as I understand this b/park thing... the infrastructure comes from the
tax stuff, but the actual building don't. When I (as FSR and a current
incubator tenant) was approached re: moving there, the question was
how would I ever justify building a structure, even if the infrastructure
already existed. It's MUCH more than a company coming out of the
encubator can really do. So who is really going to build the buildings?
these are the guys that are going to get the long term benifit of the
park as they will be getting subsidized infrastructure, while the
tenants (which is what we-fsr would be) would be paying market
prices.....
anyway, as-far-as fsr was concerned, the whole thing was too far in
the future and a non-issue anyway.....
johnt
================
>>>>> "Bill" == Bill London <london@wsunix.wsu.edu> writes:
> Diane- I echo your ambivalence--and the positive points about
> the biz park that you list. However, the message that I tried
> to give to the council (which was of course ignored by all) was
> that Moscow residents (as in voters in general)--NOT a core
> group of pro-development EDC members and cronies on
> council--needs to decide what they want Moscow to look like in
> the future. BL
> On Thu, 9 Nov 1995, Diane Prorak wrote:
>> A few thoughts on some positive aspects of the proposed
>> business park:
>>
>> 1) As Ray pointed out, the land proposed for development was
>> already zoned motor business. So while I agree that Hwy. 8
>> traffic is a problem that really should be worked on before
>> development, the alternative, in my opinion, of motor
>> businesses was worse in terms of traffic. I would very feel
>> differently about this project if it were outside the city on
>> land zoned for ag/forestry or something like that.
>>
>> 2) Diversification: We tell timber-dependent communities that
>> they need to diversify to fit the changing world. I think
>> state government, which includes universities, will be changing
>> also -- probably downsizing. Moscow probably does need to
>> diversify some more in this climate.
>>
>> 3) Jobs for spouses: To attract and retain people at the
>> universities, spouses often need good jobs. A business park
>> could provide some of those. This particular proposal isn't so
>> big as to create a huge influx of people, though I will admit
>> that future actions could lead to more growth than we bargained
>> for.
>>
>> 4) The proposal includes some possible accommodations for
>> bicyclists/pedestrians that would never come about through a
>> motor business. The sidewalks and linear park could help to
>> improve non-motorized use on the Troy highway.
>>
>> I've had mixed feelings on this issue (especially the
>> financing), but I think it also has merit as I've mentioned
>> above. I just wish they could be improving the "blighted"
>> area.
>>
>> Diane Prorak prorak@uidaho.edu
>>
>>
>>
>>