Sunday, February 3, 2008

rolling on the river

When we think of the hike and bike trail and what it could mean, it seems thoughts go directly to a major development with restuarants, apartments, casinos, and many other things.
Then people say that wont work and the idea dies.
That is how things go in Arkansas City at times.
That is something I want to change.

if we get 20 ideas talked about, 3 developed, and one actually works, that is success in my estimation.
The trail is the first step. Next step is to get a few business, which might take a year or two.

Here is my story...

We need to try things.
You know we put on a nice outdoor music festival last fall by the old meat packing plant down by the levee. That is a huge field that is not being used for anything.
Now ill be the first to admit that i didnt know what i was doing, but somehow it managed to come off rather well.
( I had lots of friends come through and some divine intervention )

(This too is part of developing the rivers)

There were several reasons that it wouldnt work.
1. No one had done that before.
2. The weather is unpredictable in late October, could be bad weather.
3. There are sinkholes all over the place and new ones show up all the time.
4. There is no electricity. (a big problem)
5. The entrance is awkward and hard to see.
6. There are lots of stickers all over the ground.
7. I (we) didnt have any money.
8, It was a school night.
9. Right before Arkalalah, people are not into a concert out in the cold at night. Especially not a Christian music festival.
10. Most people were not even aware that the field existed.

Any one of those reasons would have been a legitimate excuse to not attempt such a thing. Most of those reasons were also relatively good reasons that it might not work.

I wasnt even dreaming big enough. I was thinking maybe 200-300 people might show up. We had way over 500.

Im really glad we did it and we are going to do it again.

But one thing I want to point out is, that I was willing for it to be a total disaster. That was the risk, but one worth taking.
I remember thinking a few days before the show, what if no one comes to hear this $2,000 band we have coming, and the other bands. I thought, i guess ill have a front row seat for sure then.

There's always reasons that things wont work.
Wasnt it Kennedy that said some people see things they way they are and ask why, while others see things that are not and ask why not?

So lets quit moaning about why things wont work and get to work building Ark City.

Weirder stuff has happened.
THe Giants just won the Super Bowl.

27 comments:

Anonymous said...

A $700,000.00 expenditure is not a $2000.00 concert. Considering the results of the economic study and the trends in Ark City, it would be irresponsible for the Commission to not review the decision to see if the money could better help improve the economy.

Anonymous said...

What some people see as a waste of money, others see as a different window of opportunity to look through.

Anonymous said...

It is certainly not a waste of money to buy a hike bike trail on top of the levee. It is a good use. It should be evaluated to see if it is the best use.

Traveler Editor said...

it would be irresponsible for the Commission to not review the decision to see if the money could better help improve the economy.
>>>

I agree it is responsible to be sure money is well spent.
But, They need to realize that if they dont do it, the money goes away.

Hmmm lets see.... I am getting $700,00 that I applied for to build this thing, but i wont do it cause the money might be better spent elsewhere. Ill just tell the state to keep their money.
How smart is that ?

The Creekstone money also has limitations.

It is not a question of better use.
If we dont use it for what it was designed for, we don't get to keep it.

It is not $1.2 million with no strings attached.

Just for the record, It was not a $2,000 concert, That was just what we paid one of the bands.
It was closer to an $8,000 concert.
And would have been closer to $10,000 had the city not helped us out with letting us use equipment and the land.
(All things available to any resident who goes through channels.)

If you hit naysayers over the head with truth long enough, do you think they will finally get it?

Anonymous said...

"If you hit naysayers over the head with truth long enough, do you think they will finally get it?"

ha. well spoken, James. Just keep putting the truth out there, people will hear it.

Also, for the record, I think lots of us read the blogs. Just not that many of us write on them.

Sometimes people are negative when it would be easier and less painful to be positive. It's just in them to be that way. Doesn't mean they're bad people, just need a little help from outside themselves to see the truth.

The answer:The truth

Keep speaking the truth.

Anonymous said...

"Doesn't mean they're bad people, just need a little help from outside themselves to see the truth."

Wow. What a load of judgmental &&&p.

How can my opinion that the Commission be responsible and make the best monetary decision for the growth of Ark City be negative or untrue? How is it that I'm a bad person and need to be helped.

People need to be more conscious that their opinions, whether one way or another are not absolute truths, that people that have different opinions are not "bad people" in need of being "helped".

There are facts and misrepresentations and I'm certain in this discussion that I have been firmly on the side supporting the facts.

One opinion or another is not "truth". In fact, my opinion is not any stronger or weaker than the guy who just wants the boat dock or the person who thinks that no matter what it is for or how much money it costs, if you have a state grant you must use it. It is just an opinion, not some self-righteous "truth". Just like your opinion.

Anonymous said...

By the way. Let's be clear. The $700,000.00 that it would cost Ark City doesn't go away if it is used for another purpose. It is Ark City's money, with certain guidelines imposed by the Creekstone deal.

Anonymous said...

"Just for the record, It was not a $2,000 concert,"

I knew that. Just event insurance is $3000.00, and the insurers require security personnel, etc, etc,...

Beyond the call of duty. Most people in Ark City won't risk the money. Glad it worked out.

Anonymous said...

If you have a different idea on how to spend the money... then please share it.

I am open to hearing other ideas and certainly the commission should apply due diligence to the matter.

What leads you to believe that they haven't evaluated it to make sure it use the best use of money?

My understanding is that this didn't just sprout up over night that it has been in the planning stages for a long time.

Anonymous said...

"I am open to hearing other ideas and certainly the commission should apply due diligence to the matter."

It's my understanding that 2 Commissioners have indicated they had other options, and if these make more sense than the hike bike plan, they should be explored. It may be that the hike - bike is the best option, but it should be looked at closely before finalizing.

Anonymous said...

According, to the info James put on the blog one of those other ideas was a Softball field.... not sure that is a better choice.

Would be interested to hear what the other commissioner's idea.

Isn't the Creekstone money earmarked for parks and recreation or can that be changed?

It seems sort of a moot point if they have to use the money for parks and recreation. If that is the case, then it would make sense to get the matching grant money and get more bang for your buck.

Anonymous said...

If foundations are dug into either face of the levee trapezoid, it could undermine the levee and weaken the retaining surface wall, possibly causing a levee failure.
Check with a registered professional engineer before building any large structures on either of the 2 levee faces.

Anonymous said...

Just a speculative guess on my part, but I am sure the city would know what can and cannot be done with a levee.[or the areas closest to it]

Anonymous said...

Good point.
In Patrick's proposal to give away land for commercial development are there building restrictions? How close to the levee crest (or slope) can they build? What depth can they dig, etc.? Has anyone checked? Easy to do. City Engineer will know. There will probably be a setback from the levee berm to avoid structural problems.

I can't imagine any civil engineer permitting a backhoe anywhere close to the levee. Check it out.

Anonymous said...

Army Corps of Engineers tightly restricts construction on their levees in the "critical area", defined as 300 feet riverward and 500 feet landward from the centerline of the flood control levee.

http://www.nwk.usace.army.mil
/local_protection/guidance.html

This is referenced by the levee folks in Kansas City as the standard. I would imagine the rules in Ark City would also be similar.

Anonymous said...

"What leads you to believe that they haven't evaluated it to make sure it use the best use of money?"

Please show me where and when an evaluation took place to prove out what is the best use of these funds. There would be minutes that document that kind of discussion. Or, could it be that with this new commission, this is the first time anything along those lines has been considered? One lingering question that must be answered is whether or not those dollars are earmarked for recreation and can be used for NO other purpose. Although that may be the intent for the use of the funds, that does not automatically mean there is an absolute restriction.

This should come down to an issue of highest and best use for those dollars for the good of all citizens of Arkansas City. And, you should not stick the commissioners with making that determination. It would be good to have James have a series of roundtable events to orchestrate the dialog that needs to take place. Community representatives on both (or all) sides of the issue should have an opportunity to weigh in under a set of fair and realistic guidelines.

"My understanding is that this didn't just sprout up over night that it has been in the planning stages for a long time." While that is true, it was all focused on one particular outcome and I think it would be fair to say that those involved in coming up with the levee walkway have done an outstanding job with formulating what they have proposed and then seen realized. But, we are dealing with a different issue at this time. Is that still the best use of funds given the circumstances at this time in the history-future of this town.

Anonymous said...

A wise person once wrote, "Opinions are like rear ends, everyone has one. Sometimes they are connected.

Anonymous said...

even yours

Anonymous said...

Technical issues to overcome

#1 there is No city Engineer

#2 The army corps of engineers will not approve a bike path or any structure on a levee that will accomadate Human traffic.

#3 The Arkansas River is a federal river, the banks of said river from the high water mark out 30 feet are public, meaning that no individual or city can limit tresspass, these banks change with flooding and the 30 feet public area changes with them.

#4 The city would be foolish to invest capital without ownership.

#5 Why would your city invest in walking trails when they will not procure sidewalks for foot traffic on North summit ( from Kansas Ave to Skyline)

What i see as an outsider is that from Chestnut street North on summit street is tottaly littered with Electric poles, and i mean third world trashy looking..

Neighboring Citys do not have this, and i think your city codes even address this, I think the removal of these poles and underground electric would bring your city a new and exciteing look,,I love Ark city it is a wonderful place, good luck in your ventures

Anonymous said...

"#2 The army corps of engineers will not approve a bike path or any structure on a levee that will accommodate human traffic."

Actually they will. If you read the guidelines that were posted, something like a walking path, picnic area, that sort of thing is not a problem. Problem comes in where pipes, underground utilities, light poles, foundations, pilings, etc. come into play. Even some of those are permitted, if you jump through the proper hoops (which are substantial).

I don't think large permanent structures will be permitted to be built on the top or side of the levee.

Anonymous said...

yes you are correct they will if.
and there are alot of them.

you will need my help with this

Anonymous said...

Or, could it be that with this new commission, this is the first time anything along those lines has been considered?

>>>>>>>>>>>>>

You seem to think that this is something that was just thought up last week while people were stuck inside during the snow.

This has been in the works for many years.
The grant is specifically for this purpose.

You need to look back at the minutes. Its been discussed publicly for about 5 years.

Would be enlightening :)

Anonymous said...

Could the commission start looking at land use along the dry side of the levee now? That land could be used for a number of things from recreation to retail, from small food vendors to tube rentals. Maybe even just an observation area. There is no point in waiting. If there is going to be a hike/bike trail then we should start now trying to take advantage of it.

Anonymous said...

has anyone thought of having airboat tours along the rivers? Or a canoe tour, paddle down and driven back? Just another possible idea that could come from a river development.

Traveler Editor said...

has anyone thought of having airboat tours along the rivers? Or a canoe tour, paddle down and driven back? Just another possible idea that could come from a river development.
>>>

yes that sounds great.
This could happen.
"someone at the city" told me that the Walnut Park doesn't need much of anything for this to happen.
And I understand the Walnut is a better river for tours anyway.

This is an opportunity that is waiting to happen.

Basically all that is needed is for someone to show up with a boat :)

j

Anonymous said...

We are at the fork of 2 rivers. It doesn't matter where it starts from, there is a lot of territory to show off. The more the better. Let's get some tours going. Anyone have a boat?

Anonymous said...

I finally have some information about development along the levee. It is true that there are very specific limits as to what goes on the levee, there are very few limits on what can go alongside the levee. On the river side any development must be prepared for flood. This generally leaves docks, concrete picnic tables, etc. On the dry side, there are very few limitations.

The link below takes you to the Levee Owners Manual. Starting on page 7 of the manual it talks about encroachments. They do not list any footage requirements that I saw. However, they talk about the Project Area Easement (this distance will likely depend upon the construction/size of the levee, etc.) and that construction is usually (not always) denied. It also shows some pictures describing what is and is not okay.

The city owns most of the porperty, so the Project Area Easement issue is not really relavent and individual property owners can build on their property without worrying about encroaching. We would send anything in our property area through the Corp review.

http://www.usace.army.mil/cw/cecwhs/em/fcw/lom/lom.html

I hope this answers the question.

Patrick