Sandpoint advisory committee weighs protected bike lane versus shared multi‑use path for downtown Phase 3

Sandpoint — The Pedestrian and Bicycle Advisory Committee reviewed conceptual plans March 12 for the downtown First Avenue Phase 3 revitalization, where city staff are considering either a shared multi‑use path or an in‑street protected bike lane to improve connections to City Beach and the Long Bridge.

Public Works Director Holly Ellis introduced the project and turned the presentation over to project manager Eric Bush, who summarized the scope: full roadway reconstruction from Church Street to Lake Street with building‑to‑building frontage improvements, widened sidewalks, street trees and updated stormwater features, and replacement of an aging water main under the roadway. Bush said the design team is developing two primary east‑side options for the corridor and that the section south of Lake Street will advance to 30% conceptual design to preserve options for future grant funding.

The first option presented is a multi‑use shared path that would combine a sidewalk and low‑speed bicycle space delineated by materials such as brick pavers or contrasting concrete; the intent would be a slower, family‑oriented facility to get people to City Beach. The second option is an in‑street protected bike lane, separated by curb or vertical elements, which would prioritize continuous bike travel but remove on‑street parking in some blocks.

"We're replacing an aging water main under the roadway," Holly Ellis said, noting utility upgrades are being bundled with the street reconstruction to minimize repeated disruptions. Eric Bush added that right‑of‑way widths vary in the corridor (approximately 60 feet on the northern blocks and 80 feet on some segments), so the feasibility of adding parking, seating or a protected lane depends on block‑by‑block constraints.

Committee members and staff weighed the trade‑offs. Molly O'Reilly, pointing to the corridor's place on US Bike Route 10, urged accommodations for through cyclists and said: "If we do a multi‑use 10‑foot, I think we need to explicitly forbid e‑bikes there and set a speed limit." She also pressed the city on maintenance obligations for an in‑street protected lane (sweeping, gravel removal) if that option is chosen.

Members raised concerns about parking loss in front of several downtown businesses (Burger Dock, Spuds) and how eliminating private driveway approaches as part of access management might remove informal parking. Staff said those private parking areas are outside the public right‑of‑way and could lose function if driveways are closed, but that design details remain "in flux."

A member of the public, Sharon Olsen, urged the committee to consider shifting the planting strip on the northbound blocks to create room for a separate bicycle lane, asking whether the planting zone could be reallocated to biking space.

Committee chair Kate Husman (remote) and others said they favored either a protected lane or a wider multi‑use path depending on continuity and safety; several members emphasized that short, two‑block protected lanes are less beneficial than longer continuous stretches and that materials, delineation and posted speed limits matter for shared facilities.

No formal action was taken; staff said the presentation was for feedback and that design will continue to be refined. Next steps include advancing the southern portion of the corridor to 30% conceptual design, further outreach on materials and delineation, and follow‑up with the committee on details such as crossings, tree wells, and how driveway closures would affect local businesses.