Talking the talk about the Riverwalk
By Birney Imes III
Editor and General Manager

If the letters to the editor and coffee shop roundtables are an accurate barometer of public support, the Riverwalk project is in trouble.

Proponents of the riverside walking trail are caught between the rock of public opinion and the hard place of meeting the obligations of a $1.3 million grant. Critics cite security and maintenance concerns along the city and county's abysmal record of maintaining its parks. If the proposal is not completed, those involved with the project say we will forfeit this and future grants.

How did we get in this predicament and how can we get out of it?
The idea of a riverwalk came up about half a decade ago in the boardrooms of Main Street Columbus and the Chamber of Commerce. Both organizations embraced the idea, seeing it as a quality of life enhancement and thus an economic development issue. The groups organized field trips to Chattanooga, Tenn. and Columbus, Ga., two communities with successful riverwalks.

Supervisors and councilmen, who went on both trips returned home enthusiastic, says David Sanders, a former president of Main Street and the Chamber, who heads the ad hoc committee overseeing the Riverwalk effort. Since those fact-finding missions, however, much water has flowed under the political bridge. We have a new mayor, councilmen and supervisors, most of whom have not seen those projects nor heard the glowing testimonials.

Our grant was awarded four years ago; we have until 2004 to complete the project. The funds are dispensed by Mississippi Department of Transportation (MDOT). For our $1.3 million project MDOT will supply 80 percent or $1.1 million and the city and county must come up with the remaining 20 percent. The local share can come in the form of in-kind services. As for the grant money, we must use it for its intended purpose or lose it.

As conceived, the project would create a lighted 10-foot wide cement walking trail from Riverside Park at the foot of River Hill to a grassy area where U.S. 82 crosses the waterway. There, walkers would have access to a nature trail that leads to the lock and dam. The project would also include a much needed revamping of Riverside Park, which resembles an industrial site more than a city park.

In 1999 and 2000 the city council and county supervisors voted to fund the project. Not everyone is on board, however. Supervisor President has been an outspoken critic of the project, saying it will provide "a home for the homeless people." Reportedly Councilman Larry Upton is adamantly opposed to the walkway.

Other public officials are understandably gun shy.
"We blow this and we're toast at the next election," an official said last week.

However, recent changes in city policy and personnel, most notably the hiring of City Planner Gregg Mims, signal a positive new direction. The city has taken over Lux Creek Park and much has been done there. The right of ways have been trimmed and cleaned and signs of vandalism have been removed. Saturday afternoon, half a dozen groups of fishermen were enjoying the park while a young couple walked their three dogs.

Progress-some of it public, some private-continues downtown. As we have written before, thanks to the efforts of Main Street Columbus and adventurous developers, downtown has become this community's most conspicuous success story, one we can all take pride in.

Regardless of what is going on elsewhere in the community, visitors judge us by the view from Main and Market.

The riverfront could and should be an extension of downtown. The potential is mind-boggling. Making over Riverside Park into a green space (get rid of the power lines, the zigzag of sidewalks and about half that wasteland of a parking lot); restoring the old river bridge and making it into a promenade (Peeling lead paint would have to be stripped away and caught in nets. Also the question of stability must be answered.) and creating a park across the river are all daunting but achievable goals.
The area could become a community focal point, a place where people of all ages could gather for discourse, exercise and society.

Sanders thinks the Riverwalk could be the first step in such a multi-phase process. He says it is essential that we fulfill the obligation of the grant.
"If we don't follow through with this, we will never be considered for a grant again," he said.

There are worse things.

Funding the project and then building something poorly designed would be worse. Community self-image and confidence in our leadership would take a devastating hit if we do a shoddy job or build another something no one uses.

Riverwalk proponents have their work cut out for them. The public must be sold on the idea, understanding that it is part of a larger master plan that will be executed competently, and they must believe the facility will be safe and carefully maintained.