07/27/1981 Meeting - Laserfiche WebLink

Home Browse Search

- ------ . Sarah Mahler, 1588 Patterson, stated that she has been chairperson of West Unlverslty Nelghborhood, and she is speaking as an individual for the Emerald Waterway. The City and the task force should consider the economic relationship between the Emerald Waterways system cost and the West University Neighborhood. The cost should not be borne by only those living in that neighborhood since the benefits will not be restricted to that neighborhood. Richard M~igs, 303 Fairway Loop, stated that he is chairperson of the Economic Development Commission of the Downtown Development Board, and Ray McIver of the Eugene Downtown Association has requested that he also speak on his behalf. The interest and enthusiasm for this project are widespread in the business com- munity. T~is could have a qreat effect on life in Eugene and greatly enhance programs. Much volunteer labor and energy has brought this to the council and it would be discouraging if it were not accepted now. John Callicrate, 3065 Firwood Way, stated that he is a public health profes- slonal and feels that this is a unique idea for a fine waterway. The canal now poses a public health problem with animals that transmit disease. He would appreciate the aesthetic quality that would occur if this project were undertaken. Following the break, Councilor Haws left the meeting. Speaking in opposition: Frank Sparrow, 1568 West 24th Place, stated that he is against this project. He . has contacted the Army Corps of Engineers because he has concerns about the high water table. They feel there is a possibility that water could seep into basements of homes near the canal because of the low water table. He asked if suit could be brought against the developers of the canal if it were completed. Mary Kay Crumbaker, 1031 Mill, stated that the council had received a letter from her and attached to her letter is a copy of a letter from the Office of the Army Chief of Engineers. In paragraph 3 of that letter, it states that investi- gations, such as that regarding the canal are based on an economic evaluation of the benefits and cost of alternatives. Preliminary results of the study indicate that from a flood control standpoint, the Emerald Canal concept was not economi- cally viable. Ms. Crumbaker is concerned about the econolnic feasibility and feels that the display model is misleading and inaccurate. The model does not show churches torn down; professional offices, banks, and housing torn down; streets cut off; or telephone and utility lines moved. Likewise, there is no evidence of the high steel fences required along the waterway to prevent accidents. Also, there is no traffic dislocation shown from the cutting off of 12th, 14th, and 16th avenues. She feels the bridges on 11th, 13th, and 15th avenues will have to be very large to carryall the traffic. She is unwilling for any taxpayer's money to be used to encourage destruction of what is currently economically productive. She feels that considering such an idea should be tabled indefinitely until the economic condition of the United States, Eugene, and Lane County might possibly support such a vast expenditure of money and the economic dislocations that will occur. . Guy DiTorrice, 146 Calu~et, distributed pictures to the council: He stated that he lS aga1nst th1S because he does not support the total wording of the resolu- tion and is concerned about the economic aspect. He works with Citizens Bank of MINUTES--Eugene City Council July 27, 1981 Page 9