Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Get email alerts on the Greenway topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
Consultant outlines phased Can Creek Greenway extension, recommends sections 3 and 4 first
Summary
Consultant Ben Cathy presented a phased master plan to extend the Can Creek Greenway from Bill Park toward I‑26, recommending sections 3 and 4 be built first with a construction estimate just under $800,000 and a plan to seek larger federal grants; council to consider final action in December.
Consultant Ben Cathy presented a phased master plan for extending the Can Creek Greenway from Bill Park toward I‑26, telling the Fletcher Town Council the study’s priority is to identify a holistic route before committing to individual construction segments. "The first step...was trying to determine that overall path or strategy to get from the current greenway system at Bill Park to the interstate," Ben said during his presentation.
The plan breaks the route into logical phases designed to limit early costs while preserving future connectivity. Ben recommended building sections three and four first — a self‑contained walk and park with a proposed parking area off Rock — and listed section one as a bid alternate if prices allowed. He said portions near the railroad and Highway 25 present easement, permitting and flood‑risk complications that make crossings costly and technically challenging.
McGill construction estimates presented to the council put the buildout just under $800,000; staff noted the town has $100,000 already appropriated in the current CIP that could be used as local match. Town staff told the council they will pursue larger federal grants to complete the entire corridor but warned those awards would likely require a local match and additional preliminary design and environmental review.
Council members pressed on access and parking. Ben estimated the proposed lot would hold roughly 20 cars and said overflow could be managed by enlarging the lot or using nearby shoulder areas while cautioning against encouraging roadside parking where truck traffic is present. He also said more complicated underpass work (for section two and section six) will require railroad and DOT approvals and flood permits and will substantially increase schedule and cost.
Town staff asked the council to consider the recommendation and aim to make a decision by the December meeting so consultants can begin design and satisfy grant obligations. No formal vote to move forward with construction was taken at the meeting; staff said Ben will return for the December meeting to present refined estimates and next steps.
The council’s next procedural step will be to confirm which sections to include in the town’s grant match request and direct staff to start preliminary design and environmental submissions required by the grant programs.
