KCRag Forum

Critical_Mass wrote: ↑Fri May 12, 2023 12:25 pm

TheLastGentleman wrote: ↑Fri May 12, 2023 11:54 am

Critical_Mass wrote: ↑Fri May 12, 2023 9:39 amShe wants a different City Manager because the current one is not the correct ethnicity in her mind. And she's gone mad with power!

???

https://www.kshb.com/news/local-news/ka ... rian-platt

viewtopic.php?p=658212&hilit=platt#p658212

viewtopic.php?p=658918&hilit=platt#p658918

Intolerant, hypocritical people should be punished accordingly. These double standards need to go away.

City meeting canceled, BikeWalkKC hosting one tonight instead.
https://bikewalkkc.org/events/gillham-t ... r-meeting/

bspecht wrote: ↑Mon May 15, 2023 12:53 pm City meeting canceled, BikeWalkKC hosting one tonight instead.
https://bikewalkkc.org/events/gillham-t ... r-meeting/

This whole thing is so fucking dumb. I'm curious what this meeting will be like. Definitely will be there.

The conversation about bike lanes in this city is toxic

Cratedigger wrote: ↑Mon May 15, 2023 4:16 pm

bspecht wrote: ↑Mon May 15, 2023 12:53 pm City meeting canceled, BikeWalkKC hosting one tonight instead.
https://bikewalkkc.org/events/gillham-t ... r-meeting/

This whole thing is so fucking dumb. I'm curious what this meeting will be like. Definitely will be there.

The conversation about bike lanes in this city is toxic

The city always does this though. Meetings that have the potential to get big and perhaps heated are ALWAYS cancelled at least once. I think they think it weeds out the number of people so it's not so contentious and doesn't go as long. Basically, only those who really want to go jump through the hoop of scheduling several times.

Obstructionist and stupid. All that does is slow the process down and ruin people's desire to civically engage.

I'm new to this side of the workings of kc, so thanks for educating me. I'll brace myself now.

They probably didn't want a shouting match at this meeting like I had with Mr. Atomic back when the Truman Road meeting occurred. Public meetings are beneficial when all sides put their opinion out there, but the City should be smart enough to weed out the ridiculous and advance accordingly.

Public engagement is no longer about giving individuals a microphone because that doesn't actually provide meaningful feedback on a public project -- which are inherently about the common good. All the microphone does is sour everyone else on the project or the process and you're only left with fundamentalists from either side who will never agree on an outcome.

The move to "open house" and online engagement is a reaction to this. The pandemic also proved that a Zoom meeting or well-distributed survey can capture as many diverse voices as anything done in person without the shouting.

If you can't get your point across electronically then you're doing it wrong. Not everyone can make the time to get to one location on a specified date and time to participate. This is especially true for underrepresented groups who work atypical schedules or those that may experience cultural/language barriers.

It will take awhile for consultants, planners, and elected officials to adapt their processes. And, honestly, some want to derail things and deliberately push for the old school approach.

DaveKCMO wrote: ↑Tue May 16, 2023 9:01 am ... And, honestly, some want to derail things and deliberately push for the old school approach.

The system's not broken, it's working exactly as designed!

Still nothing introduced for Year 2 implementation, hopefully staff is working on something. Looks like it'll be too late by adoption to actually get anything done this year, unless we get some rapid movement.

First post, long time lurker. Finally decided to create an account since I actually had just asked about this.

I've been working with PW on a project in my neighborhood and have asked about year 2. I have been told that it is still planned for this year, and that the official plan should be coming out within the next few weeks.

Also, I believe this page has been updated recently.
https://www.kcmo.gov/city-hall/departme ... ementation

bobthebiker wrote: ↑Wed Jun 28, 2023 11:42 am Also, I believe this page has been updated recently.
https://www.kcmo.gov/city-hall/departme ... ementation

Woo, movement! Very new – wasn't there last week. Direct link to map: https://arcg.is/nDO0f

Good to see Cleaver, Meyer would be a big deal. Like the Admiral connection to NE.

Need to get more ambitious in the Loop + urban spine & make sure things are getting connected!

The PBL on Admiral between Grand and Woodland is going to make me mad all over again that KCUMB vacated and severed Woodland.

bobthebiker wrote: ↑Wed Jun 28, 2023 11:42 am First post, long time lurker. Finally decided to create an account since I actually had just asked about this.

I've been working with PW on a project in my neighborhood and have asked about year 2. I have been told that it is still planned for this year, and that the official plan should be coming out within the next few weeks.

Also, I believe this page has been updated recently.
https://www.kcmo.gov/city-hall/departme ... ementation

Why two new bikes lanes a block apart at Charlotte and Holmes? Would like to see the Trolley Trail extended north through Mill Creek Park to PVP and Rockhill extended to the south to Research before double lanes in the same neighborhood.

beautyfromashes wrote: ↑Wed Jun 28, 2023 1:16 pm

bobthebiker wrote: ↑Wed Jun 28, 2023 11:42 am First post, long time lurker. Finally decided to create an account since I actually had just asked about this.

I've been working with PW on a project in my neighborhood and have asked about year 2. I have been told that it is still planned for this year, and that the official plan should be coming out within the next few weeks.

Also, I believe this page has been updated recently.
https://www.kcmo.gov/city-hall/departme ... ementation

Why two new bikes lanes a block apart at Charlotte and Holmes? Would like to see the Trolley Trail extended north through Mill Creek Park to PVP and Rockhill extended to the south to Research before double lanes in the same neighborhood.

They'd follow the traffic pattern, Holmes north bound, Charlotte south bound. Initially I believe they were meant to be protected lanes. With the Gillham track they really seem redundant. The City had an engagement meeting earlier this year to discuss the potential for painted lanes or even two-way streets for traffic calming. Not sure how that meeting went. It does look like they've already updated that page with "Holmes/Charlotte Neighborhood Friendly Streets" as a featured project that hasn't been linked yet.

What happened to Paseo? Moved over to Forest? Paseo as it is now is certainly popular with recreational bikers.

moderne wrote: ↑Wed Jun 28, 2023 2:45 pm What happened to Paseo? Moved over to Forest? Paseo as it is now is certainly popular with recreational bikers.

Looks like paseo is still on 5 year plan. I don't see anything on the map that would suggest they're doing anything with forest. Looks like you might be misplacing the ones on the 5 yr on Troost.

Would've liked to see them connect Oak all the way to Admiral and then you would have a protected stretch from 85th to Columbus Park/ RM. As Oak is now it just dumps you off over 670 on 4 lane wide downtown streets. While there's hardly any traffic, you definitely notice you are suddenly very exposed on wide streets. I guess it's likely because Oak isn't being resurfaced this year and it turns into a 1 way @ 10th street.

Charlotte would've been another good candidate too as it's already striped and seems to have very little traffic. Fewer turns and such too.

Isn’t Paseo an off street cycle track now after community feedback? Basically just a wider sidewalk similar to Pennway St in Westside?

What exactly are they planning for Troost? And nothing for Paseo north of Brush Creek?

Looks like Year 2 Implementation and 5 year plan in front of council today, not really sure if it's being voted on or not. However, I believe this is the first we've heard of year 2 actually going in front of city leaders.

https://kansascity.legistar.com/Legisla ... 0043B74447

I think the map changed again.
https://arcg.is/1H4zGH

I believe admiral from grand to woodland, and st. johns is a new addition.