The ordinance that allowed QuikTrip to relocate in Maplewood stipulated that the old location would be torn down if it wasn’t developed within a year. It now looks like it might be a while. QuikTrip moved to Manchester and Big Bend last June.
QuikTrip real estate manager Alan Renner said Thursday the ordinance doesn’t apply to them.
“We’re not the owners of the property and then therefore that stipulation doesn’t apply to us, and of course it doesn’t bind the owner because they weren’t party to that agreement,” he said.
He said there’s been interest in the property but the owners haven’t been cooperative. QuikTrip has a lease until 2019. “We’re paying them whether we’re there or not,” Renner said.
“What we were anticipating is that at some point we could sublease it, or we would end up buying it back and selling it,” he said. See also: New Maplewood QuikTrip cuts the ribbon
He said three brothers own the property and they don’t seem to be able to agree on anything, and the one that seems to lead the group has cancer and has been out of the loop with chemo treatments.
St. Louis County records show the property is owned by Tilzer Associates, L.P. Missouri Secretary of State records show Jerome S. Tilzer, of Leawood, KS, as president.
“It’s just unfortunate, the set of circumstances, that we haven’t been able to get something in there, but we’re still trying and we haven’t given up,” Renner said.
Update: Maplewood city officials haven’t responded immediately to a request for comment.
This is extremely disappointing, yet, unfortunately it is not surprising. It is all about greed–Maplewood leadership’s greed, and QT’s greed. Why live your life in such a disrespectful way? Why disrespect our community like this? First QT, then Tim Horton’s. Now our greedy leadership wants to let a McDonald’s at or an intersection that already CANNOT SUSTAIN the traffic that is already there. 40 South News–what is the status of the McDonald’s? The traffic is a mess without a McDonald’s there, can you imagine what a McDonald’s would do? Oh, please, won’t new prospects for mayor, council members, etc., come forward and save our community? You would be elected if you run. The citizens of Maplewood are very sick and tired of all the lies and status quo. The people of Maplewood WILL REMEMBER THIS. #NOMcDonalds
There is no way a McDonald’s should be built where the Shell currently sits–what a horrible idea. The amount of traffic generated by the existing commercial businesses at or near the vicinity of the intersection of Big Bend and Manchester is already not sustainable. Can you imagine what a McDonald’s would do in that location? It would be a total nightmare for Maplewood, and I cannot believe that the current city leadership does not understand this. Maplewood: stand up for your rights and say no to McDonald’s. 40 South News, do you know where the issue of McDonald’s stands right now? Any information would be greatly appreciated. Again, Maplewood citizens, if you care at all about maintaining the heart and soul of our city, please say no to McDonald’s!
Huh
What brings in more real estate tax revenue, a vacant lot or a buliding?
I am really disappointed in QT. I am certain they won’t miss my little $60 a week in gas and a few more dollars for donuts . . . but I will not be a QuikTrip customer from this day on.
What a pitiful “tap dance”.
Try calling and talking to the o t guy very rude
On further thought, I am assuming that Quik Trip built the previous site and did not move into an existing building. In addition, they hold the lease for another four years. Why would they not be required to turn the property into green space? City of Maplewood, I believe you have some explaining to do.
The current site (corner of Manchester and BigBend) is also leased–QT didn’t buy the land, they are leasing it, if I remember correctly, for 99 years. It is reasonable to assume that their lease allowed them to build and maintain buildings in both cases. We don’t know what the lease agreement between the landowner and QT stipulates regarding who can do what with building assets once they are abandoned, but that is beside the point. The current landowners are going to be paid for their property regardless of whether a new tenant is found or not. What’s the rush? When you’re sitting someplace in Kansas, what do you care if a vacant building slowly sags and weeds grow up in the concrete seams?
Now that the real deal is exposed, watch the fun and games begin as politicians begin to point fingers and explain how they were also completely taken in and had “no idea!” “That evil QT!” Buckle up, Mr. Renner.
But now, just across the street, we have a McDonalds deal frying up. And they also have a vacant store down at Deer Creek. From what I’ve read, typically MickyD owns all their properties outright as real estate investments. But this one, it turns out, sits grandfathered in a flood plain, which, of course, greatly diminishes its commercial value. Surely they’d like to dump this property and maximize their return on investment. But now the old bait and switch routine is sorta going stale–“we’ll need to come up with another cheap throw-away toy for the Maplewood kids, won’t we? Hey! How about if we donate the land to Maplewood and take the tax write-off? Maplewood loves vacant buildings!”
Q!
I agree with all that you two are saying, but don’t you think it will be even harder to lease it once there is no parking lot and no building? “Green space” has bucolic undertones, but we’re not talking about green space like a park with trees, landscaping, benches, etc. Essentially we’re talking about a grassed over retail space that’s private property, i.e. no one can legally play on it or throw a frisbee. This whole thing has been shady and discouraging from the beginning. I have not forgotten the pro-QT flyers they paid for or any of what originally went down. But QT holding up their side of the supposed deal here will do nothing to help us. They would save some face, but the council still brokered a deal many of us still feel was net negative for Maplewood. Some grass on Manchester won’t change that.
I believe that the McDonald’s at Deercreek is technically in Webster city limits.
According to the Planning and Zoning map available online at Maplewood’s city website, McD’s in Maplewood. The creek is the dividing line.
http://www.ci.maplewood.mo.us/DocumentView.aspx?DID=76
Q!
But I think Doug has stated here before the Deer Creek McDonalds building is bisected by the Maplewood/Webster Groves border and that since the front door lies in Webster, it’s their building from a zoning point of view.
This sort of thing is the reason I quit going to city council meetings. For about a year and a half, I attended every council meeting and just sat and listened and watched. There were usually less than 5 in the audience most nights, overseeing pretty boring, mundane stuff. But you begin to see patterns over the long haul. Corners cut, deals made for some that aren’t made for others. Some business owners have to jump through all the zoning hoops, others are “fast tracked,” thereby avoiding the expense and time required to obtain approvals.
QT was a contentious proposal from the very beginning. There was strong opposition from the very first Planning and Zoning meeting. People on both sides of the argument, expressing robust opinions. It was nice, really, to see the community involved. One of the big sticking points was precisely this issue: What would happen to the vacant building QT left behind? On multiple occasions (with Alan Renner present) the council process covered the fact that QT management would have one year to lease the site and if not successful, they had agreed to tear it down and replace it with a green space. If they move outside of the city, we were told, then QT was under no obligation to deal with the old space leaving us with yet another vacant building in Maplewood. Approve this plan, Maplewood, and we’ll avoid the eyesore, we were told.
To now pass the one year anniversary and hear that QT only leased the property and thus is unable to fulfill any agreement to replace the building is yet another violation of public trust. Not one word was said in open session to this effect. But do you think it was only QT in on the little game of “fool the stupid populace?” Come on! The council knew as well and sat and watched as this little charade played out. You don’t think the city knew QT only leases property and therefore couldn’t really be held to any binding agreement to ever tear it down? You think the city doesn’t know who owns and who rents property in Maplewood? I’ve got a bridge in Brooklyn that I’d like to sell you if you believe that.
“The ends justifies the means.” Welcome to city politics.
Q!
Q, I could not agree with you more. I drove past the site last night and was just thinking it was about time for it to become “green space.” I am disgusted (and unfortunately not entirely surprised) to learn of the “sleight of hand” going on among both Quik Trip and the City of Maplewood. Shameful.
Please do not stop going to the meetings. Keep speaking up. PLEASE! We cannot let the current Maplewood leadership get away with ruining our city. The reason we moved here a few years ago was because we thought it was different, I mean different in a good way. Our elected leaders doing all of these business deals and deliberately ignoring the heart and soul of Maplewood neglecting our individual citizens is not what we thought we were choosing. Why can’t the people prevail? Please, please continue to go to all those meetings and please bring as many of your fellow Maplewood residents. Let’s get organized and show Maplewood’s leadership that they cannot get away with turning our beautiful city into an ugly, crappy, junk food wasteland.
This article could really use some editing. This is poorly written.
Wow, some people are just rude. Go read the Post Dispatch for your Maplewood news.
When I have an issue with the editing or errors, I contact the editor privately and he is more than happy to fix things. 40SouthNews is essentially a one-man operation, and he can’t always do it all and get news out quickly. Instead of complaining, maybe you can help make the site better.
I’m no fan of the new Quiktrip. I voted no on the Proposition and rarely go there because it’s a traffic nightmare. The only benefit is that you can now see our lovely high school from all sections of the intersection. I have also come out on here to express my skepticisms regarding Quiktrip’s intentions with the old building. I’m not happy to be proven right here. Quiktrip, you really, really stink. Having said that, I’m not sure what tearing down the building is going to do, unless they remove the parking lot as well to be grass. And that’s a new parking lot correct? It seems like a terrible waste of resources to rip out a brand new parking lot and a usable building, only to build another ugly but functional building and another parking lot in a few years. The problem isn’t them not honoring their original agreement (although that does reveal something about the integrity of the company’s management, regardless of what they pay their employees, which I have heard is pretty good); the problem is that we have a huge lot on a major road that is empty and underutilized. But I guess the same could be said about the building on the corner that they demolished. I just wish Maplewood could have found a better fit than a big, poorly designed and unwieldy gas station.
Comments are closed.