What If? The Emerald Canal

Emerald Canal model between Oak & Pearl to the Amazon channel (image source: pages.uoregon.edu/diethelm/CanalImages.html)
 

During my University of Oregon days, I became aware of a visionary plan to create an eleven-block-long canal through the heart of Eugene that would connect the eastern end of the old Millrace that courses along the backside of the fraternity and sorority houses north of 11th Avenue to the concrete drainage channel extension of Amazon Creek at 17th and Oak. This plan proposed, in the words of its champions, “a rich, local blend of historic millrace and San Antonio Riverwalk.” If realized, the project, which they dubbed “The Emerald Canal,” would be a 35’–40’ wide waterway with broad promenades on both sides meandering beneath native trees within an urban garden.
 
A related but formally separate proposal from the same era envisioned restoring the Millrace’s own downtown dead end near Ferry Street as the anchor for a new riverside district.(1) 
 
I thought the Emerald Canal concept was brilliant. Portions of the Millrace as it existed were navigable by canoe. How great would it be if my friends and I could row further through the city, perhaps pulling ashore along the way at a canal-side café for lattes? How much would such a linear water park and urban village add to Eugene’s identity and sense of place? I found the prospect of the project being realized someday incredibly attractive.
 
Chief among the plan’s proponents was Jerry Diethelm, now Professor Emeritus of Landscape Architecture & Community Service at the University of Oregon and both a registered architect and a registered landscape architect. The Emerald Canal was his decades-long personal campaign. Its origin story dates back to a 1977 graduate studio he taught called “The Amazon Corridor.” Community interest soon led to the formation in 1982 of a joint City of Eugene/Lane County Emerald Canal Feasibility Task Force, chaired by state senator Margie Hendriksen, with Jerry serving as the principal planning consultant. The task force studied the project for six months and determined it was feasible. The estimated cost back then to make it a reality? $22 million.(2) 
 
After I returned to settle in Eugene in 1988, I was excited to read further news about the Emerald Canal concept. Jerry continued to build the case for the project through the mid-1990s, teaching new design studios around the concept and conducting a series of associated planning studies for the City of Eugene and EWEB, which featured a restored millrace and a Millrace Park at the river confluence. Along with Charlie Porter and Jerry Rust, he formed the Emerald Waterways Citizens Committee, Inc. They had two large, elaborate models built to show around town, garnering support for the project. The wealthy Gloria Teichert became an enthusiastic patron, primed to invest in a water-related project after helping bankroll water-conservation work in Africa. With her backing, the committee rented a storefront space on West Broadway to show off their Emerald Canal models.(3) Then, in what Jerry called his favorite near-miss, Teichert and her brother fell seriously ill and moved to Canada, and the funding vanished with them.

 

Reversing the Canal for Amazon flood release (image source: pages.uoregon.edu/diethelm/reversible.html)

The pitch for the Emerald Canal was never just aesthetic; it promised hydrological benefits as a small but critical link in a regional water circuit: Willamette into the Millrace, through the Emerald Canal to the Amazon, past the Fairgrounds to Fern Ridge Lake, over the dam into the Long Tom River, and back into the Willamette north of Monroe. This circuit would be important for area farming, wetland habitat, and recreational boating access to Fern Ridge. The relatively short in-town connection would create a very large waterway system with benefits for the community everywhere along its course. That’s a testament to how comprehensive Jerry’s vision was.

 
The flood-control argument was the most concrete of the bunch, and probably the one that came closest to actually unlocking money. During a major flood in the Amazon Basin, when an overwhelmed Amazon Creek would back up into the city, a reversible Emerald Canal could carry the excess directly to the Willamette. Engineers at the time argued it was a cheaper fix than building dams upstream.(4) That argument has since been overtaken by events. Since the 1990s, the Amazon Basin’s flood-storage problem has largely been addressed a different way, through the West Eugene Wetlands Plan and the ongoing naturalization of sections of Amazon Creek, including the stretch between 19th and 24th avenues. The federal dollars that might once have built a canal went to restoring wetlands instead.
 
During the years that followed the initial bloom of public enthusiasm, Jerry wrote several pieces for The Register-Guard and Eugene Weekly about the concept. Undaunted but increasingly wry, these included a jab at the City of Eugene, calling it the “Home of the Historic Eugene Millrace Cover-Up,” and later, sardonically ranking the Emerald Canal and Millrace restoration as “No. 8” on the city’s perpetual to-do list.
 
Jerry’s doggedness has gone unrewarded. The Emerald Waterways Citizens Committee is no more, and there’s no next-generation advocate to reopen the conversation. In 2026, he is the plan’s sole institutional memory.
 
The disappointing part of this story, besides the fact that the Emerald Canal is not a reality today, is what it says about ambition and its limitations in Eugene. I want to believe that imaginative, farsighted people can, with popular support, still make dreams come true. That this is increasingly difficult goes without saying. Regardless, I can lament the shrinking of our ambitions while still retaining hope that realizing them remains possible.
 
Chicago architect Daniel Burnham (1846–1912) famously said the following about visionary ideas:

“Make no little plans; they have no magic to stir men’s blood, and probably themselves will not be realized. Make big plans; aim high in hope and work, remembering that a noble, logical diagram once recorded will never die, but long after we are gone will be a living thing, asserting itself with ever-growing insistency. Remember that our sons and grandsons are going to do things that would stagger us. Let your watchword be order and your beacon beauty. Think big.”(5)

Burnham wished to inspire large-scale civic planning and bold thinking. This was more attainable in his day than it is now. The reality is that grand visions and big projects aren’t financed the Burnham way anymore, through a single civic will imposing itself on private land. The post-war urban renewal era caused real damage, including here in Eugene. That era’s legacy fueled the apparatus of environmental review, historic preservation law, mandatory public comment, and eminent domain restrictions. This apparatus is necessary, but it has handcuffed those community leaders who have harbored ambitious dreams.

San Antonio's Riverwalk (image source: Library of Congress - public domain)

 

The city can still build big things, but typically only on ground it already controls, with private-sector partners. The Downtown Riverfront development is the case in point. That site was a vacant industrial brownfield: one owner, EWEB, and no other properties to buy out. The Emerald Canal, by contrast, would have run through built-up urban fabric. Digging an open waterway through eleven or twelve blocks of the West University neighborhood would have meant acquiring dozens of parcels, relocating infrastructure, and disrupting a part of town that’s only gotten denser and more expensive since Jerry first proposed the project nearly fifty years ago. Lacking an overwhelming public mandate, the city can no longer draw a diagram through occupied city blocks and proclaim eminent domain. And, tellingly, the Downtown Riverfront’s own master plan, for all its ambition, includes no reopened millrace, no daylighted canal, no flowing water at all beyond the river’s own edge.  
 
Money was and is always an issue, too. The Emerald Canal’s funding path largely depended on passage of a countywide general obligation bond measure, which never occurred. Tax-increment financing wasn’t an option, either, since much of the proposed route lay outside the Downtown Urban Renewal District.
 
The one piece of Jerry’s vision still alive today is the University of Oregon’s own millrace restoration, a concept plan for a bio-habitat-focused Millrace Natural Area, with implementation still in the planning and incremental restoration stage rather than full construction. It’s a worthy project on its own terms. It is also, unmistakably, the shrunken remnant of something much larger: campus-bound, ecological rather than civic, with no ambition to reconnect to downtown at all.
 
Eugene once had the imagination for a project like the Emerald Canal but lacked the means. Today, it is a case study that reads less like a missed chance than a measure of how far Eugene’s civic capacities have contracted. Jerry’s idea was sound, its benefits clear, and his advocacy persisted for nearly fifty years. The problem is that the machinery that might once have carried a project of its scale no longer exists here. My “what if” isn’t a prompt for nostalgia so much as a note on the distance between the Eugene some could imagine and the Eugene that could never build it.

(1) The Emerald Canal plan proper ran from the Millrace’s blunted end near 10th and Ferry to Amazon Creek at 17th and Oak. The separate Millrace Park / lower-Millrace restoration idea, tied to the mid-1990s Ferry Street Corridor and South Bank planning process, would have daylighted the Millrace down to the Willamette on EWEB-owned land, the same parcel now redeveloped as Eugene’s Downtown Riverfront district.

(2) Figure and task force account per Jerry's own 1998 Register-Guard commentary, “Millrace for the Millennium.” Accounting for inflation alone, $22 million is about $70 million today. This understates the current reality, as urban construction and right-of-way costs in a dense, developed corridor have outpaced general inflation for decades. A 2026 estimate that prices in property acquisition would probably run into hundreds of millions.

(3) Sourced to Jerry's own retelling in “Emerald Canal Diary,” Eugene Weekly, June 30, 2005 (reprinted June 27, 2013).

(4) The hydrology was run by LCOG and confirmed by the Army Corps of Engineers at the time, per Jerry's own account.

(5) The quote’s own provenance is shakier than its fame suggests. It first appeared in print nine years after Burnham’s death, in a 1921 biography, with no citation, and historians long suspected an associate had assembled it from letters and speeches rather than recorded it verbatim. A 1910 Chicago newspaper account of a Burnham speech, unearthed in 2019, closes with nearly the same words, which is generally taken as confirming he really did say something close to this.  

Echoes in Eugene

 

The Australian Pink Floyd Show performing at the Hult Center, August 4, 2026 (my photo).

Earlier this month, my wife and I thoroughly enjoyed seeing The Australian Pink Floyd Show (TAPFS) at the Hult Center for the Performing Arts. I’ve been a Pink Floyd fan since my teens but never saw the band live. TAPFS has earned its reputation as one of the finest Pink Floyd tribute acts, and this was our second time seeing them.

Before Pink Floyd came together in the mid-1960s, Nick Mason, Roger Waters, and Richard Wright were students at the Regent Street Polytechnic School of Architecture in London, now part of the University of Westminster.(1) As someone who also studied architecture, I’ve long been intrigued by the possibility that their education influenced the way they approached music. Pink Floyd’s most celebrated albums—Meddle, The Dark Side of the Moon, Wish You Were Here, Animals, and The Wall—often take the form of carefully structured sequences rather than collections of conventional pop songs. They establish atmospheres, introduce recurring themes, and develop gradually, creating a sense of place within the music.

Waters has acknowledged the importance of their years in architecture school. He recalled that an instructor ultimately encouraged him to bring his guitar into the classroom: “If I wanted to sit in the corner and play guitar during periods that were set aside for design work and architecture, he thought that was perfectly alright.”(2)

So, whether architecture directly shaped their music is difficult to say. But listening to Pink Floyd, I often hear patterns that remind me of the discipline: attention to sequence, proportion, repetition, contrast, and the gradual development of an experience.

That quality was particularly apparent in the TAPFS performance. The heavy bass and percussion in One of These Days and Sheep established a strong rhythmic foundation. In The Great Gig in the Sky, the vocals seemed to expand into the volume of Silva Concert Hall. Run Like Hell moved with a chase-like energy. And The Wall turns construction into its central metaphor, using one brick after another to represent the psychological barriers its protagonist builds between himself and the world.

TAPFS faces the difficult task of reproducing music that many listeners know intimately, down to its textures, transitions, lighting, and timing. Their achievement is not simply that they perform the songs accurately; they also recreate an experience that Pink Floyd constructed so carefully decades ago. For a couple of hours in the Hult Center, the familiar music took on a physical presence: sound filling the room, light shaping the space, and thousands of people listening together.

That may be one reason the music has lasted. Great works do not require their creators to remain present. They can be revisited, interpreted, and experienced by people who were not there when they were first made. I didn’t see Pink Floyd live, but thanks to TAPFS, I could see how the distance between an original experience and its echo can sometimes be surprisingly small. 

(1)    Syd Barrett, another founding member of Pink Floyd, studied art at the Cambridgeshire College of Arts and Technology. David Gilmour, who had attended high school with Barrett and Roger Waters, joined Pink Floyd in 1967. He initially played alongside Barrett before eventually replacing him. 

(2)    Roger Waters, “Building the Internal Wall,” Musician, May 1992, p. 51.

The Butsudan

A butsudan; not ours, but similar (photo credit: CC BY 2.1 jp, https://commons.wikimedia.org/w/index.php?curid=1801262)

The house I grew up in included a piece of furniture found in many Japanese homes. It was a butsudan—a household Buddhist altar—comprised of a dark-lacquered wooden cabinet with doors and shiny brass fittings that served as a personal shrine for memorializing ancestors and honoring the Buddha. Ours stood about four-and-a-half feet tall by two-and-a-half feet wide and occupied a corner of our formal dining room. The pair of outer doors opened to reveal fabric screens behind them. These folded out of the way, in turn revealing several ornately decorated tiered platforms for offerings and incense burners. I’ve come to think of our butsudan not only as a devotional object but as an architecture of remembrance scaled to domestic life.
 
Butsudans trace back to an edict issued by Emperor Tenmu in 685, encouraging every family to keep a Buddha image and sutras in the home. The traditional lacquered cabinet form we recognize today developed gradually and eventually became a standard across ordinary households during the Tokugawa period (roughly the seventeenth through nineteenth centuries). By then, the butsudan had settled into a recognizable architectural typology: a cabinet with doors, thresholds, and an internal hierarchy of spaces. A butsudan commonly holds a Buddha image appropriate to the family's sect alongside ihai (memorial tablets for the dead), serving two purposes at once: as a site for daily devotion, and as a fixed place where a family's dead remain, in a sense, present in the house rather than confined to a cemetery or a temple's care. Its form is not incidental; it is a domestic micro‑architecture built to house devotion and memory.
 
That underlying impulse, as a fixed place in the home where the dead remain present through offering and ritual, isn't uniquely Japanese; households across China, Korea, and Vietnam keep their own versions of the same idea, each shaped by its own blend of Buddhist practice and ancestor veneration. The object itself is another matter. The cabinet form (the doors, screens, and the internal hierarchy of platforms) is a distinctly Japanese elaboration. Even the relationship to memory differs: in Korea and China, a memorial tablet is often treated as temporary, ceremonially retired after a few years as a specific person is folded into a more general ancestral memory, while the Japanese practice tends to keep the ihai in place indefinitely. These differences matter because they show how Japan gave architectural permanence to a practice that elsewhere has been more fluid: the butsudan fixes remembrance in a built form.
 
Speaking architecturally, a butsudan is in many ways a miniature building. The ancient Romans constructed analogous structures: the aediculae, literally Latin for “small house” or “small temples.” These were classically a niche flanked by columns or pilasters and capped with a pediment or entablature, built to house and honor a sacred image or statue. And Charles Moore often used the “geode” as a conceptual metaphor for design that parallels the butsudan morphology: a building that appears plain on the outside like a rough rock, but opens up to a vibrant, colorful, and richly textured inner universe of crystals. He built the idea into his own work more than once. Our butsudan was a geode in the truest sense: a dark, silent shell that yielded upon opening to a radiant, sacred interior of gleaming brass and gold leaf.
 
Whoever crafted our butsudan understood, as any architect should, that a small object can organize the space around it if it's given enough formal authority. Ours was, without question, a focal point of our dining room.
 
My grandmother tended it daily. I don't know the full content of her practice; I was familiar with its rhythm: she placed offerings (usually fresh water, rice, seasonal fruit), lit candles and incense, and followed with solemn chanting and prayer. My father took up tending to the butsudan after, though only on special occasions, New Year's chief among them. His custodianship was lighter than my grandmother’s had been. Even as the intensity of practice shifted, the butsudan’s authority in the room never did.
 
I don't know the butsudan’s provenance. I suspect my grandmother’s parents brought it with them when they immigrated to Canada. It certainly predated anything else our family owned. It was older than the house it sat in, even older than the country my great-grandparents chose as their new home.
 
One of my cousins is now the custodian of our butsudan. I don't know if it occupies a corner as commanding as the one it held in ours. I also don’t know if she tends it the way my grandmother once did. But a butsudan doesn’t just stop being what it is. The doors still open the same way, the platforms still hold whatever is placed on them, and the hierarchy inside remains legible. Well-designed buildings outlast the intentions that first organized them too, and we don't think changes of use necessarily diminish them. Above all, a butsudan embodies a domestic architecture of remembrance by virtue of its form. Its architecture is one that quietly persists, even if the rituals that once animated it have thinned.

Stuff I Stumbled Upon

I sometimes find it tough to decide what to write about for my next blog post. This week was one of those times — that is, until I found inspiration reading a recent piece by my friend and fellow blogger, Mrs. Random. Her blog is a loose, good-natured chronicle of her daily life, on occasion focused on small discoveries she’s made. That recent entry was a simple and fittingly “random” collection of web links she thought her readers might find interesting.  

  
My interests have always been catholic, and I tend to be ADD to boot. This explains the wide-ranging links below; on any given day, I will flit between seemingly random subjects. All that connects these is my wandering curiosity. I’ve hyperlinked the headings, which will open the corresponding website in a separate tab:     
 

AI-designed house, from the Design Intent YouTube channel.

AI Designed This House . . . And It's Weird
If you’ve been a reader of my blog, you probably know I’m fascinated by the implications of artificial intelligence for the architectural profession. I came across this video on the Design Intent YouTube channel, produced by Ryan, an architect who works primarily in the commercial project sector. Like me, he’s inquisitive about AI. Among other things, his channel documents his creative experimentation with 3D modeling and visualizations; in this instance, he lets an AI LLM (Google Gemini) take control over the design of his next house. What he got wasn’t anything he expected.  

 

Anthropeum
I must also give credit to Mrs. Random for turning me on to Anthropeum, an online daily geography‑and‑chronology guessing game built around artifacts from The Metropolitan Museum of Art’s open‑access collection. The way Anthropeum works is that it shows you several pieces of art from the Met, and you must guess approximately where in the world and when it was created. It’s addicting, and my wife and I are now hooked. That doesn’t mean we’re good at it; it’s humbling to encounter the limits of our knowledge every day. Give it a try yourself. 

The New Cholesterol Guideline: What to Know
I’m trying to focus more on my health to help forestall age-related ailments. Unfortunately, my latest lipid panel blood tests show my cholesterol and triglyceride numbers are heading in the wrong direction. Consequently, I’ve become more attentive than ever to the latest developments associated with screening and risk assessment for cardiovascular disease. The web page linked in the header above reports on the latest update to the cholesterol‑management guidelines from the American College of Cardiology and the American Heart Association. The updates emphasize earlier screening and more personalized risk assessment for cardiovascular disease (using the PREVENT risk calculator for 10‑ and 30‑year outcomes). They also recommend childhood screening for familial hypercholesterolemia and one‑time Lp(a) testing. The updates outline new LDL‑C targets and treatment options, including statins and newer lipid‑lowering therapies.
 

Henry George (photo by Isaiah West Taber, Public domain, via Wikimedia Commons)

Georgism 101
I have a limited understanding of Georgism, the economic ideology formed by 19^th-century economist Henry George. For those, like me, who are not wholly familiar with its principles, the YouTube video linked in the header provides a six-minute-long primer. I wanted to learn more about Georgism because some suggest that it can help address housing affordability, primarily through land value taxes. Apparently, such a tax reduces the incentive to sit on unused parcels, makes speculation less profitable, and supports denser, more walkable urban forms. Georgism doesn’t solve zoning, permitting delays, construction costs, or NIMBY politics, but it does attack the speculative layer that inflates land prices. Here in Eugene, a land value tax would likely push more land into productive use and reduce the “empty lot premium” that has driven prices upward. Many people mislabel Georgism as a form of socialism, but it is fundamentally market-oriented and compatible with capitalism. The accusation persists because of sloppy political rhetoric, not because the theory resembles socialism in any meaningful way.
 

*    *    *    *    *    *

So, there you go: four eclectic websites for you to peruse if you’re so inclined. Maybe one or two will catch your interest the way they did mine.

The Arithmetic of Downtown Housing

1055 Willamette (Rowell Brokaw Architects)

After years of vacancy, developers deChase Miksis and Edlen & Co. are set to start construction this fall on a six-story building on the former Lane Community College Downtown Center site at 1055 Willamette Street, across from Eugene Station. The design by Rowell Brokaw Architects will bring 133 mixed-income apartments and ground-floor shops downtown. With help from the City of Eugene, the project promises to transform a long moribund site into active, useful housing. This is good news. That said, its lengthy gestation highlights the challenging economics of building housing in our downtown core.

When the City and its partners outlined the project in 2021, they estimated a total cost of about $30 million. The expectation then was that the city's contribution (primarily urban renewal funding) would total about $1.1 million, roughly four percent of the cost.

Fast forward to this year: the budgeted project cost is now $38.7 million, and the required public contribution increased to $10.5 million, more than 27 percent of the total. The design's scope barely changed; what changed was the math. Construction cost inflation, higher interest rates, financing risk, and prevailing wage requirements all contributed to the shift. None of these factors is unique to Eugene. What is distinctive is the local market in which they operate. New housing can command only the rents and sale prices local households can afford. When the costs of development rise faster than the value the completed project can generate, the gap between investment and return steadily widens.

Public debate has focused largely on the City's Multi-Unit Property Tax Exemption (MUPTE). It is important to understand what the program does. MUPTE does not eliminate property taxes; instead, it exempts for up to ten years only the taxes on new residential construction, while the underlying land remains taxable. Rather than surrendering existing tax revenue, the program temporarily exempts value that would not exist unless the building were constructed. Nor is the exemption automatic. Projects must satisfy the city's Public Benefit Criteria, which include above-code energy performance, moderate-income housing contributions, compatible urban design, and a local economic impact plan. City staff reviews every application, as does an independent panel with neighborhood representatives, developers, and design professionals. The program exchanges a temporary tax benefit for measurable public benefits.

Even with MUPTE, the 1055 Willamette project still needed a one-dollar land sale, millions in urban renewal funding, multiple rounds of financial restructuring, a City Council extension of deadlines while the developers assembled additional financing, and, ultimately, a return trip for further assistance before the remaining gap could be closed—a sequence that, on its own, might read as a story about one stubborn incentive program rather than about the market underneath it. The Lookout Eugene-Springfield editorial board recently asked a more pointed question: if one 133-unit building required nearly $9 million more public assistance than anticipated, what does that imply for the rest of the downtown housing pipeline? The Downtown Riverfront affordable housing project, a planned 75-unit community by Atkins Dame and Homes for Good, ran into the same wall earlier this year, requiring additional urban renewal funding after rising costs reopened its financing gap. Projects that once appeared feasible are no longer penciling out without additional assistance.

The Station House, the Obie Companies' proposed 124-unit development at Fifth Avenue and Oak Street, received a ten-year MUPTE exemption and substantial fee waivers. It cleared the city's entitlement process and later amendments. Yet construction has not begun, and the developer's website still describes the project as "Coming Soon." I don't know why, and perhaps no one outside the development team does. Public incentives are often necessary, but they're not always sufficient. A project can receive every approval and incentive the city can grant and still fail to move forward because the underlying economics aren't working.

Rendering of The Station House (Obie Companies)

Today's discussions differ from those contested over Capstone Communities, the out-of-state developer that proposed 1,234 student beds downtown in 2012. That dispute was mostly about scale rather than subsidy, and about whether one project should reshape so much of downtown at once, not to mention unease that most of the profit would flow to a Birmingham, Alabama, company. Some version of that unease persists. It's easy to read the widening subsidy figures for 1055 Willamette the same way, as evidence that developers are extracting value from a weak market.

I don't think the numbers support that reading. A developer angling for a subsidy does not spend years assembling financing, absorb round after round of cost escalation, and return twice for more assistance before breaking ground. Nor does one sit on a fully entitled, fully incentivized project for the better part of a year, as appears to be happening at The Station House, if incentives alone were the point. MUPTE's public benefit requirements cut against the extraction story too. A developer either meets them or gets nothing. Whatever any developer's motives, the risk runs in both directions, and lately the private side hasn't been walking away with an easy win.

The pressing question is whether existing incentive programs can bridge a financing gap now substantially larger than they were designed to address. My impression is that the City instituted MUPTE to close modest gaps between development costs and market feasibility, like the four percent delta 1055 Willamette originally faced. It wasn't intended to compensate for a market in which production costs have pulled far ahead of the value finished housing can support. As that disparity grows, incentives become less capable of closing the gap. As a result, projects are requiring direct public investment just to reach the starting line.

Abandoning incentives is not the answer. There's no evidence suggesting downtown housing will appear on its own once assistance disappears. The more likely outcome is that vacant buildings remain vacant while everyone waits for conditions to improve. And I don't think MUPTE is the central issue. The program has become the focus largely because "tax exemption" sounds like a giveaway. The structural mismatch behind it is less visible, but far more consequential. If development costs continue to rise faster than Eugene's market can support, every downtown housing project will face essentially the same problem, and most won't clear it without help. No incentive program, by itself, can erase that reality.

None of this settles what, if anything, the city can do about the underlying arithmetic itself—whether through system development charges, permitting timelines, zoning capacity, or something else entirely. That's a harder question than whether any single incentive is fair, and it deserves its own accounting.

For now, I'm happy to hear that 1055 Willamette is moving forward. After standing empty for more than a decade, the old LCC Downtown Center is finally about to become something else. I hope the projects that follow will do the same. Whether they can will depend less on any single incentive than on whether that gap begins to narrow.