Ellington

Almost 60 years ago, flood waters utterly inundanted the city of Jackson, swelling up out of Town Creek, which is now contained and flowing under the Hood building. Then, in 1979, the waters of the Pearl River rose up to reclaim the ancient swampland upon which Jackson is built. That 1979 Easter flood caused hundreds of thousands of dollars of damage and sparked a number of desperate anti-flood plans by the Army Corps of Engineers and private investors looking to protect their assets. One was the $84 million Shoccoe Dry Dam Project and later the 1996 Levee Plan, neither of which got off the ground—killed by disagreement among residents and designers.

Recently, the waters of the normally docile Pearl River rose alarmingly close to the top of the levees, fed by local rains and a virtual monsoon of rainwater north of the Pearl River Basin. Developers estimate a flood of the same magnitude as the Easter Flood would cause $1.1 billion in damages today.

Acting on this dreadful possibility, and coupled perhaps with the spirit of opportunism, representatives of Waggoner Engineering Inc., of Jackson, and the Rankin-Hinds Pearl River Flood and Drainage Control District presented to the Jackson City Council a sweeping plan for changing the face of downtown Jackson, by flooding the green space surrounding the waters of the Pearl.

The LeFleur Lakes Project has received positive responses from elected officials in both Hinds and neighboring Rankin County—which borders the other side of the river and must partner with Jackson if the project is to go forward—and is much in line with earlier plans to flood the area. The plan involves the construction of two weirs, which are dams in a stream or river to raise the water level or divert its flow, one beneath the river where it is crossed by I-55 and another beneath Interstate 20, creating the two lakes. After developers remove the abandoned city landfill from its bed beneath Gallatin Street, they plan to flood the area. Then the dredged soil used to create the infant lakes will be dumped in the middle of the bigger northern lake to form an island that environmental planner Barry Royals calls a "potential opportunity for economic development."

The plan will also feature higher, more imposing levees that are intended to restrict any incoming floodwaters to their respective lake beds.

Ward 1 Councilman Ben Allen said he welcomed the plan, which is still in its earliest developmental stages, with only an ongoing feasibility study underway at present. Allen offered congratulations to Royals regarding the firm's work, but pointed out disagreements have often stalled similar work in the past.

"We've been doing this for years, and nothing's come from it. I think it's a great idea, but the last two didn't work, not just because it didn't have public support, but (it) didn't have political support, either," Allen warned.

Ward 5's Frank Bluntson said he welcomed "any effort to stall floods."

"If it'll stop the floods, I'm for it 100 percent," Bluntson said, adding that the city was also sorely in need of economic development. "I'm on board with this."

Environmentalists voiced complaints similar to past arguments regarding the project, namely that the waters of the lake would swallow wetlands and cypress hardwoods already populating the area. Endangered species also occupy the habitat, namely the ringed sawback turtle and the gulf sturgeon. Also, while Lefleur's Bluff Park will not be affected, Mayes Lake and the numerous camping areas and walking trails that surround it will be under water. The Pearl River Basin Coalition is one of the agencies fighting the project.

"We believe that this loss of public access to land in favor of private development is against the best interest of citizens," the coalition said in a released statement. "LeFleur's Bluff State Park is a rare asset due to its location in the center of the largest metropolitan area in the state, its easy accessibility, its unique assortment of wildlife, important fossil beds, and high bluffs."

The organization also said the deforestation would aggravate a "heat island" effect in the city, whereby heat retention due to additional concrete and asphalt would raise temperatures and increase smog in the city during hot summer months.

Royals was unable to give an exact amount on the cost of the project, but the Army Corps of Engineers, which is partnering with local sponsors in developing the feasibility study, has already announced in the past that the federal government is not willing to fully fund the expensive project.

Royals said if developers could simply get the corps "to sign off on the fundamental design," then private enterprise would most likely pony up the big bucks to make the project a reality.

"If we wait on the corps to dot every 'i' we're not going to get it done," Royals said. "But a lot of people have already contacted us saying they would like to develop the money. It's a lot of money, but its doable because of that island. It's very valuable property."

Waggoner Engineering hopes to have a draft of the environmental feasibility study by early 2006. Public notice of the development would begin in the second quarter of 2006.

Previous Comments

ID

64875

Comment

It sounds like a great idea, if the politicians and powers in Jackson can ensure that Jackson and Hinds County derive a greater economic benefit than Rankin County. Otherwise, I fear most the major developments clustering on the Rankin County side with Hinds County getting minimal-to-no benefit. Although I can visualize some of the area mentioned in this article, it's difficult for me to grasp the concept without some kind of graphic illustration of what areas would be impacted or "under water". Hopefully when the public hearings are scheduled in 2006 I can get a better sense of how much the landscape will be impacted.

Author

Jeff Lucas

Date

2005-12-29T11:43:36-06:00

ID

64876

Comment

Is it just me, or is there something really striking about this part of Councilman Allen's comment that I've bolded: “We’ve been doing this for years, and nothing’s come from it. I think it’s a great idea, but the last two didn’t work, not just because it didn’t have public support, but (it) didn’t have political support, either,” Allen warned. That is an explicit acknowledgment that politicians (which I assume is what he means by "political support") are not working according to the will of their constituents, but to the will of someone else. After all, when politicians are doing what their constituents want, public support IS political support and vice versa. Just a thought. Aside from that, I'm with ejeff in wanting to see an illustration of exactly what this project would look like. I can't visualize it from the description in the article (which, I admit, is partly because I'm not terribly visual). Best, Tim

Author

Tim Kynerd

Date

2005-12-29T12:51:37-06:00

ID

64877

Comment

The plan involves the construction of two weirs, which are dams in a stream or river to raise the water level or divert its flow, one beneath the river where it is crossed by I-55 and another beneath Interstate 20, creating the two lakes. After developers remove the abandoned city landfill from its bed beneath Gallatin Street, they plan to flood the area. Then the dredged soil used to create the infant lakes will be dumped in the middle of the bigger northern lake to form an island that environmental planner Barry Royals calls a “potential opportunity for economic development.” I see this in my mind. I think it'll look great. I rode by the area not too long ago and the area they want to flood is not being used much and would me the city look so beautiful. with an islan iin the middle of one with condos and bookstores.

Author

JSU

Date

2005-12-30T11:02:56-06:00

ID

64878

Comment

Here's a rendering from the project's website, twolake.com It sounds like a great idea, if the politicians and powers in Jackson can ensure that Jackson and Hinds County derive a greater economic benefit than Rankin County. Exactly. I don't want to see Rankin county getting to claim the proposed island as theirs or something ridiculous like that.

Author

millhouse

Date

2005-12-30T11:13:11-06:00

ID

64879

Comment

What makes this "Twin Lakes" different from the other "Twin Lakes?" I'm all for flood control; but, I don't see how this is any different from the plan released a couple of years ago. I thought they were still studying the feasability of that plan? Trent Lott's editorial in this paper about having local leaders "pull the triger" on Twin Lakes or one of the other proposed solutions was just this past year. Full support from our Senators! Is there a Water Slide? ;-)

Author

pikersam

Date

2005-12-30T11:17:39-06:00

ID

64880

Comment

" I don't see how this is any different from the plan released a couple of years ago." The name of this project shifted from "Two Lakes" to "LeFleur Lakes".... it's still the same project, though. Is this what you're talking about?

Author

millhouse

Date

2005-12-30T11:47:58-06:00

ID

64881

Comment

The title of the story is "'Twin Lakes' All Over Again" and it reads like this group has come along just recently and just presented it to the City Council. I thought they did that 2 years ago? I've been to local business meetings in 2003 where the Chamber touted the progress of the project and how successful it will be. I am confused by the article because it doesn't give any dates of when Royals went before City Council or if this is the same group who presented the plan before but with a new name. However, It sounds recent. I thought that's why they did the article to kind of point out that this is the same project with a few different players. Which would be par for the course with Melton. And, to hear the quotes from Bluntson, you would gather he has never heard of any type of "flood control" before this plan.

Author

pikersam

Date

2005-12-30T12:25:29-06:00

ID

64882

Comment

as long as it's "inside" the Jackson city limits, I'll supoort it. It doesn't look like it from the website though. Looks more like they'll flood south jackson to the west a bit. Flowood ?

Author

JSU

Date

2005-12-30T14:59:07-06:00

ID

64883

Comment

From the website: "It will also add 600 acres to Jackson's central business district, which will provide active growth to the metropolitan area for several generations."" It seems like this project would really revolutionize the entire area, and maybe even the whole state. I hate to say it, but I think I'd be all for this project even if Jackson got the shorter end of the stick. I'd hate that part, but this is for the better good of Mississippi. IF this project can provide actual flood control, I think it should be a go. They've been doing environmental studies on this thing longer than they've been studying the King Ed, though...I may not live to see its completion. lol!

Author

millhouse

Date

2005-12-30T17:46:08-06:00

ID

64884

Comment

Tim, What I was referring to in the prior 2 "failed projects" was the non-support of the "Shoccoe Dam" and the Corps of Engineers "Levee Projects" by the public and the corresponding governments. The only real support these 2 plans had was from the U.S Government. Paradoxically, the "LeFleur Lakes Flood Control Project" has and has had universal support from the 16 Governmental entities affected by its construction [with the Jackson City Council and Hinds County Board of Supervisers voting UNANIMOUSLY for its completion years ago]. Our federal government has been the inpediment in its fruition, but now, with a new Corps director in Vicksburg and Senator Cochran in his Chairmanship of Appropriations, the time has finally arrived to "pull the trigger" on the pursuit of the project. The architect of this project is John McGowan, a NE Jackson geologist and engineer. It will work and will not only conquer the flooding problems associated with the Pearl River but will have an economic impact on our area that will "dwarf" Nissan. We all need to get behind this effort and keep in mind what projects such as this have done in sister cities such as Austin, San Antonio and many, many others.

Author

Ben Allen

Date

2005-12-31T16:38:46-06:00

ID

64885

Comment

From what I understand, Ben, there are very good reasons not to get behind Mr. McGowan's project. You might remind us specifically why we should support it, and then dispel the problems with the project. So far, the Jackson Free Press is wholly unconvinced that Mr. McGowan is on the right track. And saying that he has the political support he needs does not address the very real environmental and efficacy concerns about this project. I won't detail them because there are some folks much more educated than I on the project whom I expect to chime in. Also, what do you think of Mr. Melton's announcements yesterday about going around state and federal law and imploding the King Edward? (You might want to answer that on the King Edward thread now at the top of the site.) Meantime, everyone be sure to read Jesse Yancy's JFP cover story on this topic from April 2004. And we have more stories on the way. Certainly, there is a lot more research to do on this than blind faith in McGowan's promises to make us more like Austin, or some such. We're Jackson, and we have our own unique circumstances to deal with. BTW, happy new year, Ben. ;-)

Author

DonnaLadd

Date

2005-12-31T16:58:13-06:00

ID

64886

Comment

Do we have proof that this will control flooding? I seem to remember attending a meeting a couple of years ago at the Ag Museum when this issue was not resolved. What impact would this have on the houses in NE Jackson that are north of the twin lakes. Would they be less likely to flood from the river. I know many houses in Jackson flood because of rising creeks and poor drainage. Would this project help those people? I would like to have much more information.

Author

realtime

Date

2005-12-31T17:09:31-06:00

ID

64887

Comment

What I was referring to in the prior 2 "failed projects" was the non-support of the "Shoccoe Dam" and the Corps of Engineers "Levee Projects" by the public and the corresponding governments. The only real support these 2 plans had was from the U.S Government. Thanks for the clarification. IOW, what you meant was that the project lacked local support and only had support at the federal level. That makes more sense. I take it you understood my point about the way your comment sounded. :-) And I'll echo Donna's Happy New Year, even though she knows you and I don't. Best, Tim

Author

Tim Kynerd

Date

2005-12-31T18:12:29-06:00

ID

64888

Comment

Yes, your information helps a lot - thanks! Happy New Year!

Author

pikersam

Date

2005-12-31T18:28:42-06:00

ID

64889

Comment

The architect of this project is John McGowan, a NE Jackson geologist and engineer. It will work and will not only conquer the flooding problems associated with the Pearl River but will have an economic impact on our area that will "dwarf" Nissan. Ben, you're hedging on this guy pretty hard, aintcha? Let me ask it more formally...ahem...Do you happen to know if John McGowan has an interest in this project beyond professional curiosity as a geologist and engineer? :-) It's my understanding that he's a developer, and he's already been developing projects that are *near* the Pearl that he expects to have *lakeside* once he floods the river to build lakes. Which is fair enough...the guy is entitled to try and make a buck. But I think it's worth *noting* that the guy's "flood control" solution is probably going to fit that dynamic. Seriously, though....some of the criticism of the two lakes plan is that it's *pure* engineering, in the sense that it's based on getting a whole lot of land and landmass to the point where everything is a *few feet* above the 1979 "100 year event" level. That's interesting, but I'm not sure this is purely an engineering problem, nor do I know if his "calculations" take into consideration how much impermeable space (roads, parking lots, home foundations) has been added to the Pearl River basin and how many trees have been lost in the process. All of those are part of the *system* -- hell, global warming can probably be tossed in there, too! -- that could create an even more damaging flood event than 1979. One that, you know, rises a few more feet and cover the "island." I know a little something about this because I took part in a project that explored the trees in the Pearl River basin and took a look -- for instance -- at their benefits not only for lifestyle and oxygen production (which I'm big on, personally :-) but also in their ability to *process* rain water. In a way, this kind of pure engineering solution is part of the problem that Jackson is faced with in the first place. The Welty Reservoir (see how that rolls off the tongue? :-) was never designed for flood control and, in fact, does a number of enviromental things that make flood control more difficult in Jackson, particularly considering the development that continues in the floodplain. McGowan's plan would radically alter the tree canopy in Jackson and it fails to take into consideration the fact that the Pearl is more than just a trench with water running through it...it's a *system*. (Probably something that God thought pretty hard about. :-) The endeavor's flood control merits are debatable mostly because I think the premise is shaky -- that the worst thing we'll ever see is a 1979 event and that we haven altered the lanscape enought to make that same event worse (many believe we have).

Author

Todd Stauffer

Date

2006-01-01T15:26:15-06:00

ID

64890

Comment

Note, for instance, that it seemed like a good idea at one point to put up levees that could withstand a category 3 hurricane in New Orleans. Maybe with that as our model we *can* find the political will to get the Madison County dam built. Two/Twin/LeFleurs/McGowan's Lakes are not the only solution for economic development along the Pearl. There are more conservative approaches that I've been impressed with when they've been done in other towns. There are less costly solutions that would enable us to use the Pearl as the extraordinary resource that it is -- perhaps the last remaining "wild" river in a major metropolitan area in the U.S. And, c'mon. Just looking at the pictures, aren't you a little skeptical about that island? We're all aware that these architect drawings of supposedly perfect little township New Urbanism developments usually end up losing the church steeples and public croquet fields and working out to be waterfront subdivisions of micromansions, right? Where's the Wal-Mart gonna fit?! :-) - Todd

Author

Todd Stauffer

Date

2006-01-01T15:26:27-06:00

ID

64891

Comment

Todd... John McGowan lives 2 doors up from me on a lake he developed [on Meadowbrook Road]. He has just finished another 82 acre lake at the end of Meadowbrook Road [in the flood way AND the flood plain] that has 12 three acre lots and was constructed after 9 years of negotiations with the Corps, and in the final analysis, approved by them. My home sits ADJACENT to both these projects and before I purchased my home , I met with him on numerous occasions to get what I was comfortable as to what the "facts" are regarding both these projects , seeing that I would be the "first to go" if flooding was impacted by either of these developments. All I am saying is that I really hope that anyone who expresses concern on these projects MEETS with the developer and ASKS these questions of him. Yes he has a small [SMALL] parcel of properties that would be "lakeside"....but the city of Jackson and other cities as well have the vast majoriy of these holdings. We have an opportunity here to REALLY help the future of our city. Meet with him, ask questions and then draw your own conclusions based on what you hear from the engineers themselves. If you conclude, after this, that you feel the project has more demerits that merits , oppose it, but realize what we can have and then NOT HAVE with everything considered with this innovative project. It is time, in my humble opinion, to embrace efforts that can and will PROFOUNDLY affect the economic future of Jackson. If some of the "anti-arguments" I have heard were the historical "rule of the day" , we wouldn't have had the first hydro-electric dam in our country. Just say yes to a meeting....I will set it up.

Author

Ben Allen

Date

2006-01-01T16:18:40-06:00

ID

64892

Comment

I won't hone in much on this discussion, but I will say as the editor of the JFP, that Mr. McGowan has not been anxious to talk with us in the past about this projec or to address our concerns. We will be happy to sit down and hear his pitch and ask him in-depth questions about the project. Bring it on. I'm all about economic development as you well know, Ben. But I'm also not about unintelligent development that could lead to even more problems in the future, especially when it comes to the very real issue of flood control. I'm not saying that is the case here, but there are very real questions that need to be addressed about this scheme before the JFP -- and hopefully the community -- signs on to it whole hog. Just saying it'll be "good" for the economy without hard evidence isn't good enough. And I doubt very seriously, as Todd alludes, that it is the smartest way to develop the Pearl, even if it is very attractive to Mr. McGowan himself. But he is not our top concern, although if he can make money while the smartest "flood control" and development path is taken, more power to him. I'm all about entrepreneurship. But not at the cost of the community and its safety and future. To my thinking, the ball is in McGowan's court to prove that this plan makes more sense than it seems to. I've seen more than enough press releases written on his behalf in other media that do not address the concerns, and take a rather naive approach to this issue. Blind faith gets us into enough trouble already as a community and a society. I don't do blind faith, even if it's prettied up by words like "profoundly affectg the economic future of Jackson." That's a sound bite, and I've heard enough empty sound bites in the last year to last me three lifetimes. Let's get down to the nitty-gritty of cold, hard facts.

Author

DonnaLadd

Date

2006-01-01T16:46:30-06:00

ID

64893

Comment

I would love to see a JFP interview with Mr. McGowan about this project. Another local weekly did one with him about 5 years ago, I think. This is where I initially learned about the project. The JFP is THE place to get the word about about this thing. And, I know that he will be asked hard questions, so resistance to an interview may be a telling sign. Of course, he may want to wait until the Corp study is finished. Any word on when it will be done?

Author

millhouse

Date

2006-01-01T17:49:58-06:00

ID

64894

Comment

We're talking about hundreds of acres of forested land at the end of Wild Valley Drive; East Northside; and Meadowbrook. Maybe several thousand acres. This was adventure land when I was a boy growing up on Wild Valley. It could be prime real estate for residential and high end commercial/office growth. Jackson is out of convenient land for home building and thus an expanding tax base. This lake project would solve it for a long time. Economic growth goes hand in hand with this. And yes it must be properly planned. It's an unprecedented opportunity in new Urban planning. Atlanta should be so lucky.....

Author

ATLExile

Date

2006-01-04T13:04:38-06:00

ID

64895

Comment

I remember those days too ATLexile. we rode our BMX bikes down through there lots of time for fun or just muddling around in the various puddles for crawdads to go fishing with. it will definitely improve jackson's "look" from above(planes) and panoramic views. maybe that old outdated rusty structure of a Coliseum can be the new home for the thousands of pigeons that currently live in the KEH after they flood the area.

Author

JSU

Date

2006-01-10T10:11:53-06:00

ID

64896

Comment

So much optimism...and another failure to capitalize on a meaningful project.

Author

QB

Date

2008-03-19T13:26:22-06:00