New Search
BWHILWH.DOC Page 1 <br /> MEMORANDUM <br /> February 23, 1998 <br /> TO: Bill VanVactor, County Administrator <br /> FROM: Bob Keefer, Parks Manager <br /> CC: John Goodson, Public Works Director <br /> RE: Hileman & Whitely Landings <br /> The return of Hileman & Whitely Landings to the County seems to be in the best interest of the public <br /> although the County's is not in the greatest funding condition to take on these facilities. I do not believe that <br /> the City of Eugene will re -open the facilities and public access to the Willamette River in the Santa Clara <br /> area will be significantly reduced. <br /> I believe the County should take back both landings and find ways to re -open at least Whitely Landing. <br /> Whitely is a small facility with limited but usable site amenities. With a little clean up and support from <br /> nearby residences, I believe the facility will function adequately and not be a drain on our budget. The <br /> Oregon State Marine Board has indicated a willingness to help support maintenance and refurbishment of <br /> the facility. City staff have indicated that a local neighborhood group is interested in assisting with site <br /> surveillance. Looking Glass and the County Parks Division should be able to utilize an OYCC crew this <br /> summer to help renovate the vault toilet, stripe the parking lot, refurbish the picnic tables, and install new <br /> signs. <br /> City staff have mentioned the possibility of selling Hileman and using the proceeds to purchase additional <br /> land for new a boat ramp in a better location. During the last flood, the Willamette River changed channels <br /> and the current boat ramp is no longer usable. The road leading to the boat ramp is in poor shape and the <br /> site looks as though it has been abandoned. <br /> I do not believe that Hileman should be sold or traded for another piece of property along the river. This 30 <br /> acre site is irreplaceable. If the site can no longer be used as a boat landing, then the site should be <br /> temporarily "mothballed" and vehicle access should be denied. In the mean time, a boundary survey should <br /> be completed and a cyclone fence installed around the perimeter of the park. I suggest that the City be <br /> responsible for both of these items prior to the park returning to the County. We have heard that the <br /> adjoining neighbor has allowed their cattle to graze on the property and the current fence along the west <br /> property line is encroaching onto park property and is in disrepair. <br /> Once the site is returned to the County, I would hope that we could open the park to walk -in traffic. This <br /> would require a small parking area outside the gate and possibly placement of a seasonal port-a- toilet. The <br /> biggest problems will be controlling late night use, reducing other illegal activities (drug deals, gun fire, <br /> vandalism), and dealing with the adjoining neighbor who is opposed to the park being opened or cars <br /> parking near the entrance and next to their residence. Hopefully, these problems can be minimized by better <br /> signage, lighting, and increased sheriff patrols. I am working on a plan to improve site security at all the <br /> public boat landings near the metro area and will integrate these concerns into the plan and proposal. <br />