Phase II of the River Greenway Project started today?

by

They must have heard my Independence Day speech last night at the city council meeting and got inspired (FF: 4:20 ) BTW, it was nice meeting another foot soldier at the meeting last night 🙂

This email and these photos were sent to me today (awaiting some video);

I was downtown at around 7:30 this morning and came across something very interesting! Soukup is very busy today working on the east bank of the river (Phase II of the River Greenway Project). Also, it appears that they are dumping contaminated soil from the east bank directly into the river. Not sure if this is permissible, but I was at the Park Board meeting when Jon Jacobson of Confluence (the landscape architect on the River Greenway Project, Phases I and II) told the Board that the soils on the East Bank Phase II are even more contaminated than in Phase I. Someone needs to alert the EPA and the Dept. of Natural Resources. They are the agencies that permitted this job and it appears that there is no oversight taking place.


Posted in: Sioux Falls, Sioux Falls Parks and Rec

11 Thoughts on “Phase II of the River Greenway Project started today?”

  1. anominous on July 4, 2012 at 10:32 pm said:

    Hey San Antonio, here we come!

  2. Lemming on July 4, 2012 at 11:34 pm said:

    Heh…”Alert the EPA”…why bother? In 2010, the City dumped 65 MILLION gallons of sewage into the river and was fined a whopping $11,000 dollars. For the amount Soukup is dumping – the fine would probably be around $39- now on the other hand if you add another driveway pad or don’t keep your trees 12 feet or higher off the sidewalk – we’ll own your ass!

  3. l3wis on July 4, 2012 at 11:47 pm said:

    “if you add another driveway pad or don’t keep your trees 12 feet or higher off the sidewalk – we’ll own your ass!”

    Yeah, no shit? Huh?

  4. rufusx on July 5, 2012 at 12:25 am said:

    The tree height thing is a safety/liability issue. By Federal regulation, traffic signs in urban resiential and commercial areas must be no lower than 7 feet above grade (bottom of sign). Standard sign heights are in increnets of 6 inches – with a typical STOP sign being 36″ (top of sign – 10 feet.) Add a 6″ “4-way” sign, or a 24″ speed limit sign…………. Top of sign is around 12 feet. City doesn’t have tree heights in place that assure sign visibility – lawsuit pending after any traffic accident near any sign not fully visible. TAX PAYER dollars pay settlements.

    Yeah – no shit.

  5. l3wis on July 5, 2012 at 12:52 am said:

    Ruf – I think he was being sarcastic. I agree, trees should not hide the view of stop signs. I think he was referring to the massive hypocrisy. Still curious why they needed to start on this project on July 4th.

  6. James on July 5, 2012 at 9:39 am said:

    I understand the tree height issue, but then why are there so many uncontrolled intersections?

  7. Lamb Chislic on July 5, 2012 at 12:50 pm said:

    Actually, work on the project began 10 days ago on Tuesday, June 26.

  8. l3wis on July 5, 2012 at 2:04 pm said:

    Thanks Jorgi 🙂

  9. l3wis on July 5, 2012 at 2:04 pm said:

    James, I would agree. There is so many blind intersections in this city, it’s not even funny.

  10. Joan on July 5, 2012 at 11:05 pm said:

    Besides copying San Anton, apparently Yankton has beat us in having a “riverwalk” too. They were talking about Yankton on the news on KSFY at 5 and 6 PM.

  11. l3wis on July 5, 2012 at 11:11 pm said:

    Link us up!

Post Navigation