07/27/1981 Meeting - Laserfiche WebLink

Home Browse Search

"' - --- --- Ms. Miller moved, seconded by Mr. Obie, that this item be held . over indefinitely until the ordinance is rewritten. Roll call vote; motion carried unanimously. Ms. Miller stated that she hoped this could be brought back in September. B. Emerald Canal Feasibility Task Force (memo, agreement, and additional information distributed) Mr. Lindberg stated that no staff member is present who is familiar with a number of the technical points regarding engineering and waterways. However, Jerry Diethelm will speak in favor of the item and would be able to answer those questions. Mr. Lindberg stated that he is introducing this item because this notion has been around the city for almost 100 years. In the last three years, a group that has brought it forward to the elected officials for consideration of creation of a task force. Most observations have been positive although many see this as a IIdream.1I He has been one of the few officials who have indicated there are questions before progress can be made. The task force could answer them. The questions in his mind are: 1) is this project affordable to the City and the taxpayers and is it wanted; 2) will it disrupt neighborhoods in other areas--there needs to be a refined analysis of possible negative impact; 3) the process should be refined to make sure its solutions to flood plain problems are equal to or greater than other solutions; and 4) how this will affect the quality of life. Consideration should be given to the effects it could have on downtown revitaliza- tion, new downtown housing, neighborhood corporations, parks and recreation . activities, and use of the canal as alternative transportation. The Emerald C an a 1 is a dream and a concept with the possibility of becoming feasible, but it needs community direction with a connection to Eugene and Lane County. Consider- ation should be given to whether this action would be a prudent move under current economic conditions. One cannot leap into this project to see if the City wants to move forward, since it cannot immediately. No City budget nor City staff support, except to help coordinate two public hearings, will be necessary. Those expenses will be shared ~ith Eugene and Lane County. He has received letters from the Army Corps of Engineers and Senator Hatfield indicating that there is a good likelihood for $50,000 for staffing this project. John Ingle, L-COG, stated that he and Cynthia Solely were members of the Emerald Canal Housing and Economic Impact Analysis Team. They distributed a publication. At this point, it is an analysis rather than a debate. L-COG is doing the study with the HUD grant. The purpose of the study is to identify and provide infor- mation on land use and to minimize and assign costs. A public hearing could be held later. Objectives of the study are: 1) to provide baseline data on recent housing, business, and land-use trends; 2) to protect existing conditions and historical trends to the year 2000; 3) to assemble information on how construc- tion of the canal would change the area; and 4) to assess the canal-induced ch anges . They have dealt with staff and officials to develop various scenarios, and have identified impact areas that warrant further study consideration and have developed two canal scenarios. They have compared the differences between the . two canal scenarios in light of recently adopted community goals and policies. MINUTES--Eugene City Council July 27, 1981 Page 5