,000.00
$144,000.00
$ 36,000.00
1980 -- Clearance and rehabilitation on Block 39:
Acquisition costs of 2 residential and 1
combination residential and commercial
structures
Clearance costs
Administrative costs at 20%
Total acquisition and clearance costs
Less resale value of land
Net acquisition and clearance costs
Salina's Costs at 25%
$ 58,374.00
3,200.00
12,314.80
$ .73,888.80
11,250.00
$ 62,638.80
$ 15,659.70
-231-
Rehabiiitation of 3 commercial structures
Rehabilitation of 2 residential structures
Administrative costs at 20%
Total rehabilitation costs
Salina's Costs at 25% administrative costs
Total Project Costs
Salina's Costs
$ 45,000.00
7,000.00
10,400.00
$62,400.00
$ 2 , 60 0 . ,0 0
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I~
I
I
I
$125,038.80
$ 18,259.70
1980
Development of Parking Lot 4, northwest corner of 5th &
Walnut:
Acquisition costs of parking lot site
Clearance costs
Administrative costs at 20%
Total acquisition and clearance costs
Less resale value of land
Net acquisition and clearance costs
Salina's Costs at 25%
$ 76,300.00
30,000.00
21,260.00
$127,560.00
50,000.00
$ 77,560.00
$ 19,390.00
1981-82 -- Clearance of portion of block facing Iron Avenue for
new commercial building and rehabilitation of remainder
of structures in Block 30:
Acquisition costs of site for new building
Clearance costs
Administrative costs at 20%
Total acquisition and clearance costs
Less resale value of land
Net acquisition and clearance costs
Salina's Costs at 25%
Rehabilitation of remaining commercial and
industrial structures in Block 30
Administrative costs at 20%
Total rehabilitation costs
Salina's Costs at 25% administrative costs
Total Project Costs
Salina's Costs
$ 82,600.00
15,000.00
19,520.00
$117,120.00
45,000.00
$ 72,120.00
'$ 18,030.00
$180,000.00
36,000.00
$216,000.00
$ 9,000.00
$288,120.00
$ 27,030.00
1981-82 -- Clearance of the entire B1ock'35 and redevelopment as
high-rise apartment complex and commercial:
Acquisition costs for 19 residential structures,
8 commercial structures & 5 industrial
Clearance of 19 residential structures
-232-
$399,740.00
11,400.00
I
I
I
~I
I
tl
I
I
I
I
I
'I
I
;'1
I
I
:1
I
I
1983
Clearance of 13 commercial and industrial
Administrative costs at 20%
Total acquisition and clearance costs
Less resale value of land
Net acquisition and clearance costs
Salina's Costs at 25%
$ 26,000.00
87,428.00
$524,568.00
125,000.00
$399,568.00
$ 99,892.00
Rehabilitation and clearance of residential structures in
Block 40:
Acquisition costs for-clearance of 1 residen-
tial structure
Clearance costs
Administrative costs at 20%
Total acquisition and clearance costs
Less resale value of the land
Net project costs
Salina's Costs at 25%
Rehabilitation of 11 residential structures
Administrative costs for rehabilitation at 20%
Total rehabilitation costs
Salina's Costs at 25% administrative costs
Total Project Costs
Salina's Costs at 25%
$ 4,232.00
600.00
966.40
$ 5,798.40
1,000.00
$ 4,798.40
$ 1,199.60
$ 38,500.00
7,700.00
$ 46,200.00
$ 1,925.00
$ 50,998.40
-$ 3,124.60
1983-84 -- Development of full mall condition on Santa F.e from
Iron to Ash (See cost estimates.) $556,880.00
Salina's Costs at 25%
$139,220.00
1984 -- Rehabilitation of 4 residential structures in Block 37:
1984
Rehabilitation of 4 residential structures
Administrative costs at 20%
Total rehabilitation costs
Salina's Costs at 25% of administrative costs
.. .
$ 14,000.00
2,800.00
$ 16,800.00
$ 700.00
Development of Parking Lot 9 on southeast corner of Ash
and 7th Streets:
Acquisition costs for parking lot site
Clearance costs
Administrative costs at 20%
Total acquisition and clearance costs
Less resale value of land
Net acquisition and clearance costs
Salina's Costs at 25%
-233-
$136,100.00
20,000.00
31,220.00
$187,320.00
50,000.00
$137,320.00
$ 34,330.00
Total Project Costs
Salina's Costs
$118,872.80
$ 27,218.20
I
I
I
10
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
1985-86 -~ ~learance and rehabiliation of the remainder of Block 18:
Acquisition costs of 1 residential structure
Clearance costs
Acquisition costs of 5 commercial structures
Clearance costs of 5 commercial structures
Administrative costs at 20%
Total acquisition and clearance costs
$ 15,226.00
600.00
73,876.00
10,000.00
19,940.40
$119,642.40
Less resale value of land
Net acquisition and clearance 'costs
Salina's Costs at 25%
$ 15,000.00
$104,642.40
$ 26,160.60
Rehabilitation of 13 commercial structures
Administrative costs for rehabilitation at 20%
Total rehabilitation costs
Salina's Costs at 25% administrative costs
$130,000.00
26,000.00
$156,000.00
$ 6,500.00
Total Project Costs
Salina' seas ts
$260,642.40
$ 32,f)60.60
1985-86 -- Clearance of all residential structures, and dilapidated
commercial and industrial structures; rehabilitation of
other structures on Blocks 11 and 12. Redevelopment as
commercial or industrial:
Acquisition of 20 residential'structures
Acquisition of old church building
Acquisition of 4 industrial buildings
Clearance of 20 residential structures
Administrative costs at 20%
Total acquisition and clearance costs
Less resale value of land
Net acquisition and clearance costs
Salina's Costs at 25~
$126,638.00
9,6GO.00
54,096.00
12,000.00
40,478.80
$242,872.80
136,000.00
$106,872.BO
$ 26,718.20
Rehabilitation of 2 industrial and
commercial structures
Administrative costs of rehabilitation at 20%
Total rehabilitation costs
Salina's Costs at 25% of administrative
$ 10,000.00
2,000.00
$12,000.00
$ 500.00.
-234....
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
1987-88 -- Total clearance of Blocks 19 and 20 as site for multi-
purpose convention and sports complex:
Acquisition costs
Clearance costs
Administrative costs at 20%
Total acquisition and clearance costs
Less resale value of land
Net acquisition and clearance costs
Salina's Costs at 25%
-235-
$673,400.00
125,000.00
159,680.00
$958,080.00
280,000.00
$678,080.00
$169,520.00
SALINA COMMUNITY RENEWAL COSTS BY YEAR FOR CBD (NEIGHBORHOOD 8)
-_.._-----------
. -----
-------------------
Fiscal Year
1974
One-half renewal costs for new building
site in Block 29
One-half rehabilitation costs, Block 29
One-half costs of street improvements
and lighting in core area
Full cost of renewal in Block 38
Full cost of rehabilitation in Block 38
One-half rehabilitation costs, Block 28
I
N
W
..,J
I
1975
Full cost of rehabilitation, Block 21
Full renewal costs for new bus station,.
Block 19
One-half costs of rehabilitation, Block 22
Full costs of renewal in Block 27
One-half costs of rehabilitation, Block 27
1976
One-half costs of rehabilitation, Block 22
One-half rehabilitation co~ts, Block 27
Full renewal costs of Parking LotS site
in Block 29
1977
One-half rehabilitation costs, Block 33
One-half rehabilitation costs, Block 34
1978
One-half rehabilitation costs, Block 33
One-half rehabilitation costs, Block 34
Total Funds
$ 80,220.00
180,000.00
108,240.00
41,837.60
36,600.00
192.,000.00
$638,897.60
$ 48,000.00
44,120.00
144,000.00
66,860.80
>72,000.00
$374,980.80
$144,000.00
72,000.00
91,200.00
$307,200.00
$300,000.00
210,000.00
$510,000.00
$300,000.00
210,000.00
$510,000.00
Federal Funds
$ 60,165.00
172,500.00
81,180.00
31,378.20
35,075.00
176,000.00
$556,298.20
$ 46,000.00
33,090.00
138,000.00
50,145.60
69,000.00
$336,235.60
$138,000.00
69,000.00
68,400.00
$275,400.00
$287,500.00
203,000.00
$490,500.00
$287,500.00
203,000.00
$490,500.00
Local Funds
$ 20,055.00
7,500.00
27,060.00
10,459.40
1,525.00
16,000.00
$ 82,599.40
$ 2,000.00
11,030.00
6,000.00
16,715.20
3,000.00
$ 38,745.20
$ 6,000.00
3,000.00
22,800.00
$ 31,800.00
$ 12,500.00
7,000.00
$ 19,500.00
$ 12,500.00
7,000.00
$ 19,500.00
I
N
LV
CO
I'
Fiscal Year
1979
Full renewal costs for expansion of
junior high site, Block 31
1980
Full renewal costs for Block 39
Full rehabilitation costs, Block 39
Full renewal costs for Parking Lot 4
site, Block 29
Full costs of improving 5th, 7th, Ash
and Iron to conform to mall
1982
One-half renewal costs for new building
site, Block 30
One-half rehabilitation costs, Block 30
One-half renewal costs for Block 35
1983
One-half development costs for mall on
Santa'Fe
Full renewal costs in Block 40
Full rehabilitation costs in Block 40
Total Funds
$430,869.60
$ 62,638.80
62~400.00
77,560.00
144,000.00
$346,598.80
$ 36,060.00
108,000.00
199,784.00
$343,844.00
$ 36,060.00
108,000.00
199,784.00
$343,844.00
$278,440.00
4,798.40
46,200.00
$329,438.40
Federal Funds
$323,152.20
$ 46,979.10
59,800.00
58,170.00
10 8,00 0 . 00
$272,949.10
$ 27,045.00
103,500.00
149,838.00
$280,383.00
$ 27,045.00
103,500.00
149,838.00
$280,383.00
$208,830.00
3,598.80
44,275.00
$256,703.80
Local Funds
$107,717.40
$ 15, 659 . 70.
2,600.00
19,390.00
36,000.00
$ 73,649.70
$ 9,015.00
4,500.00
49,946.00
$ 63,461.00
$ 9 , 0 15 .00
4,500.00
49,946.00
$ 63,46.1.-00
$ 69,610.00
1,199.60
1,925.00
$ 72,734.60
-----------.--------
-------------------
"Fiscal Year
1984
One-half development costs for mall on
Santa Fe
Full costs of rehabilitation of resi-
denc.es in Block 37
Full renewal costs for Parking Lot 9
site, Block 23
1987
One-half renewal costs for multi-
purpose building site
"......
1988
One-half renewal costs for multi-
purpose building .site
Total Funds
$278,440.00
16 ,.80 0 . 0 9
137,320.00,
$432,560.00
$339,040.00
$339,040.00
Federal Funds
$208,830.00
16,100..00
102,990.00
$327,920.00
$254,280.00
$254,280.00
Local Funds
$ 69,610.00
700.00
34,330.00
$104,640.00
$ 84,760.00
$ 84,760.00
I
N
~
o
I
Fiscal Year
Total Funds Federal Funds Local Funds
1989
Full renewa~ cost for developing
Parking Lot 7 .
$ 66,040.00 $ 49,530.00 $ 16,510.00
TOTAL COSTS, NEIGHBORHOOD 8
$7,316,888.40 $6,171,116.30 $1,145,372.10
-------------------
-------------------
SUMMARY OF SALINA COMMUNITY RENEWAL COSTS BY YEAR
NEIGHBORHOOD 8
Tota~ Project
Year Funds
1971 $ 544,080.00
1972 520,080.00
1973 560,460.00
1974 638,897.60
1975 374,980.80
I 1976 307,200.00
IV 1977 510,000.00
~
I-' 1978 .510,000.00
I
1979 430,869.60
1980 346,598.80
1981 343,844.00
],.982 343,844.00
1983 329,438.40
1984 432,560.00
1985 189,757.60
1986 189,757.60
1987 339,040.00
1988 339,040.00
1989 66,040.00
1990
TOTALS '$7,3:1.6,488.40
(Estimate Based Upon 1969 Values)
Federal Funds in
Rehabilitation Grants
or Loans
Other Federal
Funds
$ 230,000.00
230,000.00
310,000.00
340,500.00
220,000.00
180,000.00
425,000.00
425,000.00
0.00
45,000.00
90,000.00
90,000.00
38,500.00
14,000.00
75,000.00
75,000.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
$ 235,560.00
217,560.00
179,845.00
215,798.20
116,235.60
95,400.00
65,500:00
65,500.00
323,152.20
227,949.10
190,383.00
190,383.00
218,203.80
313,920.00
84,818.20
84,818.20
254,280.00
254,280.00
49,530.00
$2,788.000.00
$3,383,116.30
Local Funds
$ 78,520.00
72,520.00
70,615.00
82,599.40
38,745.20
31,800.00
19,500.00
19,500.00
1 07 , 7 1 7 . 4 0
73,649.70
63,461. 00
63,461.00
72,734.60
104,640.00
29,939.40
29,939.40
84,760.00
84,760.00
16,510.00
$1/145,372.10
SUMMARY OF SALINA COMMUNITY RENEWAL COSTS BY YEAR
(All Neighborhoods)
Federal Funds in
Total Project Rehabilitation Grants Other Federal
Year. Funds and Loans Funds Local Funds
1971 $ 755,294.70 $ 288,608.34 $ 323;714.19 $ 142,972.17
1972 726,793.70 288,608.33 300,964.20 137,221.17
1973 li698,424.80 889,559.67 598,649.10 210,216.03
1974 1,649,169.80 906, 58 6 . 3 3 533,812.85 208,770.62
1975 1.,167,954.00 713,978.33 325,356.76 128,618.91
1976 1,420,214.96 853,467.67 425,260.51 141,486.78
I 1977 1,756,186.96 1,197,483.01 420,978.01 137,725.94
tv 1978 2,260,824.00 1,638,796.00 468,370.66 153,657.34
.~
tv 1979 2,275,915~60 1,280,629.33 746,364.37 248,921.90
I
1980 1,618,263.60 1,015,617.99 453,633.88 149,011.73
1981 1,488,168.00 521,26-2.00 722,054.42 244,851. 58
1982 1,286,289.60 513,250.00 576,654.63 196,384.97
1983 739,637.20 364,833.34 281,102.89 93,70.0.97
1984 842,758.80 340,333.33 376,819.10 125,606.37
1985 599,956.40 401,333.33 147,717.31 50,905.76
1986 463,275.60 293,000.00 126,456.70 43,818.90
1987 612,558.00 218,000.00 295,918.50 98,639.50
1988 776,602.00 346,333.34 322,701.49 107,567.17
1989 230,084.00 128,333.33 76,313.00 25,437.67
1990 164,044.00 128,333.33 26,783.01 8,927.66
TOTALS $22,532,415.72 $12,328,347.00 $7,549,625.58 $2,654,443.14
.'r.;.,
- - .- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
A P P'E N D I X
COMMUNITY RENEWAL PROGRAM
SALIN~, KANSAS
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
PART 1: MINIMUM STANDARDS AND CONTROLS
FOR REHABILITATION
SECTION I.
INTRODUCTION
These Standards and Controls are adopted pursuant to and as a
part of the Urban Renewal Plan for the City of Salina, Urban Re-
newal Project Kan. R-53, and within the project areas are intended
to promote improvements complementary to new construction in non-
residential areas, and in residential areas to be applied to deter-
iorating neighborhoods, the aim is not necessarily the creation of
neighborhoods that compare well in design and construction with new
housing developments. Rehabilitation standards seek primarily to
rejuvenate the life span of these deteriorating homes, thereby
giving a neighborhood an added 15 to 25 years of economic life.
SECTION II. GENERAL OBJECTIVES
Buildings and properties within the Urban Renewal Area, regard-
less of date of construction, shall be improved to and maintained
at a level to be prescribed by the standards set out below in
order to assure the public health, safety and welfare.
The standards set out below are minimum requirements. They
should not be construed as being meant to prohibit or discourage
construction, reconstruction, conversion, alteration, addition or
repair that result in performance superior to that to be attained
by the observance of these standards.
If the standards set out below shall be in conflict with any
applicable code, ordinance, or other legislation now in existence,
the applicable requirement shall be the stricter of the two. Any
building or housing requirements instituted by the City of Salina
are not limited or revised by these Urban Renewal Rehabilitation
Standards.
These standards represent the minimum level of housing which
the Urban Renewal Agency of Salina considers essential for health,
safety and decent living. Other items are included which, in
addition to expressing the normal minimum standard, permit excep-
tionswhere local conditions justify. .
In addition to providing specific minimum rehabilitation stan-
dards, these standards also are designed to furnish general guide-
lines for requirements which meet local conditions in the Urban
-243-
Renewal Area. Within the outlined objectives herein, ,the Urban
Renewal Agency of Salina, ,Kansas shall exercise and reserve the
right as a public agency to interpret the intention of these stan-
dards in special-cases arising from their application.
SECTION III. GENERAL STANDARDS AND GOALS
Removal of Substandard Buildings: Substandard buildings not
to be rehabilitated, as determined by the Urban Renewal Agency of
Salina, shall be removed and replaced with standard buildings
as herein ~pecified or ~he site shall be cleared and brought to
a satisfactory level through grading and filling of basements
and natural depressions to assure thorough drainage and eliminate
all safety hazards.
Rehabilitation of Structures: Structures that are not acquired
and/or removed ~nder the Urban Renewal Plan shall be remodeled,
rebuilt,' altered, or enlarged where needed so that they consist
entirely of one or more standard structures conforming to these
standards. The Urban Renewal Board shall serve as a Board of
Appeals.
Compliance with Laws and Ordinances: All uses of land and
construction, reconstruction and remodeling of buildings shall
conform with the applicable laws, ordinances, and regulations of
the City of Salina and the State of Kansas and with the officially
adopted Urban Renewal Plan for the City of Salina.
Moving of Buildings: Buildings may be moved into the project
area and may be moved from one location to another location within
the project area only if, when the move has been completed, said
building conforms in all respects to the requirements of these
Standards.
Maintenance :- Structures and Grounds: Property is to be main-
tained in a clean, sanitary and sightly manner at all times. Weeds
are to be cut. .Debris and building materials are not to be stored
or piled on the'premises except during a period of building and
cons truction. '
Urban Renewal Plan: These standards and stipulations are an
integral part of the Urban Renewal Plan for the City of ~alina,
approved by'the Urban" Renewal Agency qf the City of Sali~a, Kansas
on the day of , 19____, in accordance with
the r'equirements of the State of Kansas and which Plan was recorded
-244-
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
'I
I
I
I
I
I.
I
on the day of , 19 , in the office of the
Register of Deeds of Saline County, Kansas.
Persons Affected: All persons, partnerships, or corporations
who now own or shall hereafter acquire any interest in real prop-
erty in the above-described areas shall be required to observe the
following standards and stipulations as to the use thereof and
construction of improvements thereon.
Application: These Property Rehabilitation Standards apply
only to exi~ting properties within a designated Urban Renewal Area.
Duration: These standards shall be in full force and effect
, from date of approval by the Governing Body of the City of Salina,
Kansas of the Urban Renewal Plan for the ~ity of Salina, and until
such time as they may be amended or revised.
Plan Approval: All plans for rehabilitation which involve
exterior changes, additions, alterations or structural changes
within or without a structure, shall be submitted to the Urban
Renewal Agency and approved in writing by said Agency. If the
Agency does not act in sixty (60) days, the plans shall be deemed
to be approved and the Agency shall so certify. Plans 'shall be
approved when meeting the objectives of these standards, the Ur-
ban Renewal Plan, and health and safety requirements. Plans may
be revised by following the same procedure as that required for
approval. This sub-section shall be applicable only during the
life of the designated Urban Renewal Project.
Area Usage: The types of usage of properties shall be as in-
dicated and within the area limits described on the Salina Future
Land Use Plan.
SECTION IV.
DEFINITIONS
1. Accessory
same lot with
incidental to
Building: A subordinate building, located on the
the main building, the use of which is customarily
the main building or principal use of the property.
2. Alley: A permanent public right-of-way which affords only a
secondary means of access to abutting property.
3. Basement: The story of a building or structure having one-
half or more of its cubic volume below grade.
-245-
4. Boarding or Rooming House: Any dwelling in which more than
three (3) persons, either individuals or as families, are housed
or lodged for hire with or without meals.
5. Building: Any structure having a roof supported by columns
or walls for the housing or enclosure of persons, animals, or
chattels.
6. Building Coverage: The percentage of land contained within
the property lines~ covered by those portions of a building or
buildings that are above the adjacent ,grades.
7. Corridor: A covered passageway into which rooms open.
8. Court: An uncovered area partly or wholly enclosed by build-
ings or by walls and grating.
9. Dwelling Unit: A dwelling or portion of a dwelling used by
one family for cooking, living and sleeping purposes.
'10. Egress and/or Ingress: A place or means of exit or entrance.
11. Exit Way: A place of exit.
12. Family: One or more persons who live together in one dwelling
unit, maintain a common household, and sharing same common facil-
ities. A family may consist of a single person or of two or more
persons, whether or not related by blood, marriage or adoption.
A family may also include domestic servants and gratuitous guests.
13. Floor Areas: The gross floor area used or intended to be used
for service to residents or to the public or customers, patrons,
clients, and patients, including areas occupied by fixtures and
equipment used for display or sale of merchandise. In the case
of non-residential use, it shall not mean floors or part of
floors used principally for non-public purposes, such as the
storage, incidental repair, processing, or packaging of merchan-
dise, for show windows, or for offices incidental to the manage-
ment or maintenance of stores or buildings unless specifically
identified herein as total floor area. It also shall not include
floors ,or parts of floors used principally for toilet or rest
rooms, utilities, fitting rooms, dressing rooms, or alteration
rooms, unless specifically identified herein as total', floor area.
14. Flue: An enclosed passage for a current of air, gases, etc.,
as in a chimney, for conveying flame, smoke or gaseous effluents
to the outside air.
-246-
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
15. Habitable Room:
eating or cooking.
storage or utility
habitable rooms.
A room designed and used for living, sleeping,
Bathrooms, toilet compartments, closets, halls,
spaces and similar areas are not considered
I
I
16. Hotel: A building or portion thereof used as the more or less
temporary abode of individuals who are lodged with or without
meals and in which there are more than twelve sleeping rooms us-
ually occupied singly and in which provision for cooking is made
preponderantly in a central location.
I
I
I
17. Loading and Unloading Facility: A space devoted primarily to
the loading onto and/or unloading from vehicles of stocks, goods,
parcels and equipment.
18. Multi-Family Structure: A structure consisting of three or
more dwelling units.
I
I
19. Non-Residential Use: The use of a building or property for
any purpose other than residential occupancy exclusively. Hotels,
motels, lodging or boarding houses, tourist homes, and other
places offering temporary lodging or buildings with a majority
of living quarters not having separate cooking facilities ~hall
be considered as non-residential uses.
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
20. Off-Street: . Not infringing upon any public right-of-way.
21. Passageway: A common avenue of. transit within a building.
Under certain special instances, an enclosed avenue outside of the
building can be considered a passageway, providing the function
described is performed adequately. '
22. Plot: A portion or parcel of land considered as a unit, de-
voted to a certain use or occupied by a building or a group of
buildings that are united by a common interest or use, and the
customary accessories and open spaces belonging to same.
23. Project Area: That area defined under the project area des-
cription set forth in the project plan.
24. .public Right-of-Way: Legally dedicated street, alley, or
other means of access to abutting property.
25. Residential Use: The use of a building or property exclus-
ively for a permanent dwelling unit or units, which may include
uses incidental to residential occupancy.
I
I
-247-
26. Stairway: A flight of stairs including their supporting frame-
work, casing, balusters, etc.
27. Story: That portion of a building between a floor and the next
floor above, or roof.
28. Structure:
or building of
up or composed
That which is built or constructed, an edifice
any kind or any piece of work artifically built
of parts joined together in some definite man~er.
29. Use: The customary utilization of a space or area~
30. Yard: An open space at grade on the same lot, located between
the main building and the adjoining lot lines, unoccupied and un-
obstructed by any portion of a structure from the ground upward
except as may be otherwise provided herein. The measurement of
yard shall be the minimum horizontal distance between the lot line
and the building. The front yard shall be a yard across the full
width of the lot extending from the front line of the main build-
ing to the front line of the lot. The rear yard shall be the yard
across the full width of the lot from the rear line of the main
building to the rear line of the lot. The side yards shall be be-
tween the main building and side lot lines extending from the front
yard to the rear yard.
31. Zone 1: Special business district.
in each project.)
(Boundary to be defined
SECTION V.
RESIDENTIAL STANDARDS
Requirements (General): All residential structures, includ-
ing alterations and additions thereto, shall comply with the
standards set forth herein, in addition to applicable adopted
Housing Codes.
Objective: The individual site under consideration shall be
appropriate to the neighborhood in which it is located, and not
have characteristics which will induce or perpetuate neighborhood
blight or obsolescence.
Plot Planning: Over-crowding of lots within the area shall
be eliminated. A lot is over-crowded if any of the following
conditions exist.
a. The area of the lot occupied by all structures shall not
exceed:
- 24 8-
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
.1
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
Detached Dwelling:
(1) Interior lot coverage ---------- 40%
(2) Corner lot coverage ------------ 45%
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
Semi-Detached Dwelling:
(1) Interior lot coverage ---------- 45%
(2) Corner lot coverage ------------ 50%
Rowand End-Row Dwellings ----------- 60%
% values shown above are suggested criteria and shall be
specifically for each separate designated rehabilitation
area.
When a one-story attached or detached garage or carport
is located in the same plot with the dwelling, the area
of the garage or carport may be deducted from the total
building area in computing the lot coverage. No deduc-
tion permitted for a built-in garage or for a garage
having habitable rooms above.
b. A habitable structure shall be not less than eight (8)
feet frbm a habitable structure on an adjoining lot. All
front, side and rear yard setback requirements shall be
in accordance with the Salina Zoning Ordinance.
I
c. No dwelling shall remain, be altered, or constructed on
a lot having less than forty feet of width at the, build-
ing line.
I
I
I
I
I
I
Minimum Gross Lot Areas:
a. No dwelling shall remain, be altered, or constructed on a
lot having less than the minimum allow~d total square fee.t
of area as specifically determined for each separate des-
ignated rehabilitation area. The Urban Renewal Agency
shall buy and clear the middle lot, then offer for sale
to the adjacent property owners. If no agreement to pur-
chase is made, the Urban Renewal Agency shall purchase
the adjacent lot or lots,' add the cleared land to the
adjacent tracts and offer for resale.
b. The minimum gross lot area per family for each of the fol-
lowing occupancies shall be established:
I
I
(1) Single-family
(3) Multi-family
(2) Two-family (duplex)
-249-
There shall not be two residential structures on the same in-
terior lot, one in the rear of the other. Where existing, two
residential structures may remain on the same corner lot, one in
the rear of the other, if these structures meet all other require-
ments set forth in these minim~m standards. In no instance shall
there be two new residential structures constructed on the same
lot, one in the rear of the other.
There shall be vehicular access to all lots by an abutting
public street or highway other than an alley.
Walks and steps shall be provided for convenient all-weather
access to the structure constructed so as to provide safety, rea-
sonable durability and economy of maintenance.
Auxiliary structures, fences, open incinerators, and other
structures incidental to the main building shall be removed if
any of the following conditions exist:
a. Structures creating obstructions of light and air from
doors or windows of any dwelling unit.
b. Structures obstruct a safe means of ingress or egress to
any dwelling unit.
c. Structures create fire hazards or harbor rats, vermin, or
disease-producing conditions.
d. Structures are structurally unsafe, or
e. Structures generate smoke or air pollution or otherwise
endanger the safety or health of the occupants of this
or the adjoining premises.
All dilapidated portions of existing properties, or blighted
structures, which are not econo~ically repairable shall be removed.
Drainage of surface water shall be provided away from all
sides of all buildings and off the lot in a manner which will
prevent soil erosion and standing water and which will minimize
the possibilities of dampness in crawl spaces and/or basements.
variations to Standards: A variation to mandatory provisions
contained herein may be permitted by the URAS for specific cases,
only when the variation attains the stated objectives contained
herein and when one or more of the following conditions justify .
the variations:
-250-
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
a. Topography of the site is ~uch'that full compliance is im-
possible or impracticable.
b. Long-established local practices and customs in the area
assure continued market acceptance of the variations.
c. Design and planning of the specific property offers improved
or compensating features providing equivalent desirability
and utility.
Variations shall be limited to specific cases and shall not be
repetitive in nature or establish precedents for similar acceptance
in other cases without prior approval of the Urban Renewal Agency~
Building Planning: Space: Room sizes shown below shall be the
minimum permitted for any subdividing of existing spaces, or for
the construction of any new rooms. Unremodeled existing rooms,
where considered adequate in size and arrangement for the intended
function, may be acceptable if not more than 10 percent smaller
than the minimums given in the following schedule:
SCHEDULE
Name of Minimum Area (Sq. Ft. ) (2 ) Least
Space (1) 1 & 2 BR LU 3 or more BR LU Dimension (3 )
LR 140 150 10'-0"
DR 80 100 7'-8"
K 50 60 3'-0" (4 )
K'ette ( 5) 40 NP 3'-4"
BR 70 70 7'-0"
Total BR 1 BR, 100 3 BR, 240 (1st BR of each
2 BR, 170 4 BR, 340 LU - 8'-0")
OHR (6 ) 70 70 7'-0"
LR-DA 160 180 (9)
LR-DR 200 220 (9 )
LR-DA-K (7 ) 210 240 (9)
K-DA (7 ) 80 100 (9)
K-DR (7) 120 140 (9)
K'ette-DA (7) 60 80 (9 )
LR-DA-BR ( 8) 220 (9 )
LR-BR (8) 190 (9 )
-251-
Notes:
(1) Abbreviations:
LU = Living Unit
LR = Living Room
DR = Dining Room
DA = Dining Area
K = Kitchen
K'ette = Kitchenette
BR = Bedroom
OHR = Other Habitable Room
NP = Not Permitted
(2) Minor variations to these areas may be permitted when exist-
ing partitions preclude compliance.
(3) Least dimensions shown shall apply for 90 percent of the re-
quired room area. Minor variations to these dimensions may be
permitted when existing partitions preclude compliance.
(4) Clear passage space.
(5) Permitted in LU of O-BR or I-BR only. No kitchenette shall be
less than 20 square feet.
(6) An Other Habitable Room (OHR) shall meet all requirements for
habitable rooms, have a closet of approximately 6 square feet
and shall have a means of complete separation from other rooms.
(7) The designation of K in combination with other spaces may be
considered either as a Kitchen or Kitchenette.
(8) Permitted only in Living Unit having no separate Bedroom.
(9) Least dimension of appropriate room function applies.
Minimum Floor Area: Every dwelling unit shall contain at least
150 square feet of floor space for one occupant and 100 square feet
of floor space for each additional occupant thereof. Every room
occupied for sleeping purposes shall contain at least 70 square
feet of floor space and every room occupied for sleeping purposes
by more than one occupant shall contaiR at least 50 square. feet of
floor space for each occupant thereof. Kitchens shall have not
less than thirty square feet of floor space.
Minimum areas and dimensions of kitchen storage space shall
generally be as. follows:
a. Total shelving in wall and base cabinets - 30 square feet.
-252-
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
b. Drawer area - 5 square feet.
c. Usable storage shelving in cooking range or under sink
may be counted in the total shelving needed.
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
Clothes closet space shall be provided within each living unit
on the basis of approximately 12 square feet for the first bedroom
plus 6 square feet for each additional bedroom. None of the mini-
mum clothes closet space shall be located within the kitchen.
Exis~ing enclosed wardrobe fixtures can be considered as satisfying
the required clothes closet space; however, 'such space assigned
to wardrobe .space shall not be included in meeting the minimum
room area requirements.
Each living unit shall have a designated closet or other suit-
able space within the unit or locked space elsewhere within the
buildinq or other structure on the property, conveniently acces-
sible, for general storage. The minimum volume of,general storage
space for each living unit shall be 100 cubic feet and shall be
appropriately increased for 3 or 4 bedroom living units.
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
a. Each dwelling unit whether in a single-family or multiple-
family dwelling structure shall contain one or more habit-
able rooms and a bathroom, so arranged and equipped to
provide suitable and desirable living, sleeping, cooking,
and dining accommodations. Rooms shall be of such size
and so planned as to permit placing of adequate furniture
and equipment appropriate to and essential for the use of
the occupants. Adequate storage and closet space shall be
provided.
b. At least one-half of the floor area of every habitable
room shall have a ceiling height of at least seven (7)
feet, zero (0) inches, the floor area of that part of any
room where the ceiling height is less than five (5) feet
shall not be considered as part of the floor area in com-
puting the total floor area of the room for the purpose
of determining the' gross floor space. Bathrooms, toilet
compartments, utility rooms, closets, halls, etc. may
have a minimum of 6'-8" ceiling height.
c. No basement or cellar space shall be used as a habitable
room or dwelling unit unless it complies with all require-
ments stated herein. Every room occupied for sleeping
purposes shall contain at least 70 square feet of floor
space and, if more than one occupant, 50 square feet min-
imum for' each additional occupant.
I
I
-253-
Access:
a. Access to a single and only bathroom shall be provided
from inside the dwelling unit, except that the only access
to a bathroom in such cases may not be made directly from
a kitchen or dining area.
b. Access to every habitable room in a dwelling unit shall
be provided without having to pass through a bathroom or
watercloset compartment.
c. Each dwelling unit within a structure shall be provided
with safe, private, and unobstructed means of egress and
ingress.
Stairways:
a. Objective: To assure that all stairways provide safety
of ascent and descent, and an arrangement of stairs and
landings which have adequate headroom and space for the
passage of furniture and equipment.
b. Existing stairways in sound condition to remain, or to be
repaired, shall not be dangerous or to any serious extent
below minimum standards as to rise and run of steps, head-
room, obstructions, stair width, landings, or railing
protection.
c. Winder or spiral type steps shall not be used in stairways
of dwellings where more than one family use the stairway,
unless a separate means of egress for each living unit is
provided.
Hallways:
a. General: Hallways shall provide adequate, safe and unob-
structed circulation from living units or other spaces to
various means of exit.
b. Distance of Travel: Where a required stairway is not en-
closed and 'is open to a hallway, the maximum distance of
travel from the entrance door of any living unit to the
stairway shall not exceed thirty (30) feet. Where the
stairway is enclosed, this distance shall not exceed fifty
( 50) feet.
-254-
I
I
.1
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
,I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
c. Width: Hallways providing access to stairways and serving
more than one family shall be not less than three (3) feet,
six (6) inches wide. Hallways serving a single family
shall not be less than 3'-0" wide.
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
Doors: Exterior Doors - Existing doors in sound condition to
remain shall not be more than 4" smaller in size than the following,
and the minimum size of new doors installed in new openings shall
be:
Width Height
a. Main entrance door 3'-0" 6'-8"
b. Service doors 2' -8" 6'-8"
c. Garage doors, 1 car 8'-0" 6'-4" clear opening
d. Garage doors, 2 car 14'-0" 6' - 4" clear opening
Where new doors are installed in acceptable existing door
openings, the doors should approximate the sizes given above. Ex-
terior doors shall have safe locks.
Interior Doors - Provide a door for each opening to a bedroom,
bathroom or toilet compartment. Doors to bathroom and toilet com-
partments shall be hinged or sliding and ,shall have locks.
Existing doors in sound condition and to remain should approx-
imate in size (minimum size to be not smaller than 4" less than
stipulated size) the following, and minimum size of new doors in-
stalled in new openings shall be:
a. Habitable rooms, 2 ft. - 8 in. wide.
b. Bathrooms, toilet compartments and closets other than
linen and broom, 2 ft. - 4 in. wide.
c.. Service stair doors, 2 ft. - 8 in. wide.
d. . Cased openings, 2 ft. - 8 in. wide.
e. To public stairway enclosures, single door, 3 ft. - 0 in.
wide; double door, 2 ft. - 4 in. wide.
f. Height of all interior doors, 6 ft. - 8 in.
Exits: Each one or two family dwelling and each living unit
in multi-family properties shall have at least one (1) exit which
is a doorway, protected passageway or stairway, providing unob-
structed travel directly to the outside of the building at the
street or grade level. In additi6n, there shall be a suitable
and separate secondary exit from each living unit by means of'a
doorway, stairway,' protected passageway, or. openable window of 20"
I
I
-255-
x 20" not over 3~' from floor level. In buildings three (3) or
more stories above grade, applicable exit codes shall apply or
the secondary exit from the third story, or from any additional
stories shall be by stairway, fire escape or horizontal passage-
way providing a safe path of ~scape in case of emergency.
Access to either required exit shall not necessitate passage
through another living unit, nor shall either exit be subject to
locking by any device which would impede or prohibit ready egress.
In three (3) or more story structures accommodating more than.
one family, there shall be at least one noncombustible stairway,
Except That a combustible stairway is acceptable under either of
the following conditions:
a. An approved automatic sprinkler system, in accordance with
National.Fire Protection Association Standard No. 13,
shall be installed in the stairhall and above the stairs
on all floors, and in any closets or storage spaces under
stairs, or;
b. The stairway shall be enclosed within walls providing n9t
less than a one (1). hour fire resistance rating and/or
ceilings over closet and storage areas shall have one (1)
hour fire rating. Door openings in stairway enclosures
shall be protected by doors and door frames having not
less than a three-fourths (3/4) hour fire resistance rating.
Flush-type, solid wood one and three-fourths (1-3/4) inch
doors are an acceptable alternate. All doors shall be
equipped with self-closing devices. No transoms shall be
permitted.
Structural:
a. Every foundation and footing shall be properly constructed
of masonry, concrete, or steel materials and capable of
supporting required loads and shall be in good condit;ion.
b. Framing for floors, walls, ceilings, and roofs shall be
capable of supporting required loads and shall be in good
condition.
c. Each inside and outside stair and each appurtenance there-
to shall be so constructed as to be safe and capable of
supporting the load that normal use may cause to be placed
thereon, and in. sound condition.
-256-
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
General Condition - Structural:
a. Foundations shall be provided for all new structures with
at least four (4) foundation vents located near the corners
of the basementless space, having an aggregate free venti-
lation area of not less than four (4) square feet for
the first 2,000 square feet of floor area, and one (1)
additional square foot of ventilation area shall be provid-
edfor each additional 200 square feet of space area.
Existing structures shall meet the requirements of existing
Minimum Housing Code.
b. Each window, exterior'door, and basement hatchway shall be
reasonably weather-tight, water-tight, and rodent-proof,
and shall be in sound working condition and good repair.
c. Each outside door and each operable window shall be pro-
vided with screens in good repair.
d. Every bathroom floor surface shall be of such material so
as to be reasonably impervious to water and so as to per-
mit such floor to be kept in a clean and sanitary condition.
e. Waterproof finished wall materials shall be installed in
shower stalls and around bathtubs.with showers to a height
of not less than six (6) feet above floor-line.
f. Stairs shall provide safety of ascent and descent and
shall be designed, arranged and installed so as to afford
adequate headroom and space for passage of furniture.
g. All exterior wood surfaces shall be painted or stained in
accordance with customary practices in the local building
trades, to fully protect materials and present an accept-
able appearance.
h. Finish flooring shall be of acceptable material, smooth,
even, and properly installed. When a finish floor is not
installed, an acceptable sub-floor material shall be prop-
erly installed to be smooth and structurally adequate.
i. All interior walls, ceiling surfaces, and interior wood-
work shall be reasonably clean and smooth and shall be
finished in accordance, with customary practice for the
type of materials used.
-257-
j. Each dwelling unit shall be provided with adequate kitchen
storage facilities provided by means of shelves, cabinets
or closets. In addition to the above, adequate counter
top work space shall be provided.
Fire Protection:
a. Objective: To assure a high degree of. safety to life and
property preservation for the dwelling, by the separation
of living units and by th'e use of' materials which will re-
tard the spread of fire and prevent the passage of flame,
smoke and hot gases through open or concealed spaces with~
in the building, and by providing exits which will permit
persons to leave the building with safety.
b. Walls, Floor and Ceiling Construction: Existing wall,
floor and ceiling construction separating living units
or separating a living unit from a public hallway, other
than party or lot line walls, shall be'constructed so that
at least a three-fourths (3/4) hour fire resistance rating
is provided.
Al'l remodeling of existing construction, and new walls,
floors or ceilings shall have a fire resistance rating of
not less than three-fourths (3/4) hour.
The underside of all flights of wood stairs in habitable
areas to remain, if exposed, shall be covered with a non-
combustible material of three-fourths (3/4) minimum fire.
rating. Existing plaster in this location which is in
good condition may remain.
c. Surface Flame Spread Ratings: The classification of in-
terior finish and trim materials shall be in accordance
with Standard Designation E84 of the ASTM, (1) and as
shown in the table below.
Interior wall and ceiling finish materials shall not ex-
ceed the surface flame spread ratings given in the follow-
ing table, except as noted in the last paragraph.
Location
Class
Flame Spread
Rating
Hallways, Stairways and Other
Exits
25- 75
B
-258-
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
Location
Class
Flame Spread
Rating
Within Living Unit except for
Kitchen Space
Kitchen or Kitchen Space
Small Spac~s Enclosing Heating
or other Fire Hazardous
Equipment
C
7 5- 20 0
B
25- 75
'A
0-25
Existing interior finish materials to remain, which have
a surface flame spread rating of more than 200, shall be
covered with an acceptable flame-resistant paint.
Light and Ventilation:
a. Every habitable room shall have at least one window or sky-
light, facing directly to the outdoors, which can easily
be opened and closed. Openable area shall be a minimum of
5% of the floor area of such room or approved mechanical
ventilation system, in lieu of openable windows, providing
a minimum of 4 air changes per hour.
b. Each bathroom and water-closet compartment shall comply
with the light and ventilation requirements for habitable
rooms stated above, except that no window or sky-light
shall be required in bathrooms and water-closet compart-
ments equipped with an adequate mechanical ventilation
system which can be kept in continuous operation while
bathroom is occupied, and provide a minimum of 10 air
changes per hour.
c. There shall be effective and adequate ventilation in area
between ceiling and roof in the amount of at least one
(1) square foot for each'150 square feet of roof area.
If an attic fan is used, this ventilation area shall be
doubled.
Building Conditions:
a. Any structure showing evidence ,of continuing settlement,
dampness, leakage, decay, termites, or other conditions
impairing the safety or sanitary conditions of the struc-
ture shall be brought up to all standards covered by this
document.
-259-
I
b. Floors, walls and roofs shall be water-tight, rodent-proof, I
and in good condition.
c. Roof coverings shall be properly applied and flashed and I
shall be in good condition.
d. All porches and steps shall be properly constructed and I
in good condition.
e. When requested by the Urban Renewal Agency of Salina, the I
owner shall furnish certification by a bonded termite
exterminator that the structure and all appurtenances I
thereto attached are free of infestation by termites and .
other wood-destroying insects, fungi, or rot~
Mechanical and Electrical Systems and Equipment: I
a. Every dwelling unit shall contain a kitchen sink in good I.
working condition and properly connected to an approved
water and sewer system.
b. Each dwelling unit shall have bathroom facilities consist-
ing of a'tub or shower, lavatory, and water-closet properly
connected to an approved water and sewer system.
c. Each dwelling unit shall have an adequate supply of hot
water to be drawn at kitchen sink, lavatory basin, bath-
tub, or shower.
d. Each plumbing fixture and water pipe shall be properly
installed and in good sanitary working condition. Plumb-
ing fixtures shall have smooth impervious surfaces and
be free from defects and concealed fouling surfaces.
Plumbing fixtures shall be connected to public sewage
system and water supply, all in compliance with the ap-
plicable plumbing code.
e. Each habitable room of every dwelling shall contain at
least one separate floor or wall-type duplex electric
convenience outlet and one (1) ceiling type electric light
fixture which is properly connected to a wall switch and/
or two separate duplex wall or floor outlets. Every such
outlet and/or fixture shall be properly installed, shall
be in good and safe working condition, and shall be,prop-
erly connected to the source of electric power, all in
compliance with the applicable electrical code.
-260-
I
I
I
I,
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
f. A heating system shall be installed to serve all habitable
rooms. The installation of heating systems (including
solid-fuel burning systems) shall comply with all applic- ,
able local laws and ordinances, and with current standards,
regulations, and recommendations published by the American
Insurance Association. The heating system shall be cap-
able of maintaining an air temperature of 70 degrees F.
under ordinary winter conditions.
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
Off-Street Parking: There shall be one or more off-street,
dust-free, surfaced parking spaces provided for each existing
dwelling unit, and there shall be l~ off-street parking spaces for
each~new dwelling unit. The parking space(s) shall be 10 feet
by 20 feet, minimum.
SECTION VI. NONRESIDENTIAL AND COMMERCIAL PROPERTY REHABILITATION
STANDARDS
1. Planning and Site Conditions:
a. Open Areas: Open areas shall be graded for adequate
drainage and landscaped to enhance the character of the
neighborhood. All vegetation which overhangs a public
area shall be appropriately trimmed to prevent the ob-
struction and view of, pedestrian and vehicular movements.
b. Screening: Buildings to remain for nonresidential use
shall have an appropriate landscaped area or architectural
,screen separating this usage from any adjoining residen-
tial ~rea.
c. Off-Street Parking: Commercial traffic generators shall
provide adequate off-street parking ~f a durable all-
weather dust-free surface.
d. Loading Areas: All loading areas shall be paved with
Portland cement concrete, asphaltic concrete or equiva-
lent surfacing which shall be properly drained, free of
dust and debris, and capable of sustaining a wheel load
of 9,000 pounds.
All loading areas used or intended to be used between dusk
and dawn shall be adequately lighted. Direct lighting
shall be confined to the boundaries of the loading areas.
-261-
2. General Conditions:
a. Objective: The purpose of these minimum standards is to
establish. requirements governing the rehabilitation and
maintenance of business and industrial facilities and
their appurtenant utilities within the Urban Renewal Area
of the City of Salina, Kansas.
The minimum standards are intended to provide the require-
ments for the determining if a structure is standard or
sub-standard and further that existence.of sub-standard
conditions including but not limited to the structural
deterioration, unsafe 'conditions, lack of maintenance,
inadequate plumbing, existence of fire hazards and ade-
quate provisions for light or ventilation, or generally
exterior deterioration will require repair, removal or
demolition of the structure.
Every commercial business or industrial establishment and
the premises on which it is situated in the Urban Renewal
Area shall comply with the provision of minimum standards
whether or not such building shall have been constructed,
altered or repaired before or after the establishment of
the minimum standards, irrespective of any permits or
licenses which shall have been issued for the use of
occupancy of the building or premises, for the construc-
tion or repair of the building or premises, or for the
installation of these standards or for the installation
or repair of equipment or facilities prior to the effec-
tive date of these standards. Minimum standards are es-
tablished for the initial and co.ntinued occupancy and
use. of all such buildings. These standards do not replace
or modify standards otherwise established for construction,
repair,. alteration or use of the building equipment or
facilities contained therein except as provided in the
next paragraph. Where there is mixed occupancy, any com-
mercial business or industrial use therein shall be
nevertheless regulated by and subject to the provisions
of the minimum standards.
Other standards: . In any case where the provisions of the
minimum standards impose a higher standard than set forth
in any other ordinance of the City of Salina or under the
laws of the State of Kansas, the standards set forth here-
in shall prevail. Where the provisions of the ~inimum
standards impose a lower standard than any other ordinance
-262-
I
I
I
I
I
I.
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
of the City of Salina,or the laws of the State of Kansas,
then the higher standard contained in such ordinance or
law shall prevail.
b. Exterior:
(1) Walls and Siding: All exterior wallr:; or party walls
of new construction shall comply with the required
structural and fire requirements of the Uniform Build-
ing Code. All exterior walls of existing structures
in fire zones one or two shall have a minimum of one
. (1) hour fire resistance.
All damaged or deteriorated exterior materials shall
be repaired or replaced with materials to match the
existing.
All exterior material and surfaces shall be properly
protected to prevent deterioration due to the ele-
ments and destructive insects.
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
(2) Flashing and Roofing: All flashing, counterflashing
and roofing shall be water-tight. Materials used to
repair an existing roof shall match existing or ,be
similar in color and pattern to the existing mate-
rial where visible from the street.
(3) Gutters and Downspouts: Gutters and downspouts
shall, be water-tight and protected against rust. All
roof systems shall be served by means of a controlled
drainage system.
(4) Doors and Windows: All exterior doors and windows
shall be in sound working condition, and shal~ be
reasonably weatherproof and water-tight. All cracked
or broken glass shall be replaced.
(5) Store Fronts: All store fr'onts, canopies, and,
marquees shall be in good repair and have a general
appearance such that they shall not constitute a
blighting factor for adjoining property owners nor
an element leading to the progressive deterioration
of the neighborhood with the accompanying diminution
of property values.
(6) Walkways: On-site walkways shall be in good condi-
tion and where such walkways are over a basement
-263-
area contiguous to the adjacent buildings,precau-
tions shall be taken to make sure the opening in the
walkways are water-tight.
(7) Signs: Standards set forth in the Code of the City
of Salina shall apply.
c. Interior: All interior floors, walls, ceilings, and wood-
work shall be finished in accordance with customary
practice for the type of materials used. All damaged or
deteriorated materials shall be properly repaired or re-
placed.
d. Equipment and Facilities: Every provided facility, piece
of equipment, or utility, and every chimney, flue, cooling
tower, smokestack, and similar appurtenances shall be in
a safe and sound working condition.
3. Structural and Fire Safety Requirements:
a. Objective: To assure that nonresidential bui~dings are
structurally safe and sound.
b. Structural Requirements: Foundations and walls shall be
structurally sound and maintained to carry the design
operating dead and live loads shall be maintained com-
pletely free from open cracks or breaks that might jeo-
pardize public safety. Any foundation exhibiting undue
qisplacement shall be excavated and underpinned in a
manner to satisfactorily transmit the load of the build-
ing to a stable material.
(1) Foundations and Footings: Every foundation and
footing shall be properly constructed of masonry,
concrete, and/or steel materials, capable of sup-
porting required loads. Any building showing signs
of undue settlement shall have a soil test and writ-
ten report made by a qualified and licensed engineer,
before any improvements to the building are under-
taken.
(2) Structural Framing: Framing for floors, ceilings,
and roofs shall be capable of supporting required
loads and shall be in good repair.
Sagging floors, fireplaces, partitions, or stairs,
-264~
I
I
I
I
.1
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
and bulging exterior walls shall be properly re-
stored to an acceptable level and/or plumb position
and supported or braced to prevent a recurrence of
these conditions.
(3) Stairs: Each inside and outside stair, and each ap-
purtenance thereto, shall be properly constructed and
maintained for safe use and to be capable of support-
ing the load that normal use may require.. All inside
stairs shall be enclosed with one-hour minimum fire
rated enclosures. No stairway of a required exit
shall be less than 2'-6" clear width.
c. Fire Safety:
(1) General: Fire safety standards pertaining to the
over-all structure and use of materials and fire pro-
tection equipment shall comply with applicable
requirements of the city codes.
(2) Partitions: All partitions within structures shall
qualify for at least one-hour fire rating.
(3) Floors and Roofs: All floor and roof systems in
buildings in Zone 1 shall qualify for at least one-
hour fire rating or a higher rating as required by
all applicable building codes.
(4) Means of Egress of Occupied Areas: All floors shall
have at least two means of egress located as far
apart from each other as feasible and provided with
one-hour fire rated enclosure and marked with approved
exit signs.
At least one of these means of. egress shall lead di-
rectly to the outside, and it is recommended that
both lead directly outside.
There shall be no point in the building more than 100
feet from an exit or stairway leading to an exit; an
exterior balcony with more than one means of egress
so located shall meet the. requirements of this section
if otherwise structurally acceptable.
All new and existing required exits used by the Gen-
eral Public shall swing out and not into fJow of cross
traffic.
-265-
(5) Vertical Openings: Stairways, elevator shafts and
other vertical openings above second floor shall
be enclosed with fire retardant material having at
least one-hour fire rating.
(6) Heating Unit: All major or room heating unit or
units shall be properly vented if required and enclosed
in a self-contained unit or by walls and ceiling
as required by applicable local codes.
(f
(7). Trash: Trash debris or garbage stored inside of the
building shall be contained ina separate storage
room with a minimum of one-hour fire resistance for
walls and ceiling. If stored outside of building,
trash shall be deposited in approved metal containers
and area effectively screened from public view.
4. Light and Ventilation:
a. Objective: To provide a healthful environment and an
acceptable degree of comfort by having sufficient light
and ventilation.
b. Light: Artificial light shall be provided and so distri-
buted as to assure healthful and sanitary conditions in
all rooms or spaces. A minimum of five-foot candles of
daylight and/or artificial illumination shall be required
. at all times in public hallways and stairways.
c. Ventilation: Natural or artificial means of ventilation
shall be provided to insure a comfortable and healthful
atmosphere throughout the building, according to local
codes.
In all cases where fumes, gases, dusts, or mists are
present or produced, local exhaust ventilation shall be
provided to remove these conditions.
5. Mechanical and. Electrical:
a. Objective: To provide mechanical equipment 'and electrical
systems for the building that will be of a quality and
condition which will assure safety, adequate capacity,
protection from the elements, and reasonable durability.
-266-
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
b. Mechanical Equipment:
(1) Toilet Faciliti~s: Every nonresidential building
shall be provided with toilet and lavatory facilities.
Separate facilities shall be provided for each sex,
except in such buildings occupied by six or less per-
sons of both sexes taken together and where said
facilities are not used by the public.
All toilet facilities and toilet rooms shall be kept
neat and clean at all times. The walls and ceiling
shall be smooth and properly coated as necessary for
cleanliness.
Floors in toilet rooms shall be of nonabsorbent ma-
terials such as concrete, brick, tile, or similar
surface material. Plumbing fixtures and water pipes
shall be in sanitary condition meeting city plumbing
code requirements.
(2) Heating Facilities: Every enclosed space or rooms
in which persons are employed sh~ll'haveheating
facilities to maintain a temperature of at least 70
degrees Fahrenheit with an outside temperature of
minus ten degrees Fahrenheit. Operations requiring
maintenance of lower design temperatures, such. as
cold storage facilities, are excluded from this re-
quirement.
All gas burning heaters shall be vented in an approved
manner, to the outside.
Heating devices and installations shall be operated
and installed according to the requirements of the
city codes.
c.
Electrical System:
electrical fixtures
usable condition in
code.
All conductors, wiring, outlets, and
shall be properly installed in a safe,
compliance with the city electrical
6. Mixed Occupancy and Existing Structures: Structures having
mixed commercial and dwelling use at the time the Plan goes into
effect, and having more than fifty percen~.(50%) of the total
floor space devoted to commercial uses, shall be consi?ered as
- 2 6 7 -.
being commercial type structures ~nd be subject to commercial
rehabilitation standards. Such mixed usage having less than fifty
percent (50%) commercial floor space, shall have commercial rehab-
ilitation standards applied to that portion of the building which
is commercial usage only, with the applicable residential rehab-
ilitation standards imposed on the balance of the structure.
Separation of dwellings and commercial units shall be achieved
by minimum one-hour fire resistance partitions and/or floor-ceiling
systems. Each opening between such mlxed uses shall be a Class
"B" opening as defined by the Uniform Building Code.
Mixed residential and commercial or industrial uses inexist-
ence at the time the Plan goes into effect shall be allowed to
remain subject to all rehabilitation standards. The construction
of any new dwelling unit shall be prohibited.
7. Miscellaneous ,Provisions: The accumulation in any outside
yard areas of trash, litter, junk, salvage vehicles, part or fab-
ricated products, which can be seen ,from any public R/W shall be
prohibited. If the outside storage of materials, parts or fabri-
cated products is an essential portion of any business located
within areas designated for industria'l use, this storage may take
place if screened from public view by the following means:
a. Brick; painted concrete masonry, metallic, redwood or
cypress or other acceptable wood fence having tight or
staggered joints cutting off direct view; and such fence
or screen shall have a height equal to that of the stor-
age which is being enclosed but shall not exceed a height
of six (6) feet. Any of the above shall be supplemented
with evergreen shrubs and/or trees at intervals resulting
in adequate growth spacings.
b. Metal open link type fence,provided a continuous row of
evergreen trees or shrubs, attaining a height at least
that of the fence, are planted adjacent to this type of
fence.
Wheeled vehicles whic~ have been all or partially stripped"
parts removed for salvage or other purposes or otherwise immobile
under their own power shall be prohibited from storage, parking
or display in any outside yard area.
An incinerator shall be considered a type of trash storage
facility and shall be enclosed as described above. Except That,
-268-
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
if the housing of or encasement of the incinerator is masonry,
this shall be considered as the required enclosure. Incinerators
shall be of an approved design and such that the smoke and ember
emission is not in excess of City ordinances.
Foreign substances or odors emitted into the air from any
operation to such a degree that the content or pollution of the
atmosphere shall be considered dangerous to health or detrimental
to the best interests of the community, such operator shall pro-
vide the necessary smoke or dust arrestor effective in keeping
the content of foreign substance in the atmosphere below that
prescribed by City ordinance and shall maintain the equipment
at regular intervals to insure its performance.
Grounds and yards shall be drained away from the structure
and run-off directed away from the public sidewalk areas into the
storm sewer system.
Gutters and downspouts shall be provided f'or all primary
structures including fixed marquees, canopies and awnings, which
project beyond the property line and/or overhang a public right-
of-way, with downspouts connected either to the storm sewer sys-
tem or in the case of front canopies, marquees, etc., downspout
water may be trenched across the sidewalk and into the street
gutters provided that the trench be covered with abrasive metal
plates, grating, or floor plates designed to withstand normal
traffic for the location.
8. Parking: Off-street parking shall be provided on the lot or
site within two hundred (200) feet of the primary buildings in
the Urban Renewal Area outside of Zone 1 in the ratio of:
a. One (1) space for each 2~ seats of designed capacity of
the area for dining and assembly areas except as herein-
after specified for specific type building usage.
b. One (1) space for each two hundred (200) square feet of
floor area in retail use or in accordance with zoning and
City of Salina ordinances whichever is strictest.
c. One (1) space for each unit for motels or motor hotels.
d. One (1) space for each two hundred (200) square feet in
professional or office use.
e. One (1) space for each four hundred (400) square feet of
-269-
floor area for all other uses; Provided, however, that no
parking space is required for storage or service areas~
f. One space for each existing dwelling unit and one and one-
half (l~) spaces for each new dwelling unit.
g. One. (1) space for each two (2) employees of maximum em-
ployment assembly for all industrial units.
One (1) off-street loading space shall be provided on the lot
for each building in excess of five thousand (5,000) square .feet.
. Smaller buildings shall provide off-street loading facilities
commensurate with their needs.
Existing and new off-street parking spaces shall be improved
to result in a durable, all-weather, dust-free surfacing.
Present lot areas devoted to off-street parking shall not be
diminished by additions to buildings or to other accessory struc-
tures unless one of the following is present:
a. When the proposed addition is complete, the property's
off-street parking ratio shall equal or exceed those
ratios in the above a through g.
b. Additional land parcels are acquired by the owner and
parking is developed in accordance with the standards
mentioned above on the new lots which are not ~ore than
two hundred (200) feet from the commercial structure.
c. All parking spaces shall be reserved to serve the origi-
nal intended use.
Accessory buildings or sheds shall comply with all require-
ments imposed on the main building, except that plumbing or heat-
-270-
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I'
I
I
I
I
I
ing facilities shall be provided only as required by their use or
occupancy.
9. Church Standards: Churches to remain shall comply with the
following additional standards:
a. Each room within each structure shall contain plumbing
and electrical facilities adequate to fulfill the needs
of those activities carried on therein. Such facilities
shall be installed in conformance with the applicable
local codes.
b. Churches shall provide parking at the ratio of one (1)
parking space for each four (4) seats in the main sanc-
tuary. Churches may provide parking on-street and off-
site to fulfill the above requirement; Provided That such
parking shall be located within a six hundred (600) foot
radius of the main church structure. Arrangements for
parking off-site, as permitted hereunder" shall be veri-
fied and supported by appropriate written documents.
Said documents shall be adequate to positively assure
that off-street parking off-site shall be available for
church use for the duration of these restrictions.
10. Private Club Standards: Private clubs to remain shall comply
with the following additional standards.
a. Each room within each structure shall contain plumbing
and electrical facilities adequate to fulfill the needs
of those activities carried on therein. Such facilities
shall be installed in conformance with the applicable
local codes.
b. Private clubs shall provide parking at the ratio of one
(1) parking space for each ten (10) memberships. On-street
and off-street parking with proven availability for public
or the private club usage to satisfy maximum probable at-
tendance is the intent of this regulations.
c. One (1) attached sign not exceeding twelve (12) square
feet shall be permitted.
II I
-271-
I
I
I
. I
I
I
I
I
I I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
.1
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
~/1
"
-------- .' I;=-=~
o r-jl-jT:mr
i~ Pi
2~ ill
~~~Effi~ff 'i11l
""D~ I! lW llril
\\.. ' ~4: == I,.rrr~
I~' "J4~~~r~
% 3 AND 4-MEMBER FAMILIES
o'
r---:J~~-
:~-~
"Ii /l
l~1~iJ' Iii ~l II :, 111
L ,[11 - " I! if' \~ .A
~I! '~~~~_ I' rr;r l1
'!r~ ,~ ...~/ is)r
- ,- >'- ~"j~j "., TW 4
/ r?j .~ II, "?m~ "
'~~,,, \i rf;
~ i'IL~ TI~ (A: LH~f tf
: 1:~:i;;'~1
Ul ItSEJJ~jV
OF
JL~ I
lE!~~;"
[:::J ..~~ I ['
JIll ~i
1_ J H! ii 'i ,Ii :!
I ~ ii " 'I
).-(40~ d~~
t i TITI il. Iii.'
A)I
\1
\ ) \ \ ~..-t'~I~B~~x~"
\ \'j III If ~!~^"~~~\\ ~I
~ \ I :UI ~~!~~~~i\~1
!, I rnFl-11 ~/'- r,~
\ \ I ~li ~I ~I 1;11 I I I~
'\ ~ I 'I ~' I ~I ~' ','
\ \ \\ \lJ, Ir=~-':~I ~ ~I ~! I.
" ~LJI *i~Jl-!.~li
\ II -- ~i~__~ll
TI~ el ,~,.~~~:~1!: \,
~ nr-- ---, ~
1!li~-~-""-c' ,
\\, - ;", 111~_____\\\'
~\\~"'.' I..!~...i.'-.. ""'-'. --.' '.-," -....,..,.--';'
'~\ \ ) li~~=:?J\
':\\: IIW~11i-~ ;~~~
\ \. ~\ '\ \\ \~--
\\'".",\~\ '\ ~\'
\~ N:\~~\\ \;\
.J.. ' 'luJ
LEGEND
SALINA COMMUNITY RENEWAL PROGRAM
SALINA, KANSAS
PROJECT NO. KANS. R-53 CR
PREPARED FOR CITY OF SALINA, KANSAS
BY BUCHER & WILLIS, CONSULTING
ENGINEERS, PLANNERS & ARCHITECTS
NUMBER INDICATES % OF 3
AND 4-MEMBER FAMILIES
Tho prepmolion of this map IIHI$ finon(iolly oirled through Q htderal grent
from the Ren;J""o! ASSlsforHfI Adminillfutiol'> (If t">II OepQrlm~lnl
of HOlJsing ond Urbtll1 Development, authorllecl by HHtiQt1 405
of lb, HOi);ing Ad of 1959, os om ended,
% NON-vIHITE POPULATION
1.7
+
LEGEND
NUMBERS INDICATE PERCENT
OF POPULATION THAT IS
NON-WHITE
SALINA COMMUNITY RENEWAL PROGRAM
SALINA, KANSAS
PROJECT NO. KANS. R-53 CR
PREPARED FOR CITY OF SALINA, KANSAS
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
AVERAGE FAMILY SIZE
'I
,
_ .' (A)
,~) \,l~""l,,'~I~~,:,,:\\'~,),'Z(~~~,~~~,~~,,1 ~ TOP NUMBER - AVERAGE WHITE FAMILY
\ \ \ ! Ull.I~~~\\~1 'y BOTTOM NUMBER - AVERAGE NON-WHITE
\\ \ i IlJl~! II ~h(~rJlrl~"i; SALINA COMMUNITY RENEWAL PROGRAM FAMILY SIZE
\ \ \ Il ~ji j' Jl-;: ~i ~ ~l I SALINA, KANSAS
~\.~ >~_]i__ ~~..J~~:~::1~\" ::~~~~D N~~R ~~;; ~;5~A~~NA, KANSAS
\\~~)TI~ .~}\t BY BUCHER & WILLIS, CONSULT~NG
\\\\', ',,!L_~G"=;\\~ ENGINEERS, PLANNERS & ARCHITECTS
~*~\~ \,: G ~~~'l, -----.,,--4:,', ',', The pf~parQtion of thi$, mop \11(1$ f,inarHial1y ,aidfld through ill federal gro"i
\\,\\ i t;! r........:::::........: Lm_' hom the RfHI$wol Assistance Admm'$tration of the Depo.rtm$nl
\\~ ~, ! '::!';--~ of HOIHing and Urban Doveloplnl'!fll, C1uthonud by sediol'1 405
\~' ~I ~i of th. HousinG Ad of 1959, (1$ afll$nded.
\ ~ ' I /
\\,---,
\11
SIZE
. % 1 AND 2-MEMBER FAMILIES
(
. I
i
I
i
~ ,
+
LEGEND
NUMBER INDICATES % OF 1
AND 2-MEMBER FAMILIES
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I '{A> \ \ '-..--
\ \ \
~\
I \ ,
~\\
l
I \\~~
~.
I \~\-
\\
-I
I
PERCENT POPULATION OVER 65
+
LEGEND
SALINA COMMUNITY RENEWAL PROGRAM
SALINA, KANSAS
PROJECT NO. KANS. R-53 CR
PREPARED FOR CITY OF SALINA, KANSAS
BY BUCHER & WILLIS, CONSULTING
ENGINEERS, PLANNERS & ARCHITECTS
NUMBERS INDICATE PERCENT
OF POPULATION IN EACH
AREA OVER 65.
Tho prep(lfQliof1 of thil map .a~ finatldclly aided I"1<::I>JI1" Q F.derol granl
from thi! Ranewa! Auhlonte Admirli$hQtien of the Oeportl1Ultlf
of Hl)\J$ing and Urboll Oc",el<:llHlli!!rll, avthcrind by $edion 405
of the HClIaino Ad of 1959, Of ($Ill/HIded,
AVERAGE AGE- OF HEAD OF HOUSE
,
/\\
~-- \~.
\~
\_~~\..
\\
\ ~
\ \
\\
----L
)
i
(A.)I
VA) .. ..\..... .'.p.",. ..' ~\; ( ~ j".
, 1\ .' ~H\ \\/ ~"'~
, \. \ 'Ui ii' I,r,.. '"~!~~~~'\"~. ~
~ \ ,~, 1'..'- ~~~ "'1 '\(
I '~." i~... ~\\I y
i fin I" /l"- :-,:1:
. 'I' I 1(. 'I~
\ ~ II if ~,.n, I ~~i. ~,...I Ji ~,.I,.'I SALINA COMMUNITY RENEWAL PROGRAM
\\, ~I ,rlt=iiJi ~I ~'II SALINA, KANSAS
; ~~U'.....~ll,",..;:,,.I.,....I.-."'.'.:,I. -
. u--= 1m ~ '''''''''''' _~L PROJECT NO 0 KANS 0 R- 53 CR
~ .. T.~::lJ'..............':,:':.,..r.i.\' PREPARED FOR CITY OF SALINA, KANSAS
~~. )TI~ li'~.,,-'-~~~;;~.1, BY BUCHER & WILLIS, CONSULTING
\~\~-'-'" !~l,""", _._ )~\~\ ENGINEERS, PLANNERS & ARCHITECTS
~\ ',' --------.&........J! /
11\ i iC::::-----------: ."--=::>>. Th. prupclolion of thi, mop wcn HFlQ.,dally oided th'Qvgh Q F.detol grant
i i A.'I"t:.: r::.::::-~.......J :--.... from the RerHHlo'ol Auislanu Adminishalkm of thfl Department
~~'. ~i~ I~ [-9 I' n.1 ~'" r~~:::'~.;:::~ o. Hoo"". oed U.bo" O...lopmo"l, oOlh"',,. by ""'0" 40;
~\ :!f J J j ~I . 1'1';:' of the HQlUIFl9 Act oi 1959, as (Imended
'\ Ii \ \, \\ ," ~/ /
',\ ,---~\\~\ ~,\ \ \~-"'y ,
\j I! ',,\\ \' !
j.." \~\_i ;'
LEGEND
NUMBER INDICATES AVERAGE
AGE OF HEAD OF HOUSE
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
'1
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
AVERAGE LENGTH OF RESIDENCE
)
I
LEGEND
SALINA COMMUNITY .RENEWAL PROGRAM
SALINA, KANS.AS
NUMBERS INDICATE AVERAGE
NUMBE~ OF YEARS OF RESI-
DENCE IN PRESENT DWELLING
SOURCE: INTERIOR INTERVIEWS
o
SEX HEAD OF HOUSEHOLD
I
I
!
+
LEGEND
SALINA COMMUNITY RENEWAL PROGRAM
NUMBER INDICATES % OF HOUSE-
HOLDS HAVING A FEMALE AS
HEAD, UNDERLINED NUMBERS
INDICATE NUMBER OF MALE AND
FEMALE HEADS OF HOUSEHOLDS,
RESPECTIVELY,
SOURCE: INTERIOR INTERVIEWS
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
FAMILIES WITH 5 OR MORE
MEr1BERS
LEGEND
SALINA COMMUNITY RENEWAL PROGRAM
SALINA, KANSAS
PROJECT NO., KANS. R-53 CR
PREPARED FOR CITY OF SALINA, KANSAS
BY BUCHER & WILLIS, CONSULTING
ENGINEERS, PLANNERS & ARCHITECTS
NUMBERS INDICATE PERCENT OF
FAMILIES HAVING 5 OR MORE
MEMBERS,
SOURCE: COUNTY CENSUS
The pt.DIiHot\On of. thb mQp wai' finondolly aidod through ti hd.rol gfc('l!lt
from fhe RenecwQI AU;$!t1IHIl Admrnhtr<:ltlon Qf the DItP'Hhl'!l:ll'lt
of HQluil'lg cod Urban O.vclopll'Ier.t, aut!lQriud by HfdiQ" 405
Qf tho Houi1ng A<:l of 1959, as amended.
AVERAGE COST OF HOUSING
I
LEGEND
FIGURES INDICATE IN DOLLARS
THE AVERAGE MONTHLY COST OF
HOUSING - RENTAL OR MORTGAGE
PAYMENTS AND UTILITIES. AVE-
RAGE UTILITY PAYMENT FOR ALL
PRIORITY AREAS - $23.00.
SOURCE: INTERIOR INTERVIEWS
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
POll CE REPORTS
J
./,(
/\~f'
(~' \~~
\\
\~
I \,\.
'I \
J "
J . .
I
.1
lEGEND
SALINA COMMUNITY RENEWAL PROGRAM
SALINA, KANSAS
PROJECT NO. KANS. R-53 CR
PREPARED FOR CITY OF SALINA, KANSAS
BY BUCHER & WILLIS, CONSULTING
ENGINEERS, PLANNERS & ARCHITECTS
NUMBERS INDICATE NUMBER OF
OCCURRENCES OF CRIME PER 100
POPULATION. UNDERLINED NUM-
BERS INDICATE NUMBER APPRE-
HENDED AND RESIDING IN AREAS
PER 100 POPULATION.
SOURCE: CITY POLICE RECORDS
~~o$mp;::~~a~:O:al~t~\:t:::. ~dSm!i:i~~r~~~~ :~d:h: !~:~~~~m:~ltldeH1! g'onl
of H~'niflG (ind Urbat> Delllllopmsnt, "....'horited by Hldl<l!1 405
of the H<>'Hing Ad (If 1959, eu Qmefhi~d
.
\
SALINA COMMUNITY RENEWAL PROGRAM
SALINA, Ii'ANSAS
PROJECT NO. KANS. R-53 CR
PREPARED FOR CITY OF SALINA, KANSAS
-f :.
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
WELFARE RECIPIENTS
I'
I
UNDERLINED NUMBERS INDICATE
NUMBER OF WELFARE RECIPIENT
FAMILIES PER 100 FAMILIES,
OTHER NUMBERS INDICATE NUM-
BER OF FAMILIES RECEIVING
AID WITHIN EACH CATEGORY,
OAA -- OLD AGE ASSISTANCE
AFDC - AID TO FOSTER AND
DEPENDENT CHILDREN
AB --- AID TO BLIND
GA --- GENERAL AID
AD --- AID TO DISABLED
SOURCE: WELFARE DEPARTMENT
I
:3
. ~lj~:Jrr.,.'~';rn,.!'".i ~"~,.:!,."1.11.~.".C:C:"T:. ,.,.:
'r~"1~i ,in' ,::~J. (Ali
\A) i ,1-...t 'r~~:i j ~..'
I \ \ 1\ !lllJR~~\~"~\;1 .
~ :.... LJM1l "~~:"I (
· r' I. II~;/In- I
I \~\ I nUilll~jl~: ~l ~~ SALINA Co.MMUNITY RENEWAL PRo.~RAM
\ \ ~! 1,-- ~. ~lUl-~' I SALINA, KANSAS
~.~ --L)~.n.;.~i~-==LJ~ PRo.JECT NO.. KANS. R-53 CR
~18Tl12fi' 'i-,"J'.-=-__~, \ PREPARED FOR CITY o.F SALINA, KANSAS
I \\r\.,~ t4J. ~li~7-~~~'~ BY BUCHER & WILLIS, Co.NSULTING
\'~\ \ "'. Ii j~-=--=-~:\;;,\~\ ENGINEERS, PLANNERS & ARCHITECTS
~~~' !IL.,d_-&<_j~
' : ~.r- --- ~'-I - - ')( Tha prepotQlion of thIS mop we' IlntH1clolly elided Ihtl)lJ~h a fed.rol Qtont
~ ' !~ ~_ f ':f;~ _ from the Renetwal A$ustQ,,(e AdmU"llsfrol!on of the Oeparlrn<!f11
I \ ~ !r ~ 1,.--;;] 1-- o-ll- 1 ~I ~- ~\ of He,amg and Urbon O....elopmafl' cl\lIhonzed by ulthon 405
\ ' t I! -1 \ \ J ~ ~ ~ .,{ lhe HouslI'IQ Ad 011959, os amended
\\ .._~ \ '\ \;, \<'~~
,\' '",l, \ "-, ~I '7/
. \J I \\\:, '\;, '<>,\ I ff
..l...: '\'iI.,\-/ o' E
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
YWCA PARTICIPATION
I
I
r.-.....-.-.-
1---'
(
LEGEND
NUMBERS INDICATE TOTAL NUM-
BER OF~PARTICIPANTS LIVING
IN THE AREA. UNDERLINED NUM-
BERS INDICATE RATE PER 100
POPULATION 5 YEARS OF AGE
AND OVER.
SOURCE: YWCA MEMBERSHIP
RECORDS
LEGEND
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
YMCA PARTICIPATION
NUMBERS INDICATE TOTAL NUM-
BER OF PARTICIPANTS LIVING
IN THE AREA, UNDERLINED NUM-
BERS INDICATE RATE PER 100
POPULATION 5 YEARS OF AGE
AND OVER.
SOURCE: YMCA MEMBERSHIP
RECORDS
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
BOY SCOUT MEMBERSHIP
+
lEGEND
SALINA COMMUNITY RENEWAL PROGRAM
SALINA, KANSAS
PROJECT NO. KANS. R-53 CR
PREPARED FOR CITY OF SALINA, KANSAS
NUMBERS INDICATE MEMBERSHIP
WITHIN THE AREA. UNDERLINED
NUMBERS INDICATE NUMBER PER
100 POPULATION 5-20'YEARS
o F AG E I
SOURCE: BOY SCOUT MEMBERSHIP
RECORDS
.GIRL SCOUT MEMBERSHIP
~
...,//\\
~ \~~....
\~
\\
\\\
\\\
\\
i
I
+
LEGEND
NUMBERS INDICATE MEMBERSHIP
WITHIN THE AREA. UNDERLINED
NUMBERS INDICATE NUMBER PER
100 POPULATION 5-20 YEARS
OF AGE.
SOURCE: GIRL SCOUT MEMBER-
SHIP RECORDS
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
INTERIOR INTERVIEW
REFUSAL RATE
~
y
SALINA COMMUNITY RENEWAL PROGRAM
SALINA, KANSAS
PROJECT NO. KANS. R-53 CR
LEGEND
NUMBERS INDICATE RATE OF
INTERVIEW REFUSAL FOR ALL
REASONS.
PERCENT OF RENTERS
LEGEND
NUMBERS INDICATE PERCENT OF
FAMILIES WITHIN NEIGHBOR-
HOODS RENTING DWELLINGS,
SOURCE: INTERIOR INTERVIEWS
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
WELFARE CASE RATE
\A). \.....t...n-~I ~\. l,~ '4
II . I ~ I> \ ,,) '. '01.
. I . il '11 \ \\ (""V(~~"m .
\~\ '\' I Ilil ~Qk~~~\\~11
l I 11r. '....Il..! ~~,~,/',n".".r!I,.,~.'
~~~\ I.' l~:.. .WW[,.~Uijl!~\il ~~~~~~,C~~~~TY RENEWAL PROGRAM
\i~' ~ O. ~~li PROJECT NO. MNS.R-53 CR
, ~~Ism-;;[1! \r-.~\:::.::~,-"g~ PREPARED FOR CITY OF SALINA, MNSAS
. ~\\\.U~ I!!;~=~~\\~ BY BUC~ER & WILLIS, CONSULTING
~~\ \ mm,. 11~"""'==-=~:~;\~' ENGINEERS, PLANNERS & ARCHITECTS
~\~ ~i 1:r"--~'---=:''::T'::'~':::::::'~~ Yh", preparation of thi~ lI'Iap WtlS fi/'l.':I!'l(!{I11y oidlld (3 graot
\\.~ ~ '. .!~.' 5-""'- ,-=-....&<'1.1 '.,r:r:::.",,~? "0' 'h~ ''''"01 ''''''.M' Ad"',,,',.o;oo of 'h.
l\ \: ![ ~ [' t{ 91' I" gl; 01 HQI,Hmg ~u~d Urb"" O"vt>lapm'itnt, o",lhad~Ni by
\ '\ !i ~ !l \ "'i!';;;" of thw H{H1smu A(t of J959, O~ nmltnded.
'\ij"." '\\ \\ ,\~-'
\\ ' ~,\\. ~\;;;. I
\ ! /i \\ '~l f
LEGEND
FIGURES INDICATE NUMBER OF
PERSONS PER 1,000 POPULA-
TION RECEIVINS WELFARE
ASSISTANCE,
SOURCE: SALINE COUNTY WEL-
FARE DEPARTf~ENT
AND COUNTY CENSUS
UNEMPLOYMENT RATES
LEGEND
NUMBERS INDICATE NUMBER OF
PERSONS PER THOUSAND BETWEEN
20 AND 65 YEARS OF AGE WHO
WERE UNEMPLOYED MORE THAN 60
DAYS DURING 1967.
SOURCE: KANSAS STATE EMPLOY-
MENT SERVICE
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I