Neighborhood Backgrounder

 The Proposed Institutional Use of the Rockhill Tennis Club Property
by the Nelson-Atkins Museum

Update: City Council unanimously passed the ordinance. Below is an update letter, followed by a brief background on the issue and a summary of events.

Southmoreland Residents:

Because of your and our neighborhood's support, zoning ordinance 080281, which restricts museum usage in single family residential neighborhoods (R-1), was passed unanimously by City Council on Thursday, July 26th.

This could not have passed without the support of our city council reps Beth Gottstein and Jan Marcason. They have and continue to put neighborhoods as their top priority. We thank them for their hard work and diligence.

The unanimous vote by the City Council is simply good public policy. When faced with development and expansion plans that can have a profound effect on our residential neighborhoods, we will have a meaningful place at the table. The ordinance helps to ensure both vibrant and healthy neighborhoods and successful, world class institutions.

While our issue with the Nelson was the catalyst for amending a section of the zoning code, it serves to protect other neighborhoods throughout the city. As a result of testimony provided in this case, the Wornall Homestead Neighborhood Association found out about another museum’s expansion plans in their neighborhood. Upon this discovery, and additional investigation and deliberation, the Wornall Homestead Association voted to support the ordinance.

We are also very pleased with the unanimous support that neighborhoods received from the Mayor and City Council. They clearly understand the importance of our neighborhoods and despite considerable pressure, voted with values that will keep neighborhoods strong. We strongly encourage you to send them a note of appreciation for their political courage and enacting legislation that will tangibly improve our residential quality of life.

Below are the email addresses of our city council reps. You can copy and paste all of them into your email:

What's next? We hope to work with the Nelson in the context of a joint planning process that will take into account the needs of the Museum and surrounding neighborhoods. The Nelson proposed a planning process a week prior to the 6/26 vote. We'll keep you informed of progress.

Issue Summary (updates and resources below this summary)

This is issue is not about the Rockhill Tennis Club - it is about neighborhood preservation.

This issue is the long-term programmed use of the property by the Nelson Museum, first for administrative offices and eventually for museum exhibition space. The Nelson Museum draws 500,000+ people annually, and the long term programmed use of the Rockhill Tennis Club property, as museum exhibition space that could support a building larger than the original Nelson Museum, is inappropriate in the heart of an R1 residential historic district.

Midtown neighborhoods are fragile, and the insitutional encroachment will destroy the Rockhill neighborhood. The four lanes of Rockhill Road and the 40-foot wall constructed by the Museum are the natural demarcation between institution and neighborhood.

A brief history:

The historic home "Stone House", where the Rockhill Tennis Club is located, was built in 1905 by William Rockhill Nelson as a wedding present to his daughter Laura. It was eventually sold, and existed for a number of years is disrepair as a vacant property until it was donated to the Museum in 1953. In 1957, the Museum leased it to the Rockhill Club.

The Rockhill Tennis Club began in 1915 where Theis Park and Brush Creek are today. The Davis Cup was held there in 1928, and the Club acquired the reputation of being a moderately-priced, regionally recognized tennis club with an open door policy -- with an ethnically and religiously diverse membership.

In 1957 the club moved several blocks north and began leasing Stone House from the Museum. Since 1957, the Rockhill Tennis Club has maintained and restored Stone House without any financial or other assistance from the museum.

The club continues its 93-year history as an instution for the surrounding neighborhoods, as a source of family recreation and community gathering.

The Nelson Museum is planning to evict the Rockhill Tennis Club in 2009 and turn Stone House into adminstrative offices.

The Rockhill and Southmoreland neighborhoods have proposed very reasonable solutions that keep the club alive in our community and also provide the needed office space for the Museum. From December through March, 2008 the neighborhoods have met with the Museum over 8 times in the last several months to try and acheive a compromise. The Museum has not considered any of our proposals for compromise.

The first compromise involves building office space on the vacant parking lot the museum owns across the street (north) from the main museum. The neighborhoods have proposed building it for the museum, with a developer providing the upfront costs and leasing it to the Museum at the same or lower rent then they are paying today.

We believe that the futures of our neighborhood and the Nelson Museum are inextricably linked. We believe both the neighborhood and the Museum can grow without harming one another. That is exactly why we have never suggested the Museum not expand - we have suggested the Museum expands in a way that does not harm our neighborhoods.

It is the position of the Southmoreland neighborhood that:

#1: The institutional encroachment, represented by the Museum crossing over a 40-foot wall and 4 lanes of traffic, will drive an institutional wedge into the heart of one of Kansas City's most distinguished historical neighborhoods. This institutional wedge will drive families away from this neighborhood;

#2: the Rockhill Club is a 93-year old midtown neighborhood asset which attracts and keeps families in midtown Kansas City. The is a use of the property that is directly complimentary and directly supportive of an R1 district. While there are other complimentary and supportive uses for the property, removal of the Rockhill Tennis Club will materially harm the ability of midtown to attract and retain families, and in turn decrease single-family owner occupancy;

#3: We are comnitted to collaboratively planning with the Nelson Museum to develop solutions that will benefit both the Museum and the neighborhoods.

For a circa-1920 view of the Rockhill neighborhood and club, and William Rockhill Nelson's vision for the neighborhood, click below.

Low Res (3MB- short download time)
High Res (28MB - extremely long download time)

To resolve this issue the neighborhoods supported the passage of ordinance 080281. Update: The ordinance was passed unanimously by City Council on 6/26/08.

Here's how it works: the ordinance proposes to (1) prohibit museum and art gallery uses in R-1 zoning districts and (2) ensure museum and art gallery uses continue to allowed in R-2 and higher zoning districts. The R-1 zoning district is the most restrictive zoning district and applies to areas zoned for only residential single-family housing.

City Planning staff has recommmended to City Council that the ordinance be passed to protect Kansas City R1 districts. You can read the staff recommendation here.

4/24 Update: Yael Abouhalkah of the KC Star Editorial Board posted a column on this issue. On 4/22 and 4/24, Yael Abouhalkah wrote about this whole situation.

Read Yael's 4/24 column here.

- For additional background read his earlier 4/22 column here.

5/24 Update: Rockhill eviction featured in the "As I See It" column in the Kansas City Star. Jim Wanser, on behalf of both neighborhoods, explained the issue and why it is a insututional encroachment problem with city-wide implications.

Read Jim's 5/24 column here.

6/3/08 The City Plan recommends passaged of the zoning ordinance to protect R1 neighborhoods. You can read the staff recommendation here.

Over 50 residents from Rockhill, Southmoreland and other neighborhoods took the time to attend the hearing, with residents and many other neighborhoods providing testimony. The testimony lasted more than 2 hours. Unfortunately the City Plan Commission voted against supporting the ordinance, because they did not have enough information. This was the first time the City Plan Commission had been introduced to the issue (CPC members cannot be lobbied).