[{"_1":2,"_122":-5,"_123":-5},"loaderData",{"_3":4,"_26":27},"root",{"_5":6,"_17":10,"_18":19,"_20":21,"_22":10,"_23":-5,"_24":-5,"_25":10},"user",{"_7":8,"_9":10,"_11":10,"_12":-5,"_13":-5,"_14":15,"_16":-5},"roles",[],"isAuthenticated",false,"isPremium","planName","subscriptionStatus","featureFlags",{},"insightsBudget","isDevelopmentHost","userPreferences",{},"recaptchaSiteKey","6LcvOJcUAAAAAHsB-gPGfGktcRlKpH7OTIU_dMTD","isImpersonating","impersonation","affiliateStatus","isFreedomPortal","routes/v2/article/layout",{"_28":29,"_30":31},"notFound",true,"relatedArticles",[32,75,87,99,110],{"_33":34,"_35":36,"_37":38,"_39":40,"_41":42,"_43":44,"_45":46,"_47":48,"_49":50,"_51":52,"_53":54,"_55":56,"_57":58,"_59":60,"_61":62,"_63":64,"_65":66,"_67":68,"_69":70,"_71":68,"_72":73,"_74":73},"mediaId",6165970,"mediaKeyId","5416776-dc474bcb600cf8aaec58aff686c72397","parentId",5416776,"title","Committee approves RHID policy tweak to allow higher cap rates for targeted projects","audioSeconds",316,"startMs",2797000,"endMs",3113000,"viewUrl","/Search/View?dp=1&key=5416776-dc474bcb600cf8aaec58aff686c72397&start=2797&end=3113","thumbnailUrl","https://assets.pipeline.soar.com/5416776-dc474bcb600cf8aaec58aff686c72397/thumbnail_2797000.jpg","articleUrl","/articles/6165970/Topeka-City/Shawnee-County/Kansas/Committee-approves-RHID-policy-tweak-to-allow-higher-cap-rates-for-targeted-projects","mediaUrl","https://secure.pipeline.soar.com/6165970-523f9ace57960bd6181c00155d88fe11/orig.mp4?Expires=1771172874&Signature=iWVBvIc50vSusBMFafr2yD8DGaVuN6w5e~G3QXak4qzSHOcl0rS1QgKbC0cACV5aV7UI7LB5Ct9v-B-4VfJSe5rCOLlv~gCsG6EgsA-kUEAE7mxtObJDaoaD5NAmNL9WYfT4cBKELtKPHsQjrF6xe65AWA8LPllsIzxsEp3RAPqVE71sPDNEEshcLApnH143XXaCwTWhylJnkbnc8TEIEpCw3BZ2Sf1wSF8mdj3j4iZSMhqxLjWPQ~jubcXKM~7-I-Er5ikgvSluZuqEzItn~QOApnV1QCv~ap6uOb3derL6zdj~gzBSx~8SlVnBprHCBbYVzkQzsQRmeXq9~zJZIg__&Key-Pair-Id=KUT5TJCACFTXG","author","City Council of Topeka, KS","date","2025-07-08T00:00:00Z","article","The Policy and Finance Committee on July 8 approved a staff recommendation to amend the Reinvestment Housing Incentive District (RHID) policy to allow the RHID review team to recommend higher capitalization rates for certain projects, increasing the potential incentive available to developers.

Staff explained that RHID incentives use a “but‑for” test to determine whether a project needs public assistance to be viable, comparing projected rates of return with and without incentive. The proposed change gives the review team objective factors to justify using a cap rate above market for projects in targeted circumstances — examples cited included downtown redevelopment, projects providing workforce or affordable housing, historically undeveloped property and blighted areas under KSA 12‑17‑70, and where developers place long‑term restrictive covenants on property.

Staff said the proposal was developed during the Union Tower discussions and that their recommendation included a benchmark cap rate of 8.5% in defined circumstances, above typical market rates used in RHID calculations. “Our recommendation was use a cap rate of 8.5%, which is a little higher than market,” a staff presenter said, adding the higher cap rate results in a larger incentive allowance when the project meets the identified criteria.

Why it matters: allowing a higher cap rate in specific, justified cases increases the financial incentive that can be offered under RHID to spur development that staff believes would not otherwise proceed. That can make some large downtown or affordable housing projects financially viable for developers.

Committee action: a committee member moved to approve the amendments, the motion was seconded and members voted in the affirmative. Staff said the change is the current amendment under consideration and that other small language cleanups tied to the housing study were included.

Next steps: staff will finalize policy language and bring the RHID amendment forward as an item for the governing body to adopt; staff also noted they updated the RHID materials to reflect the housing study’s demand projections over a 20‑year timeframe.","mediaType","Video","parentTitle","Topeka City Policy & Finance Committee Meeting July 8, 2025","oneSentenceSummary","The Policy and Finance Committee approved a change July 8 allowing the RHID review team to recommend higher capitalization rates for projects that meet specific criteria, increasing potential incentives for targeted developments.","taxTitle","Topeka City, Shawnee County, Kansas","taxId",4988,"location","headline","","shortSummary",{"_33":76,"_35":36,"_37":38,"_39":77,"_41":78,"_43":79,"_45":80,"_47":81,"_49":82,"_51":83,"_53":84,"_55":56,"_57":58,"_59":85,"_61":62,"_63":64,"_65":86,"_67":68,"_69":70,"_71":68,"_72":73,"_74":73},6165972,"Committee approves Topeka adoption of the 2024 Uniform Mechanical Code with amendments",358,2412000,2770000,"/Search/View?dp=1&key=5416776-dc474bcb600cf8aaec58aff686c72397&start=2412&end=2770","https://assets.pipeline.soar.com/5416776-dc474bcb600cf8aaec58aff686c72397/thumbnail_2412000.jpg","/articles/6165972/Topeka-City/Shawnee-County/Kansas/Committee-approves-Topeka-adoption-of-the-2024-Uniform-Mechanical-Code-with-amendments","https://secure.pipeline.soar.com/6165972-f1047632d0356c7bf369fcf3458eb4e8/orig.mp4?Expires=1771172874&Signature=Jq2RSjecAV5WXpDQ~xBvyMKnbRtxTF52AvTQuI9Erzden1eDpIISdDzY8erDUAcXbBE5u-wuirIxEdEzl6Sm7UE~HSb8VjF7pe4fH9yWxwi-KIefD6uxV2qbddhiWkvVd54s08DsyL5DwXNB-vRhxbj3UqhBH5HgjLuH8bwtd49oboG6Myo3RmUxxcbvJdCoEoj1Kz7UaGcc3T7kCtzMBZG7oadwvolb-F58lLHqxCe3~fSXI5vZZG5aUJ0kmIdDc8XM6SC3X441qJXglF1fPSYEsNgbiPOcvcua8jh-Ot~oZvEZD2~-HDx~1HeQ6BGSr3PsHJBo2lo-SY2Nbepvig__&Key-Pair-Id=KUT5TJCACFTXG","The Policy and Finance Committee moved July 8 to approve a proposal recommending adoption of the 2024 Uniform Mechanical Code with local amendments.

Richard, speaking for the city’s building/mechanical code reviewers and the Board of Mechanical Examiners, said the Uniform Mechanical Code (published by the International Association of Plumbing and Mechanical Officials) is used to guide installation and repair of mechanical systems and that Topeka’s practice is to update codes every three years. “The board is making a recommendation that we adopt the 2024 uniform mechanical code with amendments and staff supports that recommendation,” Richard said during the meeting.

Richard told the committee the uniform code is more comprehensive for the city’s needs and that peer jurisdictions commonly use recent code editions; staff reached out to industry stakeholders and the board reviewed potential changes. Committee members asked whether any sections had been controversial; Richard cited one example — an added outdoor safety valve on some units that increases cost by about $15 but was adopted for safety reasons.

The committee voted to approve the recommendation as presented. A councilmember moved to approve and the motion was seconded; the committee recorded a voice vote in which members responded “aye.” Staff said the update will align Topeka with the latest national mechanical standards and improve consistency in permitting and inspections.

Why it matters: Adopting the 2024 UMC updates technical requirements for heating, ventilation and mechanical systems, affects building permits and inspections, and reduces the need for staff to consult multiple code sources by using a single, updated standard. Staff said the board and stakeholders participated in preparing the proposed local amendments.

Next steps: the committee recommendation will proceed to the governing body for final adoption. Details of the adopted amendments and the effective date will be posted with the ordinance and implemented through the city’s permitting process.","The Policy and Finance Committee voted to recommend adopting the 2024 Uniform Mechanical Code (UMC) with local amendments; the code update aligns local mechanical code with the latest national standard used by peer cities.",{"_33":88,"_35":36,"_37":38,"_39":89,"_41":90,"_43":91,"_45":92,"_47":93,"_49":94,"_51":95,"_53":96,"_55":56,"_57":58,"_59":97,"_61":62,"_63":64,"_65":98,"_67":68,"_69":70,"_71":68,"_72":73,"_74":73},6165974,"Topeka planning staff, housing committee propose allowing duplexes by right in single‑family zones",2264,75000,2339000,"/Search/View?dp=1&key=5416776-dc474bcb600cf8aaec58aff686c72397&start=75&end=2339","https://assets.pipeline.soar.com/5416776-dc474bcb600cf8aaec58aff686c72397/thumbnail_75000.jpg","/articles/6165974/Topeka-City/Shawnee-County/Kansas/Topeka-planning-staff-housing-committee-propose-allowing-duplexes-by-right-in-singlefamily-zones","https://secure.pipeline.soar.com/6165974-937f7efb04b836ee9aa8b353a63e8be9/orig.mp4?Expires=1771172874&Signature=cZvtYt4gnkDqRJhtqo04L0ao7iz~6b-QGz62LLPX4z9t1LdUyE0mpahnWp1VNujBF3bL3o3mOCo7Iiz3Sa7ceudMrNL3vsxKPms~oZRXQXIDzrXNs691~XsjPlvGfyonGUNanZ0VGW2WpMllnSy6Tw66lsd-MWu2rMGFZPiehZogg1ghWfArdv2rSyaNh~TRiz~JyddAClHSrLsl5WyOvN4kf83U29ZnNhRQUFDbTfHcwnNRWhlcF07RM2uc1Q647Eo0r-QopQLK9wRcmcn1tFQ3X5ksK2djVRxPhyDrCRrdKBEjRLJqw4b2Tw~kn0gM0-fqVs6D6Ht~8Naiq-bEtg__&Key-Pair-Id=KUT5TJCACFTXG","Topeka planning staff and members of the Planning Commission’s housing committee presented a proposal July 8 to allow duplexes in single‑family residential zones through an administrative building‑permit review and to allow triplexes and four‑plexes through conditional‑use permits.

The proposal, offered by Jim Kaup of the Planning Commission’s housing committee, is intended to increase “missing‑middle” housing — duplex through small apartment buildings — and respond to findings in Topeka’s 2020 housing market study that the committee and staff said showed a persistent shortage. “We are trying to provide more diversity in our housing stock to achieve a number of benefits for the community,” Kaup said. The committee’s presentation said 87% of Topeka’s residential zoning is single‑family and estimated demand of roughly 14,400 additional housing units over 20 years.

City staff described specific draft standards that would apply to duplexes built through administrative review, including a minimum lot width of 37 feet, required landscape in the front setback including at least one tree, alley access where available, and design standards to reduce blank facades or front‑street garage dominance. Conversions of existing single‑family houses to duplexes were included in the proposal and could be approved administratively if they met the standards; otherwise they could proceed through a conditional‑use permit, staff said.

Why it matters: committee members and staff framed the proposal as part of a broader, multi‑year effort to lower housing costs by allowing more housing types without the time and expense of rezoning. Staff said other Kansas cities and a number of states have recently taken similar steps to address housing shortages, and that local efforts are one part of a larger strategy to increase supply.

Committee discussion focused on preserving neighborhood character, public input, and parking. Councilmember Marcus and Councilwoman Hofer said they generally support increasing housing options but raised concerns about impacts in historic districts and on street parking. Councilmember Marcus suggested starting with duplexes before permitting higher‑density conversions, and he emphasized community review for conversions because conditional‑use review gives neighbors an opportunity to comment. “I think my only frustration to some degree is I am one of 10. I don't get to make all the rules…but I do think that without either some sort of carve‑out for historic districts or some promise that it still has to go through the conditional‑use permit process, that would be a hard sell to the rest of the council,” Marcus said.

Staff and committee members said they had presented to several neighborhood associations — College Hill, Historic North Topeka East and Highcrest — and had circulated an online survey. Staff reported the survey showed about 62% of respondents said duplexes should be allowed in some manner (administrative, conditional use or other), while 38% said duplexes should not be allowed. The committee acknowledged that some neighborhood meetings favored the idea while others, notably College Hill, opposed conversions of existing houses.

Next steps: the housing committee will continue work in August, incorporate committee and neighborhood feedback, and could forward a formal zoning text amendment to the Planning Commission for a public hearing and recommendation; staff said the governing body would likely see the item in September. No ordinance or text amendment was voted on at the July 8 meeting.

Details to watch: the draft standards presented would allow administrative approval if an application meets specified design, landscape and lot‑width standards; conversions that fail to meet those standards could be reviewed via conditional‑use permit, which triggers public notice and a Planning Commission hearing. Committee members directed staff to continue outreach and to return with refined language and examples for committee and council review.","Planning staff and the Housing Committee presented a proposal July 8 to permit duplexes by building permit in single‑family residential zones and to allow tri‑ and quadplexes via conditional‑use permits; no ordinance was sent forward and the committee will refine the plan after more neighborhood outreach.",{"_33":100,"_35":36,"_37":38,"_39":101,"_41":102,"_43":103,"_45":103,"_47":104,"_49":105,"_51":106,"_53":107,"_55":56,"_57":58,"_59":108,"_61":62,"_63":64,"_65":109,"_67":68,"_69":70,"_71":68,"_72":73,"_74":73},6165961,"Advocates press committee to restore and expand nondiscrimination protections; staff to draft amendments and program‑review language",0,5697000,"/Search/View?dp=1&key=5416776-dc474bcb600cf8aaec58aff686c72397&start=5697&end=5697","https://assets.pipeline.soar.com/5416776-dc474bcb600cf8aaec58aff686c72397/thumbnail_5697000.jpg","/articles/6165961/Topeka-City/Shawnee-County/Kansas/Advocates-press-committee-to-restore-and-expand-nondiscrimination-protections-staff-to-draft-amendments-and-programreview-language","https://secure.pipeline.soar.com/6165961-c4ea711d4df48e24ad4fd3ad48e7203d/orig.mp4?Expires=1771172874&Signature=L9xaQyn~E8ClIYudeYFTMUWJ1xDlGS9KxUAfnJ-xh7vNxZv5GPI3gI3JBqCfBJUIb2vhRLYGtIv8f3EwAEALPW5lvHeY1kleRNJt9Zx2qESUj6gDMHJeYdvcHHjVBk2DqDNdoMRbhO9mTxAKkR0AAl3NHCbqYtN1JmEiNwjYfr73FQybZHOn93TdfJN4mSCHiXH1Qyv~M6xwFZSCrQbHJzRvSSH3yZX4HWb2lNaBTNp1~ZyL0NZYJx506YjZeg5hlE68gJu33eLP6awz4sVkmI19aMrvi5ATY4bNrjkGd8xUCTuRXIi2wewKnSB1bhwHCOJ7ADBNtQ0YS3t1XZM08w__&Key-Pair-Id=KUT5TJCACFTXG","Advocates and residents urged the Policy and Finance Committee July 8 to restore and expand local nondiscrimination protections after the governing body’s recent ordinance change that tied parts of the ordinance to Supreme Court reasoning in Bostock.

Melissa Steiler, advocacy director for Loudlight, asked the committee to amend the local ordinance to remove the Supreme Court citation and to expand protections for housing, employment and public accommodations to include pregnancy, protective hairstyles and citizenship status. “None of these things are related to our local nondiscrimination ordinances,” Steiler said, urging prompt action and legal clarity so protections cannot be weakened by shifting federal litigation.

Separately, the chair raised a related item: an amendment to reestablish a program review committee to monitor contracting and utilization of women‑ and minority‑owned businesses and disadvantaged business enterprises. City Attorney Amanda said staff can draft ordinance language to reinsert the program review committee or tailor its scope; she requested guidance from the committee whether the group should be narrowly focused on MWBE/DBE utilization or broadened to review contracting practices overall. She also asked the committee to clarify what metrics or appeal rights the committee should have and said staff would suggest ordinance language that would maintain protections even if federal decisions shift.

Why it matters: advocates told the committee that nondiscrimination protections affect employment, housing and public‑accommodation access and that the city should ensure local protections are robust and not contingent on changing federal litigation. The program review committee discussion concerns transparency and tracking of city contracting and utilization goals for small, women‑ and minority‑owned businesses.

Outcome and next steps: Amanda said legal staff would draft ordinance language to address the program review committee’s role, the metrics to be tracked and possible language to insulate the city’s protections from future federal changes; staff will circulate a draft to the committee and post it with the agenda ahead of the next meeting. No ordinance change was adopted at the July 8 meeting.","Public commenters urged the committee to amend the city’s nondiscrimination ordinance to remove a dependency on the Bostock decision and to broaden protections; city legal staff said it would draft ordinance language and clarifying program‑review committee duties for council consideration.",{"_33":111,"_35":36,"_37":38,"_39":112,"_41":113,"_43":114,"_45":115,"_47":116,"_49":117,"_51":118,"_53":119,"_55":56,"_57":58,"_59":120,"_61":62,"_63":64,"_65":121,"_67":68,"_69":70,"_71":68,"_72":73,"_74":73},6165966,"Topeka committee weighs options for rooster restrictions after neighborhood noise complaints",639,3153000,3792000,"/Search/View?dp=1&key=5416776-dc474bcb600cf8aaec58aff686c72397&start=3153&end=3792","https://assets.pipeline.soar.com/5416776-dc474bcb600cf8aaec58aff686c72397/thumbnail_3153000.jpg","/articles/6165966/Topeka-City/Shawnee-County/Kansas/Topeka-committee-weighs-options-for-rooster-restrictions-after-neighborhood-noise-complaints","https://secure.pipeline.soar.com/6165966-00bd5a05ee41a4d6ae077ac07ced56d9/orig.mp4?Expires=1771172874&Signature=ekmzNX8sJxMhNOq~OwNFlEoXOVUgYCv7ZFcj3QayQnaJ1cbTADCGePYRJSpKcQHLFK8yfd4G1sScZQrsE9rigYUyRRXx3bPRw0WnIEP8x4PQ3YZJqK2TxEqK~nVrFkmsO8I0uCeH2dX0XGUXX~kLywHrzLJssP7ZCenAm0p0xKr5XZLdA1aX1n594IeivFVzj9ABO4k7qWUqB4PaOEZ2pjpAVvj0ZhuaUfvTV~y8vXXdoew-HAhTtYzeDH6vGYz2WU2zbVvSqruyDRgqtlh~RhMBnV2tt~quxPKTQCFAQZB74ckdhLkwDdLWlw6mesj-rLG2Cnr6Yi~SceBELkIAjw__&Key-Pair-Id=KUT5TJCACFTXG","The Policy and Finance Committee on July 8 heard a briefing from the city attorney on the city’s current rules for backyard poultry and discussed options ranging from a limited acreage allowance to an outright ban on roosters following neighbor complaints about noise and free‑roaming birds.

City Attorney Amanda told the committee that roosters are currently permitted inside Topeka city limits but that the municipal code includes provisions that can apply to poultry: it is unlawful to keep domestic poultry within 50 feet of a dwelling other than the owner’s, and it is unlawful to keep animals that “cause frequent or long continued noise that disrupts the comfort or repose of any person in the vicinity.” Amanda summarized how some Kansas cities permit hens while banning roosters, and that other cities (Overland Park, Ottawa) allow roosters only on parcels of three acres or more. She also recounted an Ottawa case and subsequent settlement that led Ottawa to refine its agriculture and chicken‑keeping rules.

Resident Dave told the committee that roosters in his neighborhood crowed as early as 3 a.m. and described a recording he said captured repeated crowing near his bedroom window. “Keeping roosters contributes nothing to the quality of life for 99% of the residents of the city,” he said, and described difficulties with repeated municipal enforcement that he said can take months and multiple citations to resolve.

Code enforcement staff said the city currently has no numerical limit on the number of chickens on a lot and that complaints are typically handled by an “eye test” and follow‑up by officers; free‑range birds that roam neighbors’ yards can create additional problems. Committee members discussed options including a straight ban inside city limits, an acreage threshold (3 acres or larger) to allow roosters, language to prohibit free‑range chickens, and possible numeric limits on flock size.

Outcome: staff asked for direction and will draft proposed ordinance language for the committee’s consideration. Committee members expressed interest in drafting either a clear acreage exemption (three acres) or a full ban; Chair and members also asked staff to consult animal control and code enforcement before returning with proposed language.

Why it matters: complaints about persistent early‑morning rooster noise, free‑roaming birds, and enforcement burdens led residents to request a clearer, enforceable city rule. Any ordinance change would affect backyard poultry owners and neighborhoods where small livestock are kept within city limits.

Next steps: staff will prepare draft ordinance options that could include an outright rooster ban within city limits, a minimum lot size exemption (for example, three acres), limits on free‑range chickens and potential numeric limits on flock size, and will return to the committee for review; no ordinance change was adopted at the July 8 meeting.","City attorney briefed the committee on current code allowing roosters subject to distance and nuisance rules; residents urged a ban or acreage limits and staff agreed to draft ordinance options for the committee to consider.","actionData","errors"]

Article not found

Committee approves RHID policy tweak to allow higher cap rates for targeted projects

Committee approves Topeka adoption of the 2024 Uniform Mechanical Code with amendments

Topeka planning staff, housing committee propose allowing duplexes by right in single‑family zones

Advocates press committee to restore and expand nondiscrimination protections; staff to draft amendments and program‑review language

Topeka committee weighs options for rooster restrictions after neighborhood noise complaints