Columbia Falls city officials discussed whether to hire Alpine Geotechnical for a $35,000 subsurface study after a June slope failure on the hillside above Second Avenue East.
The council was asked to authorize geotechnical borings and analysis at three locations to assess soil conditions and guide hazard mitigation; staff emphasized access challenges and the need to know subsurface conditions before designing a remedy.
The work would include borings to determine soil composition and provide recommendations for stabilizing the bluff, which city staff said is steep in places and had previously experienced water infiltration and slope sloughing. City Manager Eric and Public Works staff member Sean described the difficulty of safe access and told council the borings would inform any needed remediation.
Several council members questioned whether the study was necessary now, calling the $35,000 price “expensive” to confirm a problem they already observed. One council member suggested skipping the study and proceeding straight to rapid mitigation for potential life‑safety risks; others replied that acting without an engineering plan could increase liability if a later remedy failed. City staff and the attorney were asked to return with analysis on legal exposure and the likely range of mitigation measures and costs.
City staff noted emergency tree removal and temporary stabilization steps already taken after the water main failure that contributed to the slope change. The engineering firm’s cover letter, cited by staff, stated “progressive slope movement or creep is not obvious at this time” and that additional mass movement was not believed to be imminent, but borings would define soil layers and inform the design of any retaining structures or other fixes.
After extended discussion about cost, potential future expenses (for example, a substantial retaining wall) and municipal liability, council did not vote on the contract at the meeting. Instead, members directed staff and the city attorney to return with more information about liability, the likely scope of engineering recommendations, and options for limited or staged mitigation.
The council asked that the subsequent report include expected mitigation alternatives and cost ranges so elected officials can judge whether to proceed with study, immediate mitigation, or an alternative approach that may limit the city’s exposure.
Council indicated the matter will be brought back for formal action once staff and the city attorney present their findings.