[MissoulaGov] A question - or two - on Chickasaw

[Jim McGrath]

It's not the city. State law prohibits annexation of industrial or ag land.


-----Original Message-----
From: Eric Taylor [mailto:ectbo at hotmail.com]
Sent: Sun 3/1/2009 11:16 AM
To: geoffb at ism.net; Jim McGrath; mcc at offthedial.com; missoulagov at cmslists.com
Subject: RE: [MissoulaGov] A question - or two - on Chickasaw
 

All,

I appreciate the perspective, that the current discussion before the council is one that planners, property owners, and developers have been having in the valley since the mid-80's.

The other day I was upstairs in city hall. There are a couple of great photos of water works hill, one taken in the late 1800's and the other taken in the early 1900's. Both of these photos show how heavily tracked the path on the hill was over 100 years ago. In one of the photos there is a big area that has been excavated, it is approximately 300 yards from the current trailhead, on Water Works hill. I think this is the cut that is today, the transition from the road to the footpath, where wood steps have been installed on the trail. Trees have grown in the cut giving it a much more natural look today.

I suspect the discussion of developing the urban fringe has been going on in Missoula for quite some time.

Another observation I had, was how the interstate running at the base of the North Hills, affects the transition from urban to fringe environment. The interstate is like a DMZ- a no mans land if you will, separating the town from the country. In the early photos you could walk out the back door of the highland brewery, and right into the rattlesnake wilderness!

Jim, what do you think the deal is--with the city not wanting to annex industrial land? Are you saying the Champion mill site os still not annexed into the city, kind of like a little island of county land in the urban core?

From: geoffb at ism.net
To: jmcgrath at missoulahousing.org; mcc at offthedial.com; missoulagov at cmslists.com
Date: Sat, 28 Feb 2009 23:01:13 -0700
Subject: Re: [MissoulaGov] A question - or two - on Chickasaw











RE: [MissoulaGov] A question - or two - on Chickasaw









If
you want to read a thoughtful book on the whole subject of "committed
lands" I suggest "Planning for Small Town America" by
Kristina Ford, Jim Lopach and Dennis O'Donnell, published in the latter
part of the 80's and is the first instance where I heard the term. 
Kristina Ford was the Planning Director of Missoula in the mid-80's, and Jim
Lopach and Dennis O'Donnell are professors affiliated with the University of Montana.  Not
only is it a book of uncommon sense, it lays out just how communities which are
growing should think about planning for growth.  I believe it was
available at one time through the American Planning Association.

 



Geoff Badenoch

P   Please consider the environment before printing
this email. 



-----Original Message-----

From:
missoulagov-bounces at cmslists.com [mailto:missoulagov-bounces at cmslists.com] On Behalf Of Jim McGrath

Sent: Saturday, February 28, 2009
8:30 PM

To: Jed Taylor;
missoulagov at cmslists.com

Subject: Re: [MissoulaGov] A
question - or two - on Chickasaw

 

I'll address the second
question -- the philosophical one, if you will.

First, annexation is NOT infill development (except in the case of a spot like
the old Champion Mill site which has never been annexed because it used to be
industrial). Infill development is making use of what we used to call
"committed lands" -- areas within the city that already have services
but have never been developed or need to be redeveloped.

I used to refer to what you describe as "leap frog" development--
annexing non-contiguous parcels far out from existing services. In the case of
development far past the airport, for example, I agree it is problematic.

On the other hand, I don't consider this area that far flung. If a parcel on
the urban fringe (to use the current terminology) wants to join the city
slightly before another, that's okay, as long as the plan is annex all of it
(which I think we should)-- in fact, it makes the whole process easier and
cheaper for property owners and taxpayers alike.

The entire urban area should be part of the city. Urban=city.

That doesn't automatically preclude ag -- I'm a long time proponent of urban
agriculture.







-----Original Message-----

From: missoulagov-bounces at cmslists.com on behalf of Jed Taylor

Sent: Sat 2/28/2009 2:07 PM

To: missoulagov at cmslists.com

Subject: [MissoulaGov] A question - or two - on Chickasaw



Just so there's no misunderstanding, I'm a big supporter of locally grown

food, and believe that increases in transportation costs that we all will

experience in the future will make local sources that much more valuable.

And it's clear from the testimony about this project that the soil on these

lots, and especially the eastern half, is great for growing things.



So - if there's all this demand for land on which to locally grow food, and

if this land in particular is appropriate for that activity, then why hasn't

it been farmed since 2005?  Have there been people clamoring to farm it,
but

have been prevented from doing so?





My other question is more philosophical.  Is the city really ready to
annex

an individual piece of property a good mile west of its current boundary and

create this island of development surrounded by people who don't want it and

served by an infrastructure that really isn't ready to support it?  Is
this

how growth-by-infill is going to occur - in an ad-hoc, patchwork,

one-project-at-a-time manner wherever they might pop up regardless of how

far away from the current city limits they might be?









  _____ 



"Be the change you want to see in the world." - Mahatma Gandhi






_________________________________________________________________
Windows LiveT Contacts: Organize your contact list. 
http://windowslive.com/connect/post/marcusatmicrosoft.spaces.live.com-Blog-cns!503D1D86EBB2B53C!2285.entry?ocid=TXT_TAGLM_WL_UGC_Contacts_032009

-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://www.cmslists.com/pipermail/missoulagov/attachments/20090301/565ff43b/attachment.htm>