Re: Corridor Public Hearing

["John Murray" <jbiggs50@hotmail.com>]

In response to Ms. Salant's message:
Thanx for the insights.  Ms. Salant wrote:

>The Pullman Chamber of Commerce (board of directors?) came out squarely,
>unanimously for the plan, as did the property owners organization from the
>county.

This is quite a change from previous positions.  Previously, county planning 
staff has been branded by certain members of the property owners 
organization as being "anti-development" and the corridor ordinance was 
always viewed as too restrictive.  It's interesting that the Pullman COC is 
in favor of corridor development considering the potential impacts on 
Pullman business.

Ms. Salant continues:

>As for my own opinion -- I regret that people with different interests in
>the corridor don't find time to sit down, listen to each other, and try
>finding compromises that might satisfy more than one "side."  Instead, this
>process of public participation, if that's what it is, seems very
>alienating and often disrespectful.  There has to be a better way.  I would
>appreciate so much hearing a real exchange of information and ideas between
>the commissions and the public.  Instead, they get talked at and lectured;
>some speakers get applause and others don't; and we leave feeling like not
>much was accomplished at all.

The process you are witnessing is the basic legal requirement under 
Washington planning law.  The basic legal requirement is not necessarily the 
best process.  Planning staff has talked about using a process of drawing in 
"stake holders" and developing a vision for the corridor.  I think that 
process may take place as response to the DOT road plans begins to 
formulate.  Sorry, the BOCC dropped the ball and didn't announce the DOT 
plans.  The media is no where to be seen on the subject.
JM


_______________________________________________________________
Get Free Email and Do More On The Web. Visit http://www.msn.com