Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Get email alerts on the Active Transportation Planning topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
Council considers 100% state grant to plan Appleway Trail extension; members split on priorities
Summary
City staff asked the Spokane Valley City Council on Sept. 2 for direction to pursue a 100% state DOT planning grant to study an Appleway Trail extension; council members expressed mixed views about eligibility, ownership and safety priorities.
City staff asked the Spokane Valley City Council on Sept. 2 for direction on pursuing a state DOT planning grant in the Connecting Communities program (referred to in the meeting as the Sandy Williams grant) to scope an extension of the Appleway Trail across the west side of the city.
Engineering Manager Adam Jackson described the grant as a 100% award with no local match intended for active transportation projects on or adjacent to state legacy highways and communities affected by barriers to opportunity. “The Appleway Trail is, what has been proposed tonight,” Jackson said, describing the proposal as a planning exercise that would not fund construction but would define possible projects and public outreach.
Several council members said they were cautious. Council Member Patton urged staff to prioritize projects with immediate safety needs and questioned whether Appleway was an eligible legacy highway for the program; Jackson replied Appleway is not listed as a legacy highway and that last year staff had considered Pines Road (SR‑27) projects that better match the program’s crash‑risk and equity focus. Council Member Merkel raised concerns that extending the Appleway Trail could connect areas with homeless encampments and described the existing trail as an “attractive nuisance.”
Jackson said the planning study would evaluate right‑of‑way, ownership, costs and connections to regional projects such as the North Spokane Corridor and would perform public outreach. Staff noted the city does not currently own the proposed western trail corridor and that the planning effort would assess whether acquisition or easements would be needed.
Council asked for options. City Manager John Homan said staff could seek other grant opportunities but that alternatives would likely fall outside the current application cycle; Deputy Mayor Hatenberg emphasized regional coordination and historical context for legacy highways. After discussion the council indicated consensus to proceed with the proposed planning application and return to council later for a formal motion to apply.
Ending: Staff said pursuing the planning grant would carry little direct fiscal exposure because the award is 100% grant funding; however, construction and acquisition costs would be the subject of future planning and council decisions if the plan recommends build‑out.
