Clarksville, TN Online: News, Opinion, Arts & Entertainment.


Councils okays $32 million in marina debt

 

In a special session Monday night, the City Council approved an amendment to the city’s capital project budget, giving the okay to $32 million in new debt and $39 million in re-structured debt for development of Mayor Johnny Piper’s proposed marina, water park and other Fairgrounds “development.” The debt package would extend loans through 2027.

In fact, the “done deal” marina has spurred boats sales, or the illusion and suggestion of boat sales, including the collage of watercraft already on display in a Riverside Drive dealer’s lot and another boat display/storage area strategically poised on the concrete slab that once housed the Fairground Pavilion.

Councilors Wallace Redd, Marc Harris and Wayne Harrison opposed the amendment, with Harris lobbying for a 30-day stay on this vote, a move that would have allowed new city councilors a say in a development project that will, in January, fall under their purview. Not all the new councilors support the marina; the current council make-up was a guaranteed win for marina advocates.

What consideration has been given to traffic flow problems on access roads (state highways) to the new development have been elaborated on. Clarksville already has significant traffic flow issues including along Riverside Drive, and water park/marina development will magnify those issues as well for the people who live, work in or travel that area.

As the new council oversees future development of the marina and the Cumberland as a recreational waterway, it is hoped that among their concerns they will consider the overwhelming noise pollution generated by powerboats and jet skis — the latter can equal the output of a racetrack in one’s back yard. The amount of oil and gasoline residue that seeps from vehicles such as jet skis, particularly older models, is a serious pollutant on many waterways; newer models have adapted to stricter EPA standards. In many forward-thinking states these “toys” have been banned on small lakes and rivers because of the noise, noise pollution, and pollution issues, and earth-friendly reclaiming of rivers and streams — or at least, do no further harm — is the most important priority.

Given that the city for years has endured the stench of wastewater treatment permeating the downtown business and residential district, it would behoove the new council to address that that issue in tandem with any new downtown and riverfront development.

If the current administration is hellbent on this form of development, it is incumbent on the next City Council to be proactive in protecting the natural resources that run through Clarksville, and ensuring that within this development, there are ample protections for the water, the shoreline and the abutting homes and businesses (including new residential development). Or hope that the pollution just runs downstream…rendering it NIMB (Not In My Backyard).


Sections

Business, News, Opinion

Topics

, , , , , , , , , ,

3 Responses to “Councils okays $32 million in marina debt”

  1. Blayne Clements Says:
    December 3rd, 2008 at 8:41 am
    Blayne Clements

    Kudos to Harris for continuing to show that he is looking out for the people by trying to let the new council have a say.I think Harris’ proposal should have been given serious consideration. At the very least, with the special session and avoiding having the new council having a say on the issue, it gives the appearance of being run through quickly.

    I am curious what others opinion are about the project. I can see a need for a water park (however I question if it qualifies as a poublic works project), but the need for the marina seems questionable. However, my wife thinks the marina is a good idea, but not the waterpark.

    On a side note, my wife hates water parks, and I love them, haha.

    What are everyone’s else’s opinions?

  2. David Cutting Says:
    December 3rd, 2008 at 8:33 pm
    David Cutting

    The water park and the marina are briliant ideas, but neither should be built at taxpayer expense. What taxpayer money must be used for is tornado sirens and sidewalks, and the mayor should be encouraging private investors to build a marina and a water park. Additionally, a water park would best be located near I-24 Exit 1, where we have available space, good traffic flow, and existing and adequate hotels and restaurants.

  3. piperdoesnthaveadegree Says:
    July 18th, 2009 at 12:14 am

    I think this is a horrible idea. I enjoyed the “Bark Park” and everything else the Fairgrounds had to offer. I agree with the previous post about better allocation of tax dollars going to emergency preparedness. This city needs so much more than a 32 million dollar marina/water park (starting with a new mayor). “The illusion and suggestion of boat sales”? I’m confused. The paragraph started “In fact”, however “illusion” and “suggestion” are not exactly factual.

    Terrible idea.

Comments

You must be logged in to post a comment.


Personal Controls

Archives