Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Get email alerts on the Downtown Revitalization topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
Sandpoint council delays decision on Phase 3 downtown revitalization to get more design and funding detail
Summary
After a lengthy presentation on design alternatives and two funding scenarios, council voted to table the decision on whether to federalize the downtown Phase 3 project (which would expand scope but trigger federal requirements and delay construction) until June 17 so staff can provide a more detailed funding breakdown and additional intersection design options.
The Sandpoint City Council on Wednesday delayed a decision on downtown Phase 3 design and funding after a detailed presentation from Welch Engineers and city staff about design options and the tradeoffs between local and federal funding.
Matt Gillis of Welch Engineers reviewed design refinements for the Church‑to‑Lake segment, a raised plaza concept between Pine and Church, a shared‑use path, and options to reduce curb radii and better accommodate pedestrians and bicycles. "To the extent feasible we want to produce a product that the public can support," Gillis said, describing project goals to address aging underground infrastructure and rebalance space toward walking and biking.
Council members extensively questioned geometric details — curb radius at Pine and First, crosswalk placement, and whether a roundabout or a median/channelization approach at First and Superior would better balance safety, cost and right‑of‑way impacts. "The shorter the crossing, the less time it takes for a pedestrian to come across," Mayor Jeremy Grim said during the exchange about crosswalk safety.
Staff also presented two funding scenarios: a locally delivered project (lower design and federal compliance requirements but a local funding shortfall) versus accepting ELTAC federal funds, which would add roughly $2.4 million but federalize the project — triggering NEPA, Davis‑Bacon and Buy America requirements and lengthening the schedule by about a year. "If you get something, you give something," a staff presenter summarized: federal money brings more requirements and a delayed construction start.
Council members asked for clearer line‑item funding tables, additional design alternatives at the contested intersections, and an explanation of the implications for seasonal construction timing. The council moved, seconded and voted to table the item to the June 17 meeting to allow staff to bring more detailed cost breakdowns and alternate intersection designs.
If council ultimately accepts federal funds, staff advised, the project scope could expand to include additional stormwater and utility improvements but would require federal procurement and environmental review that can add time and cost.
