Conference 7.286::digital

sounds closer to fact than rumor.

    RE: .0

    Yeah, and they'll probably work out a swap (for a loss) whereby Digital
    gets the MRO4 facility back from Fidelity.

  Why might Merrimack refuse to allow Fidelity to put an addition on MKO2?
I recall that the MKO site used to have a huge amount of land? Did Digital
sell off some land (before the Fidelity purchase) to the extent that there is
not enough land to accommodate an addition? Or is the issue something other
than land?
  The MKO2 closure seems to not have inconvenienced a lot of people. My sense
is that closing MKO1 would cause major problems for a lot of people.

    Being a town planner for 6 yrs I had to consider the amount of land as only
    one of many factors.  You have to think about many other things.  The
    biggest things that would effect this decision, in my opinion, would be
    added trafic to an already crowded road system, wet areas, more
    fire fighting expenses, SCHOOL space for the already much over crowded
    merrimack school system, etc.  The list can go on and on.

+                     <<< Note 4226.4 by MKOTS3::MITCHELL >>>
+
+    Being a town planner for 6 yrs I had to consider the amount of land as only
+    one of many factors.  You have to think about many other things.  The
+    biggest things that would effect this decision, in my opinion, would be
+    added trafic to an already crowded road system, wet areas, more
+    fire fighting expenses, SCHOOL space for the already much over crowded
+    merrimack school system, etc.  The list can go on and on.
+
+
 
        RE .4
        
        The  "roads"  issue was the source of the downsized MKO2 when  it
        was  first  built.   That is no longer an issue, or at  least  it
        should not be.  The Industrial Interchange, exit 10, and the Camp
        Sergeant Rd bypass  were  built  to remove those issues.  The fire
        fighting expense issue is covered by the ponds behind each of the
        facilities  and  has  never been  an  issue  with  the  Merrimack
        Planning Board.  The real issue  today is the over crowded school
        system.  I hope the Merrimack Planning  Board and the School Board
        can  work these issues together without the controversy  we  have
        seen in the past.
        
        Considering  how  the  tax  rates  on  residential  housing  have
        increased in the  past  couple  of years Merrimack needs more not
        less commercial tax payers.
        
        \Bob Lail
        
        
        
        

    okay, so it sounds like the town wants Fidelity to pay for a new
    school.  Fidelity probably estimates the cost of adding to the facility
    + the new school for the town and says, "We might be better off buying
    the other DEC building."
    
    Mark

    
    Re .4: (Much of this repeats .5, but I feel it needs to be said anyway)

    Do you know the situation or are you speculating?

>   The biggest things that would effect this decision, in my opinion, would be
    added traffic to an already crowded road system, 

    Most traffic to a new MK facility would use exit 11.
    The rest would use the newly built Camp Sargent bypass. Do you consider
    these roads crowded?
    
>   wet areas, 

    Can't argue with this one as I don't know the layout of the land.
    However I was not under the impression that this part of Merrimack
    had a shortage of wetlands.

>    more fire fighting expenses, 

    Huh??? I drive past the South Merrimack fire station all the time.
    I almost never see the fire trucks out of the station. 

>   SCHOOL space for the already much over crowded Merrimack school system

    Could you explain this one. I thought it was people who live in houses
    which send children to the school system, and not businesses. In fact
    property such as MK contribute a lot more money to the town than they
    take away. If you're worried about school space then maybe building
    permits to residential housing should be denied, but not commercial
    building.

    It seems to me this is exactly the type of building we want in Merrimack.

    					Ed


    

    OK, everybody calm down.  There's a perfectly reasonable explanation.
    
    The buildable land which remains on the Digital plot in Merrimack is
    "landlocked":  there's no way (that had yet been proposed to the
    Planning Board) to get to or from that plot overland, without either
    getting an easement granted from somebody else to put a road / driveway
    over their non-Digital land, or to put a new road or driveway through
    or perilously close to some "wetlands".
    
    Those sorts of folks who feel entitled to dictate private property use
    to other property owners have some problems with putting a road or
    driveway through or near a "wetlands".
    
    So the Planning Board told Digital to come back with a proposal that
    would provide access to a new building, with acceptable "environmental
    impact".
    
    Digital said "OK, no problem, we think we can figure out how to do that
    and make everybody happy".
    
    The Planning Board said "Great, we'll take a look at it when you're
    ready".
    
    At this point, there's no evidence of anything more stupid or
    mysterious than this.  Presuming that Digital can make a reasonable
    proposal for access to a new building, there's no reason to think that
    there will be a big problem.

    
    RE .8 - Thanks Chip. That makes a good deal of sense.
    
    I though the author of .4 was speaking facts and not just speculating.
    
    						Ed
    
    

re: .8

Are we talking about MKO2-&-1/2 or an MKO3?  I thought the original
discussion was about adding the missing second half of MKO2 (from
the cafeteria south) vs. building a whole new building.  Certainly
access exists for that already.

- paul

It sounded to me like .4 was talking about generic issues that effect such
decisions.

This is also a generic response to .7:


>>   SCHOOL space for the already much over crowded Merrimack school system
>
>    Could you explain this one. I thought it was people who live in houses
>    which send children to the school system, and not businesses. In fact
>    property such as MK contribute a lot more money to the town than they
>    take away. If you're worried about school space then maybe building
>    permits to residential housing should be denied, but not commercial
>    building.

If Fidelity builds a new building, they will probably bring new employees into
the area to fill it.  Some percent of the new employees will choose to live
close to the plant (i.e. in Merrimack), putting pressure on developers to build
new houses.  Standard studies show that each new house costs a city $1000 over
and above the new tax revenues it generates through schools, services, etc.  I
don't know if Merrimack has impact fees on new houses or not, but regardless,
impact fees are one-time, and the $1000 is continuous.

Burns