> as a former pullman resident, now a moscow resident, i am honestly
> very puzzled by the opposition to the use of the rail right of way as a
> bike trail. i can't imagine how the elimination of rail (noisy and ground
> shaking) (i lived adjacent to rail in spokane for four years, and can attest
> to pictures falling off walls, etc) in favor of bicycles (so quiet you don't
> notice they are there) could possibly result in LOWER property values.
>
> it seems this is fear of the unknown, pure and simple, and i wonder if
> there are any thoughts as to how to better market the transition to
> reduce such fear.
You are absolutely correct here, documentation shows that adjacent bike
paths actually increase property values, people find them desirable
places to live. This has been documented in Seattle, Spokane and a host
of other areas. The kindest thing I could say about these landowners is
fear of the unknown, and fear of lost potential opportunities.
Questions about developing the corridor should focus on things related to
its value as trasnportation; i.e. who benefits and who really pays for
delays caused by new stoplights, slow turning traffic, accidents, etc.
Is the greater community willing to accept stop & go 45 mph maximum
speeds between Moscow and Pullman?
Or are we going to expect the Washington taxpayers to put up $100 million
or so for a major freeway bypass so as to protect the `private property
rights' of a few landowners who want to build shopping malls in riparian
areas and floodplains? >
The other issue of building along the corridor concerns payment for
services. I have heard Moscow city staff members state and later deny
that the city is willing to extend services into Washington. This notion
is a can of worms I wont go into. Extending sewer and water east from
Pullman is fantastically expensive.
DAve Peckham