Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Get email alerts on the Sidewalk In Lieu Fee topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
Sandpoint advisory committee reviews sidewalk in-lieu funds, urges prioritized project list
Summary
The committee reviewed the city's sidewalk in-lieu fee accounts organized by quarter section, discussed account balances and spending constraints, and the intersections subcommittee moved to adopt a list of recommended sidewalk items with special priorities for staff use.
At its July 10, 2025 meeting the Sandpoint Pedestrian Advisory Committee reviewed the city's sidewalk in-lieu fee program and a staff-supplied map of in-lieu balances by quarter section, and the intersections subcommittee asked the full committee to adopt a prioritized list of sidewalk projects for staff to use when spending those funds.
Public Works Director (unnamed) explained the in-lieu program and how funds are tracked by quarter sections, saying the fee money "goes into a pot of money that's specific for that quarter section." The director said some quarter-section accounts contain only a few thousand dollars while others contain larger sums; as examples cited in the meeting included roughly $8,640, $5,000 and one section shown with about $56,000. The director said the funds are restricted to sidewalk work and ramps.
Committee members discussed two approaches: (1) rank every candidate project in order, or (2) adopt the subcommittee's recommended list of items and flag two or three as special priorities to simplify staff use. Committee member Brianna suggested adopting the packet items at once with special emphasis on two top priorities; a subcommittee representative said the intersections subcommittee had marked specific segments (for example, the north end of South Florida Avenue) as urgent.
A motion form discussed at the meeting would read broadly as "adopt all recommended items with special priority on [specified items]." The transcript does not record a formal roll-call vote on that motion before the meeting ended; the subcommittee chair asked members to gather additional location information and prepare example sheets for the next meeting.
Staff outlined practical guidance for choosing projects: focus on neighborhoods without sidewalks rather than replacing disconnected or lightly used segments, be specific about locations to help staff navigate property-line and fence conflicts, and coordinate with property owners because some sidewalk installations can prompt fence or landscaping relocations. The director also said finance tracks individual quarter-section accounts so staff will use the committee's prioritized list to pull funds from appropriate accounts.
The committee also reviewed the city's sidewalk-trigger rules under the building-permit code (listed in the meeting materials as "7 3 10 h"). Staff said the building permit typically triggers the sidewalk requirement and that some code provisions allow applicants to pay an in-lieu fee rather than construct sidewalks at the time of permit issuance.
No final ordinance change was adopted; staff asked the committee to return with a citywide prioritized list (the director suggested a top-10 or top-20) and to provide specific map locations to guide staff spending decisions.
