R2DTOO ON THE MOVE
RE: "It's Official: R2DToo Is Moving Across the River (Barring Appeal)" [Blogtown, Feb 24], News Editor Dirk VanderHart's post about how homeless rest area Right 2 Dream Too will be moving from downtown. "Portland City Council had already listened for hours last week as foes of moving the homeless camp from beneath the Chinatown Gate to the Central Eastside laid out a litany of arguments," VanderHart wrote, noting opponents' complaints, from R2DToo's proximity to metal-finishing business East Side Plating to interpretations of Portland's zoning code. VanderHart noted that those opposed to the plan, however, "were disappointed rather quickly" by city council—four out of five city commissioners supported the move.
Has anyone tested the air and soil around East Side Plating?
posted by lazaar
"Has anyone tested the air and soil around East Side Plating?" [That's] why we typically don't allow people to live in industrial zones.
The zoning interpretation is bogus. An honest, good faith, common sense interpretation of the code shows clearly that such a use is not allowed. Also, it is absolutely correct that it sets a precedent for other industrial (and probably commercial) zones across the city.
posted by Blabby
OLD MAN YELLS AT CLOUD
RE: The Mercury's shiny new website, available for one and all—on both your desktop and your phone—at portlandmercury.com.
I love your movie showtimes listings, but there's a problem with the new redesign. Since you alphabetically arranged the geographic areas, "Elsewhere" appears before Northeast, Northwest, Southeast, and Southwest. That means most of the movie theaters that are actually in Portland are buried way down on the page. Also, I imagine you did this to look nice on mobile devices, but the font and spacing is rather large, so you can't see very many listings at the same time. Also, where are the stars that signify recommended movies? God, I'm like the old man yelling at clouds.
Matt Zimo
God bless you for being the very first person to yell at the clouds of our new website, Matt. (Our new site launched at 2 am on Thursday, February 25; your email came in at 3:31 am.) Since the time you shook your fist at us, we've already fixed the order of our movie times. Keep an eye out for more tweaks across the site in coming weeks—including the return of the stars.
STARBUCKS
RE: Starbucks?
I recently received an email from Starbucks Rewards describing a change in their rewards program from number of purchases (12) to dollar amount of purchases ($62.50) to qualify for a free item. I take exception to their statement that "most members will earn rewards just as fast or faster." By my math, one would need to buy the most expensive drink at each visit just to remain even with the current program (12 x $5.25 = $63). Previously, any item counted as a purchase. Those buying a $4 item would see a 25 percent drop in rewards frequency, and those who buy $3 and $2 items, 43 percent and 62 percent, respectively. Starbucks has every right to administer their rewards program as they see fit, but please don't insult my intelligence with blatant BS while you are doing it. So who exactly are these "most members," I ask? Doesn't "most" imply "the majority"? Everyone I have spoken with is in the "some who might have to wait a little longer club."
Robert Slugg
Robert, your righteous rage will not—indeed, CANNOT—be ignored! (By us, at least. Starbucks doesn't give a shit.) To help offset your fury at these fascist new rules, we're giving you two free tickets to the Laurelhurst Theater, where they never jerk you around! (Maybe take Matt? He seems to like movies!) We're also tossing in 12 ounces of coffee beans from Stumptown Coffee Roasters—because Robert, you deserve better. (Jesus, and we're giving you a new website? We're being fucking nice this week.)
