mormit
-
The Basics
-
mormit on Patch
-
More Stuff
Comments
-
On the article DASHCAM: How Bad Is Parking at the Promenade, Really?
-
On the announcement Clarification of Proposition Q
mormit
10:42 pm on Monday, March 25, 2013
ReplyDan. Do understand that I want to see this property put to profitable use. I would vote for the amended PUD that has been worked out. However, the ability of the council to make changes post referendum and the ability to enforce agreed upon concessions upon the lessee are open questions for me.
-
On the announcement Maplewood Voters Deserve Clarity
mormit
10:18 pm on Monday, March 25, 2013
ReplyShawn. Thanks for your work on this. I would be satisfied, but not pleased to vote yes to approve the amended PUD.
My concern is if we approve the unamended PUD, is there any legal binding for QT to abide my their concessions they agreed to in the amened PUD? By my reading of the code, we approve the original PUD and that is the new law. I could have missed something but can we approve the suspended PUD, then the council amend it, and all parties have to abide? Going back to the fruit illustration: We approve the apple and there is any legal basis we can expect the orange?
-
On the article MRH School Board Protests QuikTrip Move in New Letter
mormit
10:00 am on Friday, December 21, 2012
Mr. Lessig, we find ourselves at an impasse.
I would be happy to support the development at that site if my questions were answered by the PUD. As it is written, it only raises concerns. I came to support the CVS development because they were transparent in what they intended to do.
Pointing fingers at the school board is very poor form for our elected officials and I think only underscores the fact that there are serious problems with this move. Nobody supporting this move wants to talk about the traffic issues.
-
On the article MRH School Board Protests QuikTrip Move in New Letter
mormit
8:44 am on Friday, December 21, 2012
No Dan. No backtracking and I'm not attacking the owner. My question which was never addressed is whether or not we have any verification that there is no other interest in that site. It has been stated so can we verify that?
Also, how will Northbound Big Bend enter/exit the site and how binding is QT's commitment to the old site? These are the questions I do not hear the move supporters addressing.
-
On the article MRH School Board Protests QuikTrip Move in New Letter
mormit
10:55 pm on Thursday, December 20, 2012
ReplyDan. My "attack on who"?
My questions are not answered. I really want the property owner to benefit. But not at my expense. I still maintain this is bad location. Prove me wrong and I AM OUT.
-
On the article MRH School Board Protests QuikTrip Move in New Letter
mormit
9:24 pm on Thursday, December 20, 2012
Barry. Where do you get the idea that we want nothing to occupy that corner? The facts are that the intersection has significant traffic challenges. A high traffic, low value sales operation is a poor match for that location. If someone would convince me and others that the QT proposal will work, I would be happy to drop my opposition right now.
Problem is that what we get is finger pointing at the school board for being opposed to it. I believe they have very good reasons to be opposed. What I want to hear is how will Northbound Big Bend traffic get in and out in the AM? How binding is the crossing guard offer. How legally binding is QT's commitment to the old site?
If I can get these questions answered to my satisfaction, I'm good.
-
On the article MRH School Board Protests QuikTrip Move in New Letter
mormit
9:08 pm on Thursday, December 20, 2012
Sure Dan. Those I have spoken to have stated that the school board made an offer after discussions with QT were going no where. Kind of a try another approach.
I have no problems with the property owner specifically but do point out that if the information is only coming from that person or group, then perhaps it is from someone with an interest in the outcome. Not an attack on anyone's credibility but I was asking if we had another source to support it.
Your friend,
Matt -
On the article Visions for Vacancies: Open Lot Next to CVS
mormit
9:00 pm on Thursday, December 20, 2012
That is what was said at that meeting. But it wasn't binding.
I came to support the CVS deal because they were reasonable about their development.
Your friend,
Matt -
On the article MRH School Board Protests QuikTrip Move in New Letter
mormit
10:21 pm on Wednesday, December 19, 2012
Barry what happened to you?
In the past years you have been a voice of reason. Now you say the MRH School Board, in voicing their concerns and opposition created an adversarial position? Result: nobody gets to disagree.
Sorry they expressed their opinion. Are we, the citizens and school board not allowed to do that? Perhaps QT should have negotiated from the start but they did not. Perhaps the property owner should be more honest but is not.
mormit
5:51 pm on Sunday, April 7, 2013
I avoid it at all costs on a Saturday.
The video also highlights the main complaint I have with the Promenade lot. The main thoroughfares of traffic are right in front of the stores so pedestrians and vehicles are always crossing paths. Too late now, but they should have put the traffic thoroughfare down the center away from the stores. The isles should be directional as others point out. Then the area in front of the stores could be for isle to isle traffic only.