[Vision2020] Ring Road vs internal Hwy 8 bypass

[Jerry Weitz]

Bruce, Our office contacted the Hawkins Company about relocation/expansion. 
We asked about the retail mix, terms, dates of anticapated construction, 
and of course, water.  They indicated that the they believe they have the 
water issue under control. Hawkins also indicated that Moscow has the right 
to object to the development by Washington Law and Hawkins indicated that 
they will operate within the law and satisfy Moscow's concerns.  Lowes is a 
for sure.  The two other major retailers desired no publicity.  There 
project manager seemed positive and professional.  jerry


At 11:10 AM 8/8/06, Bruce and Jean Livingston wrote:
>I agree with Nils and Dan on the need for a bypass to the west.  An eastern
>bypass makes little sense to me, when one considers the volume of traffic
>between Moscow and Troy versus that going between Moscow and Pullman.
>
>I also believe that Nils' concerns are valid that whatever road is picked to
>funnel commuter and through traffic away from downtown will spur development
>in the area selected for the road.
>
>Whitman County is actively seeking to spur development in the Moscow-Pullman
>corridor, to address county revenue shortages.  I suspect that the entire
>distance between Moscow and Pullman will eventually see development, unless
>contrary steps are taken, given Whitman County's development efforts.
>Developing the corridor in between Moscow and Pullman also makes a lot of
>sense to entrepreneurs, who are trying to draw customers from both towns.
>
>Unless some creative conservation easements are obtained, development seems
>likely in the corridor, and I don't know that it can be stopped, or whether
>that is desirable to enough of the community at-large, or whether the voice
>of Moscow and Pullman can exert any influence on policy-makers in Whitman
>County who have their own, differing, objectives.
>
>My sense is that the commuters and the users of the Chipman trail would
>prefer not to have the corridor developed.  Personally, I am in accord with
>those users and do not desire development of the corridor.  Whitman County,
>and certain businesses needing large tracts of land, especially, desire the
>development.  Moscow and Pullman prefer development to occur within their
>municipal boundaries or on their edge where development can be annexed.
>
>In many ways, it seems to me that we ought to be focusing on growth that is
>good for our community, the Palouse, and not just the discrete political
>subdivisions with all their little self-interests that may not fit what
>makes the most sense if we didn't have concerns about who gets what tax
>money or tax burden.  A cooperative, regional approach has appeal to me,
>especially if it leads to a cooperative approach on water.  Water issues may
>be the biggest obstacle for development in Whitman County, and I suppose
>cooperative ventures between Moscow and Whitman County are another
>possibility, sharing water and tax revenue.  Whether there is any
>inclination on the part of either entity to entertain such discussions is
>not something I know.  But forestalling development on most of the
>Moscow-Pullman corridor might occur by exploring ways of containing sprawl
>along the corridor and encouraging the development closer to Moscow and
>Pullman.
>
>Bruce Livingston
>
>----- Original Message -----
>From: "Nils Peterson" <nils_peterson at wsu.edu>
>To: <vision2020 at moscow.com>; <areaman at moscow.com>
>Sent: Monday, August 07, 2006 9:55 PM
>Subject: [Vision2020] Ring Road vs internal Hwy 8 bypass
>
>
> > Thanks for the post, Dan. I agree, call it "Fred" or "bypass" and start
> > with
> > the SW segment.  With all the development going up Warbonnet Dr, it seems
> > a
> > poor choice for the SW segment to come in there (hard for Warbonnet to
> > start
> > the NW segment), but if it goes out into Washington, does that further
> > encourage development on the Washington side of the state line?
> >
> >
> > On 8/7/06 6:40 PM, "Dan Carscallen> wrote:
> >
> >> Having sat in on a lot of the discussions prior to the recent public
> >> unveiling, I can see where you are coming from.  It is nice to hear some
> >> more people come up with more ideas, though.  While ITD's recent
> >> origin/destination study didn't justify a bypass for Moscow, I think
> >> most people will tell you they would like to see it.  I'd like to see
> >> it, along with some connectivity around town.
> >>
> >> I think people get worked up a bit when they see the entire "Ring Road"
> >> concept (I'm with Walter Steed, maybe we should call it "Fred") without
> >> realizing that *if* it ever gets built, it will be built in segments.
> >> Probably the southwestern section first, then the northwestern quarter,
> >> thereby giving us our western bypass.  Next would probably be the
> >> southeastern quarter, giving us a Hwy 8 bypass.  The Northeastern
> >> quarter would probably be last, if built at all.
> >>
> >> My dream, if you will, would be to see the ring road built, in some form
> >> or another, turn Main street into something even more walkable than it
> >> is, and turn Washington and Jackson back into two-way streets.
> >>
> >> You may say I'm a dreamer, but I'm not the only one.
> >
> > =======================================================
> > List services made available by First Step Internet,
> > serving the communities of the Palouse since 1994.
> >               http://www.fsr.net
> >          mailto:Vision2020 at moscow.com
> > =======================================================
> >
>
>
>=======================================================
>  List services made available by First Step Internet,
>  serving the communities of the Palouse since 1994.
>                http://www.fsr.net
>           mailto:Vision2020 at moscow.com
>=======================================================