KCRag Forum

FangKC wrote: ↑Tue Apr 27, 2021 8:11 pm Or until recently, the homeowner being responsible for fixing broken sidewalks, which in some cases could cost thousands. Some properties have sidewalks and some have none. So one homeowner has the burden of shoveling -- or paying someone to do it -- while someone across the street doesn't. One homeowner used to have to spend thousands if their sidewalks required repair, while their neighbor didn't. Many property owners in older neighborhoods live in poverty, or are low fixed-incomes.

I'm all for property owners clearing snow. However, sidewalks are infrastructure. The property owner may never walk on their own--or any--sidewalks in the neighborhood. But, all their neighbors do -- even the ones across the street who don't have sidewalks on their property.

If a neighborhood was developed with sidewalks on only one side of the street, then sidewalk repair should be a shared financial burden, and not the responsibility alone of the property owner who has misfortune to live on that side of the street.

Fortunately, the City removed that single responsibility for sidewalk repair from property owners.

I put a piac item in back in 2019 to connect a neighborhood to parks better with brand new sidewalks where there were none. The city quoted $64,000 per house.

Things are so badly managed that the city thinks paying the cost of a house on the east side to add sidewalks is reasonable.

I'm more and more glad our new city manager isn't from KC and had to opportunity to replace a lot of the heads of departments (people leaving the position). We need wholesale change from top to bottom.

The Bite is out. Joyce says something new signed on for the rest of the lease but no word what that is

Genesis Construction filed another permit for Ashland. Should see more paint, etc go down next week

This is mostly for toDactivist. This is looking north east from the intersection of 4th and Wyandotte. There are townhouses there now.

https://scontent-hou1-1.xx.fbcdn.net/v/ ... e=612B9B6F

https://www.google.com/maps/@39.1080557 ... a=!3m1!1e3

From KC Yesterday on Facebook.


Explosion on the River Quay

The explosion on March 27, 1977 in the heart of what is today's Kansas City's River Market destroyed two bars in a lively area of Kansas City, permanently destroying the River Quay's reputation. Hiding behind the explosion is the secret history of the KC Mafia.

While Kansas City’s presence of the Mafia is less prevalent than that of cities like New York and Chicago, their presence has still been pronounced in the history of Kansas City, Missouri. The River Quay was an incredibly popular area within Kansas City, originally viewed as family friendly and a great place to spend time. The infiltration of the mafia and the business they brought in slowly killed the popular area, and the explosion was the final nail in the coffin.

The Mafias “war for control” ended up destroying River Quay with an explosion that ultimately leveled two bars and basically stemmed from conflict between one man, Bonadonna, and the Mafia.

This site shows the struggles between business owners and the Mafia. The original business owners wanted a family-friendly area and the Mafia essentially wanted to turn River Quay into a red-light district. The Mafia's fight for the control of the area, and the violence they used to do so, ended one of Kansas City’s most popular destinations and tarnished its legacy.

The name River Quay is hardly mentioned by any Kansas City native, unless suggesting a cup of coffee from a local coffee joint known as Quay Coffee.

Courtesy: KC Star, Clio Foundation

https://www.facebook.com/kcyesterday

What was there.

https://jchs.odyssey.historyit.com/item ... 04/gallery

pretty cool and thanks. only had seen bad image from the newspaper so this was the original plus the 1922 pic of original bldg was interesting. someday we will be digging in this lot and will be interesting to see what we find.

Here's an archived New York Times article about the bombing.

https://www.nytimes.com/1977/04/19/arch ... ction.html

Which day in the future would that be

patience grasshopper. it is an incredibly twisted area between HOA's, utility easements (4th and N-S alley) and legacy parking agmts that essentially prohibit removal of a single parking space much less provide for relocation during construction - thus ready for another garage? And who pays for the $4-5M it cost just to build for 121 cars that park there for another 30 years for free? Answer may be in something compelling enough in design and use that we get help or a solution. First though might be something entirely different while the rest gets sorted out. Am aware of the blight a parking lot delivers. Am aware of the stewardship we have especially in this unique area given the devastation of much of the rest of KC's vintage treasures.

Grasshopper, get ready for a pile of shipping containers on Delaware. Actually might look good.

Who's Grasshopper?

AlkaliAxel wrote: ↑Wed Aug 04, 2021 10:17 pm Who's Grasshopper?

Me

ToDactivist wrote: ↑Mon Aug 02, 2021 8:29 am patience grasshopper. it is an incredibly twisted area between HOA's, utility easements (4th and N-S alley) and legacy parking agmts that essentially prohibit removal of a single parking space much less provide for relocation during construction - thus ready for another garage? And who pays for the $4-5M it cost just to build for 121 cars that park there for another 30 years for free? Answer may be in something compelling enough in design and use that we get help or a solution. First though might be something entirely different while the rest gets sorted out. Am aware of the blight a parking lot delivers. Am aware of the stewardship we have especially in this unique area given the devastation of much of the rest of KC's vintage treasures.

I just can't believe a council person wouldn't help someone eager to move on this to navigate these issues. Can't remove parking spaces at all even if given the same amount in a garage across the street?

KCPowercat wrote: ↑Thu Aug 05, 2021 8:06 am I just can't believe a council person wouldn't help someone eager to move on this to navigate these issues. Can't remove parking spaces at all even if given the same amount in a garage across the street?

I can. You have to go to the right people to start.

The council is legislative, they can only really make new laws and prod people. Most of their power comes around saying no to someone who wants something. A new law rarely can impact the existing use of land.

The people with enforcement powers is the City Manager's office and the staff below them.
It's a little confusing because the mayor, the executive office, is on the council too but you have to look to their executive staff for action. A close analogy is like the Vice President being the tie breaking vote but they're not part of congress. You wouldn't go to congress for the functional side of the law even though the VP can vote (sometimes)

Yeah I'm not at all confused.

I’ve heard 2nd and Delaware has plenty of extra parking. Great, so they should reach an agreement with the owner of the lot on the SE corner of 2nd & D to take on those leased spaces. A new building on that surface lot could turn the intersection into one the most beautiful in the city.

normalthings wrote: ↑Wed Aug 04, 2021 10:21 pm

AlkaliAxel wrote: ↑Wed Aug 04, 2021 10:17 pm Who's Grasshopper?

Me

reference to Kung Fu TV show in the 80's....

Rabble wrote: ↑Thu Aug 05, 2021 7:26 pm I’ve heard 2nd and Delaware has plenty of extra parking. Great, so they should reach an agreement with the owner of the lot on the SE corner of 2nd & D to take on those leased spaces. A new building on that surface lot could turn the intersection into one the most beautiful in the city.

Okay so b/c i broached the subject and to be more clear on parking "issues"...LotG and LotH (3rd/DE and large lot behind RM West streetcar stop respectively) were burdened in the 90's by Old Town Development Corp - old guys - who decided that these lots should forever (till 2050) hold un-dedciated spaces for 121 cars from Chase Lofts/Askew/Volker/Pacific. The lofts have ~ 250 spaces and yet each and every space is burdened and cannot be taken away nor can the 121 spaces be dedicated/reserved. Getting the idea here? Its not a council issue and the HOA issue is another story. Infilling on these lots means building a garage to accommodate the 121 + new tenants and some ambiguity on whether the 121 could just pack into the nice new garage. And no provision for construction re-location. And one of those entities is probably litigious. So smart attys at various expensive firms has thus far not found a solution. EDC can condemn potentially but at a cost and again it comes down to $$ to compensate for lost spaces/etc on a condemnation or $$$ on a parking garage that might hold 121 cars that get to park for free. (121 x $30K/space = a big number). I am thus dis-incentified to develop. Council will soon be made aware of this as we do believe the neighborhood benefits, so TBD on the end of this story....and yes something interesting this way comes...

ToDactivist wrote: ↑Thu Aug 05, 2021 8:59 pm

Rabble wrote: ↑Thu Aug 05, 2021 7:26 pm I’ve heard 2nd and Delaware has plenty of extra parking. Great, so they should reach an agreement with the owner of the lot on the SE corner of 2nd & D to take on those leased spaces. A new building on that surface lot could turn the intersection into one the most beautiful in the city.

Okay so b/c i broached the subject and to be more clear on parking "issues"...LotG and LotH (3rd/DE and large lot behind RM West streetcar stop respectively) were burdened in the 90's by Old Town Development Corp - old guys - who decided that these lots should forever (till 2050) hold un-dedciated spaces for 121 cars from Chase Lofts/Askew/Volker/Pacific. The lofts have ~ 250 spaces and yet each and every space is burdened and cannot be taken away nor can the 121 spaces be dedicated/reserved. Getting the idea here? Its not a council issue and the HOA issue is another story. Infilling on these lots means building a garage to accommodate the 121 + new tenants and some ambiguity on whether the 121 could just pack into the nice new garage. And no provision for construction re-location. And one of those entities is probably litigious. So smart attys at various expensive firms has thus far not found a solution. EDC can condemn potentially but at a cost and again it comes down to $$ to compensate for lost spaces/etc on a condemnation or $$$ on a parking garage that might hold 121 cars that get to park for free. (121 x $30K/space = a big number). I am thus dis-incentified to develop. Council will soon be made aware of this as we do believe the neighborhood benefits, so TBD on the end of this story....and yes something interesting this way comes...

Is there any pathway to just buying those buildings?

.....