I am hoping someone can explain to me a few things here;<br> <br> 1) Why do we want MORE parking downtown? If we already have traffic congestion downtown why should we encourage more traffic, more cars, and more congestion? Shouldn't the solution be to get people to use alternative methods to getting to work and going downtown, not encouraging people to bring more vehicles downtown making the problem worse? Why not make people park OUTSIDE of downtown and walk in--like a giant outdoor mall, it is only two miles or less to downtown anyway from any other point in town. <br> <br> 2) Why should businesses that locate downtown get all free parking paid for them, maintained, and enforced at tax payer expense while all other businesses in Moscow must make the investment for parking themselves? That doesn't sound fair does it? If I pay for Book People to have parking spaces, should I not also pay Subway for parking spaces too? Why does one get my tax dollars and not
the other? <br> <br> 3) If a business is so dumb to locate in a location where their patrons are unable to access their building, isn't that a problem self induced and to be fixed by the business, not the taxpayer? Many businesses that use to be in downtown locations moved out because they wanted to provide parking to their patrons rather then requiring the government to do it for them. <br> <br> 4) Isn't a business better qualified to know their parking needs and issues, and have more at risk, than a group of self appointed liberals that think everything under the Sun would be better off if established, regulated and determined by them?<br> <br> Best,<br> <br> _DJA<br><br><b><i>Bruce and Jean Livingston <jeanlivingston@turbonet.com></i></b> wrote:<blockquote class="replbq" style="border-left: 2px solid rgb(16, 16, 255); margin-left: 5px; padding-left: 5px;"> Nils, I will not be there, as I have other commitments, but I agree <br>wholeheartedly that
the Davis/Von Wandruszka PUD plan is a fine one and an <br>example of Smart Growth principles being applied wisely. I hope that many <br>people will be there to support the project with you. I have yet to find <br>one MCA member or board member that is not in favor of the project. The City <br>has been wrong to delay this project, and it ought to move forward.<br><br>The Davis/Von Wandruszka project preserves open space and creatively places <br>the residences in ways that do not lead to greater density than would <br>otherwise be allowed under the existing zoning code, while fitting in well <br>with its neighbors, and indeed having obtained the support of the neighbors, <br>including PCEI and others.<br><br>To cross reference this to our earlier discussion, many, probably most, <br>myself included, would support the redevelopment of the grain elevators on <br>the edge of downtown. Simply asking questions about "where's the parking" <br>is wise planning, rather than
blindly re-zoning the property and eliminating <br>parking requirements, only to discover parking problems later. Asking these <br>questions need not be divisive, and the questions ought not be thought to be <br>out-of-place or irrelevant. Other experiences have demonstrated that <br>parking is an issue downtown, and it is an issue from there to the <br>University. Ignoring real parking concerns so that we can be "pro growth no <br>matter the costs" by giving the developer everything he or she requests is <br>unwise and foolish.<br><br>Suggesting that the profit motive of a developer occasionally leads to <br>re-zoning requests that are not good planning is not akin to suggesting that <br>all developers are evil or that all growth is bad. Personally, I support <br>more, not less industrial land, for light manufacturing industry and the <br>jobs they bring. And I support connected, well planned subdivisions that <br>maintain a grid that connects walkable neighborhoods.
A developer might <br>want to save money by eliminating sidewalks; I think that is generally a <br>bad idea. Does that make the developer evil for proposing the idea? <br>Clearly not. But it is stupid to give the developer everything they ask, if <br>some of what is requested is not good planning and is not in line with the <br>requirements of the City Code or Land Use Ordinance.<br><br>Nobody has said all developers are evil, or that all growth is bad. Is <br>there some insight that can be gained from your sarcastic "evil developer" <br>comments? You wouldn't be "polarizing" Vision2020 now, would you?<br><br>Bruce Livingston<br><br>----- Original Message ----- <br>From: "Nils Peterson" <nils_peterson @wsu.edu=""><br>To: <vision2020 @moscow.com=""><br>Sent: Tuesday, June 27, 2006 10:03 PM<br>Subject: [Vision2020] Another short-sighted, developer-pushed project to <br>maximize short-term profits notwithstanding the existing plan<br><br><br>| Continue this parking
discussion tomorrow evening at P&Z 7:30 where evil<br>| developers Rob Davis and Brenda VonWondruska will be pushing their plan<br>| (called 'ahead of its time' by City staff) to develop a PUD adjacent to<br>| PCEI's new campus. The plan skimps on parking and avoids building a road <br>to<br>| access the whole site.<br>|<br>| I'll be there in support of what I see is smart growth principles.<br>|<br>| =====================================================<br>| List services made available by First Step Internet,<br>| serving the communities of the Palouse since 1994.<br>| http://www.fsr.net<br>| mailto:Vision2020@moscow.com<br>| ====================================================<br>| <br><br><br>=====================================================<br> List services made available by First Step Internet, <br> serving the communities of the Palouse since 1994. <br> http://www.fsr.net <br>
mailto:Vision2020@moscow.com<br>====================================================<br></vision2020></nils_peterson></blockquote><br><p> 
<hr size=1>Do you Yahoo!?<br>
Get on board. <a href="http://us.rd.yahoo.com/evt=40791/*http://advision.webevents.yahoo.com/handraisers">You're invited</a> to try the new Yahoo! Mail Beta.