Committee authorizes staff to discuss Hamilton Carr Greenway trail relocation after erosion threatens trail

The Planning and Parks Committee on July 21 authorized staff to sit at the table with Great Rivers Greenway (GRG) and develop better cost estimates and options to relocate the Hamilton Carr Greenway where erosion has endangered the trail.

Why it matters: erosion along Clark/Carre (Hamilton Carr) Creek has reached a point where the trail corridor is at risk of failing. A full stream-bank restoration estimate previously exceeded $1 million; committee and staff discussed a relocation option that could be lower but still requires firm estimates.

Director Butich presented background: Great Rivers Greenway had earlier assessed a restoration approach that would have cost in excess of $1 million and declined to proceed with that scope. Instead, GRG is exploring trail relocation onto donated adjacent property the organization owns; relocating the trail could save the existing alignment and avoid an immediate large bank-restoration expense.

Committee members and staff discussed uncertainty about what portion of cost — if any — would fall to the city. Director Butich estimated that relocation of the trail itself would likely be in the “hundreds of thousands” of dollars, but the drainage and stream-bank restoration work would remain a costlier long-term issue. Council members asked staff to clarify timelines, the immediate safety risk and whether the trail could be expected to flood in high river-crest events; staff confirmed that the corridor is within the floodplain and that any relocated trail design will account for periodic inundation.

Action and vote: a committee member moved to authorize the department to continue discussions with Great Rivers Greenway and return with more detailed numbers and a recommendation; the motion was seconded and approved unanimously.

Discussion vs. decision: the committee authorized staff to pursue more information and coordinate with GRG; no construction contract or funding commitment was made at the meeting.

What’s next: staff will seek firm cost estimates from GRG and engineering partners, clarify GRG’s schedule and report back to the committee with recommended city roles and any funding requests.

Ending: committee members emphasized the need to understand whether the threatened section poses an imminent collapse risk and asked staff to prioritize clarity on timing and cost when they return with recommendations.