PCI only concerned about itself, not city

I don't support closure of Second Avenue for development of a medical mall. I don't accept the argument that this type of facility will bring additional revitalization downtown or significant additional jobs.

Do the citizens of Cedar Rapids realize that the City Council (as of January) has tentatively agreed to build a 450-car parking facility ($8 million), provide an economic grant (cost unknown) and allow future property taxes to be used to “offset” any property assessments for street improvements in and around the development? This in exchange for a guarantee to keep 400 jobs and add 100 more in the next five years.

So, now we know how the infrastructure costs are going to be offset for a Second Avenue closure. We also have an expert's opinion that the closure would have minimal impact (on traffic) but is that the only aspect we need to be concerned with?

Our city is easy to traverse with its grid pattern, and interrupting Second Avenue causes confusion and frustration. I would also be concerned about emergency response times.

The city has implemented skywalks successfully many times and arguments supporting the street closure aren't enough to discount this obvious and efficient alternative.

I assert that PCI is only thinking of its own needs and desires and not that of how to be a good neighbor. I urge our elected officials to not sell out for the “promise” of only 100 more jobs.

Deena Nelson

Cedar Rapids