Citizen Portal
Sign In

Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!

Get email alerts on the Transportation topic

No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.

Covington to accept reduced scope for SR 516 pedestrian‑bridge study, return unused grant funds

Covington City Council · February 10, 2026
AI-Generated Content: All content on this page was generated by AI to highlight key points from the meeting. For complete details and context, we recommend watching the full video. so we can fix them.

Summary

The council authorized a grant agreement supplement with Coe North America to reduce scope and fee for the SR 516 pedestrian-bridge feasibility work, and staff said the city expects to return roughly $161,544.39 in unused grant funds.

Covington’s City Council on Feb. 10 authorized the city manager to execute a grant agreement supplement with Coe North America to reduce the scope of the SR 516 pedestrian-bridge feasibility study and reduce the consultant fee, as recommended by Public Works staff.

Bob from Public Works summarized the consultant’s work and why the reduction is necessary: because no preferred bridge alternative has been selected, certain scope items cannot be fully defined or used under the current contract. He told the council the city anticipates returning approximately $161,544.39 in unused grant funds tied to the project.

Council members asked whether returned funds would revert to the state and whether returning funds would affect the city’s eligibility for future grants. Staff said the funds would go back to the grant source and that returning unused funds would not negatively affect future grant prospects. A motion to authorize the city manager to execute grant agreement supplement No. 4 with Coe North America — reflecting a reduction in scope and roughly $140,000 in reduced fees from the original contract — was moved, seconded and approved by voice vote.

Council members framed the decision as pragmatic: while the council did not abandon the bridge concept, members said the mitigation or tradeoffs necessary to proceed under the original scope were not sustainable. Several members said the feasibility work still yields useful information if the project is reconsidered in the future.

Staff will execute the supplemental agreement and return unused grant funds to the grantor as required by the grant terms.