I love the oppositions reasons to not build the bridge :rolleyes:
Google sponsored links
N_C
If they think a less accessable bridge will limit what they call riff raff from entering their community they are kidding themselves.
Let me tell you a little about this community. It is a Master Planned Community. They have certain rules you have to follow. You can only choose from a certain type of colors for both the inside & outside of your home, only allowed to have a certain type of fence & a certain type of garden. Everyone has the exact same mail box. The homes start at $130.000. You need permission to have a basketball hoop in your driveway. You have to keep your lawn perfectly manicured & can not cut too short or let it grow too long & no weeds of any kind. You're only allowed a certain kind of landscaping. In other words way too many restrictions for me to want to live there even though my wife & I could easily afford it.
A lot of the residents look down upon anyone who does not live there if they are driving around or visiting the community. They look at us as riff raff they do not want in their community. Part of this stems from some break ins & theft that has happened out there. Because of a few bad apples they are condemming everyone who does not live there. These bad apples may not even be from the area.
They recently completed a really nice new paved MUP. Part if it is right across the Big Sioux River form the Lewis & Clark MUP in Sioux City. We need a new bridge built to connect the 2 together. The city of Sioux City & the Siouxland Trails foundation are working on the funding for our half of it. The other half will be determined by Dakota Dunes at the CID meeting today. If they decide against it because of the opposition they will not fund their half of the bridge.
If this happens we do not know if Sioux City & the STF can still fully fund the bridge. If we do we are not sure if the Dunes will allow it to be built & connect the trail systems together.
The Dunes residents need to understand MUP's are not associated with crime. There has never been any evidence to support this. There is no evidence to support that limiting access to a community will keep children safer or reduce crime either.
I think the bottom line is they want the trail all to themselves & are citing their reasons because they do not want to reveal the real truth to it.
Welcome to the world and mindset of the white suburbanite. Barricade yourself in your perfect little community and the so called "riff-raff" can never hurt you.
maddyfish
Welcome to the world and mindset of the white suburbanite. Barricade yourself in your perfect little community and the so called "riff-raff" can never hurt you.
That is a very racist statement and should not be tolerated.
N_C
That is a very racist statement and should not be tolerated.
You're kidding right? If people think this is a racist statement then maybe they should grow a thicker skin.
DataJunkie
covenant controlled communities.
recursive
You're kidding right? If people think this is a racist statement then maybe they should grow a thicker skin.
Are you implying that it was not racist because it was correct? It was certainly a generalization about a group based on race. How was it not racist?
ken cummings
I don't know enough about the case. The planned community built an MUP. Got that. Was it built entirely on their own land, and at their own expense? If so they can restrict access as they see fit. If it is on public land and/or built in part with any public money you have a case for access. But I still do not see why they are under any obligation to cough up for the bridge. Worst case; if part of the trail on their side of the river is open to the public the bridge might have to be built at some sub-optimum location that does not touch their land.
Is there some place I can reach on the net with more details?
EDIT: I looked up Dakota Dunes on Wikipedia and MapQuest. My, my, they are in a good location for trails and to hog access to same. They are also in a good place to be wiped out in a flood ;) . Could your engineers hang a bike bridge off of the griders of the I-29 bridge? Now if the streets in Daklota Dunes were deeded over to a local public entity(city) for maintenance you may have a case for access to Paved trails as well. Especially paved trails built to serve vehicles used by any flood control district.
N_C
I don't know enough about the case. The planned community built an MUP. Got that. Was it built entirely on their own land, and at their own expense? If so they can restrict access as they see fit. If it is on public land and/or built in part with any public money you have a case for access. But I still do not see why they are under any obligation to cough up for the bridge. Worst case; if part of the trail on their side of the river is open to the public the bridge might have to be built at some sub-optimum location that does not touch their land.
Is there some place I can reach on the net with more details?
EDIT: I looked up Dakota Dunes on Wikipedia and MapQuest. My, my, they are in a good location for trails and to hog access to same. They are also in a good place to be wiped out in a flood ;) . Could your engineers hang a bike bridge off of the griders of the I-29 bridge? Now if the streets in Daklota Dunes were deeded over to a local public entity(city) for maintenance you may have a case for access to Paved trails as well. Especially paved trails built to serve vehicles used by any flood control district.
First read the story by clicking on the link to it. It explains the trail was built with funds from the DOT. Though it does not state what land the trail was built on I think part of it is on the DOT ROW.
A ped/bike bridge can not be hung from the interstate bridge. For one it would be more expensive. Second, neither DOT will allow us to do so.
Brian Sorrell
Welcome to the world and mindset of the white suburbanite. Barricade yourself in your perfect little community and the so called "riff-raff" can never hurt you.
For my money, if you subtract the word "white" and emphasize the "suburbanite" part, you will more accurately capture what is really a class issue.
Here's to hoping that they build the bridge.
sbhikes
I'd like to live in a place where $130K houses were on the exclusive end of the scale. Then maybe I could own one of the cheaper ones.
catatonic
I say propose an ordinance to rmeove their bridges. See if you can get enough signatures to have it go up to vote, and see how bent out of shape they get.
Sometimes throwing a little gasoline into the fire is appropriate. Think of it this way, if less road = less riff raff, then no roads = no riff raff /rolleyes
N_C
$130,000 is the low end of the spectrum for owning the homes in Dakota Dunes as far as owning one is concerned. The only thing cheaper is the over priced apts. Some of the homes out there are as high as 10 million+.
N_C
I say propose an ordinance to rmeove their bridges. See if you can get enough signatures to have it go up to vote, and see how bent out of shape they get.
Sometimes throwing a little gasoline into the fire is appropriate. Think of it this way, if less road = less riff raff, then no roads = no riff raff /rolleyes
That would not work. This is a master planned community. They do not have a city council in the traditional sense. The way things work there is the wealthier you are the more influence & power you have, but they still have to vote on things, like the funding for this bridge. It is just that the voting is only for good show. Not like it is in a community where you have an actual council where people can bring issues to & have things voted on & have it actually mean something.
Bikepacker67
Are you implying that it was not racist because it was correct? It was certainly a generalization about a group based on race. How was it not racist?
It can't be racist. It's only disparaging white people. :rolleyes:
trackhub
If they think a less accessable bridge will limit what they call riff raff from entering their community they are kidding themselves.
Let me tell you a little about this community. It is a Master Planned Community. They have certain rules you have to follow. You can only choose from a certain type of colors for both the inside & outside of your home, only allowed to have a certain type of fence & a certain type of garden. Everyone has the exact same mail box. The homes start at $130.000. You need permission to have a basketball hoop....
Wait a minute!! Wasn't this place featured on an episode of "The X Files??" $130K? In Massachusetts, that's a down payment on a starter home. Maybe. I suppose a bunch of pink plastic flamingo's would be out too.
bbonnn
This talk of master planned communities reminds me of Nadine Gordimer's short story, "Once Upon A Time (http://www.amazon.com/gp/product/0140165347/sr=8-2/qid=1156203916/ref=sr_1_2/102-8269552-0912954?ie=UTF8)" (short story in linked book) about a South African family who lives in one such community in order to feel "safer" from the rabble outside, protected by gun turrets, alarms, and razor wire. Of course it winds up biting them in the ass, as these things often do.
If you come across this book, spring for it.
The trend toward master planned communities and covenant-controlled extra-municipal developments scares the crap out of me. As do gated communities. There is a gated apartment multi-block-complex that is on my route to the grocery store. You have to go around it -- no way through. Of course, going THROUGH it would save me about 10 minutes when walking (the difference between melted ice cream and not), but their streets are all privately owned and I have no way of getting into the complex without a code. So much for "freedom of the road."
I call them "compounds."
N_C
This talk of master planned communities reminds me of Nadine Gordimer's short story, "Once Upon A Time (http://www.amazon.com/gp/product/0140165347/sr=8-2/qid=1156203916/ref=sr_1_2/102-8269552-0912954?ie=UTF8)" (short story in linked book) about a South African family who lives in one such community in order to feel "safer" from the rabble outside, protected by gun turrets, alarms, and razor wire. Of course it winds up biting them in the ass, as these things often do.
If you come across this book, spring for it.
The trend toward master planned communities and covenant-controlled extra-municipal developments scares the crap out of me. As do gated communities. There is a gated apartment multi-block-complex that is on my route to the grocery store. You have to go around it -- no way through. Of course, going THROUGH it would save me about 10 minutes when walking (the difference between melted ice cream and not), but their streets are all privately owned and I have no way of getting into the complex without a code. So much for "freedom of the road."
I call them "compounds."
What happens when an emergency vehicle needs to get into a gated community & can not because they don't know the code, or someone changed it & didn't tell them? If it were my home or a family member that needed EMS & the response time was increased & I lost my home or my loved one I'd be pissed. Can you say major law suit?
N_C
I suppose a bunch of pink plastic flamingo's would be out too.
Uh, yeah.
OH306
If they think a less accessable bridge will limit what they call riff raff from entering their community they are kidding themselves.
Let me tell you a little about this community. It is a Master Planned Community. They have certain rules you have to follow. You can only choose from a certain type of colors for both the inside & outside of your home, only allowed to have a certain type of fence & a certain type of garden. Everyone has the exact same mail box. The homes start at $130.000. You need permission to have a basketball hoop in your driveway. You have to keep your lawn perfectly manicured & can not cut too short or let it grow too long & no weeds of any kind. You're only allowed a certain kind of landscaping. In other words way too many restrictions for me to want to live there even though my wife & I could easily afford it.
A lot of the residents look down upon anyone who does not live there if they are driving around or visiting the community. They look at us as riff raff they do not want in their community. Part of this stems from some break ins & theft that has happened out there. Because of a few bad apples they are condemming everyone who does not live there. These bad apples may not even be from the area.
They recently completed a really nice new paved MUP. Part if it is right across the Big Sioux River form the Lewis & Clark MUP in Sioux City. We need a new bridge built to connect the 2 together. The city of Sioux City & the Siouxland Trails foundation are working on the funding for our half of it. The other half will be determined by Dakota Dunes at the CID meeting today. If they decide against it because of the opposition they will not fund their half of the bridge.
If this happens we do not know if Sioux City & the STF can still fully fund the bridge. If we do we are not sure if the Dunes will allow it to be built & connect the trail systems together.
The Dunes residents need to understand MUP's are not associated with crime. There has never been any evidence to support this. There is no evidence to support that limiting access to a community will keep children safer or reduce crime either.
I think the bottom line is they want the trail all to themselves & are citing their reasons because they do not want to reveal the real truth to it.
Your paragraphs 1,2 and 3 have nothing to do with the issue at hand. You are merely trying to build your case by degrading the people living in that community because you perceive them to be against the project. Like it or not, they are entitled to their position. They chose to live there and live by the association rules. If you don't want to be in an association like that, don't live there. Only paragraphs 4 and 5 relate to the issue. Paragraph 6 is merely an unsupported statement and paragraph 7 is more character assasination. I read the article and no where did I see the term "riff raff". In the article it was written: "Those opposed, he said, cite several reasons: they feel their children are safer on a less accessible trail; they worry after a spate of burglaries in the Dunes this spring that a connected trail will make the community less secure; and, those who use the local trail worry that a connected trail could get so crowded it would not be fun to walk, run or ride on.
In addition, Dooley said some residents aren't sure they want to create a second way for people to access their rather secluded development; they like their quiet neighborhoods. The subdivision was purposely designed with only one street leading in and out, he said." All legit concerns in my book. Did you see riff raff in there? I didn't. Maybe you consider yourself riff raff. Maybe they just don't want someone riding through their quiet neighborhood blowing an Airzound every couple minutes.
N_C
Your paragraphs 1,2 and 3 have nothing to do with the issue at hand. You are merely trying to build your case by degrading the people living in that community because you perceive them to be against the project. Like it or not, they are entitled to their position. They chose to live there and live by the association rules. If you don't want to be in an association like that, don't live there. Only paragraphs 4 and 5 relate to the issue. Paragraph 6 is merely an unsupported statement and paragraph 7 is more character assasination. I read the article and no where did I see the term "riff raff". In the article it was written: "Those opposed, he said, cite several reasons: they feel their children are safer on a less accessible trail; they worry after a spate of burglaries in the Dunes this spring that a connected trail will make the community less secure; and, those who use the local trail worry that a connected trail could get so crowded it would not be fun to walk, run or ride on.
In addition, Dooley said some residents aren't sure they want to create a second way for people to access their rather secluded development; they like their quiet neighborhoods. The subdivision was purposely designed with only one street leading in and out, he said." All legit concerns in my book. Did you see riff raff in there? I didn't. Maybe you consider yourself riff raff. Maybe they just don't want someone riding through their quiet neighborhood blowing an Airzound every couple minutes.
You don't live here, so you really don't know what they think. I do, I lived in the apts. in Dakota Dunes for 4 years. When we bought our home my wife & were looking to buy there. We did not like the rules or the restricted freedoms to live there, or the attitudes of those in the country club area of that community.
They seem to think that by limiting how people can enter the community, with only 1 road in or out, will limit who enters or exits the community, riff raff or not. This is not true. If anything I think the more the access is restricted the more elite it looks & the more outsiders want to visit, even if it is only to drive through.
In paragraph 2 I was stating the kind of community this is & give a description of it.
Paragraph 3 goes back to limiting how & what kind of people enter the community. By restricting access they think they can control who does or does not enter the community.
They think the burglaries are associated with the trail & that a trail will make the community more accessable. Yeah, by foot & bicycle. I could see the headline now, "Thief caught while riding bicycle away with stolen stereo system tucked under his arm on Dakota Dunes trail".
An MUP is not a street. The MUP is inside the community only, the only thing a bridge will do is connect it to the SIoux City trail. It will not make so much more accessable that the crime rate will sky rocket like they are making it sound. So that reason is not legit.
They are equating an MUP with the burglaries. When one has nothing to do with the other. For one the trail was not even finished when the burglaries occured.
As far as keeping the children safe. Well only good parenting will do that. Keep an eye on the kids, instead of letting the kids use the trail by themselves make it a family event.
They want to maintain their elite social status over everyone one else. They are afraid that by connecting their trail with the bridge to the Sioux City side they will lose that. The reason the Dunes trail is for public use is because public funds were used to build it. I can almost guarantee if the money had come from the Dunes & not the DOT there would be signs that say Dakota Dunes residents only.
This community was built around a golf course. It is one of the courses on the Nike Tour. It is a private country club. There are posted at every crossing where there the golf cart trail crosses a street that says Country Club Members Only. That is fine. I don't have a problem with that. The course & the cart trail was built with private monies. They have the exclusive right to exclude whom ever they wish to because of that.
But not when it comes to a public trail which we hope to have a public use bridge connecting the trail systems & communities together.
ken cummings
So South Dakota took the bridge out of the project and put over half a million into Dunes' trail system. I would love to see the file on that project. How in Heavens' name did a limited access community get that kind of money for a public works project? And how much did the Dunes kick in? And why was a bridge left out when it offered so much to South Dakota residents? If the bridge is built above high flood level it serves as a way to evacuate people during emergencies. Still the two other states could maybe approach the right people in Rapid City about a cooperative effort and bypass Dakota Dunes completely.
supcom
Maybe the good peaceful folks at the Dunes prefer to be able to let their kids walk along the MUP without having to protect them from some guy with an air horn on his bike.
cat4ever
Maybe the good peaceful folks at the Dunes prefer to be able to let their kids walk along the MUP without having to protect them from some guy with an air horn on his bike.
+1
trackhub
The trend toward master planned communities and covenant-controlled extra-municipal developments scares the crap out of me. As do gated communities..
Glad you brought it up. The very fact that these places are being built at all should be setting off alarms all over the place. But that's not happening, is it? There's one a few miles away from where I'm sitting. It's built up on a hillside, overlooking busy route 128. It consists of luxury rental units and luxury condos.
There's a guarded gate right at the base. Rumor has it that after dark, the guards (contract security guards, I'm sure) are armed. I have not seen this first hand though, as the gate is set back from the roadway. I would not be surprised though. Armed against what, exactly? This area is not what one would call a high-crime area by any means.
N_C
Dakota Dunes is not gated nor does it have a guard. It does have a security dept. though. I do not know how much authority they have. I do not think they have any power to arrest people or pull people over for speeding & I think if there is a major problem they call the county sheriff or the state patrol. They may even have a contractual agreement for North Sioux City P.D. to provide law enforcement.
sgtsmile
What I find amusing about these kinds of places is the image that their little piece of elitism is somehow desireable ;p yech, not for me thanks. How does separating people create understanding and break down fear of the other?
DieselDan
Same thing here. You gotta keep the blacks out at all costs. Just say it, we all know your thinking it. (I'm addressing the stuck up elitist snobs, not you JV)
DogBoy
What happens when an emergency vehicle needs to get into a gated community & can not because they don't know the code, or someone changed it & didn't tell them? If it were my home or a family member that needed EMS & the response time was increased & I lost my home or my loved one I'd be pissed. Can you say major law suit?
I've seen two types: Guarded and non-guarded. The guarded ones just let the emergency vehicles through. At the unguarded ones, I'm willing to bet the code 911 gets you in. My parents have lived in two such communities and that was the case at both of them. At any rate, I'm guessing the community has given the code to the emergency services that serves them.
N_C
Same thing here. You gotta keep the blacks out at all costs. Just say it, we all know your thinking it. (I'm addressing the stuck up elitist snobs, not you JV)
No prob. Wouldn't have thought that anyway. I do know & have no problem with that there are people who not caucauesan living in the Dunes. They don't care what ethnic group you belong to as long as you have the money to live there & follow the rules.
N_C
The decision has been delayed until a public forum, then the board will vote on it at it's next meeting. There are also comments from people as well. None of which came from me, but I share some of the same feelings & attitudes. I plan on being at the public forum.
Here is the story in today's paper:
"Dunes' board delays decision on trail bridge
By Jenny Welp Journal staff writer
After almost two hours of discussion, the Dakota Dunes Community Improvement District board voted 3-0 Monday to delay the decision whether to partner with Sioux City to build a 10-foot-wide bridge over the Big Sioux River.
The recreational bridge would connect the Dunes' trails to Sioux City's trail system, which already connects to South Sioux City's.
Dennis Melstad, Ryan Callaghan and board chair Ron Prorok voted yes, while Ross Jordan and John Meyer did not vote.
Multiple motions failed before the board finally approved the last motion to make the decision at the next board meeting -- holding one public forum sometime between now and then.
About 30 citizens attended the CID board meeting on Monday, and most spoke in support of the bridge from the Dunes' Two Rivers Golf Club to Sioux City's Riverside Park.
But board members said the feedback they'd collected from Dunes' residents was about half for the bridge and half against it.
The bridge is a $500,000 project.
For a limited amount of time, the city of Sioux City has grant money available to fund half the project, and has stated it will do so as long as the Dunes agrees to fund the other half. Prorok said to speed up the project, the city of Sioux City has offered to give the Dunes a no-interest loan.
Prorok said Dakota Dunes also has $30,000 left in grant money it could put toward the bridge project. And the Siouxland Trails Foundation reported it already has $25,000 set aside to help the Dunes pay for the bridge.
At the meeting one woman said if the project means Dakota Dunes has to borrow money, as far as she's concerned, the answer is no. Later a man said if money is the problem, he would use his own money to make sure the project is completed.
Dunes resident Regina Roth noted that the community has the opportunity to use $280,000 in grant money to complete the bridge project.
"We're not going to have this opportunity again, folks," she said. "We've got a pot of money, and it's going to disappear."
In addition to funding, citizens also discussed security concerns.
Jeff Horner spoke against the bridge. He said it would basically connect Dakota Dunes to the Riverside area, and said he was concerned by the crime numbers for Riverside he found on the Sioux City Police Department's Web site.
"The point is, by building a bridge, you're bringing access to our area," Horner said.
But some at the meeting said they don't want to isolate themselves from the rest of Siouxland.
Cindy Meier said Dakota Dunes residents aren't perfect. She said they are involved in domestic situations and get cited for speeding. She said by trying to close off the community, it's like residents are trying to put themselves on a pedestal.
"We're not a perfect society; we're not going to eliminate everything that's in our world," one man said in response to security concerns. "If we start confining ourselves, then we become what everyone thinks we are -- a snobbish group of people."
A letter from law enforcement crime analyst Herbert Kuehne was presented at the meeting. Kuehne reported that in the past year, there have been no misdemeanor or felony incidents on the trails west of where Hamilton Boulevard and Larsen Park Road intersect.
For those with security concerns, it was noted at the meeting that plans for the bridge do include gates that would be locked at night.
After some discussion board member John Meyer made a motion to move forward with plans for the bridge, but his motion was not seconded. That spurred a reaction from the crowd.
"How can you not hear us?" Cindy Meier said.
Citizens at the meeting asked the other board members to state their position on the issue.
Melstad talked about the Dunes being a quiet, secluded community, and said the bridge does not seem to fit the vision for the community at this time. Ross Jordan said he was excited about the bridge at first, but then he heard the concerns of residents living in his area.
"It's not so much an issue of security as it is an issue of seclusion, privacy," Jordan said.
Prorok and Callaghan both said they could go either way on the issue.
A motion was made to hold two public forums, and then have the board make a decision at the next meeting. That motion failed.
Meyer made a motion to bring the issue to a public vote. That motion also failed.
Jordan made a motion to move forward with the budget without including the bridge project -- essentially killing the project. That motion failed.
Then Melstad made the motion that was approved -- to hold one public forum and have the board vote on the issue at its next meeting."
Here are the comments:
Lea wrote on August 23, 2006 7:16 AM:
"So very proud to live in South Sioux City where we embrace each other, work together and do not spend our time behind huge lawns, for fear of actually interacting with our fellow neighbors who often appear and speak differently than those who live in my house. Those differences make us a better, more vibrant community. I am now convinced I left South Dakota 30 years ago for very good reason. You Dunes folks don't know what you are missing by keeping rabble rousers like myself & my neighbors out of your elite community."
Confused wrote on August 23, 2006 1:15 AM:
"Hey, Dunes? Do you lock your doors at night? We do just like you do. Do you lock up your cars? So do we. The people that will be walking aren't anymore interested in breaking into your home than the people driving thru. In fact, thats quite a hike to be carrying what they might have stolen. Whats next Dunes? Ya going to put gates up and try to search every car that goes in and out of your community?"
Jay S. wrote on August 23, 2006 12:17 AM:
"You know with the rise of gang's and organized crime using bicycles as their chief mode of transportation I can understand their worry. This is one of the dumbest things I have ever seen out of a local government! And what is the waste of taxpayer money?? The Dune's is going to fundraise their portion of the bridge from private sources!"
Someone wrote on August 22, 2006 10:06 PM:
"There is a reason people have moved to the area and that would be lost"
Katsup wrote on August 22, 2006 10:04 PM:
"Anyone else have an opinion on how our community should or should not spend our own money?"
Someone wrote on August 22, 2006 8:59 PM:
"News Flash, Dunes residents...all those evil criminals in Riverside CAN drive across the river now. What makes you think they are going to walk? Your excuses for stopping that bridge is about the lamest I've ever heard. It's a wonderful opportunity for Siouxland..too bad you're too short sighted to see it."
Warren wrote on August 22, 2006 7:57 PM:
"What a waste of taxpayers money!"
nm+
Oh noes, the scary poor people are coming!
Could be worse, my friend just moved to Las Vegas. He could not find one place not falling apart in his price range that wasn't gated. Its funny because he teaches the "scary" poor people (Teach for America).
Falkon
Same thing here. You gotta keep the blacks out at all costs. Just say it, we all know your thinking it. (I'm addressing the stuck up elitist snobs, not you JV)
Kinda agree that it's the mentality, but it's not really so much of a racist thing rather something based on statistics. Most rich, suburbanite snobs are white, it's just a fact. For some reason, these factors give "entitlement." The entitlement to drive gas guzzling, polution spewing land yachts, the entitlement to own the whole road and not share with anyone else be it pedestrians, cyclists, etc, and the entitlement to be completely seperated from the rest of the world with mind off the driving task at hand. It's about ignorance, it's about pretentiousness. It's like the rich sububanite is willfully oblivious to the rest of the world, and all they want to do is protect this fragile little world they live in. They have to keep everyone else out unless they're up to their own standards. I hope they have radon leaks in their mountain top houses.
Caspar_s
My mother said her neighborhood has now been walled off. I am thinking that if I ever get back to South Africa, I won't recognise it.
Bright Blue - WEEPING
I knew a man who lived in fear
It was huge, it was angry, it was drawing near
Behind his house, a secret place
Was the shadow of the demon he could never face.
He built a wall of steel and flame
And men with guns, to keep it tame
Then standing back, he made it plain
That the nightmare would never ever rise again
But the fear and the fire and the guns remain.
It doesn't matter now
It's over anyhow
He tells the world that it's sleeping
But as the night came round
I heard its lonely sound
It wasn't roaring, it was weeping
It wasn't roaring, it was weeping.
SAX SOLO - Basil Coetzee
And then one day the neighbours came
They were curious to know about the smoke and flame
They stood around outside the wall
But of course there was nothing to be heard at all
"My friends", he said, "We've reached our goal
The threat is under firm control
As long as peace and order reign
I'll be damned if I can see a reason to explain
Why the fear and the fire and the guns remain."
It doesn't matter now
It's over anyhow
He tells the world that it's sleeping
But as the night came round
I heard its lonely sound
It wasn't roaring, it was weeping
It wasn't roaring, it was weeping.
SAX
It doesn't matter now
It's over anyhow
He tells the world that it's sleeping
But as the night came round
I heard its lonely sound
It wasn't roaring, it was weeping
It wasn't roaring, it was weeping.
Composed by: Heymann/ Fox/ Cohen/ Cohen
Recorded and released by Bright Blue in 1987. One of South Africa's greatest songs... includes instrumental references to 'Nkosi Sikelel' iAfrica'.
Serendipper
'Master' planned community? lol :rolleyes:
N_C
Not sure if this is clear or not but the residents of Dakota Dunes can do nothing about whether or not the bridge is built. As it is on public land. They can how ever control whether or not they fund it. If the vote is against it the bridge will still be built, just with using other funds to do so.
Here is the breakdown of opposed, in favor & undecided. 10% oppose it, 10% in faver of it, 80% undecided. What the Siouxland Trails Foundation is trying to do is get the 80% in favor of it. In doing so hopefully the CID board, Dakota Dunes's version of a city council, will vote in favor of the community funding the bridge.
I have learned there are some really powerful ally's in favor of the bridge. 2 of which are prominante & very influencial business owners that live in the Dunes. One has a habit of literally pulling out their checkbook & writting a check for however much funding is needed with out batting an eye if needed & if they see it as a good cause, such as this one.
As much as I hate the politics of this whole thing it looks like it will work out in favor of the bridge being funded & built in the end. I just do not like the process it has taken to get there. Never before has there been this kind of opposition to something like this.
N_C
Here is more from the paper:
Dunes appears 'snobbish'
SIOUX CITY -- Sioux City makes a kind gesture to Dakota Dunes proposing a foot bridge across the Big Sioux River. Some Dakota Dunes residents scoff at the idea saying they don't want our bad element crossing the "Rio Grande" into their community. One person was concerned it would make them look snobbish ... Oops, too late! -- Trent Smith
Alice wrote on August 24, 2006 4:51 PM:
"They live in South Dakota...there is no reason to be snobbish. We should actually feel sorry for them!"
kjm wrote on August 24, 2006 4:35 PM:
"I don't think they need a reason, a slogan works better. How about " We should hike 'em over there so we don't have to hike 'em over here."
Heidi wrote on August 24, 2006 11:41 AM:
"Adam is missing the point Trent made. The point is some Dunes people don't want our kind on their side of the river. It did not say anything about tax dollars but the "we are better than you attitude" makes them snobbish."
shelly wrote on August 24, 2006 9:47 AM:
"why would dakota dunes people be snobbish, a group of people living on a sand dune? waiting for it to go under water? paying at least 6 times more for a piece of property than most of us? i don't envy their situation at all. i wouldn't at all catagorize them as snobs."
Tim wrote on August 24, 2006 9:29 AM:
"I agree that if my taxes were going up to fund this project, I wouldn't be too happy, either. The biggest gripe I have about this entire subject was the reference to the increased 'criminal element' that would/could have access to the Dunes. If we are that bad an element, stay in South Dakota for your work, your shopping and your entertainment. We're just too frightening in Sioux City!"
Adam wrote on August 24, 2006 8:29 AM:
"Why do all of you think this was a generous offer from the City of Sioux City? After the grants, how much are the taxpayers paying? Total Cost to City of Sioux City taxpayers: $0, Total Cost to Dakota Dunes taxpayers: $220,000. I'm a Sioux City resident, and this would cost me nothing, but I can appreciate how the Dunes residents wouldn't want to pay for this. If our taxes were going to have to go to pay for all non-grant funded costs of the bridge many of us would oppose it too. Would that make us snobbish?"
Attitude of some Dunes
residents offensive
SIOUX CITY -- One. I am truly offended that someone in the Dakota Dunes area thinks I'm a thief just because I ride a bicycle across a bridge. Two. Let's not forget that state funds where used to build the "public" bike trails and not funds from the Dakota Dunes Bigotry Club. Three. The guy who had the thoughts and vision to build Dakota Dunes was from Stevenstown or for the uneducated Dunes people that would be Riverside. Russ Christianson is probaly turning over in his grave. -- Bill Clark
Someone wrote on August 23, 2006 8:05 PM:
"Excellent comments, Mr. Clark. Dunes residents put their pants on one leg at a time just like the rest of us. The trail is all ready there--right along the interstate and a criminal isn't going to need a bridge for criminal activity. I'd be way more worried about automobiles than I would bicycles. "
Connector would open
trails in both areas
RIO VERDE, Ariz. -- Congratulations to those who are considering a connection over the Sioux River from the Missouri River Trail to Dakota Dunes.
Such a connector was considered in the 1980s and 1990s when the city and Siouxland Bike and Fitness Trail Inc. was working on a master plan for a bicycle trail system. SIMPCO and other powers that be squandered a couple of excellent opportunities to make such a connection at the time the I-29 Sioux River bridges were being reconstructed. It would have been easy to hang a bicycle deck on the side of one of the bridge structures.
A connection between Sioux City and the Dunes would not only open up the trail systems in each area, but would give safe easy access to Union County blacktop roads to serious bikers. -- Robert R. Eidsmoe
Linking trails great
benefit to communities
SIOUX CITY -- I want to express my support of the trail connection between South Dakota and Iowa. I have been thrilled in the recent months to see progress being made around the tri-state area regarding our trail system. As a member of the Missouri River Runners and the Siouxland Cyclist, the trail can be a great asset for us hosting successful events. By providing races and rides, we are able to draw people to our great cities. This, in turn, creates a great economic benefit. In addition, I feel that this is an opportunity for healthier, happier lives for our tri-state citizens.
Oftentimes I travel to cities across the country and am impressed by the linking of their trails. It creates an enormous sense of community and pride to know that people care enough to work together and make this happen. I can enjoy a trail in a city that I do not know by hopping on my bike or running and following the maps to experience their city. I will find myself discovering many hidden beauties within a simple ride or run n- nature, housing, recreation, businesses, and especially n- the people.
Our area is struggling to make this connection and the decision they are facing is vital to taking a gigantic step forward to becoming a linked and thriving community. For those who are opposing this approval, I ask you to take a broad, open-minded view of what this can do for our community. I think you will see that it will outweigh any negative you are fearing. I pray that you will consider the many lives that this trail connection will enhance and the years of enjoyment that its patrons will experience.
As I have learned, life is short and we must live each day to it's fullest. We need fitness to maintain our quality of life and happiness. This trail connection is vital to the growth of our cities and the lives of its residents. Please give your support to the trail connection. -- Patty Considine, biker, runner, walker and fitness enthusiast
Blue Order
Classic freeriders. They want the benefits of trails, and will certainly use the bridge themselves to get to town for lattes and such, but they want somebody else-- the town-- to pay for benefits that the town and the Dunes will enjoy.
Dchiefransom
Classic freeriders. They want the benefits of trails, and will certainly use the bridge themselves to get to town for lattes and such, but they want somebody else-- the town-- to pay for benefits that the town and the Dunes will enjoy.
Actually, from the links N_C has put in, the town doesn't have to pay for a cent. They are using grant money that a higher level of government gave them. The Dunes would have to pay for their part of the bridge by taxing themselves more. One of The Dunes residents offered to pay the money himself. That's the offer they should take up.
Blue Order
Ah, I stand corrected. And yes, they should definitely accept the generosity of the checkwriter. Name a trail section-- or the bridge itself-- for him if it seems appropriate. Problem solved for everybody, no?
0_emissions :=)
That is a very racist statement and should not be tolerated.
:rolleyes: it's true, "white flight" is still happening today...why do you think these idiots are still building these type of "communities?", if you can call them that?
0_emissions :=)
This talk of master planned communities reminds me of Nadine Gordimer's short story, "Once Upon A Time (http://www.amazon.com/gp/product/0140165347/sr=8-2/qid=1156203916/ref=sr_1_2/102-8269552-0912954?ie=UTF8)" (short story in linked book) about a South African family who lives in one such community in order to feel "safer" from the rabble outside, protected by gun turrets, alarms, and razor wire. Of course it winds up biting them in the ass, as these things often do.
If you come across this book, spring for it.
The trend toward master planned communities and covenant-controlled extra-municipal developments scares the crap out of me. As do gated communities. There is a gated apartment multi-block-complex that is on my route to the grocery store. You have to go around it -- no way through. Of course, going THROUGH it would save me about 10 minutes when walking (the difference between melted ice cream and not), but their streets are all privately owned and I have no way of getting into the complex without a code. So much for "freedom of the road."
I call them "compounds."
I actually worked with a fellow who immigrated here with his family from S. Africa. Everything you say is true. He had a huge fence with razor wire, cameras, the whole nine yards. He had loaded guns all over the house. Every morning when he got into his vehicle, he would slide a loaded 9mm under his leg, for protection. That was his reason for moving here. He was sick of the violence. People would come up and shoot you at an intersection, just to steal your truck....
chipcom
"You know with the rise of gang's and organized crime using bicycles as their chief mode of transportation I can understand their worry."
:roflmao: :roflmao: :roflmao: :roflmao:
nm+
:roflmao: :roflmao: :roflmao: :roflmao:
Ooo, do we get to ban H2's with 40in rims too?