sweetmilk on 7/26/2008 11:48:33 AM wrote:
Based on VF's absense at Thursday's MMAC meeting it looks like they have gone undercover at least for the time being. My prediction is that they will return to the MMAC, this time in bed with the Zoo.
|
sweetmilk on 6/27/2008 9:56:01 AM wrote:
duh. Looks like I missed the due date by "only" one month. It's the July MMAC meeting. Not the June meeting.
|
sweetmilk on 6/26/2008 8:41:45 PM wrote:
At the April MMAC meeting VF asked for 60 days to prepare a response to some concerns that the MMAC expressed about the most recent RLI proposal. VF was expected to show up at today's monthly MMAC meeting and to present their response.
They did not show up.
|
sweetmilk on 6/6/2008 12:38:32 PM wrote:
"...voters decide the location". When did the citizens get the right to vote on the location of a restaurant?
|
MsElenaeous on 6/6/2008 9:41:38 AM wrote:
If they really want to move the valley forward "young professionals" should forget about food for a second and start advocating to restore passenger rail service here. There are many places to eat but nowhere to catch a train.
|
sweetmilk on 5/19/2008 8:16:59 PM wrote:
Karen. I think the MMAC posed some hoop jumping questions for VF at the last meeting. Essesntially, VF, has not presented any scale drawings of their proposal. Just some flimsy sketches. They are now denying that they are the developer of record. Apparently no developer has stepped forward and expressed an interest in this proposal though the City sent out a nationwide search. VF is just a small group of "volunteer professionals" who should be given an A+ for Audacity and an A+ for Smoke & Mirrors but hopefully they will be flunking Wool Pulling.
|
sweetmilk on 5/19/2008 8:24:56 AM wrote:
FYI.
VF was supposed to make a last, formal presentation to the MMAC this coming Thurs and the MMAC was to vote on the VF RLI proposal at the June meeting. VF has asked for and been given a 60 day extension to prepare this proposal. At this point the soonest the MMAC will be voting will be at their Aug meeting. This will be 18 months since the original proposal was revealed. BTW the meetings are open to the public and are held at 4 pm at the Discovery Center on MM Park.
|
sweetmilk on 5/3/2008 1:47:26 PM wrote:
jthelm, are you involved with the Walnut Ave. Riverland Rd.Neighborhood Assoc.? They have been active against the RLI.
Karen, that is interesting about "City". About three months ago they refused to print a letter from an anti. I don't know the contents of the letter but I do know the writer and he is well known for his civil,well-thought, non-confrontational writings in the RSS and the RT.
|
jthelm on 5/2/2008 4:49:35 PM wrote:
I own and operate a Real Estate Appraisal business out of my home at the top of Walnut Avenue. I am fully aware of the negative effect developement of Mill Mountain will have of my house value and others located on our hill. The volume of cars we have on Walnut Avenue is already bad enough without adding additional draws to the top of the mountain.
|
sweetmilk on 4/28/2008 5:09:40 PM wrote:
They like playing that "1%" card but when you consider the percentage of buildable space they will need to gobble with the restaurant footprint, service access road and additional parking lot/parking garage the real percentage is probably closer to 50. "Greenspace is a Consumer Product" ought to be on the VF logo. Ha!
|
sweetmilk on 4/25/2008 3:15:46 PM wrote:
I think their VF mindspeak thinking goes as follows." Ok, let's name drop Bookbinders to give the RLI some uptown, top dollar cachet. Then if, somewhere down the road, we have to deny that it will be a Bookbinders, we will still have Bookbinders in the public's subconscious." (Though I wonder if they use words like "cachet" when they are speaking among themselves.)
|
sweetmilk on 4/25/2008 1:22:44 PM wrote:
It's Steve Parry.
|
sweetmilk on 4/25/2008 1:18:32 PM wrote:
VF is denying that it will be a Bookbinders. However the restaurant person they have on board ( I think his name is Steve Park) owns all or several BB's in Va. When I googled him a few months ago it appears that he may have a hand in other non-BB's but still high end restaurants in Va.
|
Walker on 4/24/2008 2:58:01 PM wrote:
....Tracker
You apparently missed my dig at Pittsburgh. As it isn't the most aesthetically pleasing place that I've seen.
|
Walker on 4/24/2008 9:40:41 AM wrote:
Wow, that pic is really flattering...
But, guys we ARE talking about Pittsburgh right? :)
|
sweetmilk on 4/24/2008 8:30:21 AM wrote:
Sometimes I think newspaper columnists like Shanna just say stuff like that to get attention. Other times I think they are just that stupid. Either way, that picture is a most eloquent mute response.
|
sweetmilk on 4/22/2008 7:45:57 PM wrote:
And besides it was you, T&H, not me who was ranting about George Soros and Che's underwear several weeks ago.
|
sweetmilk on 4/22/2008 4:01:54 PM wrote:
What?? You mean I'm not brilliant, insightful and sardonically witty?
|
sweetmilk on 4/22/2008 11:29:43 AM wrote:
(cont.) In that case Council will have no choice but to complete what VF has been wanting from day one. A restaurant with a blockbuster, wide-screen tourist luring view.
|
sweetmilk on 4/22/2008 11:25:11 AM wrote:
Is there a "sub-clueless" class? If so, it's where Shanna Peter Principled out.
Go up on MM now before the trees get in full green. Imaging that VF cuts ALL of the trees within the football shaped slope where they want to place the RLI. ( They deny wanting to cut them all but just imagine this anyway.)Note that with this area clear cut there is STILL only a tiny, if any, view of the distant mountains. No view of the RoVa and no view of the city. These views are blocked by the trees on the OTHER side of Prospect Road. So if this thing eventually gets built you can figure on those trees all being eventually cut also because the restaurant leasor will go crying to Council, " I can't attract business without a view".
(cont.)
|
sweetmilk on 4/22/2008 8:19:15 AM wrote:
Anyone read Shanna this morning? What she does not get is that buildings and mountains are apples and oranges. In regards to a building, the view FROM the building's restaurant is what is important. With a mountain the view OF the mountain is as important ( and needs to be protected) as the view FROM the mountain. She is correct. There will be NO view from the RLI unless Shanna gets chainsaw certified.
|
sweetmilk on 4/22/2008 8:12:05 AM wrote:
T&H has appointed himself as Gretchen's protector. That's funny. He says that she is "... spinning...". And that is precisely the truth. She spends most of her time here spinning her positions, painting her responses with broad, general strokes and avoiding any questions that require detailed answers.She may well be wasting her time here because most of this board see through her VF talking points.But every time she avoids answering a question, the act of avoidance is a clear answer in itself and does not speak well for her VF mission.
|
sweetmilk on 4/18/2008 2:12:46 PM wrote:
Gretchen wrote, " You can too. Good luck". Style points awarded for that sly little dig. Actually I am well known within certain departments of the City and County govts. And, believe it or not, I am known more for my good, team oriented, proactive works and boocoo volunteer hours for both localities ( I don't "do" Salem.)as opposed to being known for the sharpened stick I occasionally poke in their eyes.My theory is that if I do tons of vol work then I earn the right to poke them when I think they are wrong.I'm sure you are familiar with that stick. It works on the private sector, too.
|
Walker on 4/18/2008 12:15:59 PM wrote:
I understand what T&H is saying, Gretchen looks like the only one on here defending VF's position as of late. But, she does it on her own (I respect her for it also). Nobody is making her.
My mind is made up regardless. I believe private property would be a better idea, one that I would support.
I also agree with Karen, people should be able to bring in new information as they wish and discuss it, whether Gretchen is here to respond or not.
I've definitely changed my outlook since originally posting on here, due in large part to the posts and talking with my now infamous BIL. So it's a good dialogue until the final decision is made.
Like Karen said, go out and vote. That's the most powerful way to have your voice heard.
|
sweetmilk on 4/17/2008 5:27:50 PM wrote:
gmweinning wrote at 1:56:33..
"Because you can't have someone from the group who has to make the decision sit on the team that is making the proposal".
So please explain how it is appropriate for Rupert Cutler, who is on on the Rockledge Design Team and has been out front at many of your press conferences, to actively persue a Council position without pledging in advance to abstain from any RLI votes should he become a Council member? Doesn't that refer right back into the face of your quote?
|
sweetmilk on 4/17/2008 5:01:33 PM wrote:
So are you telling me that you deliberately decided not to consult with the MMAC ( the Council appointed stewards of MMP) because you felt that might place MMAC members in a compromising position regarding the vote? Wouldn't it be their decision to decide about compromising themselves, not yours? Don't you think it would have created a more accomodating atmosphere for your proposal had they been a part of the design process as opposed to opening the RT one morning and reading about what smelled like a done, insider deal? Your spinning is making me dizzy.
not yours?
|
sweetmilk on 4/17/2008 1:07:05 PM wrote:
Gretchen. No one on this board has said that the Rockledge Design Team was comprised of Realtors/developers.The question was, why were four of the thirteen member Team Realtors/developers and no members of the MMP user groups or the MMAC on the Team? The Team make-up suggestes that VF might have been primarily interested in designing and developing public property.
|
Walker on 4/17/2008 8:38:32 AM wrote:
Scandals-
I understood what you meant. I know you didn't mean anything personal by it. I also agree that private property would be a much better idea for VF. Especially since the Fishburn family has come out against the idea altogether.
|
scandals on 4/16/2008 11:37:21 PM wrote:
One more, sorry, I'm still at work and the computer won't stop ruling my life.
Seth,
I looked up "morass" in the dictionary too. That's a snobbish word. I guess that's the chip talking again. A morass to some is a precipice to others.
|
scandals on 4/16/2008 11:20:46 PM wrote:
Hey,
That's great Seth. Good job.
After considerable thought away from everything..how a person is what the they is, is not my concern or obligation. I apologize if I have personally upset anyone. However, regarding the question about RLI, I'm just saying, that if I wanted to develop a piece of property on a mountain top around Roanoke, which I believe to be a gold mine and agreable, I would not try to use public park space to do it. I would do it privately. Surely there are plenty of other spots that overlook the city.
If done honestly, tastefully and fairly, it would still be an assett to the valley and be less suspicious and controversial, kind of like lodges in Alps look...good.
|
Justafan on 4/16/2008 9:38:40 PM wrote:
Well said Seth.
|
dontmesswithseth on 4/16/2008 8:54:43 PM wrote:
I'm not wading into this morass again except to say: scandals, I make 26 thousand dollars a year. My father was a high school dropout. No one ever handed me anything, and I am hardly elite.
But I am a member of VF, where I've been welcomed, and where I've found plenty of folks with backgrounds similar to mine.
Elitism works both ways, and the chip on your shoulder is hard to hide.
|
scandals on 4/16/2008 6:07:28 PM wrote:
Although I disagree with most of what VF is doing and the very existence of such a contentious, elitist, them and us type of organization, I do appreciate there work and support of the greenways. They've raised a lot of money and should be commended for it.
|
scandals on 4/16/2008 5:35:27 PM wrote:
VF wants RLI so they can feel important. I mean, when you're handed down your livelyhood from family ties, it's hard to feel important, like you're making a difference to the average guy.
I wish everyone the best, I really do, but what does an upscale restaurant and convention center have to do with the utilitarian welfare of MOST Roanokers.
"Look ma, it's that place up on the hill where we can't ever afford to go". It is clear to me that average Roanokers don't want it. Just like it was clear that most people didn't want to tear down the stadium w/o replacing it with another. For that matter, why is there a Valley Forward. I mean, just ask and city council will tell you that there is some real progress being made. Just stop already.
|
Justafan on 4/16/2008 2:48:27 PM wrote:
"Do you just want to sling mud from behind an anonymous username?"
Sorry Gretchen, but that is the only thing they seem to be able to do well. All are not anonymous, but most are. They are against the RLI plan no matter what you say or what questions get answered. Most of the questions I have seen asked on this forum are asked with such a negative spin, there is no way to answer in the positive. Good Luck at the meeting though. Hopefully some undecided citizens will show up who are interested in what you have to say and will give it thought and not argument.
As I have said in the past, it's the undecided on who you need to concentrate.
|
sweetmilk on 4/15/2008 6:20:27 PM wrote:
They took down the petition??!! That's funny!
|
sweetmilk on 4/13/2008 10:24:01 AM wrote:
My point was that in today's culture with our completely different ideas about what is appropriate and what is not, the Star would not even be proposed, much less built. But I love it as a relic of the past. It's big, brassy, tacky and screams, " Look at me! I'm neon! I'm 80 feet tall! I'm on a mountain top and looming over the Roanoke Valley"!It's like one of your favorite old uncles. He's loud, he has bad breath and occasional gas but, dammit, he's your uncle, he loves you and you love him.I think my favorite thing about the Star is when I tell my sophisticated out of town friends about it. Their jaws drop. They think I should be embarassed about it.
|
herewegoagain on 4/13/2008 1:50:38 AM wrote:
I wouldn't go so far on the Star, but Karen & sweetmilk are generally right, I think.
The Star has been a great advertizement for Roanoke. It has to be visible, so a mountaintop is an appropriate location for it, and it doesn't take up all that much space. Except for the huge amount of power it consumes, I think on balance it's a good thing.
Karen shouldn't have given in to the pressure to reveal her name.
But since she has, Rusticnature & dontmesswithseth should practice what they preach. Assuming they're 2 persons.
|
sweetmilk on 4/12/2008 3:36:33 PM wrote:
Yes. I think it is very important to note that our cultural values in general and our ideas about conservation in particular and our ideas about green space/park space in MMP in micro particular have evolved over the years. Change is inherent in growth and we are constantly evolving. Therefore the mindset that thought an 80 foot neon star on MM was a great idea in the 1940's would be hooted out of town in the 2000's. VF,in its most simplistic moments, would like us to believe that since it was once OK to build the original RLI, the watch tower, the access road, the Star, the Zoo, the radio tower and the DC on MMP that, ergo, there really should be NO limit on how much more can built as long as the space is there.
|
ziranthia on 4/11/2008 8:41:07 PM wrote:
"So what does the "other side" look like? Just curious Z and wondering which side I am on"
Hey VatoGA. What a topic "the other side" is, and not one to be discussed on a Mill Mountain thread. All I will say is that there is so much hatred out there, and there doesn't need to be. Roanoke is somewhat buffered from it. Opinions aren't as strong, and actions aren't as extreme. But people need to try to get along. That isn't happening. Personally, I don't insult people of different races, yet I have been insulted because I am white. That is just wrong. Ya know?
|
sweetmilk on 4/11/2008 6:57:10 PM wrote:
Travelguy. Just a fine point but the Inn and the Playhouse were the same bldg. Different times. The fact that MMP is surrounded by development, is an in-the-City island of mostly green in an ocean of asphalt, concrete, commerce, neighborhoods etc is one of the main reasons for drawing the line on more development in the Park.
|
Travelguy on 4/11/2008 5:37:06 PM wrote:
Mill Mountain is just a giant hill in the middle of the City. It is currently developed on all sides by houses, a hospital, a giant star, a zoo, a visitor center, a wildflower garden, etc. Where is the peace of quiet there than one finds in the country? The forward thinking people of Roanoke in the 1930's knew that it had potential to draw visitors here(to spend money)so they built the Star, the Mill Mtn Playhouse, the Zoo and the Inn. I think the problem is the South Roanokers simply don't want the tourists in their back yards. If this mountain was in another location I think everyone would welcome more and more development!!!
|
sweetmilk on 4/11/2008 5:22:36 PM wrote:
karen. Did Lugar come here and say, "Bring it on"? Or did he just send the message via dontmethwithseth?
|
VAtoGA on 4/11/2008 5:00:27 PM wrote:
Ziranthia wrote: "If you think for a second that Roanoke has race issues, come to Atlanta, where I live. You have no idea! All I can say is that I do my best to accept EVEYONE for who they are. The other side DOES NOT."
So what does the "other side" look like? Just curious Z and wondering which side I am on...
|
sweetmilk on 4/11/2008 2:30:33 PM wrote:
Karen. Sure there are loads of worthy projects that VF could direct their attention to. But the RLI is their signature, vanity driven, high profile, mover/shaker power maker project. They will ride this horse until it drops.
|
sweetmilk on 4/11/2008 2:18:52 PM wrote:
The idea of taking Seth up on his offer to carry questions from this board to the VF leaders and to relay back their answers is attractive. I'd love to know if they favor taking the Family to court. But since I have no way to validate that Seth is who he says he is or that any "responses" he brings to this board are bonafide, I'll have to pass on the offer. I'm pretty sure Gretchen would not "yes" or "no" that question either.
|
sweetmilk on 4/11/2008 1:51:35 PM wrote:
(cont.) After the Dir submits his findings and opinions to the MMAC, the MMAC will conduct a comm. vote and send their their recomendations to Council.
|
sweetmilk on 4/11/2008 1:47:43 PM wrote:
I have a casual relationship with one of the Family members. They have, since the early days of the RLI proposal, been against it and have expressed this opposition in writing to Council at least twice since May or June of last year. The Roanoke City Attorney says that if the family is in opposition the only way it can be overturned is via the court system. Mayor Harris has said twice in the last year or so that he is opposed to carrying the matter into the courts.If anyone on this board has any reliable or more inside info on this matter, please share it.
The Family says they will follow the decision of the MMAC. The MMAC is currently seeking input from the Dir. of the City Park and Rec Dept. (cont.)
|
roenoke on 4/11/2008 1:07:27 PM wrote:
Donald
"Take this tax money and put it into something that will really help Roanoke grow."
What do think will help Rnk grow? As I've asked many who oppossed RLI, do you have a better idea? If so lets hear it.
|
ziranthia on 4/11/2008 12:55:41 PM wrote:
Donald, you sound like you have a good head on your shoulders, but the comment about race issues is irrelevant. First one must realize there is a problem before any solution will work. When one group of people lives in an idealistically stylized culture, that is filled with violence and revenge, and a semi-illegal barter system, and is incapable of comprehending the fact that the other race isn't full of hate for them and everything they stand for, then BOTH sides will distrust each other, and no amount of money will fix that. If you think for a second that Roanoke has race issues, come to Atlanta, where I live. You have no idea! All I can say is that I do my best to accept EVEYONE for who they are. The other side DOES NOT.
|
Walker on 4/11/2008 12:41:32 PM wrote:
Donald-
I think I may have gone to school with you growing up, James Madison Jr. High. Anyways, I agree with many of your sentiments. One question though, in all seriousness, how would you use tax money to deal with "race issues"?
|
roenoke on 4/11/2008 11:45:37 AM wrote:
I'm with Walker on that.
That wraps it up. If the Fishburns say no than no RLI.
Nice chattin with you folks.
|
Walker on 4/11/2008 9:33:40 AM wrote:
"We are not in favor of anything on top of the mountain or on any property that our family gave," Louise Kegley (Fishburn family)said.
"People say, 'You've got the star and Discovery Center and the new bathroom and playgrounds. You've got development, so what's wrong with one more thing?' But we're for NOT having anything else put up there," she said.
That is ALL I need to hear. The Fishburn family doesn't want it. End of story.
For all those at VF, I personally like the "idea". We do need more to showcase the city. I also think criticism on here has been outrageous and unfair at times.
But, since the family is against it, I have to side with them.
|
lovenrv on 4/11/2008 8:56:39 AM wrote:
Roanoke is beginning to experience the critical mass it will need Downtown for a resurgence of local businesses, galleries
and more with the opening of the Museum, Riverside Center and the re-use of older buildings as condos + lofts. This group would best serve the city by focusing ideas, money + efforts Downtown. With full-time residents moving in and tourists about to descend, there
will be more need for cafes, local shops and services. Anyone with $$backing should be planning one or two mid-rise residential towers around the downtown area, a chic little boutique hotel, moving their offices downtown, adding new public spaces + a dense arts zone-think downtown Charlottesville. Leave Mill Mountain natural - as it should be.
|
sweetmilk on 4/11/2008 7:23:39 AM wrote:
dontmethwithseth.To answer your question of 4/8 7:07 pm. We all have to pick our own battles. No one has the time to become involved in every battle on every issue over which we have strong feelings. Do you have a battle that is more important to you than fighting for your group to be allowed to build a restaurant in a public park?
|
herewegoagain on 4/11/2008 2:45:11 AM wrote:
dontmesswithseth on 4/10/2008 2:21:55 PM wrote:
"you're in this for sport or entertainment. I'm not."
What are you in this for?
4/8/2008 7:07:47 PM
4/8/2008 7:32:40 PM
4/8/2008 8:49:02 PM
|
sweetmilk on 4/10/2008 6:42:42 PM wrote:
Karen, I heard that Lugar or Fralin was on WFIR this week and he mentioned some "rumors". Any idea as to what they involved?
|
sweetmilk on 4/10/2008 6:07:23 PM wrote:
Stonewalled on #5.
|
dontmesswithseth on 4/10/2008 5:47:30 PM wrote:
1) Three more informational public meetings are being planned right now. No, that is not a debate, but if you'd like to plan a debate, I'd expect VF would be happy to represent Rockledge.
2) Polling is what you do to "see where the numbers lie." That's been done. The numbers are in favor of Rockledge.
3) Gosh, what a totally unbiased and helpful question! And, no.
4) Boy, this one too! Also no.
|
sweetmilk on 4/10/2008 4:31:07 PM wrote:
You know, I read his 2:57 post backwards and it made more sense than frontwards! I think what he meant was that his opinions are worthless. Hurrah! Common ground!!!
|
sweetmilk on 4/10/2008 4:24:40 PM wrote:
You aren't excactly a font brimming with clarity. Although I appreciate your offer to run messages back and forth, the fact that those people cannot or will not to speak for themselves is loud and clear.Again, is just the heat and kitchen thing.
|
dontmesswithseth on 4/10/2008 2:57:05 PM wrote:
Your question is not an opinion, but any answer I give clearly would be. You obviously have an opinion about this, and it is different from mine. This is not a question with a concrete answer, and my opinion on it does nothing to provide more information for people considering this issue. If you'd like to state your opinion on this, by all means: go ahead.
|
dontmesswithseth on 4/10/2008 2:21:55 PM wrote:
Tracker: That's pretty clearly a matter of opinion. You have one opinion, and I have another. I'm sure no answer I give you is going to broaden this conversation.
sweetmilk: It's cute how you're trying to bait me here. Clearly you're in this for sport or entertainment. I'm not. If you have questions related to this issue, I'm happy to get answers for you. Since you aren't posing questions, I assume we're finished having this exchange. I am a member of VF, and in fact I have bowed out of this because I think you're prone to below the belt attacks that do not address the merits of RLI. So, yes, it is reasonable to think a VF member might come here to provide info, and the stop engaging because the tenor of the conversation is poor.
|
sweetmilk on 4/10/2008 12:31:50 PM wrote:
Seth. Wouldn't it make more sense to just have a member of the VF comm. log on here, use an alias and enter into the discussion? A message board is an excellent venue to debate. It gives both parties ample time to research and construct their responses. Gretchen was tough enough to do it. If they feel they are being unfairly bashed they can just refuse to respond, right? I don't think we nor they need a messenger boy running back and forth in what has been and would would surely continue to be be a contentious debate. I'd prefer to duel with them, not just read excerpts from their press releases. But, on the other hand, maybe the idea of a debate is why they prefer to stay away?
|
dontmesswithseth on 4/10/2008 11:18:27 AM wrote:
Does either one of you have a specific, clear question you'd like answered? If you'd like to pose it without a bunch of drama, I'm happy to take it to the Rockledge committee and get a concrete answer for you. I'm not willing to participate in the childish antics that otherwise pervade this board. If you prefer the latter to the former, I can't help you. If you really do want to exchange information, please tell me what you'd like to know, specifically, and I'll do what I can to get you that information. Speculation in terms of "if... then" with regard to public opinion or absurd hypotheticals is not something I can provide.
|
sweetmilk on 4/10/2008 11:13:23 AM wrote:
I think there is a great deal of difference between belittling a peron who disagrees with my positions and belittling the flawed logic of that person's responses. Now, I will certainly belittle the people behind their backs when I am in the company of my allies. That's a part of the fun of this battle. We swap war stories.
But then there was that guy several days ago who was ranting about Che and George Soros. On a RLI thread! That sort of silliness earns no respect and he should be treated accordingly.
Gretchen has earned a great deal of my respect. Seth is, at best, a work in progress.
|
Justafan on 4/10/2008 11:13:03 AM wrote:
Who did I call a name? An ISSUE as I see it is persuading those who are undecided towards your position. That's hard to do with the confrontational and defensive posts that I have read.
Sweetmilk...YOU were the one who brought up the RULES of messege board engagement. I thought you knew something the rest of us didn't.
Like others you have run away from this board, this will be my last post on the subject. Talk amungst yourselves.
|
sweetmilk on 4/10/2008 10:50:42 AM wrote:
He's stepped in as a self-proclaimed "whipping boy". As far as I know there are no "rules" forbidding acid humor, sarcasm, wit and/or cynicism on this message board. If he or anyone else cannot carry their weight in those arenas then they need to stop giving wise guys like me straight lines like that.It's not like I have accused anyone of being a moron or blathering, ill informed geezak.Unfortunately he cannot speak for the inner sanctum of VF so I really don't anticipate asking him any questions that might require anything more than the pat, broad brushed answers we hear so regularily from that side of the table.
|
Justafan on 4/10/2008 10:05:03 AM wrote:
Sweetmilk....In my view, your last two postings proved Seth's point. Where are the RULES to this sight?
Tracker....I haven't read every single post on this sight, but the name calling seems to be against VF from the side that wants to preserve MM.
I am undecided on this issue, but people like you who belittle those who don't agree with you are pushing me towards VF's side.
|
sweetmilk on 4/10/2008 9:16:10 AM wrote:
It appears that the pugilisticaly self named "dontmesswithseth" is whining about not wanting to become involved in an "e-brawl"? Perhaps he should close his account and come back onboard with a less confrontational board name like for instance, "iamsethcanirubyourback". Nobody has been tougher than sweetmilk on gretchen. I think she understands the rules of message board engagement and is willing to stick her chin out on the behalf of a cause in which she so passionately believes.
|
sweetmilk on 4/10/2008 8:21:17 AM wrote:
If you think of yourself as a VF whipping boy isn't that because you feel you've been beaten and whipped here...have not been able to withstand the scrutinization? Not being a VF insider puts you at an obvious disadvantage but if you can't stand the heat....
|
dontmesswithseth on 4/10/2008 7:39:04 AM wrote:
No, it isn't ok. And further, it isn't productive. Sweetmilk's mind clearly can't be changed, and s/he clearly isn't interested in rational, respectful conversation. There's no reason to continue those exchanges. You seem unclear on the difference between reasonable dialogue and an e-brawl.
Additionally, this is not a blog. This is an anonymous message board with extreme limitations on posting ability. This is hardly a political vehicle, especially since it's dominated by the same four people, none of whom seems esp intent on being civil.
I am a member of VF. I am not on the Rockledge committee. Personally, if a majority of the population were opposed, I would make other plans. I can't speak for VF, but it's also a moot point.
|
dontmesswithseth on 4/10/2008 12:12:50 AM wrote:
Yeah, sweetmilk, I'm a member of Valley Forward, and since you seem to need a whipping boy, I guess that's me.
I'm finished engaging with you, because you're not willing to have calm, respectful conversation, but if you need someone to rail against, go for it.
|
sweetmilk on 4/9/2008 10:51:34 PM wrote:
Gretchen is obviously chosen to ignore the City's Engineering Dept drawings of MMP that show the vast majority of the MMP acerage as unsuitable for building due to steepness of the slope.So what VF is proposing to build upon is actually a large portion of the remaining buildable space, not the tiny percentage she has repeatedly cited.Those darn details are SO annoying.
|
sweetmilk on 4/9/2008 10:20:19 PM wrote:
I think just about everyone who is pro RLI eventually rationalizes it with the " It's empty space therefore it is developable space."
flawed logic.That is to be expected when you have four Realtors/developers on the Design Team.
While Gretchen is gone is there another card carrying, certified member of VF willing to wade into the water on this thread?
|
sweetmilk on 4/9/2008 5:32:09 PM wrote:
So you just "heard" things? You didn't make an effort to reach out and engage those critics in any sort of constructive problem solving? I know you went to the MMAC in May and got a negative response from them. Did you sit down with any of them before you went back to the table with proposal #2? You know, we probably would not be having this discussion today if you had made an effort to be inclusive two years ago. But you didn't and we are.
I can't believe that you are leaving for a few weeks! I'll have to talk to "roenoke" ! I'm convinced that every minute I waste reading any post of his causes an irreversible drop in my i.q.
|
sweetmilk on 4/9/2008 3:42:48 PM wrote:
Now, that said, Gretchen has earned a lot of my respect for becoming, by default, the Voice of Valley Forward, for coming here regularily to defend and promote the RLI and to do it under her own name. The downside of this is that she has become the lightening rod for some people who really know how to throw some major league heat.
Life is interesting. Human behavior is even more interesting. Batter up!
|
sweetmilk on 4/9/2008 3:26:10 PM wrote:
( cont.) Your tired refrain, the one you claim your opponets don't "get", is "It's not just a restaurant". Well, here's one you probably will not "get".
It's a really bad marriage of structure to site.
|
roenoke on 4/9/2008 3:19:25 PM wrote:
You didn't answer the question sweetmilk.
Is Mill Mnt. Zoo a "commercial facility"? Not whether its profit or non-profit or if it gets $ from the city.
Here you go again...
"RLI on the other hand will be crammed onto the last available area"
Not True. There is still plenty of space on the Mnt.
So sweetmilk...you wont say why you are against RLI, but you do say PoO is great because its in a valley. Is it safe to assume that you don't like the RLI idea just because its at the top of MM? or do you have another reason you don't like the idea???
|
sweetmilk on 4/9/2008 3:16:27 PM wrote:
( cont.) The RLI parking lots/parking garage and automobiles will be, after the Discovery Center, the next structure one sees upon cresting MMP. The PoO valley also contains a camp ground (hidden) and a picnic area. (hidden)
MMP on the other hand contains, in a MUCH smaller area, a radio tower ( sore thumb) Discovery Center (sore thumb) Zoo ( hidden)a little green space and "The World's Tallest Neon Star". And into that jumbled mix you want to plop your restaurant.
|
sweetmilk on 4/9/2008 3:03:06 PM wrote:
The PoO lodge and restaurant actually enhance the visiting experience of the area. The facility is nestled comfortably in a valley measuring about 1 1/2 mi. by about 2/5 of a mile.The facility has a beautiful distant view of Sharp Top and the lake. It was designed to blend into it's space. It's parking lots were designed to be mostly hidden from the view of those not visiting the facility.RLI on the other hand will be crammed onto the last available area loosely measuring about 150 yds by about 120 yds. By your own admission there will be no view of the city and it is very arguable that there will be any significant view of the distant mountains. (cont.)
|
sweetmilk on 4/9/2008 2:33:55 PM wrote:
I think the Zoo is owned by a private foundation but receives City $ support. I don't know about it's official "profit" or "non-profit" status.
|
roenoke on 4/9/2008 2:25:05 PM wrote:
Is Mill Mnt. Zoo a "commercial facility"?
|
dontmesswithseth on 4/9/2008 10:21:28 AM wrote:
Big box stores are relevant in that they present real threats of development and commercialization. Dismissing them as an issue in this undermines the assertion that your concerns here are about those things, and suggests that, really, this is just a personal issue for you. I am concerned about commercialization and development, wherever it happens. I think we have to strive for smart, purposeful development that serves our community, and as such I'm more concerned about building a Home Depot across from Lowe's than I am about a LEED-certified, community-centered building enhancing an already developed space. We disagree, and that's fine. It's just that, unlike you, I can disagree with you without questioning your morals and your motives.
|
roenoke on 4/9/2008 10:14:07 AM wrote:
Well said Seth.
|
dontmesswithseth on 4/9/2008 8:53:23 AM wrote:
Karen, I never implied otherwise. Yes, I do believe that many people who oppose Rockledge are rational and well-intentioned. I'm not sure that demographic is represented here, however. This is not a conversation. A conversation involves the exchange of information, not accusations and derision. Can you provide clear, concrete examples of the ways this project directly financially benefits those involved in its planning? Can you explain how to integrate two of the arguments made against Rockledge: that it's not financially sustainable/ that it's a profit vehicle for VF? These seem contradictory and further the impression that the opposition here is just hysteria, not reason.
|
sweetmilk on 4/9/2008 7:48:16 AM wrote:
Thanks herewego, you saved me a few keystrokes.
I am a person who is often more interested in the WHY than I am the WHAT.Therefore I wonder WHY there are four developers/Realtors on the RLI Design Team and no members of the MMAC. Gretchen says they "listened" to the complaints of the opposition in the preparation of proposal #2. Listen how? Thru the newspapers? Or did they activly sit down with spokespersons from the opposition, members of the MMAC,reps of City Park and Recreation, representatives from the adjoining neighborhoods, reps of MMP user groups and engage them in a discussuion. If so, who? Historicaly, VF has been poor at paying attention to the details and engaging those who will actually be affected by changes in MMP.
|
herewegoagain on 4/9/2008 2:24:10 AM wrote:
"Do you believe there is some secret, insidious plot associated with Rockledge?"
It's insidious, but no secret:
Developers are in the business to develop everything they can get their hands on. They go for undeveloped land because it's cheaper than recycling land that's already been spoiled by previous development. And they use PR to blunt the opposition.
|
dontmesswithseth on 4/8/2008 8:49:02 PM wrote:
Sweetmilk, I hesitate to engage you, but can you tell me exactly what your premise is on this whole thing? Your issues seem to go beyond basic concerns about land use decisions and veer toward an elaborate theory about rich people conspiring to build a clubhouse you aren't allowed to come to. Do you believe there is some secret, insidious plot associated with Rockledge? Can you not simply acknowledge that VF and those who support Rockledge are rational, intellingent, benevolent, well-intentioned individuals who have come to a conclusion that is different from yours? We clearly disagree one one decision facing our community, but presumably we share other similar goals regarding our home. We're all on the same side.
|
sweetmilk on 4/8/2008 8:13:23 PM wrote:
Gretchen. Why did VF see a need to place four local real estate developers on the thirteen member RLI Design Team? Exactly what design expertise did they bring to the Team otherwise comprised of trained architects, engineers, landscape architect etc ? In preparing proposal #2 exactly who in the opposition community did VF consult with? You mentioned "listening".
|
dontmesswithseth on 4/8/2008 7:32:40 PM wrote:
So that's a no on being involved in fighting any other environmental and commercial threats, then, I take it?
|
dontmesswithseth on 4/8/2008 7:07:47 PM wrote:
The degree of hysteria over here is amazing.
I understand that there are a lot of strong opinions about the Rockledge project, but it seems that many of them have come out of a vacuum. Are those of you who oppose it equally "active" (if shrill internet posting can be considered activism) in opposing the myriad other threats of deforestation and commercialization facing our area? For example, have you worked as actively to oppose the influx of redundant big box stores that not only claim land and threaten the environment here and globally, but also undermine local business? Are you working to ensure the lake remains accessible to those who don't own million dollar homes? These seem like much larger, more threatening issues.
|
Walker on 4/8/2008 4:17:37 PM wrote:
Sweetness-
People think you have other motives because your opposition lacks merit. Say what you truly feel and let it simply be that.
|
sweetmilk on 4/8/2008 4:14:26 PM wrote:
Looking at the Save MM site reminded me. Look at the open area to the left of the RLI footprint. VF probably does not want you to know this but there will need to be an access road cut into the slope at that point to allow access to the RLI loading dock, deliveries, the dumpsters. Another five or six trees lost there.
|
sweetmilk on 4/8/2008 3:31:31 PM wrote:
So you are referencing a partisan "Save MM" web site and you contend that it has validity that a City of Roanoke Engineering Department map, which you have never seen, lacks?
|
roenoke on 4/8/2008 3:31:00 PM wrote:
"they are asking for most of what is able to be built on."
Not true.
"most of the oppostion don't want the RLI built and have many well formulated, sound reasons. "
This could be a lie. If it isn't the truth is yet to be seen.
BTW
"They had no idea that anyone would or could see thru the transparency of their plan."
What exactly seen thru "the transparency of their plan"? If its not to build RLI on top of MM what is it?
Why don't you want RLI built sweetmilk? Do you have other motives. Do you have a est. in town that you feel is threatened by RLI? Let us know why you feel so strongly against this plan.
|
roenoke on 4/8/2008 3:13:50 PM wrote:
Go to your SaveMM site and see the big blue green area next the RLI site that even the SaveMM folks refer to as "the parks only flat or nearly flat open space other than the parking lots" That shaded area is larger than the footprint for RLI.
This easy.
|
sweetmilk on 4/8/2008 2:14:15 PM wrote:
Good question. You will see that I was correct when you go to the WVLT office at 722 First St and ask Roger to show you the MMP zones 1,2, and 3 map. Next "lie", please.
( Man, this is easy.)
|
roenoke on 4/8/2008 12:40:33 PM wrote:
I already did but here you go...
"The balance is unbuildable slope."
|
sweetmilk on 4/8/2008 12:22:06 PM wrote:
Well. The "b" word is certainly debatable but please point out my lies and explain why they are lies.
|
roenoke on 4/8/2008 12:21:17 PM wrote:
whoops
I know you didn't say...
|
roenoke on 4/8/2008 12:16:37 PM wrote:
"I have not said that they should build it elsewhere nor have I used the enviro argument."
I know you said that...you haven't said anything. You just bitch and lie.
|
sweetmilk on 4/8/2008 12:05:56 PM wrote:
I have not said that they should build it elsewhere nor have I used the enviro argument. You'll have to look elsewhere to pick fights over those. As far as the City's MMP zones #1,#2,#3 map you'll have to access that yourself. I first saw it at the WVLT office downtown. Now go take a look for yourself because obviously you don't believe me. BTW, are you and T&H the same person?
|
roenoke on 4/8/2008 11:42:52 AM wrote:
Oh sorry sweetie you said buildable not usable space. That still doesn't change the fact that your not telling the truth.
Why should they build it somewhere else? Location is everything. That already developed Mnt. sits above the city and is a wonderful symbol of the natural beauty this area has. This rstrnt could be a wonderful way to showcase that. You can still do all the same things you could before at MMP but with RLI there is more to offer. More attraction.
As for the enviro arguement. Doesn't it make for "smarter growth" to develop on already developed land instead of imposing on virgin forest and mnts.
|
sweetmilk on 4/8/2008 11:11:22 AM wrote:
Walker. I don't think many people "...just don't want the land built upon..." I think most of the oppostion don't want the RLI built and have many well formulated, sound reasons. ( and a few sort of nutty reasons) Same thing with the proponents. It's not that they JUST want to build it, they want it built and they have many well formu......uh....wait a minute...... no...they don't. Whatever.
I think it's interesting that though VF has four very well known local Realtors and property developers on the Rockledge Design Team, they have not trotted any of them out to the media. That would certainly give the RLI idea a little credibility.
It's always Gretchen, who does a fine job, Rupert, their In-House Show Pony and that Moving Guy.
|
sweetmilk on 4/8/2008 10:41:53 AM wrote:
Please point out to me where I said "usable space". It's 09:31 and you've already driven your jalopy into the "Gulch of Rants". Isn't it about time for you to mention Che?
Walker mentioned something that I have heard many times...the question of why VF doesn't just find another place. I think the answer lies in the ego thing plus the fact that they simply could not interest a real developer in investing in what would surely be a much, much more expensive and risky project.
|
Walker on 4/8/2008 9:41:46 AM wrote:
I still like the idea. I think VF has some great plans and remains a great organization for young people who want to direct change in the valley.
I also don't really care if the Fishburn family NOW says it would be okay to do this. The man who donated the land, call him Gramps if you want, didn't want the land used for this type of thing.
Obviously, these MY opinions. I respect what VF is trying to do, I just feel that they might need to pick a different spot on the BRP. I realize that would throw a huge wrench in the plans, but thats how I see it.
I hope they can get it done, but I think it is VERY important to honor the wishes of a man who gave SO much to our city a long time ago. Lakewood Park, Wasena Park, SoRo Park, Mill Mtn., Norwich Park...he donated it all.
|
Walker on 4/8/2008 9:35:09 AM wrote:
I am glad someone finally came out and said, "protecting the land, nature is enough reason to be against it", or something like that. Karen did.
While I think its a silly position to take, in general, I appreciate her honesty. If you JUST don't want land to built upon....fine, just say it.
I love nature myself and enjoy it as much as possible, but I am always a bit skeptical of self-described tree-huggers. Anyways, enough said on that.
After reading a recent letter in the Roanoke Star and Sentinel (I think thats right), I have decided that VF needs to find somewhere else to do this project.
Fishburn donated this land and other land specifically for the purpose of "parks and recreation". Now, you'd have to be Clintonian to believe that RLI fits in with that.
(Cont)
|
roenoke on 4/8/2008 9:33:10 AM wrote:
dirtbomb-
That blog is lamer than karens!
WHAT A PATHETIC JOKE!
|
roenoke on 4/8/2008 9:31:30 AM wrote:
"resourceful enough to be riding up and down the mountains of the 400+ miles length of the BRP are not fit enough to ride down Mill Mountain for food and lodging?"
Your either still missing the point or thats just your best arguement against her example.
You see this is what I'm talking about. Your arguement is weak. If you don't like it because "insert reason here", thats fine. But trying to rebut every point just makes you look silly.
And as I've shown...when you can't make a good argument you just make one up. Please admitt you lied about the usable space.
You're losing credibility.
|
sweetmilk on 4/8/2008 9:10:06 AM wrote:
" Why VF spends it's energy pushing one mountain idea". I've asked that and had it asked of me several times. The best answer I've heard is that this is VF's signature, vanity project and they thought they could sell it to the City with their ease of selling a three bedroom, two bath rancher in SW county. They had no idea that anyone would or could see thru the transparency of their plan. Now, their considerable egos are on the line and it is especially galling to them since they see the oppostion as being mainly a bunch of blue hairs and tree huggers. Of course I'm no psychologist and I didn't even stay in a Holiday Inn Express last night. In fact, like those poor thru-bikers I couldn't find ANYWHERE to stay in the 'gic City.
|
sweetmilk on 4/8/2008 7:40:38 AM wrote:
roenoke. I have held the zone #1, #2,#3 map in my hands. I know how to read a map. So are you trying to tell me that those bikers who are fit enough and resourceful enough to be riding up and down the mountains of the 400+ miles length of the BRP are not fit enough to ride down Mill Mountain for food and lodging?
I realize this seems such a small point but G has become the spokesperson for VF on this page. This poor little cyclist story is a part of her oft repeated sales pitch so when she says stuff like that it begs to be parsed.
And debunked.
|
roenoke on 4/7/2008 10:53:12 PM wrote:
"The balance is unbuildable slope."
NOT TRUE!
|
roenoke on 4/7/2008 10:50:06 PM wrote:
Sweetmilk...check your facts. This statement is just not true "they are asking for most of what is able to be built on"
Secondly you keep attacking Gretchens BRP biking friends but you still fail to read what she wrote. She said lodging and food close to the BRP. Not whether you can see a hotel from MMP.
If you don't like the idea of RLI say it. But please quit with all these pathetic arguements you use to justify being against it.
|
sweetmilk on 4/7/2008 8:18:01 PM wrote:
Gretchen, MMP has three zones as determined by the City. The smallest zone, the top, ( I think this is called zone #1) is the only one that is deemed buildable. The RLI and it's accompaning parking lots/parking garage will occupy most of the remaining space in that zone. So it's not that VF is asking for just a tiny portion of the 600 acre MMP...they are asking for most of what is able to be built on. The balance is unbuildable slope.
Also, if your end-to-end biking friends had pedaled over to one of the MMP overlooks they could have SEEN the Hotel Roanoke.Beds. Good food. Ummmm.....
|
sweetmilk on 4/7/2008 4:56:02 PM wrote:
So what's the point of entering debate against someone you think of as "stupid"? Isn't that a no win situation for you because if they are truely stupid they will never cede any of your points or admit defeat? So you end up stumbling away, frustrated and muttering about George Soros and Che. BTW, if you reply to this it means you actually ARE debating with someone you deem "stupid". Next topic. Please.
|
sweetmilk on 4/7/2008 4:28:55 PM wrote:
Yeooowww...Look out! T&H is in no condition to drive!
|
sweetmilk on 4/7/2008 1:22:25 PM wrote:
And besides, I don't think Gretchen is perceiving any lack of clarity issues from my posts.
|
sweetmilk on 4/7/2008 1:14:08 PM wrote:
roenoke. Sounds like you have one foot in T&H's careening jalopy. You guys need to take a secret vote and elect a driver.
|
roenoke on 4/7/2008 1:04:00 PM wrote:
Sweetie-
I have to agree with T&H here. What is your main problem with RLI. You seem to just want to bitch and take apart Gretchens post without really reading it. Please give the rest of us some clarity.
|
sweetmilk on 4/7/2008 11:58:16 AM wrote:
T&H. On 3/25 you were ranting about early communists, Che and George Soros.
On a RLI thread.
I don't think I want to enter into any RLI discussion with you. You would surely steer it into some nutcase ditch.
|
sweetmilk on 4/7/2008 10:53:18 AM wrote:
So let me see if I understand this correctly. Your four young professional friends relocated to Asheville as opposed to the RoVa SOLEY because of A'ville's BRP connection? Doesn't Roanoke have an almost identical BRP connection? Or was that physical connection just one of many factors? Having biked the length of the BRP twice in the pre-google era and never having to forage for berries or sleep on the ground it amazes me that your dozens of young professional cycling friends were so resourcefully challenged as to not be able to make Roanoke work for them. Those people have computers on their BIKES!
|
sweetmilk on 4/7/2008 10:36:42 AM wrote:
People with Asheville envy should be careful about what they wish for.
http://www.ashevilleparc.org/
Asheville is certainly way ahead of the RoVa in grabbing the tourist trade. Unfortunately they are also way ahead in abusing their slopes and ridgelines.
|
sweetmilk on 4/7/2008 10:31:38 AM wrote:
Tracker is dead on correct. The idea of a poll is a very tricky one. Who would be responsible for conducting the poll? Obviously if it is another VF "poll" the questions will be framed to solicit the results they want. Same thing if it is a MMC poll. Of course another WDBJ Seven poll would be a more reasonable one but again who is to say that the TV station does not have an agenda? Seven would probably laugh at the idea of VF and MMC being allowed input on how the questions are written. Also any announced poll would surely be preceeded by a VF financed media blitz designed to shape public opinion.My feeling is that the more the public knows about this proposal, the more likely the public is to oppose it.I suggest a series of public debates.
|
TripleActionJones on 4/7/2008 10:03:51 AM wrote:
.
Still on the fence over this whole project myself.
While I thought gmweinnig did a good job explaining some of her and VF's position on the issue, I don't agree that the BRP connection to Asheville is a major factor of it's attraction .
I've spent a lot of time there, have friends who live there and while I am sure the BRP helps in some way, it's not a big part of what makes Asheville work the way it does.
Much more than that.
I think both sides make extremely good points for the pros and cons of this project. It's a hard decision.
With both sides having websites detailing their arguements, a poll at the May 6 elections isn't a bad idea.
|
sweetmilk on 4/6/2008 9:04:13 PM wrote:
If Gretchen believes that the BRP has some sort of magnetic appeal to masses of the young, she obviously has not been to Mabry Mill on any Sunday in May. It looks like an AARP Convention!
|
sweetmilk on 4/6/2008 8:59:07 PM wrote:
Giving the BRP all of the credit for Asheville's tourist boom and ability to attract and the young is quite a stretch and is a good example of VF's tendency of offering simple solutions to very complex probelms. Attracting tourists had been something that the Asheville area had been doing very well for at least 75 years prior to the construction of the BRP. In fact, that pre-exiting tourist trade was one of the main reasons that the BRP was routed through A'ville. Not vice versa. To suggest that the RLI would be that missing link between the Roanoke Valley and a BRP tourism bonanza is laughable.
|
sweetmilk on 4/6/2008 8:36:38 PM wrote:
Jeeze Walker! Maybe you need your meds adjusted.
|
Walker on 4/6/2008 5:25:42 PM wrote:
sweetmilk-
I admit, my last post was a bit "loud" for the current discussion. But, I am sick of the environmental BS that has invaded nearly every marketing campaign.
Green = BullSh-t
Yet many people sit proudly with their mouths agape, waiting for their next helping to fall steaming out of Gore's arse.
And speaking of answering questions or debating an issue...the prophet (GORE) simply refuses, belching accusations of heresy from his mealy mouth.
So, if you simply do not like any new construction on any "GREEN" land, please just say so.
|
sweetmilk on 4/6/2008 8:19:31 AM wrote:
Wow. Walker is turning into a hysterical Drama Queen, jubilee is going down in flames. We need ziranthia to "rescue" this thread. What ever happened to that person who claimed to be a VF board member and blew the whistle on Walker's bil? Now he/she was FUN.
|
Walker on 4/5/2008 11:25:24 PM wrote:
Well, then it's settled. No more construction in Roanoke on earth that hasn't ever been turned.
While we're at it, no more automobiles or electricity for that matter. We all know how those are made and maintained.
Clearly, the best way out of slow economic times is to stop the economy altogether. No more buying or selling.
Candles and horse carriages, THAT is the future!
Now, THOSE are the revolutionary ideas of OUR times.
(This statement was brought to you by Al "who cares if my house is the size of the Pentagon" Gore and the Earth Liberation Front)
By the way, I haven't decided if I am for or against this project. Just sick of the GREEN scam that has metastasized here (earth) of late. It's the new pet rock.
|
herewegoagain on 4/5/2008 8:54:50 PM wrote:
Reality,
This might make a good email to letters@roanoke.com
If you don't want to reveal your real name, you could post permission here for someone else to send it in.
|
Justafan on 4/4/2008 3:16:04 PM wrote:
I think you folks are missing a very big point. Judging from the sentiments I have seen, there is nothing VF can say that would dissuade folks like JubileeKaren from opposing their inititive. Also, there is nothing she can say to dissuade or insult VF. It's the people in the middle who are undecided you both need to reach. I doubt seriously that there is a majority for either side. There are a lot of people like myself who are undecided. Personal attacks and innuendo are not going to convince the undecided folks. I haven't seen many facts to back up either argument. Whole lot of personal opinions though, and while some don't see them as vicious, they do come off as very smug.
|
roenoke on 3/28/2008 9:51:33 PM wrote:
Nope. I'm serious.
You show people how little it imposes on the landscape of a mountain already containing a zoo, parking lots, roads, nature center, radio towers, delivery trucks, utility trucks, garbage trucks, a large neon sign, etc.....and your gonna get better than 66% saying, "That looks like a good idea!"
|
roenoke on 3/28/2008 5:49:44 PM wrote:
I went to the SaveMM website and accually felt the pictures showed how small and how little space RLI would take up. It proves that there would still be plenty of space to picnic and play since it wont infringe on the any of the flat space. If your looking to sway public opinion I don't think showing those pictures are gonna help you.
They really show how little impact RLI will have on the usable park space. As a matter of fact I would encourage all who are against the rstrnt to look at the pictures and see how it really isn't ruining anything.
If you keep showing those diagrams your gonna have more than 66% in favor of RLI.
|
sweetmilk on 3/28/2008 9:34:04 AM wrote:
Aarone.Can you tell us the sources of the glossy dollar figures VF is tossing about regarding revenues they say the RLI will produce?
|
sweetmilk on 3/26/2008 1:21:27 PM wrote:
The old RLI was never anything but a commercial failure ( look it up)and the theatre was probably about as much of a "draw" as the Mill Mountain Theatre is today.
|
herewegoagain on 3/26/2008 5:38:09 AM wrote:
Meeting rooms are already free at places like public libraries. If they charged for the meeting space nobody would come.
|
roenoke on 3/25/2008 7:04:25 PM wrote:
The sky is falling the sky is falling....HAHAHA
You folks need to get a grip. You've declared this biz a loss and it hasn't even been aproved.
If you don't like RLI thats fine but quit making up all this silly crap about room rentals and revenue loss. Your spectulating on something you probably know very little about.
Its Roanokers like you folks that think everything sucks and will continue to suck that keep this defunct RR town gasping for air.
Maybe someone can answer How voting for former mayor Bowers is a step forward?
|
TripleActionJones on 3/25/2008 1:10:03 PM wrote:
TruthandHumor won't even eat Progresso soup because it's facist,commie,liberal soup!!
:)
|
roenoke on 3/24/2008 6:21:34 PM wrote:
What is "their agenda" Tracker?
|
sweetmilk on 3/24/2008 4:38:26 PM wrote:
Rupert "The Valley Green Giant" Cutler.
|
herewegoagain on 3/21/2008 8:28:44 PM wrote:
A pair of restaurants? I agree. One restaurant could be nice, if it was the right kind. Hiking thru nature builds an appetite.
This VF thing you've all been talking about wouldn't even let a sweaty hiker in the door, let alone serve a good meal at a decent price.
|
jjackson60 on 3/21/2008 10:25:31 AM wrote:
For those wishing to discuss the upcoming elections, we've created two message boards. Visit the city council board or the presidential and congressional board.
The Mill Mountain board will remain active for that discussion to continue.
Thanks,
John Jackson
Online editor, roanoke.com
|
Walker on 3/21/2008 10:07:27 AM wrote:
I agree GeorgiaBoy. Please excuse me here for a second folks.
Like TAJ said, why aren't there more topics to discuss?
We have a HUGE election coming up for the President of the United States. Some like to call it a "historic" event. I would use that term as well, it is a HISTORICALLY awful selection we have to pick from.
We have a man, who's been made out to be the chosen one, who has been shown to support a racist organization and believe in a purely racist theology.
Barack Obama is a fraud and he IS the Democrat candidate. The Dem party is in shambles. They have no alternative but to allow him to move forward.
If their wonderfully, UN-Democratic system of SUPER-SIZED delegates dares to push Clinton ahead...remember Reginald Denny?
|
TripleActionJones on 3/21/2008 9:38:56 AM wrote:
Since we're including city council conversation here - (sidenote: why hasn't there been a thread started on this forum devoted entirely to city council? There's been plenty of cause and articles as of lately.) - how much support do you think Bowers is going to get?
Anita Powell or George Sgouros?
I think many people are dissatisfied with some current council members and Mayor Harris and would vote for a change in the council.
I am unsure though if enough people would support Bowers to give him a majority of the vote since he's run before and been unsuccesful the past couple times.
I do think a lot of people are wanting some change, or a more well blended mix in council & not so lopsided.
Should be interesting to watch unfold
|
GeorgiaBoy on 3/21/2008 9:36:03 AM wrote:
Quick!! Somebody bury this horse....300 some-odd posts and counting.....it's been beaten enough! Move on folks....get a life!
|
sweetmilk on 3/20/2008 9:53:43 AM wrote:
Jubilee, where can I find the text of David's speech?
|
Entropy on 3/19/2008 7:13:05 PM wrote:
What will roanokers do when it rains?
Well, if today was any indication, I would say... "forget how to drive like a sane human."
but thats off topic.
To bring it back on topic, you know what would be a good art installation project? Childproofing the art museum with giant rubber or cork balls over the sharp edges.
You heard it here first folks.
|
ziranthia on 3/17/2008 9:54:17 PM wrote:
Whether Roanoke builds Rockledge, a tram, an amphitheather, a weird museum, a trolley car, a hot dog stand, an empty business park, a "new urbanization" community, an intermodal site, a traffic roundabout, a one-way street, two-way street, or no-way street, YET another Walmart, another particle board and plastic siding-infested neighborhood, a high-end car dealership, an over-priced bookstore, yet another short-term restaurant at Valley View, a nursing home, an Advance Auto, a Jiffy-Lube, an outdoor sports retailer, a carwash, a Shoney's, Hardee's or DQ, or the same old stuff, Roanoke will never be a destination that most people care, or have even heard about. Just being honest. Sorry.
|
