<!DOCTYPE HTML PUBLIC "-//W3C//DTD HTML 4.0 Transitional//EN">
<HTML><HEAD>
<META http-equiv=Content-Type content="text/html; charset=iso-8859-1">
<META content="MSHTML 6.00.2900.2873" name=GENERATOR>
<STYLE></STYLE>
</HEAD>
<BODY>
<DIV>Whoa Nellie!</DIV>
<DIV> </DIV>
<DIV>Matt, I think you need to stop buying what certain "growth at all costs"
types are selling in their inaccurate smear of the MCA as an organization
favoring no-growth. We are by no means a "no-growth"-seeking
organization. </DIV>
<DIV> </DIV>
<DIV>We seek to bring open public discussion and planning -- long range
planning especially -- back into the process. We seek to incorporate
into our City better pedestrian and bicycle corridors, sidewalks, mixed uses and
cluster developments that use forward thinking combinations of higher densities,
and more shared, open space. We seek sustainable community
development, not stagnation. There is a continuum of positions on the
growth spectrum, from no growth on the one hand to unregulated, absolute power
to develop one's land without regard to the effect on one's neighbors on the
other. MCA is not for the former; I would hazard a guess that GMA is
not for the latter. Time will tell.</DIV>
<DIV> </DIV>
<DIV>Up until recently, this City has operated on a basis that had relegated the
zoning code to an advisory document, spot-zoning and re-zoning property
willy-nilly at the request of any developer -- regardless of the conflict
any particular proposal may have had with the Comprehensive
Plan. Evidence of that sad pattern can be found with the prior
council's frittering away of the West A street commercial property that has been
turned into one apartment complex after another. The "pro-growth at all
costs" crowd decries the current "lack" of motor business land in the City and
uses that alleged "lack" as a basis for asserting the necessity of re-zoning the
Thompson property. Those same "pro-growth regardless of the costs" folks
include those who spent much of our best motor business land on short
term, short-sighted, frenzies of granting every request to turn A
Street into apartments -- in an area that has no adequate pedestrian
crossing of the largest road in our City for the numerous pedestrian students
who were locating in those apartments. </DIV>
<DIV> </DIV>
<DIV>Smart Growth we advocate, not "no growth." <A
href="http://www.idahosmartgrowth.org/">http://www.idahosmartgrowth.org/</A></DIV>
<DIV> </DIV>
<DIV>The best place for heavy commercial growth was always along the Pullman
Highway and behind Third Street on A, as was set forth in the Comprehensive
Plan. The recently annexed university-owned land north of the Palouse Mall
is an obvious motor business area, and it serves far wiser planning and
strategic needs by its location as close to Pullman as we can place it, while
retaining a Latah County location. The good folks of Troy will drive
through Moscow and past our downtown to get to the Moscow motor business
developments near the state line. The Pullmanites and WSU students,
particularly those using the bus, seem much less likely to drive or hitch a ride
to the far side of eastern Moscow, especially as their choices expand in Whitman
County. </DIV>
<DIV> </DIV>
<DIV>Being opposed to a misguided and ill-conceived, 77 acre motor business
re-zone on the east side of town does not make one anti-growth. It makes
one opposed to that particular development.</DIV>
<DIV> </DIV>
<DIV>Likewise, as evidenced by prior discussion on this list, expressing concern
and seeking solutions about water usage on the Palouse is not anti-growth.
In fact, it is pro-growth. The Seattle model, referenced by Nils
Peterson and Mark Solomon on V2020 discussions, is worthy of pursuit here.
Seattle was able to grow -- substantially -- while actually cutting
its water usage through thoughtful, long-term conservation policies. We,
too, can do the same. Given our scarce and declining water supply, why not
seek to implement water conserving policies that will enable future growth,
rather than blindly play a game of chicken with an aquifer of unknown size and
dimensions? Preserving our water through thoughtful and proven
conservation methods preserves our ability to grow for the long term. Our
County Commissioners, two of whom are Republicans, have listened and learned
from Diane French, Mark Solomon and others on the water issue, so don't be so
quick to dismiss Diane and Mark as having ideas that take root only on the left,
when the evidence is to the contrary and their hard work on
water management benefits us all.</DIV>
<DIV> </DIV>
<DIV>Personally, I also welcome discussion of a reservoir. I oppose
injection of the pristine waters of the Grand Ronde aquifer with relatively
filthy runoff from muddy fields laden with various herbicides,
pesticides, fertilizers, and assorted other pollutants. But opposing
injection of the Grand Ronde does not make me anti-growth, Matt, it makes me
opposed to that particular water management option among a myriad of
choices that enhance the possibility of and favor long-term
growth.</DIV>
<DIV> </DIV>
<DIV>I am pro-growth. Most in the MCA are as well. Several years ago
the MCA Board took a position favoring growth. We accepted the Smart
Growth model, and rejected a no growth alternative. That position has
not changed.</DIV>
<DIV> </DIV>
<DIV>We in the MCA welcome the GMA to the discussion; undoubtedly the community
at large does, too. Informed and open discussion is enlightening and
useful to all. Overall, my sense is that the Moscow community is glad that
the MCA arrived and changed the discussion from private conversations of a few
policymakers, movers and shakers to a much larger group of people throughout the
community who are all engaged in the discussion. The GMA will
undoubtedly add its voice to the discussion, which can only be a good
thing. Let the marketplace of ideas percolate and see what happens.
But don't mis-apprehend the MCA as being anti-growth, for we are not.</DIV>
<DIV> </DIV>
<DIV>Bruce Livingston</DIV>
<DIV> </DIV>
<DIV>
<DIV> </DIV>
<DIV>Matt Decker said:</DIV></DIV>| Remember this(GMA) group was established
because of the Mark Solomans, Diane <BR>| Frenchs, and the MCA groups that back
up their no growth attitudes. Smart <BR>| Growth, Please. Disguise it however
you like, but it just adds up to little <BR>| or nil growth. The attitudes of
these people are just to aggressive for <BR>| Moscow. Yes some of the people in
the group have lives outside of the <BR>| computer, that depend on growth,
including myself.<BR>| <BR>| See what we can do first before belittling us to a
bunch of money crazed <BR>| good ol boy. This group also wants what is best for
Moscow.<BR>| <BR>| MD<BR>| <BR>| Matt<BR></BODY></HTML>