>i still have an extremely difficult time understanding such emotional
>distress over a PLANNED park with CONNECTIONS to LINEAR PATHS
>and PEDESTRIAN SIDEWALKS set off the curbs by planting medians ala
>ft russell, with landscaped GREEN BELTS and PARKS, housing HIGH
>salary (read economic contribution to the tax base), LOW IMPACT
>businesses...
>
>all of which we (this group) say we prefer over continued, busines as
>usual, sometimes tacky, unplanned "construction-because-we-can."
>
>i read greg's concerns as merely red herrings for his basic opposition to
>ANY new construction in moscow.
I think you are mistaken. I'm on record as conditionally
supporting a technology park that involves *real* rather
than fictitious urban renewal.
> in the case of the proposed site
>near tidymans, the land is CURRENTLY zoned motor business. the
>business park would have been such a tremendous improvement over
>what could leaglly, without much public input, could happen on that site.
>yet greg indicated he would fight the business park because the hotdog
>stands and car dealerships would happen ANYWAY. i just don't get it....
Let's try again. Those that believe an attractive business park
will not be a magnet for other types of businesses, including the
less desireable ones cited above, either have no experience with
such matters or are not living in the real world. Visit other cities.
Look around successful business parks and see what you find.
Ray would have us believe that it is either a business park located next
to Tidymans or less desireable businesses locating there. There is
no such tradeoff or choice. A successful business park located
there will merely *increase* the pressure for the "less desireable"
businesses to situate themselves next to the "attractive" business
park. There are always secondary and tertiary effects associated
with successful development.
>he was saying he'd rather have trashy strip development ONLY, rather
>than have a well-planned, aesthetic example of what CAN be done to set
>an example that others could then live up to or be left behind by.
Perhaps Ray could provide me with the text where I stated
that I preferred "trashy strip development?" Does Ray have
*any* evidence whatsoever that successful business developments
do not attract other business developments including the
less desireable ones?
----------
Greg Brown
Assistant Professor, Dept. of Forestry, Southern Illinois University
Adjunct Assistant Professor, University of Idaho
gregb@uidaho.edu