KCRag Forum

paisstat wrote: Yes the park could be a gem of a park, and it does indeed need to be redeveloped.  Yes, much of the activity is illegal and many people don't want to see the activity, however this is a part of an urban environment, which makes a city different from the sick bourgeois/middle class value system of suburban wastelands.  That said, If those individuals buying a $500k condo want a suburban lifestyle, maybe they should locate to the suburbs.  Pushing illicit and perceived immoral behavior to the sidelines is not the solution.  Should all activity considered deviant be pushed out of sight?  And who decided which behavior is deviant?  If people want a sterile/fake environment, maybe they should stay away. I don't see it healthy or helpful and in fact consider it very dangerous to demonize these segments of society.  Where does the demonizing end?  I suppose it depends on ones political and moral orientation, however this is a dangerous precedent to begin. I'm sure I'll take lots of flak for this post, but bring it on.

beautyfromashes wrote: I get so tired of the whole 'well, that's what you get with an urban environment' argument.  Public sex, prostitution, open drug use, dog crap on the sidewalk, unkept filth, etc. are NOT what living in an urban community is all about.  Urban living is being in close enough proximatey that you develop a sense of community.  This means you care enough about the person close to you that you don't enfringe on their rights to enjoy the common spaces.  This means you have enough class to find somewhere to have sex without someone else having to see it.  An urban community can be safe, clean and dense enough for everyone to enjoy the space together.

Pork Chop wrote: Updated master plan for Penn Valley Park offers safeguards from development

By MATT CAMPBELL

The Kansas City Star


Penn Valley Park should be off-limits to private developers, according to a report expected to be approved today.

An updated master plan for the park also calls for improving access and security and creating a support association among the park's neighbors.

The plan, which will be voted on today by the Kansas City Board of Parks and Recreation Commissioners, revises a 1991 plan. It was spurred in part by concerns over designs on the park by private developers.

paisstat wrote: Yes the park could be a gem of a park, and it does indeed need to be redeveloped.  Yes, much of the activity is illegal and many people don't want to see the activity, however this is a part of an urban environment, which makes a city different from the sick bourgeois/middle class value system of suburban wastelands.  That said, If those individuals buying a $500k condo want a suburban lifestyle, maybe they should locate to the suburbs.  Pushing illicit and perceived immoral behavior to the sidelines is not the solution.  Should all activity considered deviant be pushed out of sight?  And who decided which behavior is deviant?  If people want a sterile/fake environment, maybe they should stay away.  I don't see it healthy or helpful and in fact consider it very dangerous to demonize these segments of society.  Where does the demonizing end?  I suppose it depends on ones political and moral orientation, however this is a dangerous precedent to begin.  I'm sure I'll take lots of flak for this post, but bring it on.

voltopt wrote: they never seemed to close the edges with buildings or find a compelling everyday use for this park, beyond large gatherings and festivals.

KansasCityCraka wrote: Great, now they brought the skaters DT. What next the Gothic people. What are they going to do put in a Hot Topic store?