My friend, Mayor Charlie Brooke, frequently says: People who are against a project are usually uninformed, and if they would learn the facts they would change their minds. Unfortunately for the citizens of Davenport, in this case it is the city council, city staff, and DavenportOne that do not have all the facts.
My firm has negotiated all the riverfront permits for the city since the St. Genevieve dredge was moored at LeClaire Park. My engineers have built projects everywhere on our river systems. I have offered to the council, to city staff, and to DavenportOne to sit down in any professional format and answer any questions pertinent to the permitting history of our riverfront, from the St. Genevieve through the President up to and including the current configuration of the guest-services barge, porte-cochère, and the Rhythm City Casino barge. SmartRiverfront.com and River Action have listened and studied these permit actions; the others must not want to know the facts. I agree with Mayor Brooke: If you know the facts then you will change your mind. Here are those facts.
During the first round of public input, Kreiger & Associates was asked if the Corps of Engineers had been contacted relative to the river environmental and floodplain-construction issues. The moderator misled the public when he said they had and that they had a letter stating there would not be a problem. You simply cannot believe the casino. No one has talked to the regulatory authorities pertinent to these issues, and the casino's engineer (Stanley Consultants) would never make such a statement. The fact is that even if the casino agreement is approved by the city council, the project as proposed will most likely die because of federal environmental law and FEMA regulations.
If the council moves the project forward, at some point, the city (which holds the permit) will have to modify its permit to moor the casino boat upstream and to build a structure in the floodplain. When the formal application is submitted to the Corps of Engineers, it will be reviewed by one of the best regulatory sections in the country. These regulators will issue a public notice requesting public input, and for a minimum of 30 days they will receive a mountain of comments.
Legitimate, honest objections will be raised by environmental organizations pertinent to walleye habitat, eagles, and flood profiles, which will prompt environmental-impact studies and hydraulic-engineering reviews. The hydraulic engineering will conclude the earthen berm has a significant effect on flood profiles above the 100-year flood, when the river overtops the seawall at Oneida Landing like it did in 1965 and 1993. The U.S. Fish & Wildlife Fisheries' biologist will not grant authority to excavate the precious walleye habitat that exists at the bottom of the original Rock Island Rapids. The environmental-impact law requires a thorough discussion of alternatives, and good alternatives are available. It is my professional opinion that the regulators will not cave from the political pressure, and the permit-modification request will be denied.
The permit history clearly shows that Connelly's request to moor the boat further upstream was denied, and U.S. Fish & Wildlife only allowed it upstream of the Main Street boat ramp because the law required it to cruise, and further downstream there was not adequate navigation depth. I would testify under oath, if required, that Connelly's and the City of Davenport's permit-negotiating team promised they would never request to move the boat further upstream if the permit would be issued to moor the vessel where it sits today. That promise resulted in the authority to initiate riverboat gaming on the Davenport riverfront. Responsible owners and government officials usually know the answers to environmental and flood-plain issues before the Corps of Engineers requests public comment. Davenport has the cart before the horse.
So what is Davenport's next move? The folks that are speaking the loudest simply want to save the riverfront and optimize its public use for future generations. DavenportOne wants the economic boost the project can create. I suggest it is time to stop and examine the alternatives and find an alternative that is a win for everyone - the riverfront improvement and the economic development, which is necessary to fund the recreation trails, improve our parks, and help our not-for-profits' essential work. SmartRiverfront.com and River Action have asked me: "Can you sketch an alternative?" One possible alternative follows; I am certain there are others to be carefully evaluated.
Immediately landward of the Crescent Bridge and downstream of the Marquette Street boat ramp, there originally was an island - City Island. It disappeared when the city dump filled the river channels between the island and the Iowa shore. If you walk landward from the Crescent Bridge abutment by the recreation trail, you will find two railroad bridges almost lost in the mountains of uncontrolled dump that filled the old river channel. On this island, the depth of the dump is minimal, and the cost of building hotel foundations would be acceptable. A 10-story hotel would have beautiful views in all four directions - you can see all the way downstream to Buffalo and upstream to East Moline. The skylines of Davenport and Rock Island would make the hotel exciting. From the top of the hotel you would be able to see river history, such as the location of Black Hawk's Saukenuk Village, Credit Island Park - the site of Major (President) Zachary Taylor's battle with the British and Indians - Arsenal Island, and the slow, beautiful curve of our mighty Mississippi. Go up to the IMAX floor at the Putnam and you can confirm these facts are true. But, better yet, this possible alternative locates the hotel above historic high water; flooding issues disappear and life-safety concerns are much easier to solve.
What about the casino boat? Connelly could not put the President at this location. The water depth is insufficient for navigation, and the original riverboat gambling law required the President to cruise. Today, Rhythm City does not have to cruise, and the law allows a boat-in-a-moat concept to be a riverboat. The law might even be more ridiculous as pure gambling interests have taken over the industry from the river pilots, but that is a different debate; the current law solves our immediate problem. The casino boat could be put in a hole just off the wall or better yet, it could be put into a basin inside the wall, where river fluctuations could be controlled, thus simplifying the architectural problems for the hotel-casino complex.
Those who do not want to listen to public input will now start to scream that any alternative needs to be connected to the Figge Art Museum or close to downtown, even though the facts prove these are also both falsehoods. But let us satisfy that concern by being creative. River Vision concluded that the Davenport and Rock Island riverfronts should be symbolically connected by building piers into the river and operating the Channel Cat between the cities. Think hard and you'll remember that Bernie Goldstein proposed an old locomotive train be operated by the Diamond Lady as a tourist attraction. Why not operate a trolley from the Isle of Capri in Bettendorf along the I.C.&E. Railroad right-of-way since there is space for another track? (There used to be two tracks.) The trolley could have stops at Leach Park, East Davenport, the Boat House and Oneida Landing, the future railroad "River Crossings" historic center, the Dillon Fountain and Figge Art Museum, the Union Station, John O'Donnell Stadium and Sports Center, and the new hotel-casino. In fact, if we funded a bridge tender for the swing span, the trolley could go across the historic 1894 Crescent Bridge and stop at the new condominiums being proposed downstream of Modern Woodman, stop at the Armory and the District, the Botanical Center, Sylvan Park, and the Mark of the Quad Cities. Actually, with some engineering and hard planning, it could connect Port Byron with LeClaire and Buffalo. It would be fun to ride, attract people to our area, and help showcase our Quad Cities community. It would also be responsive to the public's input.
Let us turn this debate into a win-win situation. Let us reclaim an abandoned dump and make it a beautiful section of riverfront. Alternatives that satisfy both sides and meet all federal environmental and flood-plain laws are available. The casino's engineer, Stanley Consultants, is well qualified to design the alternative. Mayor Brooke, I expect you to listen and learn the facts, and then be the "Moose" we elected and lead the way.
William D. Ashton is a professional engineer with Ashton Engineering, Inc.
My firm has negotiated all the riverfront permits for the city since the St. Genevieve dredge was moored at LeClaire Park. My engineers have built projects everywhere on our river systems. I have offered to the council, to city staff, and to DavenportOne to sit down in any professional format and answer any questions pertinent to the permitting history of our riverfront, from the St. Genevieve through the President up to and including the current configuration of the guest-services barge, porte-cochère, and the Rhythm City Casino barge. SmartRiverfront.com and River Action have listened and studied these permit actions; the others must not want to know the facts. I agree with Mayor Brooke: If you know the facts then you will change your mind. Here are those facts.
During the first round of public input, Kreiger & Associates was asked if the Corps of Engineers had been contacted relative to the river environmental and floodplain-construction issues. The moderator misled the public when he said they had and that they had a letter stating there would not be a problem. You simply cannot believe the casino. No one has talked to the regulatory authorities pertinent to these issues, and the casino's engineer (Stanley Consultants) would never make such a statement. The fact is that even if the casino agreement is approved by the city council, the project as proposed will most likely die because of federal environmental law and FEMA regulations.
If the council moves the project forward, at some point, the city (which holds the permit) will have to modify its permit to moor the casino boat upstream and to build a structure in the floodplain. When the formal application is submitted to the Corps of Engineers, it will be reviewed by one of the best regulatory sections in the country. These regulators will issue a public notice requesting public input, and for a minimum of 30 days they will receive a mountain of comments.
Legitimate, honest objections will be raised by environmental organizations pertinent to walleye habitat, eagles, and flood profiles, which will prompt environmental-impact studies and hydraulic-engineering reviews. The hydraulic engineering will conclude the earthen berm has a significant effect on flood profiles above the 100-year flood, when the river overtops the seawall at Oneida Landing like it did in 1965 and 1993. The U.S. Fish & Wildlife Fisheries' biologist will not grant authority to excavate the precious walleye habitat that exists at the bottom of the original Rock Island Rapids. The environmental-impact law requires a thorough discussion of alternatives, and good alternatives are available. It is my professional opinion that the regulators will not cave from the political pressure, and the permit-modification request will be denied.
The permit history clearly shows that Connelly's request to moor the boat further upstream was denied, and U.S. Fish & Wildlife only allowed it upstream of the Main Street boat ramp because the law required it to cruise, and further downstream there was not adequate navigation depth. I would testify under oath, if required, that Connelly's and the City of Davenport's permit-negotiating team promised they would never request to move the boat further upstream if the permit would be issued to moor the vessel where it sits today. That promise resulted in the authority to initiate riverboat gaming on the Davenport riverfront. Responsible owners and government officials usually know the answers to environmental and flood-plain issues before the Corps of Engineers requests public comment. Davenport has the cart before the horse.
So what is Davenport's next move? The folks that are speaking the loudest simply want to save the riverfront and optimize its public use for future generations. DavenportOne wants the economic boost the project can create. I suggest it is time to stop and examine the alternatives and find an alternative that is a win for everyone - the riverfront improvement and the economic development, which is necessary to fund the recreation trails, improve our parks, and help our not-for-profits' essential work. SmartRiverfront.com and River Action have asked me: "Can you sketch an alternative?" One possible alternative follows; I am certain there are others to be carefully evaluated.
Immediately landward of the Crescent Bridge and downstream of the Marquette Street boat ramp, there originally was an island - City Island. It disappeared when the city dump filled the river channels between the island and the Iowa shore. If you walk landward from the Crescent Bridge abutment by the recreation trail, you will find two railroad bridges almost lost in the mountains of uncontrolled dump that filled the old river channel. On this island, the depth of the dump is minimal, and the cost of building hotel foundations would be acceptable. A 10-story hotel would have beautiful views in all four directions - you can see all the way downstream to Buffalo and upstream to East Moline. The skylines of Davenport and Rock Island would make the hotel exciting. From the top of the hotel you would be able to see river history, such as the location of Black Hawk's Saukenuk Village, Credit Island Park - the site of Major (President) Zachary Taylor's battle with the British and Indians - Arsenal Island, and the slow, beautiful curve of our mighty Mississippi. Go up to the IMAX floor at the Putnam and you can confirm these facts are true. But, better yet, this possible alternative locates the hotel above historic high water; flooding issues disappear and life-safety concerns are much easier to solve.
What about the casino boat? Connelly could not put the President at this location. The water depth is insufficient for navigation, and the original riverboat gambling law required the President to cruise. Today, Rhythm City does not have to cruise, and the law allows a boat-in-a-moat concept to be a riverboat. The law might even be more ridiculous as pure gambling interests have taken over the industry from the river pilots, but that is a different debate; the current law solves our immediate problem. The casino boat could be put in a hole just off the wall or better yet, it could be put into a basin inside the wall, where river fluctuations could be controlled, thus simplifying the architectural problems for the hotel-casino complex.
Those who do not want to listen to public input will now start to scream that any alternative needs to be connected to the Figge Art Museum or close to downtown, even though the facts prove these are also both falsehoods. But let us satisfy that concern by being creative. River Vision concluded that the Davenport and Rock Island riverfronts should be symbolically connected by building piers into the river and operating the Channel Cat between the cities. Think hard and you'll remember that Bernie Goldstein proposed an old locomotive train be operated by the Diamond Lady as a tourist attraction. Why not operate a trolley from the Isle of Capri in Bettendorf along the I.C.&E. Railroad right-of-way since there is space for another track? (There used to be two tracks.) The trolley could have stops at Leach Park, East Davenport, the Boat House and Oneida Landing, the future railroad "River Crossings" historic center, the Dillon Fountain and Figge Art Museum, the Union Station, John O'Donnell Stadium and Sports Center, and the new hotel-casino. In fact, if we funded a bridge tender for the swing span, the trolley could go across the historic 1894 Crescent Bridge and stop at the new condominiums being proposed downstream of Modern Woodman, stop at the Armory and the District, the Botanical Center, Sylvan Park, and the Mark of the Quad Cities. Actually, with some engineering and hard planning, it could connect Port Byron with LeClaire and Buffalo. It would be fun to ride, attract people to our area, and help showcase our Quad Cities community. It would also be responsive to the public's input.
Let us turn this debate into a win-win situation. Let us reclaim an abandoned dump and make it a beautiful section of riverfront. Alternatives that satisfy both sides and meet all federal environmental and flood-plain laws are available. The casino's engineer, Stanley Consultants, is well qualified to design the alternative. Mayor Brooke, I expect you to listen and learn the facts, and then be the "Moose" we elected and lead the way.
William D. Ashton is a professional engineer with Ashton Engineering, Inc.
