New Search
Comments and Responses, September 27, 2000 Public Hearing in Springfield <br />T29.9--Comment acknowledged. <br />Transcript 2 <br />46 <br />T29.8 1 throe historic buildings and their potential. <br />Conti. 2 Because I think it was clear in your report that <br />3 you wore atating that consultants or other people would have <br />4 to articulate Lho quality or the character of that ora¢ervntion <br />6 and if 1t was -- if 1t had any value. <br />'i7g,g 8 I want to eumnarize and I'll try to do this <br />7 briefly entl I'm sorry that I didn't spend more time on this, <br />B Dut the first time arouhtl. I handed You a three-pogo <br />9 description of how I felt. <br />l0 2Lem two on that states that the river front <br />it site pro3ect offers the greatest esthetic opportunity of any <br />l2 of the altos that you're considertng. It occurs nt the <br />13 entrance to a city, The bridge crossing of an American <br />id heritage river. Lho Willamette River. <br />is It will Influence change on both sides. Again, <br />18 none of your altos will do that. If you look at security, it's <br />17 got Island Park, tt'c got a river odge, it's pot to the south <br />18 a main bridge and a highly traveled roetlwaY. <br />19 Ths poltco docnrrswnt is talking about an <br />20 sxpanaion pro,iect that will be throe blocks away from this <br />21 pro,iect. Environmental issues, the Nill Race and the <br />22 reaWration And I used the Snn Antonio descriptton of Ins Peeeo <br />23 del Rio, bscauae you have that potential. <br />24 You have n Dotential to Mks a linkage t0 large <br />2b geographic amenities that none of the shoe orovlde. <br />New Federal Courthouse 275 Final EIS <br />