Guthrie staff say federal review and rising costs prompt withdrawal of Elbow‑area RTP trail application

Parks staff informed the Guthrie Parks and Urban Forestry Board on Sept. 25 that the Oklahoma Tourism and Recreation Department has recommended withdrawing the city’s RTP (Recreational Trails Program) application for the planned Elbow‑area trail. "They were basically recommending our withdrawal of the project," staff said during the update (staff update begins SEG 305).

Staff described a chain of problems that led to the recommendation: cultural‑resource studies conducted under the federal Section 106 process identified multiple areas of historic concern; the city notified 11 tribes and did not receive a response from the Osage, a missing reply that staff said factored into the state’s advice; the 2022 cost estimate used in the application no longer reflects 2025–26 construction prices; and the project would likely require easements from the Oklahoma Department of Transportation and onerous on‑site oversight (staff said an inspector on site 24/7 could be required if artifacts were found). Staff also said a third‑party cultural study (Switchgrass Consulting) had completed shovel‑test work (12 test locations) that yielded no artifacts but that the surrounding area and aggregated findings raised enough concern for the funder.

The packet cited the original 2022 budget and funding picture: an RTP grant award of about $300,000 and a total project cost estimated then at $601,228. Staff told the board that changing construction costs and the added compliance steps make the original federal scope "no longer viable" and suggested the city pursue other locations or use local funds to avoid the federal red tape and Section 106 constraints.

Board members expressed disappointment and asked about alternatives. Members and staff discussed options that include: (1) re‑scoping the project to avoid sensitive areas and resubmitting in the future; (2) pursuing a locally funded, lower‑impact natural trail that would avoid federal requirements; or (3) looking for other trail locations that are less constrained by archaeological and easement issues. Staff committed to continuing to explore options but framed the immediate outcome as a staff recommendation to withdraw from the current RTP scope rather than a final council decision.

What happens next: staff will continue to explore alternate sites and funding approaches and provide more detailed cost figures once the fiscal‑year close reconciles earlier estimates. The board did not take a formal final action on the grant at the meeting other than accepting staff’s update and direction to pursue alternatives (provenance: topic starts SEG 305; update closes SEG 876).