[Vision2020] Moscow's Growth Policies Don't Apply toWhitman(ordothey?)
Bill London
london at moscow.com
Tue Jan 16 12:12:02 PST 2007
G-
I really do not understand why you insist on making fun of the concept of landowners preserving their property by transferring the development rights.
The Nature Conservancy is perhaps the best known example of organizations that match landowners with a concern for the future with donations from people who want to see open space preserved. Conservancy groups broker deals like this daily across the US.
And yes, the Palouse Land Trust is doing the same thing in this region.
Transfering the development rights maintains the use of the land (agricultural, grazing, forest, etc) for benefit of the generations to come. What is so hard to understand?
BL
----- Original Message -----
From: g. crabtree
To: Craine Kit ; Vision 2020
Sent: Monday, January 15, 2007 5:24 PM
Subject: Re: [Vision2020] Moscow's Growth Policies Don't Apply toWhitman(ordothey?)
Ms. Craine, thank you for the additional information. After reviewing the sites you kindly provided, two major questions remain (actually more than two but these are the biggies)
1. Where does the money come from to buy the development rights? An already over burdened group of local property owners would be my first (and only) guess. Forgive me if I, and many others in the county, don't find that path terribly attractive.
2. What happens when the farmer/landowner quite reasonably doesn't want to become involved with a scheme that strips him of a significant amount of control over his own property (hint: Thompson property SE corner of Mtn. View & Troy Rd.) You Vill co-operate or else, eh bubbi?
It would seem that the only people in this area that would be anxious to participate in a boondoggle of this magnitude would be land owners with absolutely no desire to ever develop their property and those who have no qualms about coercing others to pay for the things they desire but are unwilling to pay for themselves. (and, of course, the bureaucrats who will obtain a sinecure administrating said plan) Or were you thinking, perhaps, of a group such as the MCA picking up the tab? If so, great! How about I sell you the development rights to my back yard. It's covered in "valuable agricultural soils" as evidenced by the award wining dandelions I produce there each summer plus, I wasn't planning on putting a wal-mart back there anyway.
g
----- Original Message -----
From: "Craine Kit" <kcraine at verizon.net>
To: "Vision 2020" <vision2020 at moscow.com>; "g. crabtree" <jampot at adelphia.net>
Sent: Monday, January 15, 2007 2:38 PM
Subject: Fwd: [Vision2020] Moscow's Growth Policies Don't Apply to Whitman(ordothey?)
> Oops. I noticed some of my links were bad. Here's they are again.
>
> Kit
>
> On purchasing development rights:
> http://ohioline.osu.edu/cd-fact/1263.html
> http://www.plannersweb.com/wfiles/w140.html
>
> On transfering development rights
> http://ohioline.osu.edu/cd-fact/1264.html
> http://government.cce.cornell.edu/doc/html/Transfer%20of%
> 20Development% 20Rights%20Programs.htm
> http://www.mass.gov/envir/smart_growth_toolkit/pages/mod-tdr.html
>
> On both
> http://www.wi-ei.org/AgLand/transfer.htm
> http://dnr.metrokc.gov/wlr/tdr/bank.htm
>
> Begin forwarded message:
>
>> From: Craine Kit <kcraine at verizon.net>
>> Date: January 15, 2007 1:46:46 PM PST
>> To: Vision 2020 <vision2020 at moscow.com>
>> Subject: Re: [Vision2020] Moscow's Growth Policies Don't Apply to
>> Whitman(ordothey?)
>>
>> Gary,
>>
>> This is an idea that has been around for some time. There are two
>> approaches. One is for the government or other entities to purchase
>> the right to develop. The other is trading the right to develop from
>> one property in return for rights to develop something else, ususally
>> at a higher density than is normally allowed. It in either case, the
>> property owner still owns the property and can rent or sell it. He or
>> she just can't develop it. This is an an alternative to pure zoning
>> restrictions that has been used in many places.
>>
>> Here's a limited list of web sites you can check for more
>> information, including an explanation of how the value of the right
>> can be calculated. If you want more, try Googling "buying development
>> rights" (without the quotes).
>>
>> On purchasing development rights:
>>
>> ohioline.osu.edu/cd-fact/1263.html
>> www.plannersweb.com/wfiles/w140.html
>>
>>
>> On transfering development rights
>> ohioline.osu.edu/cd-fact/1264.html
>> government.cce.cornell.edu/doc/html/Transfer%20of%20Development%
>> 20Rights%20Programs.htm
>> www.mass.gov/envir/smart_growth_toolkit/pages/mod-tdr.html
>>
>> On both
>> www.wi-ei.org/AgLand/transfer.htm
>> dnr.metrokc.gov/wlr/tdr/bank.htm
>>
>> Kit
>>
>> On Jan 15, 2007, at 10:53 AM, g. crabtree wrote:
>>
>>> What would be the incentive for the property owner to allow his
>>> land to be tied up in this manner? How is a number/value arrived at
>>> for the development rights? Can you provide an example of where
>>> this has been "successful elsewhere" along with the details? I can
>>> see how this would work for farmers/land owners who really do not
>>> want to let their land go but for a owner who might be looking to
>>> cash out, I do not see what incentive he would have to participate.
>>> Or is this a program where saying no thank you is not an option?
>>>
>>> g
>>> ----- Original Message -----
>>> From: "Craine Kit" <kcraine at verizon.net>
>>> To: "Vision 2020" <vision2020 at moscow.com>
>>> Sent: Monday, January 15, 2007 9:26 AM
>>> Subject: Re: [Vision2020] Moscow's Growth Policies Don't Apply to
>>> Whitman(ordothey?)
>>>
>>>> Given that the Palouse has very valuable agricultural soils and that
>>>> once these are disturbed they lose productivity, perhaps we should
>>>> protect them by using an approach that has be successful elsewhere:
>>>> as a community, we buy the development rights. In other words, we
>>> pay
>>>> farmers to keep their land in production. If, at some point in time,
>>>> the community as a whole prefers development over agriculture, we
>>> can
>>>> sell the rights and perhaps make a profit on our investment.
>>>>
>>>> Kit Craine
>>>>
>>>> On Jan 13, 2007, at 1:42 PM, g. crabtree wrote:
>>>>
>>>>> Dave says:
>>>>>
>>>>> "they (Latah/Whitman co. farmers, presumably) are using their land
>>>>> (as) a lever to maximize profits as they know best, trying to
>>>>> protect their futures."
>>>>> and
>>>>>
>>>>> "The ag community needs to break its monoculturalistic thinking and
>>>>> adopt
>>>>> sustainability principles."
>>>>>
>>>>> Who are we to tell the owners of "the most valuable resource in the
>>>>> area", the palouse soil, how and what to think? As land owners I am
>>>>> certain that they have given the matter more than a little bit of
>>>>> thought. If what you say is truly what you believe, would I be
>>>>> correct in assuming that you are acquiring farm land as it becomes
>>>>> available and putting your "sustainability principles" into
>>>>> practice? If not, why? If you are, could you please share with us
>>>>> the details of your experience and profitability?
>>>>>
>>>>> g
>>>>>
>>>>> ----- Original Message -----
>>>>> From: "david sarff" <davesway at hotmail.com>
>>>>> To: <mattd2107 at hotmail.com>; <thansen at moscow.com>;
>>>>> <vision2020 at moscow.com>
>>>>> Sent: Saturday, January 13, 2007 11:36 AM
>>>>> Subject: Re: [Vision2020] Moscow's Growth Policies Don't Apply to
>>>>> Whitman(ordothey?)
>>>>>
>>>>>> Matt et.al
>>>>>>
>>>>>> I'm not so sure that it's a Whitman County vs. City of Moscow
>>>>> fight; It's a
>>>>>> constituency struggle. What we have are some city folks who want
>>>>> to live in
>>>>>> one kind of surroundings and they are surrounded by a pack of
>>>>> farmers who
>>>>>> are tired of being pressured and wrestling with economic
>>>>> realities. Looking
>>>>>> out for themselves, they are using their land a lever to maximize
>>>>> profits as
>>>>>> they know best, trying to protect their futures.
>>>>>> What I would prefer is that city retain its agricultural
>>>>> foundations and
>>>>>> integrate them more fully back into the community. Put the farmer
>>>>> square in
>>>>>> the middle of the community. There are some small signs in town,
>>>>> that this
>>>>>> is trying to happen.
>>>>>> The ag community needs to break its monoculturalistic thinking
>>>>> and adopt
>>>>>> sustainability principles.
>>>>>> The Palouse soil is the most valuable natural resource in the
>>>>> area, if we
>>>>>> don't work to utilize and enhance this medium, we will all loose.
>>>>>> Don't pave Paradise.
>>>>>> Dave
>>>>>>
>>>>>>> Tom,
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> What a great post. I only hope more of these come out in the near
>>>>> future.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> And cheers to Whitman for not allowing Moscow to bully them with
>>>>> silly
>>>>>>> excuses and agendas.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> Matt
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> From: "Tom Hansen" <thansen at moscow.com>
>>>>>>>> To: "Vision 2020" <vision2020 at moscow.com>
>>>>>>>> Subject: [Vision2020] Moscow's Growth Policies Don't Apply to
>>>>> Whitman (or
>>>>>>>> dothey?)
>>>>>>>> Date: Sat, 13 Jan 2007 06:47:52 -0800
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> >From today's (January 13, 2007) Moscow-Pullman Daily News -
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> ------------------------------------------------------------
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> OUR VIEW: Moscow's growth policies don't apply to Whitman
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> By Murf Raquet, for the editorial board
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> Saturday, January 13, 2007 - Page Updated at 10:20:50 PM
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> Political boundaries on the Palouse are clear.Moscow city
>>>>> limits extend
>>>>>>> to
>>>>>>>> the Washington state border as does the eastern edge of Whitman
>>>>> County.
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> Both entities have their own regulations to follow when it
>>>>> comes to
>>>>>>>> development. Often those rules are similar in that they require
>>>>>>> development
>>>>>>>> plans to undergo sufficient public scrutiny to protect the
>>>>> environment.
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> It's time for Moscow to recognize that Whitman County is
>>> perfectly
>>>>>>> capable
>>>>>>>> of determining how and what acreage is developed within it
>>>>> borders.
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> Whitman County has all but cleared the way for the Hawkins
>>>>> Companies of
>>>>>>>> Boise to develop a 600,000-square-foot retail center along the
>>>>>>>> Pullman-Moscow corridor. The center would abut the state line
>>>>> and Moscow.
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> Moscow registered concerns about the effects the development
>>>>> would have
>>>>>>> on
>>>>>>>> the aquifers, wetlands and traffic.
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> Those concerns and others were addressed through the Washington
>>>>> State
>>>>>>>> Environmental Policy Act, an environmental assessment procedure
>>>>> that is
>>>>>>> one
>>>>>>>> of the more stringent in the nation.
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> Whitman County had no legal obligation to consider Moscow's
>>>>> concerns but
>>>>>>>> did
>>>>>>>> so because of Moscow's proximity to the development.
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> That was the right thing to do.
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> "Moscow is our very close neighbor," said Whitman County
>>>>> Prosecutor Denis
>>>>>>>> Tracy. "We have taken extensive steps to take their concerns
>>> into
>>>>>>>> consideration. If they have any concerns that are not part of
>>>>> the SEPA
>>>>>>>> review the county hopes Moscow will pick up the phone and we
>>>>> can talk
>>>>>>> about
>>>>>>>> their concerns."
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> Dialogue is a fine way to resolve problems.
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> Now, Moscow must accept the SEPA conclusion and not drag the
>>> issue
>>>>>>> through
>>>>>>>> the court system.
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> Moscow has every right to determine growth policy within its
>>>>> city limits.
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> We hope the city can restrain itself in the future if the urge
>>>>> to impose
>>>>>>>> its
>>>>>>>> standards elsewhere pops up again.
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> ------------------------------------------------------------
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> My concern is not with what facilities are built on
>>>>> Washington's side of
>>>>>>>> the
>>>>>>>> line, but what resources are used by those resources. As
>>> has been
>>>>>>>> discussed
>>>>>>>> here on Vision 2020, Moscow and Pullman share a common
>>>>> aquifer. The
>>>>>>>> primary
>>>>>>>> concern, in relation to the aquifer and facilities built on
>>>>> either side
>>>>>>> of
>>>>>>>> the state line, is the "right to use" of that aquifer.
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> As discussed by guests Rocky Barker, environmental reporter
>>> (Idaho
>>>>>>>> Statesman), State Senator Charles Coiner (R-Twin Falls), and
>>> Prof.
>>>>>>> Barbara
>>>>>>>> Cosens, University of Idaho Law School, when "Mary in Moscow"
>>>>> called in
>>>>>>> on
>>>>>>>> Thursday's Idaho Public Television's "Dialogue" program, this
>>>>> decision
>>>>>>> may
>>>>>>>> not be made locally, but by the US Supreme Court.
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> http://www.tomandrodna.com/Stuff/Dialogue_011107_01.mp3
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> Thoughts?
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> Tom Hansen
>>>>>>>> Moscow, Idaho
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> "The Pessimist complains about the wind, the Optimist expects
>>>>> it to
>>>>>>> change
>>>>>>>> and the REALIST adjusts his sails."
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> - Unknown
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> =======================================================
>>>>>>>> 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
>>>>>>>> =======================================================
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> _________________________________________________________________
>>>>>>> The MSN Entertainment Guide to Golden Globes is here. Get all
>>>>> the scoop.
>>>>>>> http://tv.msn.com/tv/globes2007/?icid=nctagline2
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> =======================================================
>>>>>>> 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
>>>>>>> =======================================================
>>>>>>
>>>>>> _________________________________________________________________
>>>>>> Get FREE Web site and company branded e-mail from Microsoft
>>>>> Office Live
>>>>>> http://clk.atdmt.com/MRT/go/mcrssaub0050001411mrt/direct/01/
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>> =======================================================
>>>>>> 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
>>>>> =======================================================
>>>>
>>>> =======================================================
>>>> 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
>> =======================================================
>
>
------------------------------------------------------------------------------
=======================================================
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
=======================================================
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: http://mailman.fsr.com/pipermail/vision2020/attachments/20070116/d92536d4/attachment-0001.html
More information about the Vision2020
mailing list