From: Dave Wildemann
With overall project costs unknown and growing, perhaps a lower cost alternative should be considered for the riverfront project.
Are the benefits of the in river recreation features worth the projected $6 to $12 million project cost? Even with all the impact studies being done, will we really know the impact the man-made recreation features will have on the natural river environment?
In addition to projected project cost, the cost of future maintenance (or lack thereof) and the effect of future deterioration should also be considered. Will future generations be saddled with an albatross similar to what we are working to remedy today?
Removing the unsafe deteriorated current dam, fixing the erosion, and returning the river to its natural state would be a lower cost alternative both now and in the future.