[Vision2020] Re: subdivisions (Was "Tribune Uncovers")

[John Dickinson]

Hi-

I've stuck a few comments in response to some of the items in this post. I
hope they are helpful.

John Dickinson

 

  _____  

From: vision2020-bounces at moscow.com [mailto:vision2020-bounces at moscow.com]
On Behalf Of bill bonte
Sent: Sunday, May 28, 2006 10:30 AM
Subject: Re: [Vision2020] Re: subdivisions (Was "Tribune Uncovers")

 

 

Reference Mr. Harkins statement that residents of the Rolling Hills

subdivisions have easy acess to the Joseph Street ball parks and Latah

Fairgrounds:  It is true that a wonderful stairway was constructed between

6th street and Hathaway Drive and another between Panorama and the new

Trinity Baptist Church.  These provide a walkable connection among the

three neighborhoods.  A further connection is possible to the Fairgrounds

through the Salsbury neighborhoods (when the streets are completed).  As

for now, bicycle and foot traffic to the Joseph Street ballparks from all

neighborhoods east of Paradise Creek must the use Joseph Street Bridge. 

This is one of the most dangerous pedestrian rights of way in Moscow.  Now

that the traffic has increased in volume and speed it can be life

threatening to use this narrow bridge.  This is a good example of the

failure of city development officials.  Before approving the Salsbury

addition, they should have required the bridge be replaced by a new, wider,

pedestrian friendly crossing, at the developers' expense.  It is obvious

that Joseph, east of Paradise Creek will become a major arterial, but no

provision was made, and the developer was not required to provide right of

way for future widening of the road. 

The bridge on Joseph was approved and funded sometime in the late 1990s. It
has not been constructed yet for a number of unconnected little reasons. The
latest was that someone questioned whether the bridge was old enough to be
of historic interest - and so that needed to be checked out (it is not an
historic bridge).

 

The comprehensive plan does show a connection from the Rollings Hills

subdivisions to the area of Good Sam and Hordeman Pond, but this does not

currently exist.  Residents must walk or bike (as Bill London stated) to Mt

View Rd, and walk along it, without sidewalks most of the way, to D street.

Once again, the developers of Rolling Hills and the planned Windfall

subdivision east of Mt. View between Rollings Hills Dr and Paradise Creek,

shoud be required to provide sidewalks on Mt. View.

Developers are required to provide street improvements along any streets
that their development touches. When a development has an impact on streets
and roads that are farther away from the development, it is a difficult
matter to demand improvements. When there was talk of the high school moving
beyond Mt. View Park, that development did include improvements beyond the
borders of the development. But the prospects of improvements were worked
out with the developers and the city, I don't think we could have required
the improvements. To some extent, every development impacts the entire
community and these costs (impacts) are recovered in a variety of
development costs, such as water meter installations.

 

The Comprehensive plan shows a public park at the end of Moser extending to

the south.  This would further connect the neighborhoods.  The developers

must have paid into a fund to contruct this park, but it has not been

started after more than 8 yrs of Rolling Hills development.  I am firmly
against

private parks and doubt their legality.  With the property taxes I pay, I am
within

my rights to expect a public park in my neighborhood, as promised.

The park will exist. It will be a public park. I would like to see our
subdivision code include an addition to the parkland dedication section to
facilitate the early development of the parks within development. Currently
the parks are developed as the land that they exist on is developed. It
makes sense, in that a developed park with no streets of sidewalks to get to
would be less useful than one with infrastructure - but I still would like
to see parks developed early so that they could mature with the
neighborhood.

 

Developers already pay far too little for the privilege of building in
Moscow.  They

can afford to put in right of way connections as exist in your Frontier and
Borah

neighborhoods.

 

On another subject - water.  Developers of residential lots should have
increased

water and sewer hookup fees, in the $20,000-30,000 range per lot.  This
would 

let the market regulate the amount of new construction in Moscow.

Developers don't really pay development fees, home buyers do. There are many
conflicting goals here - affordable housing, charging fees that can be
substantiated as fair and equitable. I don't think that higher fees are a
good idea - higher fees just for the sake of higher fees may not be legal,
would create a community where only the rich could live, and wouldn't stop
growth (if that is your point).

-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: http://mailman.fsr.com/pipermail/vision2020/attachments/20060528/3dd77641/attachment.htm