With the return of Adrian's Island talk and how best to access the riverside property, comes an often heard complaint from residents - why develop an area that frequently floods?
Officials with the current incarnation of the project see no issue with flooding on the property, pointing to other city and state parks that frequently face - and get through - flooding issues.
The long-discussed Adrian's Island project resurfaced last summer after Jefferson City resident B.J. DeLong donated $50,000 to pay for preliminary design work on a bridge to access the property.
Adrian's Island is actually a peninsula between the Capitol building and the Missouri River that developed as settling sand and river bottom accumulated from the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers' rock dikes built in the 1960s to maintain a 9-foot minimum channel depth.
Since the summer donation, local engineering company Bartlett & West has been doing the preliminary design work on multiple bridge options to the property, revealing the result of its work at a Jefferson City Council meeting at the end of December.
There, Bob Gilbert of Bartlett & West presented four bridge options considered for gaining access to Adrian's Island. The preferred option they will try to move forward with would begin between the Senate garage and the Veterans Memorial, achieving the goal of being near the Capitol at a price tag of $2.99 million. The trail would be a 10-foot-wide concrete path and abide by all requirements laid out in the Americans with Disabilities Act of 1990.
Since that presentation, some News Tribune readers have expressed concerns about any project moving forward at Adrian's Island, especially in light of how much the property floods. But Gilbert and others with the project don't see that as an issue.
Earlier this month, Adrian's Island was the featured topic at a Jefferson City Area Chamber of Commerce Friday Coffee. At that presentation, Gilbert said the recent flooding at the end of December left 13 acres of the land unaffected, which included the area where the planned ramp would land to access the property.
"There are low areas of the island, but there are also high areas," Gilbert said, noting the planned bridge also is completely out of the 100-year flood plain on the property.
Gilbert said the potential for flooding shouldn't hinder the project, as many parks throughout the state are affected by flooding - something Jim Crabtree knows firsthand. At a Parks and Recreation Commission meeting, where the same Adrian's Island presentation was made Jan. 12, Crabtree said more than half of Missouri's 87 state parks and historical sites are located in flood plains.
Crabtree spent 10 years working for the Missouri Department of Natural Resources in planning, design and development for state parks and another 15 years before that in architectural firms working with recreational developments all over the country.
Crabtree said parks are ideal uses for properties frequently affected by floods because they are one of the few things that can be developed (passively) in a flood plain and flood cycles help promote environmental and ecological diversity.
"The highest and best use for flood plains and floodways is for recreational use," Crabtree said. "The reason for that is it's a very low-density, dispersed use that recovers quickly after being flooded."
Crabtree specifically pointed to the Katy Trail and Bennett Springs State Park near Lebanon as examples of parks that frequently face flooding issues but see high use rates.
"That was one of the common factors that you dealt with when you were developing a state park," Crabtree said. "There are design techniques that you utilize so that these areas recover fast. They do go underwater, but they also can be brought back to a recreational use if you're doing the design correctly."
J.J. Gates, Jefferson City park resources and forestry division director, said both Washington Park and the Noren Access often deal with flooding issues as it is, but it's not a difficult task to deal with.
"If it wouldn't happen, we would be happy," Gates said. "But we do the best we can with that and we just clean up afterwards and hope it doesn't happen too often."
Gates said they have the most difficulty at Washington Park, primarily because that area is not passively developed but includes structures and equipment that are affected.
"It doesn't really do a lot of damage there either; it's just the silt and the mud and stuff that's left on the parking lots and around Lions (baseball) field," Gates said.
The heaviest effect of flooding at Washington Park is mostly unseen. Gates said when flooding occurs at the Lions baseball field, it deposits silt and begins raising the field levels, though it takes several years to get to that point. That's when parks crews have to peel back the turf to get it down to the right levels, he said.
Gates said areas of Adrian's Island were unaffected by the most recent flooding in December and would focus in those areas for any type of structure, like a restroom.
"It's a little bit higher than people think," Gates said. "We'll just have to be smart as to what we develop; and if there's trails there, we'll just have to get in there and clean "em up.
"We've got the equipment; we've got the staff that's done it."
Crabtree said providing access to Adrian's Island will allow people to experience a "diverse environment" with sand flats, marshy areas and woodlands.
"Within a very short period of time, you can go through several different environmental niches that demonstrate the diversity that we have along the river," Crabtree said. "It would be a great benefit to the city and to the residents and for visitors. ... Jefferson City was located here because of the river, and we need to embrace that."
News Tribune readers share opinions on Adrian's Island
As talk resurfaces about pursuing access to Adrian's Island, many News Tribune readers have added their voices to the conversation. Below is a collection of some of the feedback we have received.
From Duncan Kincheloe: "It is great to read of the progress of the Adrian's Island project! This will be a tremendous asset to Jefferson City and visitors to the Capitol. The usage and appeal of other riverfront parks along the Missouri River fully demonstrate that these frontages can be successfully developed and maintained despite flood events. Progress here is long overdue. The entire community and future generations will owe a debt of gratitude to Mrs. DeLong and other supporters with the vision to make this project a reality."
From Dana Wildhaber: "I like it! No further tax money used, and I'm really a fan. I would even consider donating to the construction of it. If they would do sponsor "stones' or bricks/plaques/plates where corporate/private sponsors could have their support recognized, even better. Great community pride can be built by doing this with private funds. Ms. DeLong may have started something great."
From Ann Findlay: "It is not that I am opposed to the concept of Adrian's Island, but I have doubts about the feasibility of it being a real asset to JC. In other towns that I have visited, you can drive to the riverside park. You can eat lunch at a table or your car and watch and enjoy the river or just stroll along the shore all the while feeling safe.
"One of my concerns is the cost of upkeep. Even with volunteer labor, how can trails be maintained when the island is almost always under water or a portion of it every year? The Missouri River is full of silt, which it leaves behind freely when it recedes, and anyone who has lived near the river can attest to the fact that it takes a long time for it to dry and is hard to remove.
"Has anyone given any thought to emergency care for accidents, injury or health issues? The proposed bridges look like pedestrian only, which would not make it easily accessible for emergency equipment to get to the island. Will this leave the city open to lawsuits?
"Personal safety is another concern. Since it will be accessible only by a walking bridge, law enforcement will not be able to keep it patrolled. How long will it take for them to respond to a 911 distress call? I doubt that many women will feel safe enough to use the trails by themselves given today's society. And will the island be closed down at night? If not, I can see it being used by party-goers (even underage ones) and drug parties. JC does have a drug problem, as do most communities.
"I would rather see the park at the end of the Katy Trail bridge be developed. It already has a great beginning, and while it's not in the downtown area it is in JC and could be promoted. It rarely floods, and a raised pavilion could be built for concerts and other uses. It has a lot of possibilities, while I don't see much for Adrian's Island."
From Linda Nilges: "Awesome! Another park in which the people can explore and play!! Let's do this!!"
From Diane Brandt: "I think a good location for a park would be at the river access close to the new walkway across the bridge, can build it up to prevent some flooding, Adrian's Island is a stupid location, floods real easy, and a waste of money to build a fancy bridge, people just like to waste money on foolish things, why don't we get a raise on our salaries instead."
Jeremy Cady wrote on Twitter the project is a "complete waste of money." When asked if it makes a difference that the project is being pursued with private money, he said, "I doubt my opinion of waste would change, but I suppose if it isn't public waste my attention would."
From Alex Devlin: "This might bring sales tax revenue up. Honestly, if this was built, I'd be far more likely to come to Jefferson City for the afternoon. Many others would agree. People like looking at water."
From Jenny Reinkemeyer: "Yes, because Jeff City doesn't desperately need any improvements to schools or roads (U.S. 50/54 junction, Missouri Boulevard at South Ten Mile Drive intersection, engineering nightmare at Missouri 179/U.S. 50/Missouri Boulevard/Country Club, Southwest Boulevard at Jefferson Street/Route C). But, please, spend taxpayer money on an "island' that will be flooded several times a year and is in a dangerous location."
From Dawn Dlouhy Yerian: "I've lived in this town for 14 years and never heard of this "island' until reading (News Tribune) articles. I understand that the money for this project is designated for riverfront parks, but I agree this town is in desperate need in other areas, particularly the schools. For those that think a park like this will draw sales tax from visitors, what about the potential residents we are losing because of the extreme overcrowding of our schools?! We would gain more taxes from a growing population than we would any occasional sales tax. We need to spend the money to fix what's broken, not "pretty up' an area many probably don't even know about!"
From Debbie Nothdurft: "It is probably totally underwater right now (on Dec. 28). There are other things this city needs besides a constantly flooding island. But it is Jefferson City, enough said."
From Raechell Henley: "The tax money ($840,000) already "set aside' should be re-allocated to something that the rest of the 99.99 percent of taxpayers believe is more important. Sounds like these private fund donors can easily come up with another cool million to get their island project completed another day."
From Lisa Branson-Rackers: "More ridiculous ideas from this city."
From Jamie LeCure Kleffner: "I want a picture of Adrian's Island with all this rain (on Dec. 28). Huge waste of money, especially when it's going to be underwater and sucking up more money with every flood."
From Tim Wilding: "Jeff City's Bridge to Nowhere."
From Jon Cregger: "So how much water is on the "island' right now (on Dec. 28)?? What a waste of money and effort!"
From Donna Phillips Payne: "I totally agree with all of you. I just dare someone to voice their opinion that is for this. I want to hear one realistic reason we need this. And no matter how much of this is paid for by donations it's going to end up costing the Jeff City taxpayers. I hope anyone on the City Council and the mayor is reading all of these comments."
From Gwen Braun: "Such an asinine undertaking. I hope (it) floods this summer like crazy."
From Steve Moore: "This is like a trainwreck. You just can't stop watching to see what's gonna happen. Just spend it up. Spend it all. Get rid of it, then deal with what you have."
From Kim Ames: "Ridiculous and waste of taxpayers' money."
From Kathy Stevens Bosch: "It seems that previous talk maybe one or two years ago indicated JC taxpayers were very much against this idea and wasting more money. So why is it back on the radar? Don't these politicians understand the word no?"
From Mary Oesterly: "Let it go, let it go, let it go! No one in their right mind would go for this. Ask the people of JC."
From Amy LeeAnne Frank: "Stupidest thing I have heard!"
From Lynne Sharp Norris: "Just say no!"
From Cyndi Siebeneck-Howser: "Stupid idea."
From Jack Gevecker: "A Bridge to Nowhere II."