Recent conversations with CPKC Railway have left McGregor city officials questioning the plans—and the city’s role in the plans—for two separate railroad projects potentially occurring within McGregor.

Mayor Anne Kruse and Economic Development Director Brandi Crozier shared updates on the two projects—one a replacement of the trestle bridge behind Kwik Star and the other proposed improvements to the railroad crossing at the foot of Main Street—at the Aug. 5 city council meeting.

“You get different information, really, with every conversation,” Crozier told the council.

With the bridge project, for example, Crozier said the city was under the impression until just that day that the current trestle bridge would be replaced with a box culvert. Engineers previously suggested the city incorporate flood gates into that project, work that would also prompt the need for a stormwater retention basin or similar infrastructure. This would temporarily store inland stormwater and allow it to be pumped into the river during heavy rainfall events when the flood gates were closed to protect the community from river flooding.

Crozier said she and a representative from Davy Engineering “were totally thrown off guard” that day because “they are, in fact, no longer doing a box culvert. They are going to replace it with a bridge. So everything we spent the last two years talking about related to a box culvert and flood gates is now done, or different.”

The bridge replacement is planned for 2027, she added.

Alex Cronk from Davy Engineering felt the railroad likely did not want to be responsible for flood gates or incur the hassle of working with another entity.

Crozier said, while the city will still need flood mitigation efforts, they will be different than originally planned—and hopefully less expensive if a retention basin is not needed.

“This may be a blessing in disguise because we can do this separate from the railroad and at our own pace,” she told the council.

Discussions about the crossing improvements at the foot of Main Street, where drivers and pedestrians access the riverfront park and parking lot, were similarly confusing. Earlier this year, the city was informed it was approved for the Railway-Highway Crossings (Section 130) Program, which would have installed arms at the crossing. The request was unknown to—and pre-dated—current city officials, who were under the impression McGregor would have no choice but to do the project whether it still wanted to or not.

“Now, there seems to be softening on that position,” Kruse stated.

“[The railroad] was pretty adamant that, ‘You applied for it, you’re doing it.’ No choice,” Crozier said. “Since then, I’ve been resisting moving forward because I can’t figure out how to fund it.”

On CPKC’s end, work would largely be funded with federal highway money through the DOT, according to Crozier. However, the project would necessitate relocation of the public restrooms and fencing to improve safety in the area. The city was additionally considering lowering the flood berm, which is higher than necessary, to create a trail that would improve accessibility between the riverfront and nearby First Street parking lot. Those pieces would include some engineering and construction expenses to the city.

“When we talked to them last week,” said Crozier, “suddenly they had money to move a public restroom. But there would still be some other costs, for sure.”

“I think the bigger surprise was them back peddling on that we could potentially get out of doing the project,” she added. “That may not be the best move to make. I don’t know. That’s kind of up to you guys to decide.”

According to Crozier, the downside of opting out is McGregor would miss out on increased safety mechanisms.

“Part of it is we need to have accessibility to get to the park and into the parking lot and to the Kwik Star parking lot and to the parking up by Riverview,” Crozier told the council. “There are so many pros and cons to weigh out with deciding this. This is more informational, but at some point we need to gather what those pros and cons are and start going through them so a decision can be made.”

Council member Mel Wild suggested the city could still tackle some improvements, such as lowering the berm, even if the crossing work doesn’t proceed. He wondered if a cost analysis was available to help officials decide.

Crozier said that information is difficult to secure since the railroad is a private business.

“They don’t want to give you those costs or be very clear about what it is they are going to engineer and what you’re going to engineer,” she explained. “I was trying to work out what do I really need for funding and what components of this project do we have to do versus what we want to do. It’s clear as mud.”

In other agenda items, the council, at the recommendation of the McGregor Parks and Greenspaces Committee, approved allocating $1,251 from the recent sale of the old Triangle Park fountain and a $1,000 donation from residents Bob and Marsha Clark toward proposed art installations for Triangle Park. Crozier said the installations, including an art piano, tiki-style signage, utility vault wrap and replacement of the plaque on the historical triangle fire alarm, are not part of McGregor’s Creative Places grant, but were selected by that committee as the “icing on the cake” for park improvements. The total cost of the installations is $2,565.

Now several months into a trial period, the council also approved continuing to meet twice per month—at 5:30 p.m. on the first and third Wednesdays. City staff previously proposed increasing the number of monthly meetings from one to two in order to shorten meetings and limit special meetings, which they noted can be difficult to schedule.

“It seems to have cut down on special meetings and makes people’s lives easier to plan,” mayor Kruse said. “We’ve enjoyed shorter meetings.”

The amount of city business also necessitates more frequent meetings, agreed council member Charlie Carroll.

“There’s a lot going on right now,” he said. “Maybe, down the road, we could go back to one.”

The council will consider an ordinance, as well as compensation, at an upcoming meeting.