April 2, 2023

If you’ve got nothing but time and at least a passing interest in urban planning, have I got a map for you.

It’s the result of weeks of online public input into the proposed Riverline District, and I readily will admit I ran out of time once I started digging into all the comments left on it.

On one hand, this is citizen-powered democracy at its best. Ask for input in the public sector and sometimes you shall receive – but not always.

In this case, feedback is anything but lacking for the approximately 10 acres east of downtown adjacent to Nelson Park. Ideas abound. Cautionary clues exist. And I’m glad I’m not the one tasked with making sense of it all.

If you want to take a look for yourself, here’s a link.

I don’t remember ever seeing such a convergence and divergence of input around a potential development. I attended multiple such meetings for The Steel District, for instance, but much of that area involved private development. While I think there was an appreciation for being asked to provide input, there also was a recognition that the market would drive much of the ultimate investment.

Maybe the Falls Park master plan provided a clue of what was to come with the Riverline District as I remember the consultants running that plan were amazed at the volume of feedback from Sioux Falls citizens.

Engagement is a great thing … but now it’s probably time to set expectations, and that’s true both for the large group attempting to guide this effort as well as for the citizens hoping to see something materialize there.

Here are a few of my big takeaways:

Based on the comments, there is a clear reluctance from many who participated in this exercise to support a large-scale publicly funded sports venue. To be clear, I did not read all the comments and I have not seen the results of the survey that went with this, which might give a broader look at the sentiment. But each time I saw someone mention a stadium, the number of negative reactions far exceeded the number of positives.

There could be multiple reasons behind this – fear over cost, a lack of information about tenant options for a potential stadium, maybe concerns around access – but it’s important for those leading this process to not dismiss what to me was a pretty clear message, albeit an unscientific one.

There seemed to be a mix of reactions to some sort of indoor athletic amenity. I saw some comments about indoor recreation and some advocates for indoor ice, including curling. I even saw suggestions around horse racing and cricket. In some cases, I admittedly couldn’t tell if they were serious.

Some of the more intriguing feedback came from people who seemed to be trying to think broadly about the potential of the space.

“Build an outdoor/indoor plaza type of space,” someone wrote. “Multiuse buildings with an emphasis on pedestrian foot traffic that would integrate into the trail and river. Sioux Falls needs more walkable, outdoors-focused space. No one wants to attend a subpar sports game.”

Someone else suggested an area that could seasonally accommodate everything from food and beverage kiosks to booths selling kites to arts and crafts activities – or even a container park to complement the railyard theme. I’ve been to a container park, and they’re great – though also not the easiest to fill with retailers.

Another person suggested creating a community gathering place with “sports courts not often seen. Rock climbing wall, pickleball, disc golf, etc.,” the person said. “Host classes, partner with libraries, park with weight training equipment, make it a space to use year-round. Focus on low-income development as that is an undeveloped group in this area.”

I do think whatever is proposed has to reflect both the neighborhood around it and the opportunity we see as a city to drive downtown’s momentum east to Cliff Avenue.

And I don’t think we should discount the idea of some larger-scale public facility that will draw more activity. For anything largely publicly funded, I’m inclined to think multi-use, as best that’s possible, probably inspired in part by a recent conversation I had with Jered Johnson, CEO of Pepper Entertainment.

We were talking about the growth of his company and the evolution of the entertainment scene in Sioux Falls, and I asked him if there were any venue styles he thought the community still lacked.

“We call them boutique amphitheaters,” he said, while quickly noting that’s different from Levitt at the Falls. “Apples to bananas.”

These amphitheaters include reserved seating and a capacity of 5,000 or less, designed to create a festival-like environment for summer series.

The Vetter Stone Amphitheater in Mankato, Minnesota

A lot of acts want to tour in the summer and only play outdoors, Johnson said.

“The fairgrounds is an option, but it’s not a permanent stage, and there are extra expenses,” he said. “There are tours that only target boutique amphitheaters … so we lose the opportunity to bring them to Sioux Falls.”

Barenaked Ladies, Willie Nelson, Train, Goo Goo Dolls and Kip Moore have done such tours, he said.

“The Levitt is gorgeous and a great community asset, but to have a 3,500- to 5,000-seat amphitheater where we can do ticketed national touring, permanent concessions and a lawn you can scale or do a green space is one of the things markets this size typically evolve into,” Johnson said. “This thing would just crush it in Sioux Falls. We have the foundation built now. It would be filled well in advance.”

If we’re being honest, community leaders didn’t sell Sioux Falls citizens on the idea of the Denny Sanford Premier Center with the promise of watching local sports teams in a nicer venue. They sold it on improving the concert scene and attracting more unique events. And the market has responded, with tickets sales that have gained attention in the industry.

The more I talked with Johnson the more I realized live music, outdoor entertainment and recreation and taking advantage of the time people enjoy coming downtown — in the nicer weather — is probably what it will take to build consensus around a plan for the Riverline District. If we can add athletic uses to that plan, it’s a bonus, but it’s not going to be what galvanizes widespread public support.

The biggest takeaway from weeks of public input is this: There’s a clear appetite in Sioux Falls to take advantage of the rare opportunity this property provides.

The most important first step is to secure the land – which in its own right requires a significant funding commitment that shouldn’t be assumed before it’s finalized. Without the land, nothing can happen, so it’s important those supporting this potential redevelopment make their voices heard as that approval process moves forward.

I can point to multiple instances when the city had opportunities to acquire land or buildings and passed because it was perceived politically to be too tough of a sell. I always regretted not buying when we had the chance, and it always has ended up costing more to accomplish the same objective in the long run.

But as long as we’re setting expectations, it’s important to remember any new development here is going to come with a hefty price tag and an increased cost to finance it. It may be that until the market cooperates, we end up holding land for future use.

Still, opportunities like this don’t surface often, and any large-scale public-private project is going to have some twists, turns, surprises and disagreements along the way. But I’m encouraged by the early interest, the broad coalition that has come together and the ideas that have been generated so far.

We owe it to future generations of Sioux Falls to make the Riverline District a reality, whatever form that ultimately takes.

Jodi’s Journal: For women and girls, success needs recalibration