Here’s a modest proposal for solving the blue roof controversy: Raise the pump house 30 feet, and place a ring of fire around the base, a la the plans for the Keeper of the Plains. It will look impressive, and no one will be able to see the roof at that height.
Posted by Randy Scholfield
Registered?
Commenting on WE Blog now requires you to be a Kansas.com member. Use the links above to register, if you haven't already, or to log in.Contact us
Follow us
Daily Archives
-
Recent Comments
- BlueJay on Open thread 11/22
- Regular on Open thread 11/22
- Regular on Open thread 11/22
- Rage on Open thread 11/22
- cosmos_originally on Open thread 11/22
- Chas on Open thread 11/22
- BlueJay on Open thread 11/22
- Boxlock20 on Open thread 11/22
- satatom on Open thread 11/22
- JimJohnson on Open thread 11/22
19 Comments
LOL! *Thumbs up* That’s pretty funny! :D
The pump house is just a monument to the City council spend, spend mentality. Maybe we should hire a counsaltant to improve its looks. I am sure some out of State expert could suggest some exspensive Suggestions!
IF THE PEOPLE AT TALLGRASS WANT TO BE SUCH CRY BABIES WHY DON’T THEY CREATE A TAX AREA FOR TALLGRASS TO PAY FOR THE ROOF REPLACEMENT?
ANY OTHER PLACE IN THE CITY THAT DOESN’T HAVE A HIGH INCOME LEVEL WOULD JUST BE BRUSHED OFF. BUT OF COURSE THAT IS WHAT THE CITY COUNCIL CATERS TO IS THE WEALTHLY.
With all our local problems, health care benefits being slashed, lay-offs, schools under funded and the city is going to spend our tax dollars on a bunch of rich spoiled people. Those people need to get a life.
Your suggestion would not be very modest. I believe the cost to taxpayers for raising the statue and building the ring of fire is some $25 million plus the cost of natural gas to provide the flames in the ten or so burners. So raising the pump house might not be the answer. In the case of the Keeper of the Plains, they could have accomplished the same at no significant cost by trimming the scrub elm trees around the statue.
The brain drain is evident when it comes to Wichita’s City Council, they didn’t want to paint the roof because it would negate the warranty, so . . . they just ripped it off and sent it to the landfill, in Oklahoma probably. Why worry about a warranty on something you are trashing anyway? I know there all industrial coatings available for less then the 78 grand used that would have been more then sufficient to end the poor rich kid’s eyesore problems. May the Lord help us and our government cheque writers when a blue roof offends across the street from an orange one that’s accented by a monstrous billboard! I petition for any politically inexperienced individuals to run for Wichita’s governing offices, the career politicos are ‘killing’ us!
Wichita City Council have been dropping ball alot lately. As if we don’t have enough problem with school under-funded, Boeing lay-offs, Gander Mountain bad report card results, Sports Arena that still need to be nailed down on seating number, we have to deal with this ludicrous blue roof. Is lack of common sense part of the requirement to run for City council? It must have been, because their short-comings are very easy to spot now. I guess I can’t run for office, I place too much value on “not splurging money unnecessarily”.
Looks like they are doing much for than the roof! I drove by it today and they even have the outside walls of the pump station house torn off to bare wood.
Tj Ewertz wrote:
“Why worry about a warranty on something you are trashing anyway?”
Brilliant comment! I nominate you for City Council.
The real problem here is not a blue roof; it’s the perception, probably accurate, that city services are doled out only to those rich few that influence our good-ole-boy political machine!
The only solution is for us citizens to vote the bastards out, and then make sure that anyone we elect who isn’t decent, honest and intelligent doesn’t get reelected! Ever!
I wish all I had to worry about was a blue roof…
An outsider’s view-The City made the original mistake. The Homeowners Association were within their legal rights to demand the city correct the problem they made. By labeling the “Homeowners Association” with words like rich, wealthy, influential only dilutes the real problem, the mistake the City Leaders made. What if it was Koch Industries (or any other reputable Wichita Business)that demanded the City hold itself accountable for a mistake (an illegal action)the City made, would citizens label them with the same name calling.
But let’s give the Leaders a little bit of credit. The idea that painting the roof makes the warranty invalid, and that by disposing of the roof in oh say Oklahoma somewhere it’s invalid anyway, isn’t looking past the nose on your face. The warranty would cover a lot more than just the roof, it would also cover damages inside the building by a faulty roof, a much more expensive bill to foot. Was it worth the risk? How much of a risk was it?
What have the City Leaders done to ensure the mistake won’t happen again? These are the questions I’d like to see the Wichita Eagle ask the City Council.
WHATS GOOD FOR THE GOOSE IS GOOD FOR THE GANDER.
PEOPLE IN THE AREA OF WEST WICHITA NEAR THE FIRE STATION AT MAPLE AND MAIZE ROAD WOULD LIKE THE CITY TO REMOVE THE BLUE ROOF.
IT IS UGLY AND TAKES AWAY FROM THE VALUE OF OUR COMMUNITY.
HOW LONG WILL IT BE BEFORE WE CAN EXPECT THE REPAIRS TO BE DONE?
(NOT ENOUGH WEALTHY PEOPLE IN THE AREA TO QUALIFY?)
george, do you have a shift key on your computer ? Please use the upper and lower case functions. TYPING IN ALL CAPS means you’re screaming. It looks dumb.
The roof warranties I’ve seen cover only the roof. How do you get a roof warranty that covers the building and contents? I’ve never been offered one at any price, but maybe that’s why the stupid city roofs are so overpriced.
For me the outrage is that water that gets into my house whenever the rains are heavy. I don’t live on a creek. This is street water that gets 3 ft deep! I’ve been after the city to do something about it for 20 years; but no, they spend their money replacing new roofs with new roofs on new pumping stations for places that never get wet.
MR BUMM DON’T YOU KNOW THAT PEOPLES NAMES ARE CAPTALIZED? WHO APPOINTED YOU THE RULE MAKER. SOME PEOPLE WITH BAD EYE SIGHT NEED BIGGER LETTERS
DON’T WANT YOUR NAME PUBLISHED, NO GUTS?
You are correct in stating that it was the City’s error to begin with on the blue roof. However, with all the other ineptitudes that the City has shown in the financial arena (HMMMM, the ice rink anyone???) do we really need to add $78,000 to an already over-taxed budget??? Surely there are more important things that we can focus on than a roof that the neighbors don’t like? And who okayed the blue roof anyways? I’d like to see the contract that the City had with Tallgrass and where it states that they would try to camoflage the pump house. And then I’d like to see the proposal by the contractor who built the stupid thing, and whether or not their original proposal had that darn blue roof in it…….. Seriously, people, don’t you have better things to complain about than a ROOF????? It does boil down to income levels. Most people in this city wouldn’t think twice about just letting the issue go.
Good points, Wendy.
What would have the poor Tallgrass citizens done if the corner had been zoned commercial and an IHOP and its bright blue roof plopped itself on the corner? How about an orange Hooters roof? Or a red Pizza Hut roof?
You know, though, if the property values dropped would they complain about paying less property tax?