New Search
Comments and Responses, September 27, 2000 Public Hearing in Springfield <br />T29.2-Comment acknowledged. <br />transcript 2 <br />42 <br />17g,t 1 the river front site, site numbor 1, would bo the developrwnt <br />Conti. 2 of s new courthouse on a river front site would build <br />3 connections Lo an extsttng infrastructurq whilq itlproving not <br />4 only the local and reglonn7 economy, but stso the social, <br />6 cultural valuga of our natroaoliLan ergs as a whole. <br />8 I think that when I made that Droaentntion, I <br />7 wes really trying to emphesiZe tho regional nature of your <br />8 tlecision. And not thq orovincal nature of siting a building <br />9 on a particular site that hes bore infraatructurq, which I <br />t0 think probably all five of the 61teq would meet thnt ortterin. <br />11 IL was clear that Chic alts would influonco a <br />t2 metropolitan area grgntAr than any of the other sites, And <br />13 that's very, very critical. I think you've hoard tt expressed <br />t4 in a number of different fashions this evening, <br />15 If ycu took at Your development achgdule and You <br />18 look at working on the silo by the your 2002, you won't even <br />i7 have occupancy until 2004. In a three-and-a-half to four-year <br />18 windown, you would sos a transformation in this coamunlty that <br />t9 would influence in a very positive fashion tho rntiro <br />20 metropolitan area. <br />T28Z 21 Because tho Drivate sector people have tnikgd <br />22 atwut coming to Springfield with Ehic kind of building as a <br />23 part of their downtown area. But in ntltlltion to influencing <br />24 the downtown aroa, it's tho only silo that would influonco both <br />25 sitles of Lho river. Geograahicallr. you influonco Glenwood 1n <br />New Federal Courthouse. 271 Final EIS <br />