BaldwinCity.com

Jayhawker1 (Anonymous) says…

Just a little frustrating when you raise your kids in this town to see what happens when good people try to do something good for the town…

We all have our own opinions, just got a little excited when I saw you typing something innaccurate from the meeting I went to, the things I've read about the project, and what people around here have been saying.

Gotta love public forums!

Jayhawker1 (Anonymous) says…

If you would have really read my email genious n0zpe, I said use the other two entrances to your subdivision..that would imply that you avoid the one where your precious eyes might be looking at a bobcat…instead of the road…where your eyes should be anyway.

Nice to see adequate representation from your neighborhood at these meetings…did I see maybe 2 or 3 households represented out of the 130+ in your sacred neighborhood?

Let me guess…they all told you that they agree with you…but couldn't make it to a public forum specifically designed to let their voices be heard…

Perhaps the majority of the City's business owners that were present at the City Council meeting might be right? *gasp* could the city government be inadequate? The business owners would know….not a joco transplant trying to be a schmuck.

Jayhawker1 (Anonymous) says…

Hmmm…I didn't get that from your previous posts. If the crux of your frustration was with conduct from councilmen then why did you choose to not mention it when you were ranting ignorant statements about site plan issues?

Nice try.

Jayhawker1 (Anonymous) says…

You really are ignorant to what has happened during this process. The changes you mentioned were part of the conditions of the first approval. The extra elevation and hard surfacing were added as conditions to a second illegal approval of an already approved site plan.

Jayhawker1 (Anonymous) says…

Angry neighbor n0zpe,
You're really late to the game and should have been involved last spring if you're pissed about the project. The special meeting by the City Council is explicitly for the purposes of signing the replat. The only gripe you still have is the access that they allowed…and you can't do anything about it. As you were told at the meeting last Monday, the code doesn't say anything about double frontage lots in the commercial zoning. I'm sorry you can't just let it go and be happy that you got your desperately needed screening from the horribly offensive light duty rental equipment. If you're so offended by the sight of the store, why not use the other two entrances to your subdivision.

Jayhawker1 (Anonymous) says…

n0zpe

The plat has nothing to do with the site plan, other than to reflect acurate easements and property lines. The site plan is it's own entity not tied to the plat. Your justification for thinking that the previous approval was nullified is not acurate. It should not have gone back to planning commission after the inital approval last summer….I think everyone learned valuable lessons from this pain…namely that the city code is horrible and they need to update it faster than they had planned in order to protect city staff and the neighborhoods in baldwin.