Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout04/11/1983 Meeting - M I NUT E S City Council Work Session Wilder Room, Conference Center April 11, 1983 5 p.m. PRESENT: Mayor Gus Keller, Emily Schue, Mark Lindberg, John Ball, Betty Smith, Dick Hansen, Cynthia Wooten, Freeman Holmer (from 5:29); Micheal Gl eason, Ci ty Manager; Gary Long, Admi ni strative Services; Don All en, Public Works; Charles Porter, Emerald Waterway Citizens Committee; Donal d Zadoff, task force member; Jerry Di ethel m, pl anning consul tant and task force member; Paul Redhead, task force member and property appraiser; Marjorie Beck, Community Council Services; Barb Bellamy, Public Information Officer; Susan Peck, Eugene Register-Guard I. INTRODUCTION Mr. Lindberg introduced guests. Three documents were distributed, including: The Fi nal Report of the Emeral d Canal Feasibil i ty Task Force, the Fl i nt River Flood Control and River Beaut i fi cati on Proj ect Close-Out Report, and an untitl ed coll ection of information pertinent to the proposed Emeral d Canal. ~ II. THE EMERALD CANAL AND WATERWAYS SYSTEM e Mr. Diethelm said that since the 19th century farmers have been interested in irrigating lands from the Willamette River but have not found an economical way. He said, the Mayor's Millrace Committee in the 1960's looked for a solution to the Millrace problem. Later, Robert Clark received $50,000 which paid for the CH2M Hill Study which looked at water resources. In 1977, Mr. Diethelm said he became interested in the waterway. $100,000 worth of study later, the Army Corps of Engineers confirmed his opinion on quality of water in the Amazon. He said the laO-Year Fl oodpl ain Map shows that fl oodwater buil ds from the west back to the city. He pointed out the canal is the best way to relieve flooding problems. Mr. Diethelm said as building is done to the west of the city, flood suseptibility will increase. He added the Emerald Canal would not only do positive things for the city but would also protect investments in that area. He said Jerry Rosenthal of L-COG suggested reversibility of water, allowing the Emeral d Canal to be more than just fl ood control or to protect interest in that west Amazon basin but said that the Emerald is a way of dealing with residents' interests in the waterway. Mr. Diethelm said hearings were held in 1978 and supporters appeared, including boaters at Fern Ridge and Ted Deitz, president of the Upper Willamette Resource Conservation District Project, who supported the Emeral d Canal as an asset to agricul ture. Al so, Senator Hatfi el d said hi s 1 i fel ong interest in water management was behind the Emeral d Canal and suggested the County and City jointly solve water-related problems. Mr. Diethelm said others in favor of the Emerald Canal include Mr. Meisenholder, a Fern Ridge MINUTES--Eugene City Council April 11, 1983 Page 1 . store owner, Fish and Wildlife people, and vector control people. Mr. Diethelm indicated that in 1978 his students investigated the Amazon Corridor and Bob Marosi was hired. Mr. Diethelm pointed out a traditional relationship exists between park and open space development and economic develoment. He said some people in the University area are worried that property values will go up and they will suffer from the success of the Emerald Canal. Concerning the amount of water needed, Mr. Diethelm reported that dams are authorized to release water for water needs first and wildlife enhancement programs second. He said 2,000 cubic feet per second is enough and a water permit is pending. Mr. Diethelm hoped 2,000 cubic feet per second of potential water wealth would not be squandered. He indicated EWEB had proposed high- voltage lines in the area of the proposed canal but have decided to take another high-voltage path. Mr. Diethelm indicated an inland waterway section has been added to the Metro- politan Area General Plan. He remarked that the difference between inland waterways and the river is that inland waterways have the potential to support housing and commercial development. Mr. Diethelm listed the seven areas the canal touches which include: the river; the millrace; the area between the millrace and downtown, including 10th and 11th avenues; the canal zone between 10th and 11th between Oak and Pearl and south to Amazon; the West 11th Corridor; the Fern Ridge area; and farmlands for which water for irrigation would not have to go through Fern Ridge Lake. e Regarding increased tourism resulting from the Emerald Canal construction, Mr. Diethelm highlighted the packet distributed on the effect of tourism after the San Antonio Waterway was completed. Mr. Diethelm emphasized that returning the millrace to power generation could produce revenue to pay for some costs of the system. Mr. Diethelm concluded that the Emerald Canal is not only a flood control or a housing or a recreation project, but a complex project with each part reinforc- ing the other, which links City and County interests. Complexity enhances the project and makes it attractive for funding. Mr. Diethelm remarked that the Emerald Canal project can attract outside funds to this area. Also, the Army Corps of Engineers can contribute $2.5 million, which is their estimate of flood control costs. Mr. Diethelm said the Portland based Yard Foundation paid for task force expenses. He has asked them to consider helping the City and County to continue with the project. Mr. Diethelm added that local foundations are waiting on commitments from the City Council. Mr. Dietholm said as the economic conditions improve, people will support the project and he encouraged action. He said the Flint, Michigan, Waterway took 18 years to complete from the time of acceptance by City Council. - III. LANE COUNTY'S POSITION (letter of April 11, 1983, to Mayor Gus Keller from Jerry Rust distributed) Mr. Lindberg read the letter from Jerry Rust which stated that Lane County prefers the Emerald Canal project be kept alive and the County will continue to participate except financially. MINUTES--Eugene City Council April 11, 1983 Page 2 e e e IV. THE TASK FORCE'S COST ESTIMATE Mr. Redhead said the format used to prepare the cost estimate was prepared by Garret Rosenthal of L-COG. Mr. Rosenthal's cost estimates were reviewed for reasonableness and costs were updated where appropriate on the real estate portion of the tax estimate. Mr. Rosenthal took tax lot maps and planned the most probable canal route which is designed to have a minimum impact on signifi- cant real estate, considered cost constraints and tried to be consistent with preliminary desiqn concepts. Based on that canal route, he assembled a list of parcels of land that would be involved. He began with the assessor's true cash value and reviewed that for reasonableness and adjusted it based on his exper- ience. Finally, those figures were rounded and totaled. $1 million on admini- strative costs was included. Mr. Redhead said the planning and design figures are based on Mr. Rosenthal's and they include items which would be necessary for the project. Starting with design criteria, these figures were based on gross evacuation, concrete, and place figures. Bridges were independently reviewed by people in the University of Oregon Architecture Department. The utility costs were estimated and updated based on utility agency information. Mr. Redhead reported the total estimated cost of construction is $22 million. He added the ongoing yearly costs are estimated at $300,000. V. POTENTIAL SOURCES OF REVENUE Mr. Zadoff said the current economic climate caused the project to begin with a handicap. However, he added, sources of funds were located outside the commun- ity. Several Federal acts will help in paying for the canal and Oregon Senate Bill 541.8340 is a logical source for funds. Mr. Zadoff added, as with the Flint, Michigan, Canal, two-thirds of the cost could be paid with funds from without the community, the other one-third from within the community. The functions of the Emerald Canal would meet the demand for necessary funds. Mr. Zadoff indicated that locally, Urban Renewal funds, bike, and park money might be used. He commented that locally generated funds should be explored further. VI. FLINT, MICHIGAN--A REPORT ON A COMPARABLE PROJECT Mr. Dietholm indicated that a final history of the Flint, Michigan, Waterways Project shows the city's share of the cost was 29 percent. Also included are a history of procedures and agreements between parties and a section on diffi- culties which were encountered. VII. EMERALD WATERWAY'S CITIZEN COMMITTEE, INC., OFFER OF CONTINUING ASSISTANCE Mr. Porter said EWCC would set up the Emerald Canal. and Lane County's seals on planning and zoning can be pay staff expenses if a joint committee is formed to He added that a letterhead with the City of Eugene's it can be used to tap outside funding sources. Then completed. MINUTES--Eugene City Council April 11, 1983 Page 3 e Responding to a question, Mr. Dietholm said the Delta Pond is another magnifi- cent waterway opportunity and is a part of the Emeral d Canal pl an. VIII. STAFF REPORT (letter of March 31, 1983, to City Councilors from Gary Long distributed) Mr. Long indicated staff met when the Emerald Canal Task Force report was received and chose to focus on the util ity and f1 ood control issues because they had the most immediate public benefit and some of the major public costs. He reported that the Springfield Utility Board indicated an interest but because of the Bonnevill e Power Admini stration and WPPS, they are now not interested. Mr. Long said one issue was that Public Works Department is working with the Federal Emergency Management Agency on f1 ood control issues and will be for the next year. When that process is completed, staff will know what the focus has been and that is the point at which to detennine the direction the City shoul d go. Mr. Long added that if the project is begun, a variety of boards and commissions should be involved, including Parks Department, streets, and the planning process. Mr. Diethelm said that included in the packet is a fl oodpl ain manager's report from the task force. He said Mark Annstrong pointed out that the canal would save ,400,000 in f1 oodpl ain insurance costs. e IX. POSSIBLE RESOLUTIONS AND A PROPOSAL Mr. Lindberg said task force members feel that the best option is to ask City Council to direct staff to consider, in conversation with Lane County, the best system at minimal expense for presenting the idea wi thout accel erating the project unrealistically. Ms. Smith responded that the City is not in a position to budget funds for the Emeral d Canal; however, Mr. Porter's suggestions coul d be used. Mr. Porter said his plan includes a committee with representatives of the City and County wi th two sta ff to meet wi th the commi ttee, wi th EWCC fundi ng 1 etter- heads on letters requesting assistance. He anticipates more success if two juri sdictions are invol ved. Ms. Wooten favored conti nued work on the Emeral d Canal proj ect wi th the under- standing the City has no funds to contribute. Her concern is that perpetuating the committee gives tantamount approval to the project. She feels uncomfortable without a public hearing process or opportunity for people to express themselves. Mr. Porter responded that many peopl e support the Emeral d Canal if fundi ng can be found. He said the next step is pl anning to sati sfy funding questions so hearing or zoning hearings could be held. e MINUTES--Eugene City Council April 11, 1983 Page 4 . e e Ms. Smith added that specifics must be available before a public hearing can be held. She said that if EWCC can provide funding and provide a definitive plan City Council could support it. Ms. Wooten concurred. Mr. Lindberg recommended that staff be directed to consider the options and report back to City Council. He said there are four levels of effort that coul d be chosen and information is needed on how those coul d be pursued. He said the fi rst is the minimum-effort 1 evel of maintaining the water rights which the City currently has. The second level is naming a pl ace to receive and interpret information, such as the Public Works Department, at Which to consider flood control information prior to maki ng a staff recommendation, and to consider which option to pursue. The third level is exploring funding sources. The fourth option is the maximum-effort 1 evel which involves pl anning, the most staff time, and the highest level of commitment. Mr. Lindberg added that steps one through three could be done without holding a public hearing since City staff woul d not be involved to a very high degree. Ms. Schue agreed with Ms. Wooten about public input and she agreed with Ms. Smith that this may not be the time to have a hearing process. However, Ms. Schue does not want the deci si on made that the Emeral d Canal wi 11 never be b ui 1 t. Mr. Holmer commented that a public hearing is premature now but Emerald Canal information must be exposed to determine if the public wants further exploration. He suggested a two-stage process with evaluation being the first. Mr. Gleason added that a typical way in Which a project is undertaken begins with a scoping study. The next step is a formal feasiblity analysis Which is one percent of the cost of the project, in this case $200,000. At that point, if a decision is made to proceed, a design study is done with ten percent of the cost or $2 mill ion, then construction begins. He said publ ic hearings can be plugged in at any point in the process. That decision is up to City Council. Mr. Kell er added a fi fth 1 evel of effort is the yearly operation costs which may have more impact. He said honesty in prioritizing $300,000 in that program versus whatever el se the Ci ty might do is necessary. He added the Ci ty cannot do all the fi nancing. Mr. Diethelm emphasized that over the past few years a series of five public hearings have been held with generally positive feedback. He said the project is so complex and links so many possibilities that more public education is necessary. Mr. Redhead added that two public hearings were held during the task force tenure. 75 percent of those people speaking were citizens of the city 0 f Eugene. ML Wooten stressed her will ingness to extend the pl anning process but expressed concern that City Council needs to hold a hearing before a decision is made. Mr. Porter emphasized the importance of EWCC having the benefit of working with a committee that includes representatives of both the City and County. He added feasibility studies are needed before a public hearing is held so the public can have specific information. MINUTES--Eugene City Council April 11, 1983 Page 5 e e e Ms. Smith added that the staff recommendation should include actual figures for pl anning costs. Summarizing, Mr. Gleason said a fonnal staff report would be made to City Council in June on options for Mr. Lindberg's four levels of involvement, including procedures and choices. (R MINUTES--Eugene City Council April 11, 1983 Page 6