River's Edge Development (Playland Park)

FamilyMan · Post by **FamilyMan** » Thu Mar 03, 2011 11:27 am

icejammer wrote:
FamilyMan wrote:Which leads me to this question..Does the city not have any obligation to adhere to the master plan ?
The short answer is "no." It depends on what they got back on RFPs, which are not required to adhere to the master plan; if the City receives proposals from various developers that don't adhere to the RFP, the City (usually) has the option to either reject or accept - just depends on how much the City is willing to let the process drag on and on and on....

The whole process seems shady to me and in essence eliminates the ability of the neighborhood homeowners to even have the opportunity to form and voice any concerns, opinions or suggestions. Not once have I seen an announcement for a public meeting concerning this development. I'm really curious as to the amount of dollars spent to hire the firms to create this plan it isn't worth the paper it's printed on. Have they chosen a developer for the dry side yet ? the RFQ's went out years ago. Not even a short list ?

FamilyMan · Post by **FamilyMan** » Thu Mar 03, 2011 11:37 am

Jwunderlich wrote:
My family and I live on 39th St. and for 5 years have been trying to obtain info from various city reps on what to expect down here. Our efforts intensified when the city purchased and demolished all the houses on the east side of 40th St.(essentially our backyard). Don Gross offered no explanation for the city spending what must be over a million dollars to buy and then demolish those properties, telling me that " they ",(whoever that is ?), are in the process of preparing amendments to the master plan to do something with that space..although he didn't know what. Seems to me that the plan should come before the demolition ? Truly frustrating since we have our home listed for sale but have had no offers due in part to the uncertainty about what they bought it for. Who would buy a house next to a 200 space parking lot ? Nobody, that's who.

Agreed I live north of 41 and B and we have the same concerns and it hard to find information about what is actually going to happen as far as I have been able to find out i would think that area is going to be new interstate on ramps and such.

All i can find online.

Don Gross, Rose Brown, Gayle Malmquist, IDOT, realtors...nobody knows anything..The IDOT aesthetic plan shows some sort of drainage ditch running through our backyard. Also wondering why IDOT bought the property on the southwest corner of 40th st.

icejammer · Post by **icejammer** » Fri Mar 04, 2011 8:18 am

FamilyMan wrote:[The whole process seems shady to me and in essence eliminates the ability of the neighborhood homeowners to even have the opportunity to form and voice any concerns, opinions or suggestions. Not once have I seen an announcement for a public meeting concerning this development.

Check out the first page of this thread, the first public involvement meetings on this were announced over four years ago.

Jwunderlich · Post by **Jwunderlich** » Fri Mar 04, 2011 3:29 pm

Found this interesting to read just passing it on.

http://communitydev.councilbluffs-ia.go ... gust-9.pdf

FamilyMan · Post by **FamilyMan** » Mon Mar 07, 2011 9:51 am

icejammer wrote:
FamilyMan wrote:[The whole process seems shady to me and in essence eliminates the ability of the neighborhood homeowners to even have the opportunity to form and voice any concerns, opinions or suggestions. Not once have I seen an announcement for a public meeting concerning this development.
Check out the first page of this thread, the first public involvement meetings on this were announced over four years ago.

You're correct, all meetings are announced in tiny print in a newspaper(which I read virtually every day) that will print what the powers to be want them to print. Do you read the Nonpareil ? Hy- Vee can run full page ads..well I'd like to see the full page article that explains to my kids why our neighbors houses are gone. We've been to the DOT's public meetings and If I told you about that experience you probably wouldn't believe me.

FamilyMan · Post by **FamilyMan** » Mon Mar 07, 2011 9:55 am

Jwunderlich wrote:Found this interesting to read just passing it on.

http://communitydev.councilbluffs-ia.go ... gust-9.pdf

Be more interesting if it wasn't 3+ yrs old. Wonder what that study cost and of what value it is considering current market conditions.

icejammer · Post by **icejammer** » Tue Mar 08, 2011 8:50 am

FamilyMan wrote:[You're correct, all meetings are announced in tiny print in a newspaper(which I read virtually every day) that will print what the powers to be want them to print. Do you read the Nonpareil ? Hy- Vee can run full page ads..well I'd like to see the full page article that explains to my kids why our neighbors houses are gone. We've been to the DOT's public meetings and If I told you about that experience you probably wouldn't believe me.

This meeting notice (4+ years ago) was on the front page of the Nonpaper, not in the tiny print section of notices and what-not. There were several front page articles pertaining to this proposed project over a couple years as well.

If you want to tell me the DOT people from central Iowa are clueless about Council Bluffs (and FHWA people are even worse), it wouldn't stretch my imagination any to believe that. I've been to most of those meetings regarding the interstate as well.

Jwunderlich · Post by **Jwunderlich** » Tue Mar 08, 2011 3:31 pm

Found this a while ago didnt know if anyone else had seen it.

http://www.sasaki.com/what/portfolio.cg ... n=2&page=2

Jwunderlich · Post by **Jwunderlich** » Tue Mar 08, 2011 3:51 pm

Icejammer if you hear of any new meeting please pass it on me i would be very interested in attending.

icejammer · Post by **icejammer** » Wed Mar 09, 2011 8:25 am

Jwunderlich wrote:Icejammer if you hear of any new meeting please pass it on me i would be very interested in attending.

If I do, I will post to this thread.

Ben · Post by **Ben** » Fri Mar 11, 2011 1:27 pm

They've finally gotten started in earnest on the park on the wet side of the levee. There's about half dozen pieces of heavy earth moving equipment, and a bunch of drainage pipes going in...

StreetsOfOmaha · Post by **StreetsOfOmaha** » Fri Mar 11, 2011 6:17 pm

Awesome! It will be really cool to see this going in.

FamilyMan · Post by **FamilyMan** » Sat Mar 12, 2011 1:03 am

FamilyMan wrote:
icejammer wrote:
FamilyMan wrote:Which leads me to this question..Does the city not have any obligation to adhere to the master plan ?
The short answer is "no." It depends on what they got back on RFPs, which are not required to adhere to the master plan; if the City receives proposals from various developers that don't adhere to the RFP, the City (usually) has the option to either reject or accept - just depends on how much the City is willing to let the process drag on and on and on....
The whole process seems shady to me and in essence eliminates the ability of the neighborhood homeowners to even have the opportunity to form and voice any concerns, opinions or suggestions. Not once have I seen an announcement for a public meeting concerning this development. I'm really curious as to the amount of dollars spent to hire the firms to create this plan it isn't worth the paper it's printed on. Have they chosen a developer for the dry side yet ? the RFQ's went out years ago. Not even a short list ?

Why would developers submit proposals that dont adhere to the rfp ?

FamilyMan · Post by **FamilyMan** » Sat Mar 12, 2011 1:12 am

The original master plan was amended to exclude everything east of 40th st.....then they bought and demolished the houses that were excluded. Don Gross is yet to offer any explanation as to why...go ahead and tell me they don't know why they want that land. Anyone ?

thenewguy · Post by **thenewguy** » Sat Mar 12, 2011 3:43 pm

FamilyMan wrote:The original master plan was amended to exclude everything east of 40th st.....then they bought and demolished the houses that were excluded. Don Gross is yet to offer any explanation as to why...go ahead and tell me they don't know why they want that land. Anyone ?

I'd have to look at the plans again, but in the meantime, many of the houses that were removed were less than becoming of an area that has so much invested in it. It is a good thing, as far as the overall plan is concerned.

FamilyMan · Post by **FamilyMan** » Sun Mar 13, 2011 3:31 pm

thenewguy wrote:
FamilyMan wrote:The original master plan was amended to exclude everything east of 40th st.....then they bought and demolished the houses that were excluded. Don Gross is yet to offer any explanation as to why...go ahead and tell me they don't know why they want that land. Anyone ?
I'd have to look at the plans again, but in the meantime, many of the houses that were removed were less than becoming of an area that has so much invested in it. It is a good thing, as far as the overall plan is concerned.

Not if they make it a parking lot, or a two story structure that blocks the skyline view from our deck. Good for developers I suppose. Unfortunately, I'm not a developer.

icejammer · Post by **icejammer** » Mon Mar 14, 2011 12:07 pm

FamilyMan wrote:Why would developers submit proposals that dont adhere to the rfp ?

Probably because they're the ones that have to make the bottom line work out in their favor, and if they can improve bottom line by coming in with something that at least adheres to the RFP in spirit, they'll get a look. Just my two cents.

icejammer · Post by **icejammer** » Fri Mar 18, 2011 12:14 pm

Work starts on River’s Edge Park

Work has begun to transform a portion of the Council Bluffs Missouri River riverfront from vacant ground to a world-class, signature park. . .

“We’ve been driving sheet pile along the water to prevent erosion,” added Travis Lienemann, project manager for Council Bluffs-based MFT Construction, Inc.

The park will eventually stretch from well north of the Council Bluffs landing of the Bob Kerrey Pedestrian Bridge to Harrah’s Casino & Hotel on the south and will feature a two-lane park road meandering for a mile throughout, along with paved walk/bike trails with connections to the pedestrian bridge and existing city trails.

The showcase will be a six-acre “Great Lawn” right in the middle of the park where people can relax, walk their pet, play Frisbee or enjoy an evening movie or concert with the Omaha skyline as a backdrop. A sand area, complete with funbrellas, for relaxing and to watch the river flow by will be located directly west of the Great Lawn. There will also be an outdoor amphitheater to the north. . . .

Over the next two weeks, workers will be widening the top portion of the levee, now used as a walk/bike trail, westward toward the river where the amphitheater will be located, Lienemann said. . . .

All this work is just for the first phase of a new park. One, possibly two, more phases are planned as funds become available, he said. A large fountain is planned for a later phase that could be used for ice skaters during winter, Foster said.

Completion of this current work is set for December 2012. . . .

iamjacobm · Post by **iamjacobm** » Fri Mar 18, 2011 12:19 pm

A large fountain is planned for a later phase that could be used for ice skaters during winter, Foster said.

YES!! Not enough fountains in the metro!

Jwunderlich · Post by **Jwunderlich** » Tue Mar 22, 2011 10:13 am

So i thought they couldn't bring in any dirt to the wet side of the project that the Army COR. wouldn't let them change any of the elevation of the area but clearly they are bringing in lots of dirt and adding to the west side of the dik. Clarification please..

Ben · Post by **Ben** » Tue Mar 22, 2011 10:23 am

Jwunderlich wrote:So i thought they couldn't bring in any dirt to the wet side of the project that the Army COR. wouldn't let them change any of the elevation of the area but clearly they are bringing in lots of dirt and adding to the west side of the dik. Clarification please..

Not to be mean, but I think you thought wrong....

The plan for this park has always been to add dirt, drainage, and make it less prone to flooding. Knowing that it is on the wet side of the levee though, they did have to plan the park for the occasional flood, and couldn't entirely remove it from the floodplain (ie no 5' high retaining wall). While they did remove many trees that would have prevented erosion, I believe part of their plan involves planing other wetlands type foliage around the main park grass to prevent errosion issues. I'm sure the Army Corps of Engineers had to signoff on the project plans, given where the park sits....

Jwunderlich · Post by **Jwunderlich** » Tue Mar 22, 2011 10:38 am

cejammer

City Council

Joined: 05 Oct 2004
Last Visit: 21 Mar 2011
Posts: 3364
Location: Council Bluffs
Posted: Tue Mar 23, 2010 8:33 am Post subject:

Jwunderlich wrote:
Not in the actual river on the the river side of the dike to build up that side for the green space and park.

Yes, I understood, but placing fill material on the riverside of the levee would violate floodplain/floodway regulations.

_________________
"Destiny is not a matter of chance, it is a matter of choice; it is not a thing to be waited for, it is a thing to be achieved."

--William Jennings Bryan

This is why I was asking I assumed from previous correspondence that it was still illegal to add fill material.
Jwunderlich

icejammer · Post by **icejammer** » Tue Mar 22, 2011 11:52 am

Jwunderlich wrote:
cejammer

City Council

Joined: 05 Oct 2004
Last Visit: 21 Mar 2011
Posts: 3364
Location: Council Bluffs
Posted: Tue Mar 23, 2010 8:33 am Post subject:

Jwunderlich wrote:
Not in the actual river on the the river side of the dike to build up that side for the green space and park.

Yes, I understood, but placing fill material on the riverside of the levee would violate floodplain/floodway regulations.

_________________
"Destiny is not a matter of chance, it is a matter of choice; it is not a thing to be waited for, it is a thing to be achieved."

--William Jennings Bryan

This is why I was asking I assumed from previous correspondence that it was still illegal to add fill material.
Jwunderlich

Illegal without the proper permits. I'm having a hard time believing that they could place substantial amounts of fill though, without running afoul of State of Iowa regulations concerning placement of fill in the floodway. Perhaps they're using the removal of all the trees as a means to mitigate for the addition of fill.

OmahaBen · Post by **OmahaBen** » Mon Apr 25, 2011 10:33 am

FamilyMan wrote:The original master plan was amended to exclude everything east of 40th st.....then they bought and demolished the houses that were excluded. Don Gross is yet to offer any explanation as to why...go ahead and tell me they don't know why they want that land. Anyone ?

East of 40th street - wouldn't that be related to the I-29 reconstruction and not the redevelopment of the park?

FamilyMan · Post by **FamilyMan** » Mon Apr 25, 2011 12:04 pm

If it was, the state of Iowa would've bought them..not the city.

Post by **Brad** » Mon May 30, 2011 9:58 am

The west side of the park on the wet side of the levee is completely under water.

Linkin5 · Post by **Linkin5** » Mon May 30, 2011 10:26 am

Brad wrote:The west side of the park on the wet side of the levee is completely under water.

I don't understand why retaining walls and such weren't built before grading was done and work started.

HuskerDave · Post by **HuskerDave** » Tue May 31, 2011 1:19 pm

Brad wrote:The west side of the park on the wet side of the levee is completely under water.

I suspect this parkland is part of the flood relief, intentionally on the 'wet side' as you said - so high water doesn't inundate commercial areas of CB and DTO.

Coyote · Post by **Coyote** » Sun Jun 05, 2011 5:17 pm

Work postponed on River’s Edge Park

TIM ROHWER, Staff Writer wrote:Work has been postponed for several months in the construction of the River’s Edge Park from the rising waters of the Missouri River, but there’s been no significant damage, Council Bluffs Parks Director Larry Foster. What’s more, the water is being held in a way that it won’t flow outward or erode the soil, Foster said. It was designed to hold water like a bathtub, he said. What’s more, 80 percent of the park is meant to remain in its natural wetlands environment so when flooding does occur, it will simply be allowed to drain away naturally, Foster said.

iamjacobm · Post by **iamjacobm** » Tue Nov 29, 2011 7:58 pm

Has there been any whisper of work on this recently?

almighty_tuna · Post by **almighty_tuna** » Tue Nov 29, 2011 8:29 pm

Not really since the flood. There was some machinery doing some earthwork on the channel that goes underneath the ped bridge on the CB side repairing flood sediment, but nothing else that I can see.

icejammer · Post by **icejammer** » Wed Nov 30, 2011 9:42 am

Work on the park is going to be scaled back, but how much hasn't been publicly revealed yet.

Post by **Brad** » Wed Nov 30, 2011 9:56 am

Bill Stazzoni from the Council Bluffs Chamber was on Grow Omaha last weekend. He made it sound like they may be going back to the drawing board after the floods.

iamjacobm · Post by **iamjacobm** » Wed Nov 30, 2011 9:58 am

Brad wrote:Bill Stazzoni from the Council Bluffs Chamber was on Grow Omaha last weekend. He made it sound like they may be going back to the drawing board after the floods.

Makes sense. I hope at least the proposed park happens. The housing was ambitious, but a nice park would be cool on the other side of the bridge.

StreetsOfOmaha · Post by **StreetsOfOmaha** » Wed Nov 30, 2011 10:04 am

Did the water ever rise over the levy during the flood? If not, I don't see how the flood should affect the established concept, which is designed to accommodate flooding on the "wet" side.

Post by **Brad** » Wed Nov 30, 2011 10:08 am

StreetsOfOmaha wrote:Did the water ever rise over the levy during the flood? If not, I don't see how the flood should affect the established concept, which is designed to accommodate flooding on the "wet" side.

It never went over the top of the levee, but it came up as ground water and flooded lots of homes around there.

almighty_tuna · Post by **almighty_tuna** » Wed Nov 30, 2011 10:10 am

Of course no water overtopped the levy, but there is massive damage on the wet side. All the grading done this year is wasted, the river left behind feet of sediment (enough that you can only see the top two of the three culvert sections stacked up). They're pretty much back to square one.

Stargazer · Post by **Stargazer** » Wed Nov 30, 2011 10:40 am

Would be interesting to see what the impact would have been on a One Renaissance Center marina had one been built.

icejammer · Post by **icejammer** » Wed Nov 30, 2011 11:26 am

StreetsOfOmaha wrote:Did the water ever rise over the levy during the flood? If not, I don't see how the flood should affect the established concept, which is designed to accommodate flooding on the "wet" side.

Problem is two-fold: 1) this year's flood showed potential for problems that the designers had not considered, and 2) the City spent a considerable sum of money on flood-fighting this year and is strapped, so costs need to be reduced.

S33 · Post by **S33** » Wed Nov 30, 2011 12:56 pm

Why not just something simple, like a basic park with trees, running/biking trails, and open areas to play flag football, soccer, or whatever? Add on all the extra stuff when the money is there. I don't know why everything in CB has to be so elaborate, a simple public park would get lots of use and require minimal upkeep.