[Vision2020] Fwd: Will Moscow support Hawkins sprawl-mall?

[Ted Moffett]

All-

Given that the economic externalities of the future costs of CO2 emissions
induced climate change associated with the development of and profits from
shopping malls should be an issue in the decisions regarding the Hawkins
proposed development, how might these externalities be addressed?  A
percentage of revenue generated at the mall could be applied to the purchase
of wind, solar, geothermal, tidal, or wave energy, etc., advancing the
inevitable transition away from CO2 emitting finite fossil fueled energy
sources.  This idea probably will go over like a lead balloon...

And given the aquifer supply doubts on the Palouse, this variable alone
could indicate hesitation to support development that is water intensive,
though if the mall employed the water capture and conservation strategies
employed in Spokane's Saranac building, this objection might be weakened.

I am a "conservative" on resource and energy issues, meaning when resources
are finite or in doubt, we do not proceed with increased use of these
resources for short term gain, potentially jeopardizing future generations
via depletion of these resources, or damaging the environment in the long
term;  this conservative approach applies both to the depletion of
irreplaceable fossil fuels, a great treasure, and the resulting destructive
climate change, and to the potential depletion of local aquifers.

The Earth, Nature, our environment, has limits, and we should now adjust to
these limits before it is too late, don't you think?  Our local impacts are
global impacts, given that our CO2 emissions enter the global atmosphere, as
the climate is altered via well established principles of physics regarding
CO2 absorbing infrared heat energy from the sun, an atmosphere that will not
bend to our laws or economies or religions or governments or consumer
lifestyle, nor stop its objective behavior as a phenomenon of Nature, based
on whether the human race lives or dies.

Ted Moffett

---------- Forwarded message ----------
From: Ted Moffett <starbliss at gmail.com>
Date: Jan 13, 2008 5:58 PM
Subject: Re: [Vision2020] Will Moscow support Hawkins sprawl-mall?
To: "mark r. seman" <baukunst at moscow.com>
Cc: Vision2020 <vision2020 at moscow.com>



Mark et. al.

It is astonishing to perceive how the very serious energy and environmental
crises we are facing somehow get dismissed or down played in the economic
arguments for local development.  We are living in a world where our local
actions are having profound impacts on economies and the environment,
nationally and internationally.  No longer can we responsibly view our
behavior just through the lens of a local cost/benefit analysis.

Oil depletion, peak oil, etc. alone is a national security issue, given our
nations economic dependence on 20 million barrels of oil a day,

http://www.eia.doe.gov/neic/quickfacts/quickoil.html

oil that recently hit 100 dollars a barrel (I posted this news to
Vision2020, and astonishingly this generated not a single response).   Yet
we continue to proceed with business as usual as though a development model
based primarily on a fossil fuel powered economy is not soon to be a
"dinosaur."  Do we have an energy and transportation infrastructure in place
to address this?  No.  Should this be a priority now for every community in
the USA?  Of course.

Add to this the approximately 20 tons of CO2e per capita (yes, for every
women, man and child) that the USA economy dumps into our atmosphere
annually,

http://www.eia.doe.gov/oiaf/1605/ggrpt/

the most by far per capita of any nation, and the USA earns the shocking and
shameful status of the greatest contributor to what is very likely a massive
planetary environmental disaster in anthropogenic climate change, recognized
by the Pentagon as a serious national security risk (if the Pentagon is
worried, this means business, because I do not think the Pentagon is
populated by wild eyed environmentalist socialist tree huggers, to use a
derogatory composite stereotype lobbed at those warning of the dangers of
human sourced climate change):

http://observer.guardian.co.uk/international/story/0,6903,1153513,00.html

'Disruption and conflict will be endemic features of life,' concludes the
Pentagon analysis. 'Once again, warfare would define human life.'

The findings will prove humiliating to the Bush administration, which has
repeatedly denied that climate change even exists. Experts said that they
will also make unsettling reading for a President who has insisted national
defence is a priority.

Sir John Houghton, former chief executive of the Meteorological Office - and
the first senior figure to liken the threat of climate change to that of
terrorism - said: 'If the Pentagon is sending out that sort of message, then
this is an important document indeed.'

Bob Watson, chief scientist for the World Bank and former chair of the
Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change, added that the Pentagon's dire
warnings could no longer be ignored.

'Can Bush ignore the Pentagon? It's going be hard to blow off this sort of
document. Its hugely embarrassing. After all, Bush's single highest priority
is national defence. The Pentagon is no wacko, liberal group, generally
speaking it is conservative. If climate change is a threat to national
security and the economy, then he has to act. There are two groups the Bush
Administration tend to listen to, the oil lobby and the Pentagon,' added
Watson.

'You've got a President who says global warming is a hoax, and across the
Potomac river you've got a Pentagon preparing for climate wars. It's pretty
scary when Bush starts to ignore his own government on this issue,' said Rob
Gueterbock of Greenpeace.

Already, according to Randall and Schwartz, the planet is carrying a higher
population than it can sustain. By 2020 'catastrophic' shortages of water
and energy supply will become increasingly harder to overcome, plunging the
planet into war. They warn that 8,200 years ago climatic conditions brought
widespread crop failure, famine, disease and mass migration of populations
that could soon be repeated.

------------------------------------

We are not paying for the economic externalities of our CO2 emissions, which
will cost the economy in the future billions of dollars, due to damages from
climate change.  So we can have our fossil fueled wealth now, and leave the
damage to future generations?  Is this an ethical approach?

http://www.climatesciencewatch.org/index.php/csw/details/ucs_northeast/

------------------------

http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/business/6096084.stm

A report by economist Sir Nicholas Stern suggests that global warming could
shrink the global economy by 20%.

But taking action now would cost just 1% of global gross domestic product,
the 700-page study says.

-------------------------------

Given these daunting realities, if we are going to promote development, the
issues of reduction in fossil fuel dependence and CO2 emissions, developing
a clean energy, energy conservation and alternative powered transportation
infrastructure, should be top priorities, as national security issues.

Is there a way to have a new mall operate in the Pullman/Moscow corridor
that can substantially address these concerns?  Perhaps, though limiting the
CO2 emissions associated with the extra distance shoppers will drive from
Moscow to the mall and back is a far more difficult problem to solve (plug
in electric gas or diesel hybrids partially powered by clean electric
sources) than building a "Green" mall incorporating alternative energy
and resource and energy conservation strategies.  Building a mall on the far
edge of a city that will encourage driving miles from the city for some
residents to shop is inherently an inefficient proposal.

It could be argued that those who commute on the corridor daily might use
less fossil fuel to shop, due to stopping at the mall on their daily
commute, rather than making a longer shopping trip to other outlets.  Of
course, the massive fossil fuel use and CO2 emissions associated with the
commuter lifestyle demands mitigation of these impacts.

As has been pointed out, some shoppers who drive to Lewiston or Spokane
might instead shop more locally if they could find the products locally that
draw them to Lewiston or Spokane.  However, I think some shoppers go to
Lewiston or Spokane to "escape" from the local area, and shopping is just an
added attraction, not the primary motivation.

Mark's suggestions address some of these issues, yet I have not heard,
except perhaps from councilman Tom Lamar, comments from the Moscow City
Council indicating they are prioritizing the national security issues of
fossil fuel dependence/depletion, anthropogenic climate change, and the
inevitable and critical necessity of the rapid development of clean energy
technologies, energy conservation strategies, and alternative energy
transportation infrastructure.

Information on the most environmentally advanced large city building in the
Inland Empire:

http://www.landscouncil.org/news/welcome_to_saranac.asp

------------------------------------------

Vision2020 Post: Ted Moffett

   On 1/13/08, mark r. seman <baukunst at moscow.com> wrote:
>
>  very few current businesses are positioned to sustainably operate within
> the triple bottom-line model of people/planet/profits [http://getsustainable.net/].
> although new and existing businesses can be encouraged or incentivized to do
> so if the citizens of their resident communities perceive a value in doing
> so.  the communities (town, county, and state entities) of the palouse seem
> well positioned to do so with the Hawkins development.  but it requires that
> *all* parties at least agree to work towards implementing programs to
> achieve sustainable business (& development) practices.  negotiations will
> then determine how far programs will be taken.  there are so many elements
> that could be identified to take positive steps and time should be allocated
> to identify and deliberate them.  why shouldn't the corridor be developed
> with enough vision to make it an "oasis" that positively addresses economic
> development, the environment, transportation, waste streams, energy, natural
> resources, construction materials & methods,
> inter-state/multi-county/trans-municipal collaboration, etc?
>
> sidebar on achievable water conservation measures:
> waterless urinals & dual flush toilets, IR controlled lowflow faucets,
> stormwater detention for irrigation use, rainwater harvesting for irrigation
> & toilet use, recyling greywater for toilet use, xeriscape plantings,
> education programs for facility users and maintenance staff.
>
> mark
>
>  <bau at moscow.com>
> mark r. seman, architect
>        v=928.925.7617
>        f=928.776.9107
>
> -----Original Message-----
> *From:* vision2020-bounces at moscow.com [mailto:
> vision2020-bounces at moscow.com]*On Behalf Of *keely emerinemix
> *Sent:* Sunday, January 13, 2008 10:20 AM
> *To:* Donovan Arnold; Bill London; v2020
> *Subject:* Re: [Vision2020] Will Moscow support Hawkins sprawl-mall?
>
> I'm astonished at the equation of a locally-owned (and owned by its
> customers) food co-op that lives out its mission of sustainable, healthy,
> locally-produced and fairly traded products -- one that "recycled" a vacant
> building and improved it while still making it accessible to its community
> by locating downtown -- with a huge shopping mall.
>
> I don't think there's enough caffeine in the world to have that one make
> sense . . .
>
> Keely
>
>
>
>
>
>
>  ------------------------------
> Date: Sun, 13 Jan 2008 01:36:39 -0800
> From: donovanjarnold2005 at yahoo.com
> To: london at moscow.com; vision2020 at moscow.com
> Subject: Re: [Vision2020] Will Moscow support Hawkins sprawl-mall?
>
> Mr, London makes the following arguments against a new shopping center on
> the edge of town:
>
> "If the Moscow council ships utilities across the state line to enable
> this strip mall, Moscow will face a series of problems, including:
> --depletion of the aquifer that supplies this town with most of its water
> --massive sprawl that will further uglify the Palouse and ravage existing
> downtown vitality
> --bankruptcy of Moscow businesses unable to compete with this new shopping
> mall
> --continuing future upgrades of Moscow infrastructure to cover the demands
> made by this extension of services, upgrades that will be paid for by
> Moscow taxpayers
> Is this what Moscow residents really want?"
>
> As I understand it, Mr. London strongly supported the expansion of the
> Co-Op, not once, but twice to larger buildings that further deplete the
> town's water aquifers, increased sprawl of other businesses to the outside
> of town, created more competition with other businesses in the area,
> and forcing future upgrades of Moscow's infrastructure to be paid for by
> Moscow taxpayers. So I would argue what is good for goose must also be for
> the gander.
>
> "Is this what Moscow wants?" I bet it is. If it isn't, then we will have a
> vacant building on the edge of town. I willing to venture out on a limb, and
> say those that putting millions into a building of new shopping center
> aren't doing it on a guess, but in fact put as much research into it as Mr.
> London did for the expansions of his Co-Op grocery store.
>
> I think it would be a significant advantage to have a mall on the western
> edge of Moscow accepts and competes with the big chain only stores in the
> Palouse Empire Mall that prohibits local businesses from leasing there. I
> also think it would allow other chains in Spokane to locate here, and
> provide jobs to local students and residents, increasing wages and
> competition for quality laborers rather than providing them to people in
> Spokane.
>
> Best,
>
> Donovan
>
>
>
>
>
> *Bill London <london at moscow.com>* wrote:
>
>  Won't it be grand?  The Moscow-Pullman Highway turned into one long strip
> mall.....
> And you can read in today's Lewiston Tribune (below) that the first big
> step in that direction will likely soon be taken.  The new Moscow City
> Council is under pressure to sell use of Moscow utilities (like sewage and
> water, and possibly police/fire protection) to the planned Hawkins shopping
> center located in Washington state on the Moscow-Pullman Highway.  The new
> council members (pragmatic politicians that they are) seem to be willing to
> ignore the real issues and fall for a cheap payoff.
> If the Moscow council ships utilities across the state line to enable this
> strip mall, Moscow will face a series of problems, including:
> --depletion of the aquifer that supplies this town with most of its water
> --massive sprawl that will further uglify the Palouse and ravage existing
> downtown vitality
> --bankruptcy of Moscow businesses unable to compete with this new shopping
> mall
> --continuing future upgrades of Moscow infrastructure to cover the demands
> made by this extension of services, upgrades that will be paid for by Moscow
> taxpayers
> Is this what Moscow residents really want?
> BL
>
> -----------------------------------------
> LEWISTON TRIBUNE
> Council shift changes outlook for proposed Hawkins development
> By David Johnson
> Saturday, January 12, 2008
>
> MOSCOW - Politics here may have shifted enough after the November election
> to trigger talks about the city providing water and sewer services across
> the state line for the proposed Hawkins Co. shopping center.
> A majority of Moscow city councilors, Whitman County commissioners and a
> spokesman for Hawkins told the Lewiston Tribune there's renewed potential
> for cooperation.
> This despite Moscow's continued legal challenge of Hawkins' attempts to
> secure water rights to drill its own wells for the 700,000-square-foot
> shopping mall.
> The situation comes as the first of two public comment meetings has been
> scheduled in Colfax on Monday. The county commissioners will take comments,
> beginning at 1:30 p.m., regarding Hawkins' recent request for Whitman
> County to float revenue bonds of more than $10 million to help fund
> infrastructure (including water and sewer) for the development.
> A Whitman County pro-business citizens group, meanwhile, Friday endorsed
> the proposed bond issue and called on Moscow officials to drop their water
> rights appeal against Hawkins.
> "It's clear Moscow's appeals are not about water but about keeping out
> particular kinds of businesses," April Coggins, spokeswoman for Businesses
> and Residents for Economic Opportunity wrote in a news release. "That
> attitude was rejected by Moscow voters in November and it is our hope that
> the new Moscow city council will see things differently and seek to
> cooperate with their neighbors."
> Moscow's waterlines extend right up to the Hawkins property, and the
> sewage treatment plant is located nearby.
> "Hawkins is always open to talking to the city of Moscow," said Jeff De
> Voe, project manager for the proposed shopping center. He declined further
> comment because of the pending legal appeal.
> It remains unclear how much money Moscow might make (through fees) or
> Hawkins might save if the two entities can reach an agreement about water
> and sewer services. But City Attorney Randy Fife and Public Works Director
> Les McDonald confirmed that a hookup of services is both legal and
> technically possible.
> Whitman County Commissioners Jerry Finch and Greg Partch, who continue to
> champion the Hawkins project as the beginning of retail development between
> here and Pullman, said it's time for Moscow to either join ranks or get out
> of the way.
> "Moscow didn't say no, they said hell no," Finch said about the city's
> refusal to cooperate with development of the mall. "Before the election,
> it's pretty obvious the door had been slammed."
> Three new Moscow councilors were elected in November and appear to have
> become part of a five-member, pro-business majority. The three, Walter
> Steed, Dan Carscallen and Wayne Krauss, along with council President Bill
> Lambert, all said they are willing to talk with Hawkins and Whitman County
> officials about water and sewer services. Councilor John Weber couldn't be
> reached for comment, but indicated in the past he favors cooperation.
> Only Councilor Tom Lamar, who has gone on record opposing retail
> development in the corridor, balked at renewed talks. "I think the best way
> for Hawkins to tap into our sewer and water is to locate in Moscow," Lamar
> said.
> Moscow Mayor Nancy Chaney, who's been accused of spearheading efforts to
> thwart the Hawkins project, said her intentions are rooted in environmental
> and groundwater concerns. That was confirmed by McDonald. "The mayor's
> driving concern," he said, "is the water resource that the whole region
> relies upon.
> "Moscow has always been open to talking," said Chaney, adding that the
> table for such discussion has already been set through the water rights
> appeal. She said the city has proposed mediation as a means of settling the
> issue.
> But Partch said talks, if they happen, shouldn't happen in a legal arena.
> Withdrawal of the appeal, he said, would be the best way for Moscow to show
> good faith. "That would be a huge gesture on their part," he said, "and we
> would certainly like to work with them."
> The water rights appeal hearings are scheduled to begin in March.
> "You can't build without water," Finch said, adding that many people think
> Chaney is simply using the water issue as the only legal lever available to
> stop retail development in the corridor. "She's the one who seems to be dead
> set against it."
> A shopping center, said Finch and Partch, is not necessarily a big water
> consumer. But it would surely be a big revenue producer for the county.
> According to county records, the undeveloped Hawkins acreage, which abuts
> the Moscow city limits and the Washington-Idaho state line, currently
> generates about $1,400 in annual tax revenue. If the mall is developed to
> full capacity, it could produce nearly $1.8 million in annual property and
> sales taxes for the county, De Voe told the commissioners when making his
> pitch for the $10 million in infrastructure bonds.
> While Moscow couldn't directly tap into those tax dollars, councilors here
> said the city might be able to negotiate a fee for water and sewer services
> that translates into a profit.
> "If it's going to happen and we can sell them something," Lambert said,
> "why not?"
> "I'm very anxious to get together with entities across the border," said
> Krauss.
> "I would be interested in talking about the possibility of extending
> services to Hawkins," Steed said.
> "I think that I would," Carscallen said about talking. Whether Hawkins
> connects to Moscow or drills its own wells, he said, doesn't seem to make a
> lot of difference. "They're going to get it out of the same tub we're
> getting ours."
> Researchers have said the underground aquifers on the Palouse have been
> steadily dropping. But, lacking data about just how much water is available,
> the same scientists have said a water management challenge is at hand, not a
> crisis.
> Finch suggested its up to Moscow officials, since they've filed the appeal
> against Hawkins, to propose new talks. "If they send us a letter, I would
> find it more receptive," he said.
> But Lambert said the catalyst for talks might have to come from elsewhere.
> "I don't see why it would hurt for these people to approach us. Somebody has
> to generate it, but it wouldn't be something generated by the council, per
> se."
> Moscow City Supervisor Gary Riedner said the city might reach out. "I will
> do what we can to facilitate it at the mayor's direction."
> "I know lots of people are talking about talking," Fife said.
> De Voe, meanwhile, told Whitman County officials that his company wants to
> begin construction this summer. As proposed, the shopping complex would be
> anchored by a Lowe's home improvement center.
> ---
>
>
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: http://mailman.fsr.com/pipermail/vision2020/attachments/20080113/fe57f18a/attachment-0001.html 
-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: not available
Type: image/gif
Size: 1913 bytes
Desc: not available
Url : http://mailman.fsr.com/pipermail/vision2020/attachments/20080113/fe57f18a/attachment-0001.gif