To leave a comment use this link POST A COMMENT
To read Fire Chief Matt Mace's reply to comments from readers on the blog portion of the Raytown Report,
scroll down to the bottom of this page.
 |
| BY GREG WALTERS |
Boulevard
Upgrades
A WIN/WIN SITUATION
A WIN/WIN SITUATION
FOR ALL
OF RAYTOWN
The
Raytown Board of Aldermen is considering a number of projects aimed at
improving Raytown’s appearance. Some opportunities before them is a new
streetscape for Downtown Raytown and improvements on Blue Ridge Boulevard from
59th Street to the northern city limit.
If done
properly, the two projects will improve one of Raytown's major roadways from
the northern city limits south to 63rd Street. Grand funds totaling $615,000
help to soften the economic impact of the two projects.
Improvements
in Downtown Raytown include new curbs, larger sidewalks and of course, a new
street surface. Blue Ridge Boulevard is slated to have a new surface with bike
lanes.
Blue
Ridge Boulevard is a significant traffic carrier on the northern part of the
city. Its slow winding curves follow a natural ridge that is one of the highest
elevations in the Kansas City area. In the 1800’s settlers used the Blue Ridge
as a landmark to prepare for their journey to the west along the Santa Fe
Trail.
TO TURN
OR NOT TO TURN . . .
A few of
the Aldermen have expressed concern the bike lanes will cause an elimination of
the turning lanes on Blue Ridge. They correctly point out that turning lanes
expedite traffic and relieve the street of congestion.
Their
concern is legitimate but should not be used as an excuse to block the project.
The
Board should sit down with city staff and find a way to make the improvements.
The city owns the right of way along Blue Ridge and could easily build a
walking/bicycle trail along the Boulevard. The project would raise property
values and help improve Raytown’s image.
RED
HERRING
A red
herring (in political terms) is something introduced into an argument to divert
attention or mislead. Some on the Board of Aldermen are trying to use this
maneuver to block the Blue Ridge Boulevard improvements.
Their
argument is based on the need to make improvements to the 83rd Street Bridge.
It is a misguided argument.
The
Missouri Department of Transportation has inspected the bridge and noted needed
improvements. City Hall personnel responded properly by issuing a Request for
Proposals. Proposals are not due back to the city until late this year. Once
awarded, the bridge will need design work before a contract is awarded for
construction in 2017.
The
funds for the bridge will be needed in 2017, not 2016.
Hysterical
“what if” arguments based on gloom and doom scenarios simply do not hold water.
The
bridge will be repaired once the city has finished its due diligence.
The
Board of Aldermen has an opportunity to improve Downtown Raytown and Blue Ridge
Boulevard in 2916. Both streets are overdue for repair. The grant money is
there to help pay the way. When finished it would be a project all of Raytown
could look at with pride.
It is an
opportunity the Board should not let slip away.
 |
| BY PAUL LIVIUS |
The intent of the Raytown Municipal Redevelopment Corporation (RMRC) is to strengthen the economic viability of the Downtown Raytown area by providing an innovative financial incentive for improving the exterior appearance, interior and structural conditions of its buildings. The RMRC Board of Directors has recommended approval of the amended application for Chapter 353 tax abatement at Level A “Market Stabilizing” for the property located at 9503-9507 East 63rd Street.
The two vacant office buildings are proposed to be renovated and leased to several businesses. The submitted application indicates the type of improvements proposed and the estimated costs will include:
• Roofing: $30,000
• A/C & furnace: $70,000
• Electrical: $15,000
• Plumbing: $10,000
• General Remodeling Work: $50,000
• Brick Work: $1,700
• Repair to stairs and parking lot: $1,200
Though
no jobs are required to be created or retained as a condition for a “Market
Stabilizing” tax abatement project in the City’s Chapter 353 Tax Abatement
Policy, the applicant states in submitted application that a minimum of 15 jobs
are estimated to be brought to the property.
Some of these jobs will be for businesses that the applicant indicates will move to the property from other locations in Raytown while some of the other jobs will be created by new businesses coming to Raytown and locating on the property. The project meets the requirements of the City’s Chapter 353 Tax Abatement Policy.
Chapter 353 is not an economic development incentive designed to spur new jobs or capital investment, but rather emphasizes the removal of blight. As this project will dramatically improve/enhance the appearance of the building, staff and the RMRC believes the project achieves the desired impact from the program.
Alderman Teeman asked if there would be any improvements to the front curb appeal.
Mr. McGee said they would only repair the roof. Alderman Mock asked what businesses would be moving into the building. Mr. McGee said there will be a computer tech company, and “Escape This Place”, which is a team building facility.
Some of these jobs will be for businesses that the applicant indicates will move to the property from other locations in Raytown while some of the other jobs will be created by new businesses coming to Raytown and locating on the property. The project meets the requirements of the City’s Chapter 353 Tax Abatement Policy.
Chapter 353 is not an economic development incentive designed to spur new jobs or capital investment, but rather emphasizes the removal of blight. As this project will dramatically improve/enhance the appearance of the building, staff and the RMRC believes the project achieves the desired impact from the program.
Alderman Teeman asked if there would be any improvements to the front curb appeal.
Mr. McGee said they would only repair the roof. Alderman Mock asked what businesses would be moving into the building. Mr. McGee said there will be a computer tech company, and “Escape This Place”, which is a team building facility.
The
Board heard the first reading of an ordinance approval of rezoning application.
Greg Stervinou Construction Inc. is seeking to rezone a 1.0 acre area of a 2.17
acre vacant land from High Density Residential and Planned Zoning Overlay
District (RP-3) to Neighborhood Commercial and Planned Zoning Overlay District
(NC-P) and the remaining 1.17 acre area to Low Density Residential (R-1).
The property is bounded by 63rd Street on the north and Blue Ridge Boulevard on the south, Blue Ridge Elementary School to the west and an office building on the east. The rezoning is being sought as Dollar General wishes to construct a new store on the northeast side of the property and the applicant wants to construct three single-family homes on the south and west side of the property.
A site development plan, a copy of which is enclosed, has been submitted for the portion of the property that is proposed to be rezoned to NC-P.
Aspects of the site development plan are described in the accompanying staff report provided to the Planning and Zoning Commission. Greg Stervinou Construction Inc. is seeking to rezone a portion of a 1.37 acre area of vacant land from High Density Residential and Planned Zoning Overlay District (RP-3) to Neighborhood Commercial and Planned Zoning Overlay District (NC-P) and the remaining portion from High Density Residential and Planned Zoning Overlay District (RP-3) to Low Density Residential (R-1).
The property proposed to be rezoned is located at 9109 East 63rd Street is bounded by 63rd Street on the north and Blue Ridge Boulevard on the south, Blue Ridge Elementary School to the west and an office building on the east.
The rezoning is being sought as a Dollar General store is proposed to be constructed on the northeast side of the property and three single-family residential lots are proposed to be created on the south and west side of the property. In 2012 the applicant submitted a similar rezoning application for this property which included a site development plan for construction of a Dollar General on this property.
The previous rezoning application and development plan proposed to use the entire property for a Dollar General store. Prior to final action on that rezoning application, however, the applicant withdrew the application. Based upon comments and concerns raised at the public hearings on the previous rezoning application, the applicant has revised the development plan for the property and submitted this new application. The following describes how this rezoning application and development plan differs from the rezoning and development plan that was submitted in 2012:
The property is bounded by 63rd Street on the north and Blue Ridge Boulevard on the south, Blue Ridge Elementary School to the west and an office building on the east. The rezoning is being sought as Dollar General wishes to construct a new store on the northeast side of the property and the applicant wants to construct three single-family homes on the south and west side of the property.
A site development plan, a copy of which is enclosed, has been submitted for the portion of the property that is proposed to be rezoned to NC-P.
Aspects of the site development plan are described in the accompanying staff report provided to the Planning and Zoning Commission. Greg Stervinou Construction Inc. is seeking to rezone a portion of a 1.37 acre area of vacant land from High Density Residential and Planned Zoning Overlay District (RP-3) to Neighborhood Commercial and Planned Zoning Overlay District (NC-P) and the remaining portion from High Density Residential and Planned Zoning Overlay District (RP-3) to Low Density Residential (R-1).
The property proposed to be rezoned is located at 9109 East 63rd Street is bounded by 63rd Street on the north and Blue Ridge Boulevard on the south, Blue Ridge Elementary School to the west and an office building on the east.
The rezoning is being sought as a Dollar General store is proposed to be constructed on the northeast side of the property and three single-family residential lots are proposed to be created on the south and west side of the property. In 2012 the applicant submitted a similar rezoning application for this property which included a site development plan for construction of a Dollar General on this property.
The previous rezoning application and development plan proposed to use the entire property for a Dollar General store. Prior to final action on that rezoning application, however, the applicant withdrew the application. Based upon comments and concerns raised at the public hearings on the previous rezoning application, the applicant has revised the development plan for the property and submitted this new application. The following describes how this rezoning application and development plan differs from the rezoning and development plan that was submitted in 2012:
1. The area on which the Dollar General would
be located is smaller. The applicant has submitted a site development plan, a
copy of which is attached, for that area of the subject property proposed to be
rezoned to NC-P and on which the Dollar General store is proposed to be
constructed.
2. Three single-family residential lots along
the south and west side of the property are proposed to be created. Two of the
residential lots would extend along the west side of the property on which
Dollar General is proposed to be constructed and the other residential lot
would be to the south.
The
Board heard the first reading of an ordinance approving the final plat of Jacob
estates 2nd plat. Greg Stervinou
Construction, Inc. is seeking approval of the Final Plat of Jacob Estates 2nd
Plat. The final plat proposes to replat a 2.17 acre undeveloped tract of land
into four lots. Lot 1 will front onto 63rd Street while Lots 2, 3 and 4 will
front on Blue Ridge Boulevard.
Lots 2 and 3 will extend through to 63rd Street but will not be allowed to access 63rd Street due to limited sight distance on 63rd Street due to the crest of a hill. The final plat is proposed as the applicant is seeking to develop Lot 1 for commercial purposes while Lots 2, 3 and 4 are intended to be developed for single-family homes.
Cross Walk Closure
Causes Concern BY GREG WALTERS
It is very clear to me and I hope others that some of the people at City
Hall have lost sight of their mission. It is also a sad situation. I sincerely hope our City Council members
look into this act of stupidity that has been done by our Public Works
Department and quickly undo it.
Another
Reason Why
Lots 2 and 3 will extend through to 63rd Street but will not be allowed to access 63rd Street due to limited sight distance on 63rd Street due to the crest of a hill. The final plat is proposed as the applicant is seeking to develop Lot 1 for commercial purposes while Lots 2, 3 and 4 are intended to be developed for single-family homes.
Causes Concern BY GREG WALTERS
About 20 years ago a child was struck by a car as he tried to cross
the four lanes of 63rd Street on his way school at Blue Ridge
Elementary. There was no crosswalk light at the time at the location where the
youngster was hit. There was, however, a crosswalk guard provided by the
Raytown Police Department. Despite the best efforts of the crosswalk guard, the
youth was hit by a car estimated at traveling at the speed of 25 miles per
hour.
The young man ended up in the hospital for an extended stay.
Thankfully, his recovery was complete.
I was on the Board of Aldermen
at that time. Our response was swift and effective. Within a month we had a
crosswalk light installed at the location where they boy was hit.
The crosswalk light is needed at that location because during the early
spring and through the summer months the sun can be blinding in the morning
hours. The location of the light is important as well. The crosswalk light was
purposely placed at the bottom of as swale on 63rd Street. It gives
motorists plenty of time to see the light and any pedestrians.
Incidentally, a neighbor of mine was struck and killed by a motorist
further west because she crossed the street at its apex (near Kentucky and 63rd
Street). That particular accident happened in the evening. The motorists in
that case did not see her as he crested the hill. The incident re-enforces my
belief of the need for keeping line of sight clear for motorists as a matter of
safety.
The two accidents prove the perils of crossing 63rd Street
can be perilous.
I was visiting a friend this past week near the crosswalk. I noticed
the lights had plastic bags over them and that the buttons had been removed
from the poles.
I asked what was going on and was told the city disconnected the light
first. When people kept trying to use the crosswalk they removed the crosswalk
buttons. When asked what pedestrians should do to get across the street my friend
was told to have them cross at 63rd Street – about four blocks away!
The crosswalk is still used by pedestrians, particularly during the
school year. Check it out any morning in decent weather and you will see
parents frantically trying to herd their children across the street.
The police department no longer provides a cross walk
officer at the location.
It is very clear to me and I hope others that some of the people at City
Hall have lost sight of their mission. It is also a sad situation. I sincerely hope our City Council members
look into this act of stupidity that has been done by our Public Works
Department and quickly undo it.
My friend on 63rd Street pointed to the
new curb cuts for the handicapped the city installed at the cross walk.
She told me the curb cuts were put in place three weeks before the
lights were shut off!
Where is the sense in that?
Turning off the crosswalk lights is a mistake. It may be our representatives at city hall are unaware of the situation. I almost hope that is the case. Because the situation is tempting fate and needs to be corrected.
The others sad part of this story is the callous attitude displayed by city officials who pretty much make it clear they really do not give a damn when it comes to local citizen needs.
Turning off the crosswalk lights is a mistake. It may be our representatives at city hall are unaware of the situation. I almost hope that is the case. Because the situation is tempting fate and needs to be corrected.
The others sad part of this story is the callous attitude displayed by city officials who pretty much make it clear they really do not give a damn when it comes to local citizen needs.
 |
| BY JENN |
Owning a Pet Is Awesome
According to a study from the Human Animal Bond Research Initiative, two researchers from George Mason University
calculated that pet ownership accounts for an $11 billion savings in U.S.
health-care costs. Yes, $11 billion dollars.
Here’s how they did that math: Pet
owners visited the doc 0.6 times less than non-owners. There are
132.8 million pet owners in the United States, and the average cost of a
physician office visit is $139. Therefore, pet owners were responsible for
saving $11.37 billion in U.S. health-care costs.
Additional savings came
from dog owners who walk their dog five or more times a week.
This group,
totaling more than 20 million people, shows a lower incidence of obesity and
were responsible for saving $419 million in related health-care costs.
READ MORE
The following
message was received today from Raytown Fire District Matt Mace. The message
was too long for posting on our blog, so we have moved it to our front page. –
Greg Walters
(Greg I tried to post this on your
blog but it would not let me. It said I exceeded the number of characters
allowed., Can you please post this in it entirety, I do not want to try and cut
it down and run the risk of leaving someone out.)
Greg, I cannot speak for any of the other Raytown
governmental entities, but as far as the Raytown Fire Protection District goes
it is safe to say I am an authority on the subject and would very much
appreciate the opportunity to respond to some of the comments posted on
here.
Anonymous,
January 18, 2016 at 10:59 PM is correct in that the Fire District is not under
the governance of the Board of Aldermen or anyone employed by the City of
Raytown. We are our own political subdivision as provided for under the
RSMO 321 statutes. The reason why we are a Fire District is because when
the district was established our boundaries were greater than that of the city
of Raytown, this continued to be the case until the city expanded its boundaries
to mirror those of the Fire District.
Anonymous,
January 20, 2016 at 8:21 AM the Fire District did not sign off on the 350 Hwy
TIFF project and to be honest I am not completely sure what your statement
means. The Fire District does not have a seat on the TIFF commission or have
the authority to approve or deny any form of tax abatement either to a property
owner or a developer. The previous administration of the Fire
District was approached by the City and asked to help fund some of the
improvements needed to complete Project 1. The Fire District agreed to
waive its rights to the property tax (50% of the value) which state law
prohibits the TIFF commission from taking from us. The stipulations
placed on this agreement were that they only applied to Project 1 and the funds
could only be used to fund improvements in the public right of way owned by the
City.
Anonymous,
January 20, 2016 at 2:44 PM is partially correct. The Fire District is to
be provided a new fire truck once Project 3 has generated sufficient
revenue to repay the debt incurred from the issuance of the bonds. In
other words, once everything has been paid if there is money left the Fire
District may get a new fire truck, but given the fact the Project 3 is still a
grassy lot its safe to say the funding is not going to be there anytime soon.
Anonymous,
January 20, 2016 at 4:52 PM the 2016 levy rate was set at $1.0064 which if
everyone pays their taxes should generate just over 2.3 million dollars for the
Fire District. The reason why our levy is higher than the City of
Raytown’s is because they have the ability to generate revenue from other
sources such as fees and taxes associated with utilities which we do not.
Otherwise the City of Raytown would operate on an annual budget of 1.6 million
dollars instead of the 14 million dollars the 2015-16 budget allocates.
Anonymous,
January 20, 2016 at 6:24 PM your understanding of the Raytown/ KCFD automatic
aid agreement is incorrect. First Bob Palmer is just one of the three
directors who voted unanimously to enter into the agreement with KCFD in
2013.
Second Raytown has the same number of fire trucks in service as it did prior to the agreement. As far as the usage we closely monitor the give versus aid receive aid statistics for each months calls to ensure KCFD is not abusing the aid we provide.
In fact, most months calls for service requiring an individual unit are within 10-12 calls of each other, with KCFD often giving more than they receive. As far as multi-unit responses KCFD provides Raytown with 10 units given to 1 received. In 2014 MARR and Company audited the agreement and found that it was an overwhelming gain for the citizens of Raytown and on September 10, 2015 the Raytown Brooking Eagle published an investigative report on the agreement with KCFD and concluded it was a friend to the community of Raytown.
If you are aware of any other independent investigation of the Raytown/KCFD aid agreement that concludes the agreement does not provide a benefit to the citizens of Raytown, I would be very interested in reading that. As far as the reason why the truck was driving up and down the street, I would be happy to look in to the incident for you if you can provide me with the date, time and street you live on I will investigate it.
You are correct time is very important which only adds to the argument for automatic aid. The part that gets lost in all of the “my fire truck versus their fire truck” arguments is the fact there is a person needing help and at that point it does not matter whose taxes go to pay for the truck. Almost 50% of the Raytown Schools are in Kansas City and on any given day ½ of the population of the Raytown Middle School is comprised of the children whose parents pay taxes to the Raytown Fire District even though that building is located in KCMO.
Under automatic aid each truck is equipped with a GPS transmitter that provides the 911 call taker with the location of the closest unit able to respond. A case in point to this was three weeks ago when a KCFD fire truck was passing 350 highway and Gregory Blvd when a call came in for someone not breathing at Hy-Vee.
The truck was equipped with a paramedic (P41 for those who wonder) and was on scene in less than 1 minute from the time of the call and successfully restarted the victims heart using an advanced life support defibrillator.
Because of the privacy laws we are bound by I cannot provide a great deal of detail about this incident, but given the fact it occurred at Hy-Vee I am sure there are more than a few witnesses who can verify this account. The Auto-aid system is not unique to Raytown & KCFD and has in fact been used by all of Johnson County, KS for the past 12 years.
Second Raytown has the same number of fire trucks in service as it did prior to the agreement. As far as the usage we closely monitor the give versus aid receive aid statistics for each months calls to ensure KCFD is not abusing the aid we provide.
In fact, most months calls for service requiring an individual unit are within 10-12 calls of each other, with KCFD often giving more than they receive. As far as multi-unit responses KCFD provides Raytown with 10 units given to 1 received. In 2014 MARR and Company audited the agreement and found that it was an overwhelming gain for the citizens of Raytown and on September 10, 2015 the Raytown Brooking Eagle published an investigative report on the agreement with KCFD and concluded it was a friend to the community of Raytown.
If you are aware of any other independent investigation of the Raytown/KCFD aid agreement that concludes the agreement does not provide a benefit to the citizens of Raytown, I would be very interested in reading that. As far as the reason why the truck was driving up and down the street, I would be happy to look in to the incident for you if you can provide me with the date, time and street you live on I will investigate it.
You are correct time is very important which only adds to the argument for automatic aid. The part that gets lost in all of the “my fire truck versus their fire truck” arguments is the fact there is a person needing help and at that point it does not matter whose taxes go to pay for the truck. Almost 50% of the Raytown Schools are in Kansas City and on any given day ½ of the population of the Raytown Middle School is comprised of the children whose parents pay taxes to the Raytown Fire District even though that building is located in KCMO.
Under automatic aid each truck is equipped with a GPS transmitter that provides the 911 call taker with the location of the closest unit able to respond. A case in point to this was three weeks ago when a KCFD fire truck was passing 350 highway and Gregory Blvd when a call came in for someone not breathing at Hy-Vee.
The truck was equipped with a paramedic (P41 for those who wonder) and was on scene in less than 1 minute from the time of the call and successfully restarted the victims heart using an advanced life support defibrillator.
Because of the privacy laws we are bound by I cannot provide a great deal of detail about this incident, but given the fact it occurred at Hy-Vee I am sure there are more than a few witnesses who can verify this account. The Auto-aid system is not unique to Raytown & KCFD and has in fact been used by all of Johnson County, KS for the past 12 years.
Anonymous,
January 21, 2016 at 3:01 PM it is not just you, if anyone has a question or a
concern they are absolutely welcome to call fire station 1 at 816-737-6034 and
ask to speak to the duty chief or if warranted directly with me. We
realize and value the trust the public places in us and take concerns like the
ones mention here very serious. As mentioned before for us to investigate
an issue it is helpful if you can provide the date, time of day and address
where this occurred. We would also like to obtain the name and contact
number of the caller, because a part of our process includes contacting them
with the findings from our investigation once it is complete.
I
hope I have explained things in a clear manner, which is both educational and
factual. It is important for citizens to be not only vocal but informed
as well when it comes to how the government is serving their needs. My door is
always open and I welcome your comments and suggestions.
I am very proud and humbled to have the
opportunity to serve as the Fire Chief of the Raytown Fire Protection
District. The men and women of the Fire District are very dedicated,
hardworking and compassionate individuals that strive to provide the best
possible services to our community day in and day out. I am constantly
reminded how our staff goes above and beyond each day to provide the best
emergency and non- emergency services they can.
Respectfully
Matt Mace,
Fire Chief
Matt,
Thank you for your clarification on the use of public tax dollars to underwrite the TIF financing of commercial developments on 350 Highway. I agree the Fire District did not and does not have a seat on the TIF Commission. But the District did participate in providing tax dollars to fund the project. As is clearly stated in your message
"The previous administration of the Fire District was approached by the City and asked to help fund some of the improvements needed to complete Project 1. The Fire District agreed to waive its rights to the property tax (50% of the value) which state law prohibits the TIFF commission from taking from us. The stipulations placed on this agreement were that they only applied to Project 1 and the funds could only be used to fund improvements in the public right of way owned by the City."
It would be interesting to see how much of the Fire District's revenue has been drained to help pay down the debt.
I understand the City is supposed to provide an annual report on the amount of monies collected and paid toward retirement of the TIF for the project on 350 Highway.
I have not seen any such report --- even though I believe we are in the tenth year of collecting taxes to pay down the 23 years of debt. I would think that by now the cost of the entrance ways would be paid off. Until some real numbers are shown by the city it will remain a mystery to all.
Thank you for your clarification on the use of public tax dollars to underwrite the TIF financing of commercial developments on 350 Highway. I agree the Fire District did not and does not have a seat on the TIF Commission. But the District did participate in providing tax dollars to fund the project. As is clearly stated in your message
"The previous administration of the Fire District was approached by the City and asked to help fund some of the improvements needed to complete Project 1. The Fire District agreed to waive its rights to the property tax (50% of the value) which state law prohibits the TIFF commission from taking from us. The stipulations placed on this agreement were that they only applied to Project 1 and the funds could only be used to fund improvements in the public right of way owned by the City."
It would be interesting to see how much of the Fire District's revenue has been drained to help pay down the debt.
I understand the City is supposed to provide an annual report on the amount of monies collected and paid toward retirement of the TIF for the project on 350 Highway.
I have not seen any such report --- even though I believe we are in the tenth year of collecting taxes to pay down the 23 years of debt. I would think that by now the cost of the entrance ways would be paid off. Until some real numbers are shown by the city it will remain a mystery to all.
Greg Walters
23 comments:
Groucho Marx said:
Informative if not frightening information regarding Raytown sales taxes Mr. Walters- thank you. Sales tax opponents could truthfully say that twenty-percent of that (any) sales tax is basically dedicated to WalMart. That plus the sham that continues regarding the parks/storm-water revenues severely 'taxes' the very credibility of Raytown government.
Don't blame the current Raytown government. When the current Board discovered the lack of money going to storm water, they immediately tried to fix the problem. The last Board created the problem. This Board is granting tax abatements on property, but they are insisting on claw back clauses. The other Board didn't even know what a claw back was. This Board, with the exception of a couple of people, are trying hard to help the residents. That's more than the last Board did.
Bloomberg report on Walmart closures:
http://www.msn.com/en-us/money/companies/wal-mart-it-came-it-conquered-and-now-it%E2%80%99s-leaving/ar-BBoFl7R?li=BBnbfcL
We received a lengthy blog post from Fire Chief Matt Mace today. The blog was too long to post on this page, so we moved Mr. Mace's comments to the front page of this week's edition of the Raytown Report. To read Mr. Mace's comments scroll down to the bottom of this week's publication.
It really makes me angry that the city turned off the crosswalk light on 63rd Street. If they did this because of budget reasons I wonder how much. It would shed some light on the price tag they put on a child's life up at city hall. I find the whole mess disappointing and disgusting.
Students along with teachers cross 63rd st where the cross walk was dismembered. It is a TOTAL disgrace this was done. People speed up and down that area daily. I along with other school bus drivers are on that stretch from 6:15 am to 5:15 pm. Public works did a great injustice by covering up a crosswalk signal next to a school
The school does not use the crosswalk. There is a chain and lock on their gate on the partial fence. And they are putting in a complete fence now. I would hope that once that fence is done, the city will look at taking the school zone out.
The fence is indeed chained. You cannot enter the playground area as a safety measure. You must enter all school via the doors and be buzzed in. And YES the school and school children use the crosswalk. Students only have school provided transportation when living over one mile from the school. Hope this helps
To 12:03
Why would the city take a school zone out?? The school is not closing. It is a school zone when a school is present. School zones are a state wide safety feature that is a certain area before and after a school. Securing a playground with a fence does not effect a school zone. You just need to drop your speed down in those areas.
What amazes me about the arguments I am hearing for closing down the crosswalk is the tunnel vision from the Raytown School District. Here's a news flash for them. When it is cold outside not as many people use the crosswalk. Bitterly cold weather tends to keep people indoors. When it is warm outside the crosswalk is used. Particularly by children who like to use the basketball goals and playing fields during the summer. The school is lit up like a Christmas tree all year round which makes the basketball and other activities go later into the evening. Believe it or not, some of those kids live north of 63rd Street. The point is that the crosswalk is needed during the hours the school is closed as well as open.
Any thinking person can see this is an accident waiting to happen. Please contact the people at city hall and tell them to re-think a very bad decision to close down a crosswalk to a school on one of Raytown's busiest streets.
No they don't use it. Contact the school district.
IMHO.... There is no need for a "walking" path along Blue Ridge Blvd. There is now a sidewalk on each side! As a part of the upcoming Blue Ridge Blvd improvement/repair/upgrade project the walks will get improved handicap access ramps and broken sections will be replaced. Areas where the walk has settled below existing drainage structures will also be replaced. For walking/jogging that's all we need.
The bike lanes are only PAINT. Let's try them for a couple years and see. Just north of the city limits the Boulevard loses it's turn lane and there's no perceptible slow down or increased incidence of accidents.
One area where the turn lanes are absolutely needed is at the high school. Well the good news is that the project begins at 59th St so the turn lanes at the school will remain.
BTW... Let's keep the crosswalk by the elementary school.
Have a great day Raytowners. RN
My oldest is turning 16 in a month but she and her older half sister both went to Blue Ridge elementary, both started there. At that time we lived on Kentucky about 4 or 5 houses north of 63rd. And if you measured the distance from our house to the schools front door it was over a mile, walking the streets as the girls would have, crossing at what was then an open cross walk. If you did it as the crow fly's, in a straight line it was just under a mile.
Looking at though a 5 or 7 yearolds eyes I could never see them walking the extra 2 blocks to use the crosswalk. After a long talk with the school the girls road the bus. We still used the crosswalk to go play on the playground after hours, on Saturday's, gates locked there now.
I don't know when the gate got locked or when the light was turned off, its been 2 years any way. No crossing guard, ok the kids should not be using it anymore and any one north of 63 should be bused to the school anyway. The gate to the play ground should be unlocked after hours and the light should be there.
Oh and someone said that the school zone should be removed..... really are you in that big of a hurry that you can slow down to make it safer for children??
Yes students living under the one mile radius are considered walkers and that extends across 63rd and they do use it ( the crosswalk)
To 1/26 at 8:17pm
Raytown School District is not closing down a crosswalk . Public works dismantled the crossing signal. The school district provides transportation to those living over a one mile radius from the school. Students within that one mile radius are considered walkers/ car riders and thus would use the crosswalk. The one mile Radius includes south, east, west and north of the school so north of 63rd is included. A school speed zone is state law.
The fence around access to the playground is a safety measure. Let's say students are on recess and someone comes on the property to kidnap a student. Safety measures are needed in and around schools; it is not the 50s or 60s and dangers are unfortunately targeted to schools
Who's stirring the chili while these guys are posting long diatribes about this crap?
Diatribe is bitter and abusive speech. What I see is a community conversation about a topic Mr. Walters wrote of in this blog
Potty Mouth Go Home. We are not impressed your vulgarity.
I understand the School Disrtict is also in favor of another Dollar General being built on 63rd Street. At least that is what the Development department at city hall said at the last BOA meeting.
Imagine that! They are concerned about everyone's safety but they support a Dollar General right next door to the school.
Here's a wake up call for the school district. There is more activity around their property when the school is not open. Making it unsafe to cross 63rd Street with its freeway type of lanes really does not sound like someone who is concerned about children's safety.
Sounds like someone is gunning for the school district with their diatribes .
We cook our chili in the crockpot over long period of time. Reduces the amount of stir time. If you are wondering Engineer Eric Ferguson makes the best I have had at the department.
I hope that answers the question that is if it was directed at the Fire department?
Capt Doc Summers
Doc --
Is it 3, 4 or 5 Alarm Chili?
However, actually I think most of them where directed at the school crosswalk.
I don't understand the word diatribe either. The city disabled the crosswalk signal, not the school district. It strikes me as odd that someone would carry on about the need for fences locking kids off of school property but no concern about that same kid crossing four lanes of traffic on a street with a history of serious injuries and even death due to cars hitting pedestrians.
You nay sayers need to calm down and do the right thing. Fix the crosswalk light. To knowingly allow the situation to continue is allowing dangerous situation to continue. A city has a responsibility to maintain crosswalks for public safety reasons. If a tragic accident happens because of the city's negligence, in this case a non functioning crosswalk, (which is now very public information) the city can be held liable for the any damage done for disconnecting the light. Even worse to keep the structure in place creating a false sense of security.
I am with you on this. Have a crosswalk with a disabled signal on a four lane heavily travels thoroughfare spells Dissaster and the City needs to rethink their obvious Poor Decision
Is the city prepared for a lawsuit when someone is killed or seriously injured at the crosswalk with a signal disconnected by the city??????
Andy Whiteman
Post a Comment