02/06/1980 Meeting - Laserfiche WebLink

Home Browse Search

~ Manager noted staff had reviewed this application and recommends approval. Public hearing was opened with no testimony presented. Applicants indicated they were available to answer questions. Ms. Smith moved, seconded by Mr. Lieuallen, to forward recommen- dation for approval. Roll call vote; motion carried unanimously. e IV. JET BOAT ISSUE--UPDATE (Memo Distributed) Manager introduced the topic. This issue was discussed at length last year when the jet boats started operating on the Willamette River. Action had been requested of the Army Engineers; their report indicated they would not revoke the permit and that they felt it would be best to pursue speed limits as a way of regulating this situation. Speed limits would provide for safety, as well as minimum damage to the environment. The Marine Board was contacted in regard to establishing speed limits, but they refused to take any action on this matter. Manager introduced Stan Long, City Attorney. He had looked at the possibility of the City imposing speed regulations but felt there was a question about the City's authority in this area. He outlined a course of action that perhaps would provide the best means of assuring public safety with minimal environmental damages. The Council could declare the river area parks and easements a place to be kept free of urban noise as much as possible. He also. felt it would be beneficial 4It if Lane County, Springfield, and the University of Oregon joined in the proposal for the noise abatement program so that the entire urban river area upstream from the Beltline Bridge is included. If such a program is developed, then the City could formally request assistance from the Marine Board and perhaps receive a more favorable response. Mr. Lieuallen asked what kind of action the Marine Board might take if they accepted the river as an urban park. Long's response was that the action would depend upon the kind of program which was presented to the Board. Ms. Smith asked if the Board could still say no. Long responded that a formal request would need to be reviewed differently and they may then respond in a different manner. Mr. Drapela commented that park users resent any air or noise pollution. The river is viewed as an extension of the park itself and users object to noise and air pollution which staff also would object to on the river as if it were within the park land itself. He felt a comprehensive plan for such resources would be good. Ms. Miller added that the University should also be included in those discussions. e 2/6/80--8