First Prev
of 3
Next Last
Doris Borgelt

Arnold, MO

#1 Jun 5, 2014
See, I don't pay attention for a little while and whooosh, they come up with another way to reward their campaign donors with $300,000 in sales tax money!!!! If paying over half a million dollars on the Ridgecrest property, wasn't enough, it was sold to current owners at a loss after the current owners collect fees from the city for dumping their fill on this very same site and now they want the taxpayers to foot another $300,000 for "public improvements." We already paid for the sewers, and the street improvement, what other "public" improvements can they come up with? This is the same group who ran a million over on the CVS road project and our representatives want to give them even more!
Don't forget that Amato, Freese and Evans made a big deal with residents of Windcrest out of Rent to Own car rental because Phil can't stand automobile dealers, they didn't bother to tell the residents they had even bigger commercial plans.
Oh Boy

Saint Louis, MO

#2 Jun 5, 2014
What do you mean - Amato, Freese and Evans made a big deal with residents of Windcrest out of Rent to Own car rental

Please explain made a big deal with residents
Doris Borgelt

Arnold, MO

#3 Jun 5, 2014
They had the residents of Windcrest come to the public hearings and protest the conditional use permit of the Rent to Own Auto Center. The residents were led to believe that traffic would increase significantly when in reality this business has considerably less traffic per day than it's predecessor Arnold Rental.
Now the dirt keeps piling higher everyday and the retention basin in the subdivision behind Windcrest is filled with silt, not to mention what is running down into the properties behind there. Residents called to tell city personnel there was mud coming into their yards and were told, it's not mud, it's silt....really???? Aren't both composed of dirt?
Doris Borgelt

Arnold, MO

#4 Jun 5, 2014
and I do realize they have a different chemical make-up....just that they both appear to look the same as dirt.
Martha

Saint Louis, MO

#5 Jun 6, 2014
More and more seems as the city, school, police make up their own rules...
Arnold residents should stand up!
Superintendent makes 260,000 a year- wow....
How much does the Chief make?
Eileen

Arnold, MO

#6 Jun 6, 2014
Doris Borgelt wrote:
See, I don't pay attention for a little while and whooosh, they come up with another way to reward their campaign donors with $300,000 in sales tax money!!!! If paying over half a million dollars on the Ridgecrest property, wasn't enough, it was sold to current owners at a loss after the current owners collect fees from the city for dumping their fill on this very same site and now they want the taxpayers to foot another $300,000 for "public improvements." We already paid for the sewers, and the street improvement, what other "public" improvements can they come up with? This is the same group who ran a million over on the CVS road project and our representatives want to give them even more!
Don't forget that Amato, Freese and Evans made a big deal with residents of Windcrest out of Rent to Own car rental because Phil can't stand automobile dealers, they didn't bother to tell the residents they had even bigger commercial plans.
What am I missing:

1.$500,000+ paid for property by city taxpayers - city departments use as dirt dump

2. future owners bill city (taxpayers)$300,000 for dump fees on city property

3. property sold by city (taxpayers) for LOSS to new owners who dumped

4. new owners now asking city (taxpayers) to pay $300,000 for more public improvements

-$500,000 out
-$300,000 out
-$300,000 potential out
__________
-$1.1 M out

+$...... in ?

Since: Feb 13

Jefferson County

#9 Jun 6, 2014
Glarners who ripped off taxpayers with Northwest Plaza. http://www.stltoday.com/news/local/govt-and-p...
Doris Borgelt

Arnold, MO

#10 Jun 7, 2014
JCPenknife wrote:
Glarners who ripped off taxpayers with Northwest Plaza. http://www.stltoday.com/news/local/govt-and-p...
Yes, the very same Glarners! If there is anyone out there who thinks this project along with the CVS and street project were not a ripoff, let them produce the itemized bills for the projects. Councilman McArthur can't understand why anyone would be against this project that will help small businesses, according to his statement at Thursday evening's meeting. This project is yet another prime example of corporate welfare. It will not benefit the small business who has to charge an extra one cent or the citizens/shoppers who have to pay it, it benefits THE DEVELOPER!!! Which happens to be the Glarners, who were allowed to have cost overruns of more than a million dollars on the last project, charged the city to dump on city land they subsequently bought at a loss, that the city paid a premium price of $286,000 to former business partners of sitting councilman Phil Amato. The Glarners will be the ones who will reap up to a $300,000 refund of their costs for a project they, not the citizens of Arnold, will profit from.
Concerned Resident

Fairfax Station, VA

#11 Jun 8, 2014
What is going to be built on the Ridgecrest Property?
Suzy Q

Saint Louis, MO

#12 Jun 9, 2014
Concerned Resident wrote:
What is going to be built on the Ridgecrest Property?
Maybe another used car lot. Seems like Arnold can never have enough of those. I guess it really depends on who can get the best "deal" out of city hall (not what's best for the residents).
Concerned Resident

Fairfax Station, VA

#13 Jun 10, 2014
Suzy Q wrote:
<quoted text>
Maybe another used car lot. Seems like Arnold can never have enough of those. I guess it really depends on who can get the best "deal" out of city hall (not what's best for the residents).
I hope not. The intersection is already congested. Turning left into the property will be impossible.
DSH

Saint Louis, MO

#14 Jun 10, 2014
Concerned Resident wrote:
<quoted text>
I hope not. The intersection is already congested. Turning left into the property will be impossible.
Not without the addition of a traffic signal.
Doris Borgelt

Arnold, MO

#15 Jun 10, 2014
There is already a traffic signal at Ridgecrest and Jeffco,.
DSH

Saint Louis, MO

#16 Jun 10, 2014
I was thinking a bit further north, at McClain. A momentary fugue.
Doris Borgelt

Arnold, MO

#17 Jun 10, 2014
The taxpayers footed the bill for the widening of Ridgecrest to provide a right turn lane and the left arrow, southbound Jeffco allows for safe entry that way or northbound a safe right turn into either Ridgecrest or McClain is available. A right turn onto Jeffco from McClain is another means of egress.
The taxpayers also footed the bill to move the water and utility lines. This is another foolish move on the part of Arnold to benefit the developer, not the taxpayers they were elected to represent.
Concerned Resident

Fairfax Station, VA

#18 Jun 18, 2014
I recieved a letter yesterday about the rezoning of the two lots on ridgecrest. Is there a buffer that is required between R-4 and C-2?
DSH

Saint Louis, MO

#19 Jun 18, 2014
d)

No structure shall be erected within 15 feet of a property line adjoining property in an "R" Residence District. At a minimum, the fifteen-foot (15') wide setback must be a landscape buffer and shall meet the following minimum requirements:

1.

Natural Vegetation
Minimum Species Mixture 100% coniferous
Minimum Species Height 6 feet
Maximum Species Spacing 6 feet on center
Suzy Q

Saint Louis, MO

#20 Jun 18, 2014
DSH wrote:
d)
No structure shall be erected within 15 feet of a property line adjoining property in an "R" Residence District. At a minimum, the fifteen-foot (15') wide setback must be a landscape buffer and shall meet the following minimum requirements:
1.
Natural Vegetation
Minimum Species Mixture 100% coniferous
Minimum Species Height 6 feet
Maximum Species Spacing 6 feet on center
And when the vegetation dies it just sits there - dead. It is not replaced & it looks awful. I've seen this time & time again. They can have all the stuff they want planted, if it doesn't get watered & taken care of, there are always some of them that will die. If it was me, I would push them for a privacy fence - one tall enough to block the view & some of the noise.
Concerned Resident

Arnold, MO

#21 Jun 19, 2014
The area is very high visability, so I would assume it would be maintained.
Arnold 86

Arnold, MO

#22 Jun 25, 2014
Doris Borgelt wrote:
The taxpayers footed the bill for the widening of Ridgecrest to provide a right turn lane and the left arrow, southbound Jeffco allows for safe entry that way or northbound a safe right turn into either Ridgecrest or McClain is available. A right turn onto Jeffco from McClain is another means of egress.
The taxpayers also footed the bill to move the water and utility lines. This is another foolish move on the part of Arnold to benefit the developer, not the taxpayers they were elected to represent.
I lived in Sunny Ridge Subdivision since 1993. There are a few more facts you're missing.

Ridgecrest was a private street prior to the widening. Ridgecrest was also in a state of decay, especially towards the bottom of the hill just before the entrance to Sunny Ridge Subdivision. The original plan involved the city taking over the street and improving it to meet city standards. This would be done with a tax district with the total cost spread between everyone living on or immediately off of Ridgecrest. A certain Mr. Kellogg, who owns a great deal of rental property along Ridgecrest as well as Ida and Virginia drives balked. He wanted all the streets fixed. This drove the price beyond feasibility for all the property owners like myself. The deal stalled.
Along come the McCain property developers (Windcrest). Part of their deal was they had to pay 1/2 the cost of the Ridgecrest improvements. This brought the total costs into a more affordable realm for us property owners. The deal was done and the street improvements were finished.
On a side note, Ridgecrest would've eventually had to have been taken over or at the very least, fixed by the property owners on or off the street. The narrowness of the street down towards the bottom due to deterioration was soon to make it a hazard for emergency vehicles to be able to safely pass. Had it gotten to that point, the city would have declared the street unsafe and forced the street repairs upon us. We actually got a good deal when the city negotiated and made the Windcrest people pay for 1/2 of the repairs. The only Arnold taxpayers that have paid for any of the improvements are those living either on Ridgecrest or a street tied to it.

Tell me when this thread is updated:

Subscribe Now Add to my Tracker
First Prev
of 3
Next Last

Add your comments below

Characters left: 4000

Please note by submitting this form you acknowledge that you have read the Terms of Service and the comment you are posting is in compliance with such terms. Be polite. Inappropriate posts may be removed by the moderator. Send us your feedback.

Arnold Discussions

Title Updated Last By Comments
value village 12 hr Becky 8
Fox C6 Board of Education : Discussion (Jun '14) Apr 24 Paul Bunyan 1,254
Petco Flawed Dogs on Saturdays (Mar '10) Apr 23 Shelti1007 37
Arnold's Home and Garden Show. Really??? (Apr '09) Apr 21 Outmindouttime 20
New Plaza Apr 20 ArnoldCC 1
Where's Doris? Apr 16 GolfBall 68
Fulbright and Amato Win Apr 14 WOW 8
Fox High School Superintendent (Sep '10) Mar '15 77warrior 1,505
More from around the web

Arnold People Search

Addresses and phone numbers for FREE

Personal Finance

Mortgages [ See current mortgage rates ]